4.3 Article

Incremental prognostic value of diastolic dysfunction in low risk patients undergoing echocardiography: beyond Framingham score

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR IMAGING
Volume 29, Issue 7, Pages 1441-1450

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10554-013-0246-2

Keywords

Diastolic function; Low risk outpatients; Framingham risk score; Outcomes

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We sought to assess the prognostic value of diastolic dysfunction (DD) in low-risk adults beyond Framingham risk score (FRS). Consecutive patients without cardiovascular risk factors or co-morbidities were identified from a retrospective cohort. Multivariate binary logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with DD, and Cox proportional hazard model to evaluate the association of DD with all-cause death. Analysis was repeated by stratifying by the year of the echocardiogram to account for possible time-related shift in measurement techniques. Net reclassification improvement (NRI) was performed to assess incremental prognostic value of DD. The study cohort consisted on 1,039 patients with a mean age (SD) 47.9 (15.7) years. Overall, 346 patients (33.3 %) had DD, among whom 327 were grade 1. Age was the only independent predictor of DD with odds ratio 3.2 (2.8; 3.7) for every 10 years increase (p < 0.0001). After a mean follow-up time (SD) of 7.3 (1.7) years, 71 (6.8 %) patients died. Adjusting for age, gender, and race, DD remained an independent predictor of all-cause mortality with hazard ratio (95 % CI) 2.03 (p = 0.029), and similarly after adjusting for FRS (HR 2.73, p = 0.002) which resulted in IDI gain of 1.4 % (p = 0.0037) and NRI of 15 % (p = 0.029). In 463 age and gender matched subgroups, DD was still an independent predictor of mortality (HR 2.6 [1.25; 5.55], p = 0.01). In low-risk adult outpatients undergoing echocardiography, DD was associated with 2-3 fold increase in risk of death and had incremental prognostic value beyond FRS.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available