ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2025
Artificial Intelligence ECG Diastolic Dysfunction and Survival in Cardiac Intensive Care Unit Patients.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence-enabled electrocardiography for detection of left ventricular diastolic dysfunction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European heart journal. Digital health · 2026Review
- New Insights into Cardiac Intensive Care.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Incremental Prognostic Power of Coronary Flow Reserve and Artificial Intelligence-Enabled ECG-Derived Filling Pressure in Angina With Nonobstructive Coronary Arteries.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Article
- Deep learning-enabled ECG system for detecting left ventricular hypertrophy and predicting cardiovascular prognoses.BioData mining · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLeft ventricular diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) predicts mortality in patients in cardiac intensive care units. An artificial intelligence enhanced ECG (AIECG) algorithm can predict LVDD and mortality in general populations but has not been examined in cardiac intensive care units.
methodsThis historical cohort study included consecutive adults admitted to Mayo Clinic cardiac intensive care unit from 2007 to 2018 with an admission AIECG. The AIECG assigned the LVDD grade (0-3). Medial mitral E/e' ratio >15 on transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) defined elevated filling pressures. In-hospital and 1-year mortality was evaluated, before and after multivariable adjustment.
resultsWe included 11 868 patients (median age 69.5 years, 37.7% female); 48% had heart failure and 44% had acute coronary syndromes. AIECG LVDD grade was 0 (normal), 33%; 1, 7%; 2, 39%; and 3, 21%. In-hospital and 1-year mortality increased in each higher AIECG LVDD grade. After adjustment, each higher AIECG LVDD grade was associated with higher in-hospital (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.22 [95% CI, 1.13-1.32]) and 1-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.23 [95% CI, 1.19-1.29]); this persisted after adjustment for TTE measurements. Patients with grade 2 or 3 LVDD by AIECG and medial mitral E/e' ratio >15 by TTE had the highest in-hospital (adjusted OR, 2.54 [95% CI, 1.69-3.88]) and 1-year (adjusted HR, 2.03 [95% CI, 1.65-2.48]) mortality, whereas patients meeting either of these criteria had similar, elevated mortality.
conclusionsThe AIECG LVDD grade was strongly associated with in-hospital and 1-year mortality in patients in cardiac intensive care units, even after adjusting for clinical variables and TTE measurements. Patients with concordant AIECG and TTE for elevated filling pressures were at highest risk.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.