ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2025
Outcomes and Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction in Cardiac Magnetic Resonance: Challenging the "Higher Is Better".
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Clinical value of perioperative myocardial strain assessment by transesophageal speckle-tracking echocardiography in patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundContradictory evidence exists regarding the correlation between supranormal left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and adverse outcomes. This study aimed to elucidate the prognostic value of supranormal LVEF.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study analyzed patients referred for cardiac magnetic resonance imaging to assess myocardial ischemia or viability. Subjects were stratified into eig8ht LVEF groups: <20%, 20% to 30%, 30% to 40%, 40% to 50%, 50% to 60%, 60% to 70%, 70% to 80%, and ≥80%. Primary outcomes included cardiovascular death, heart failure, myocardial infarction, and stroke. The extracellular volume fraction was measured.
resultsThe study cohort comprised 3279 patients (mean age 68.0±12.7 years; 64.0% female). The group with 60% to 70% LVEF had the lowest risk and was used as the reference group. The median follow-up was 41.4 months (interquartile range, 33.9-49.7 months). The group with LVEF <20% exhibited the highest composite outcome risk (unadjusted hazard ratio [HR], 6.77 [95% CI, 3.81-12.03];
conclusionsLVEF >70% demonstrated increased event rates compared with an LVEF of 60% to 70%. The supranormal LVEF warrants further investigation into its pathogenesis and management.
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.