ReviewHeart failure reviews2025
Heart failure and left ventricular ejection fraction: a necessary but imperfect partnership.
Review in Heart failure reviews, 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.
- Heart Failure with Reduced and Mildly Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Network Interpretive Framework of Mechanisms, Phenotypes, and Therapeutic Response.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Left ventricular deformation in chronic schizophrenia-a detailed analysis from the three-dimensional speckle-tracking echocardiographic MAGYAR-Path Study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction in Heart Failure-A Parameter to Be Discontinued?Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Rethinking ejection fraction for anesthesiologists: a narrative review.Perioperative medicine (London, England) · 2026Review
- The Use of Metabolomes in Risk Stratification of Patients with Heart Failure: A Scoping Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is the most commonly used index to assess left ventricular systolic function and guide management in patients with heart failure (HF). This is largely due to the widespread availability of echocardiography, its practicality, rapid scan time, ease of measuring left ventricular (LV) volumes, and its extensive application in both clinical practice and research. Accordingly, a recent joint clinical consensus statement from the Heart Failure Association (HFA) and the Heart Failure Society of America (HFSA) recommends that LVEF be evaluated longitudinally to assess disease trajectory, natural history, and response to treatment in patients with heart failure (6). However, there is little, if any, evidence that serial LVEF assessment improves risk stratification or guides management in HF. Notably, LVEF may not accurately reflect overall cardiac function. While it is commonly used as a measure of systolic function, LVEF does not fully capture the status of the heart. Other parameters-such as diastolic function, ventricular size, valvular function, and right ventricular function-also play important roles in determining patient risk. This paper proposes an alternative strategy, shifting from serial LVEF evaluation to a more comprehensive approach that includes assessment of congestion, right ventricular function, and structural myocardial damage to provide more robust diagnostic and prognostic information.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41015636What 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.