Key result
A global work index (GWI) of <500 mm Hg% was a predictor of severely impaired ejection fraction, very low exercise capacity, and strongly elevated NT-pro-BNP in patients with heart failure.
Why the study?
Identification of patients with heart failure and a poor prognosis is paramount to ensure timely and adequate treatment.
Does global work index (GWI) correlate with established prognostic parameters in patients with heart failure?
Observational
Does global work index (GWI) correlate with established prognostic parameters in patients with heart failure?
Global work index (GWI) <500 mm Hg% correlates with established prognostic markers in heart failure, suggesting its potential utility in identifying patients with poor prognosis.
May support GWI for identifying high-risk HF patients; leaves open incremental prognostic value beyond EF and NT-proBNP.
AIM: Identification of patients with heart failure and a poor prognosis is paramount to ensure timely and adequate treatment. We investigated the relationship between the new measures of noninvasive pressure-strain analysis, such as the global work index (GWI), and established prognostic parameters of echocardiography, cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPX), and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-pro-BNP). METHODS AND RESULTS: 15.6 ± 4.2 mL/min/kg). CONCLUSION: GWI correlates with known prognostic markers of heart failure. A GWI of <500 mm Hg% was a predictor of severely impaired ejection fraction, very low exercise capacity, and strongly elevated NT-pro-BNP, indicating a poor prognosis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hedwig et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Heart failure. Global work index (GWI) was evaluated on Correlation with established prognostic parameters (ejection fraction, exercise capacity, NT-pro-BNP). A global work index (GWI) of <500 mm Hg% was a predictor of severely impaired ejection fraction, very low exercise capacity, and strongly elevated NT-pro-BNP in patients with heart failure.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: