Why the study?
Does a histopathological index of contractility failure accurately diagnose idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy in patients with suspected dilated cardiomyopathy?
Does a histopathological index of contractility failure accurately diagnose idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy in patients with suspected dilated cardiomyopathy?
A histopathological index of contractility failure from endomyocardial biopsy showed poor sensitivity and specificity, failing to reliably distinguish idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy from other causes of heart failure.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Index lacks diagnostic utility; leaves open whether biopsy-derived indices can distinguish idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy.
A histopathological index of contractility failure, which was reported to be accurate for the diagnosis of idiopathic dilated or congestive cardiomyopathy in Japan, was used to assess endomyocardial biopsy specimens from 41 Dutch patients with suspected dilated cardiomyopathy. The calculated index had a sensitivity of 62.5% and a specificity of 68% for idiopathic dilated or congestive cardiomyopathy. These disappointing results indicate that the histopathological index of contractility failure does not reliably distinguish between idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy and other diseases that cause congestive heart failure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yonesaka et al. (1987) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: