Key result
Combining global myocardial work index (GWI) with LVEF improved multi-classification diagnostic performance to 98%, compared to 88% for GWI alone and 82% for LVEF alone.
Why the study?
Accurate evaluation of LV systolic function is essential for diagnosing and treating chronic heart failure, motivating an exploration of the incremental value of echocardiographic myocardial work.
Does the addition of echocardiographic myocardial work parameters to LVEF improve the diagnostic accuracy in classifying chronic heart failure patients?
Population
206 participants (155 chronic heart failure patients and 51 healthy controls)
Comparison
HFpEF vs HFmrEF vs HFrEF vs healthy controls
Design
Observational cross-sectional study
Authors
Loading...
LVEF + GWI may improve chronic HF classification accuracy; leaves open need for prospective outcome validation before practice change.
Observational (n=206)
Does the addition of echocardiographic myocardial work parameters to LVEF improve the diagnostic accuracy in classifying chronic heart failure patients?
Absolute Event Rate: 98% vs 82%
Global myocardial work index (GWI) complements LVEF to significantly improve the diagnostic accuracy in classifying chronic heart failure phenotypes.
Li et al. (2021) conducted an observational in chronic heart failure (n=206). Echocardiographic myocardial work (GWI) vs. Conventional LVEF was evaluated on Multi-classification diagnostic performance. Combining global myocardial work index (GWI) with LVEF improved multi-classification diagnostic performance to 98%, compared to 88% for GWI alone and 82% for LVEF alone.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: