Prognosis in Ischemic Heart Disease: Can You Tell as Much at the Bedside as in the Nuclear Laboratory?

Paul R. Marantz, Jonathan N. Tobin, Sylvia Wassertheil Smoller, Chul Ahn, Richard M. Steingart, John P. Wexler

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

20 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background.—While the resting left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) predicts prognosis in ischemic heart disease, clinical evaluation is also useful. Methods.—To compare the prognostic value of LVEF by resting radionuclide ventriculography with that of clinical signs and symptoms of congestive heart failure (CHF), 170 Patients with suspected ischemic heart disease were followed up in this prospective study. Patients had a standardized history and physical examination performed by a study cardiologist immediately before the nuclear scan. Chest roentgenography and radionuclide ventriculography were performed in a standard manner. The diagnosis of CHF was made by validated clinicoradiographic criteria based on the Framingham study. Mortality was determined by means of the National Death Index; median follow-up time was 3 years. Results.—There was CHF at baseline in 70 patients, and baseline LVEF was low (<=0.4) in 63 patients. Low LVEF was significantly associated with CHF. During follow-up, 55 of the subjects died (overall mortality, 32%). Subjects with CHF had a significantly higher risk of death than those without CHF, and subjects with low LVEF had a higher mortality than those with preserved LVEF. Both CHF and LVEF were independent predictors of mortality. In a Cox model, each percentage increase in LVEF was associated with a 2% decreased mortality, while subjects with CHF had a mortality 2.5 times higher than that of those without CHF. Also, CHF with preserved LVEF had a better prognosis than CHF with depressed LVEF, but this prognosis was worse than that in subjects without CHF. Conclusions.—The clinical diagnosis of CHF, based on clinical evaluation and chest roentgenogram, is a valid predictor of mortality and provides information independent of the radionuclide LVEF in determining prognosis in patients with ischemic heart disease.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2433-2437
Number of pages5
JournalArchives of Internal Medicine
Volume152
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - 1992

Fingerprint

Myocardial Ischemia
Stroke Volume
Heart Failure
Mortality
Radionuclide Ventriculography
Thorax
Proportional Hazards Models
Radiography
Radioisotopes
Signs and Symptoms
Physical Examination
History
Prospective Studies

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Internal Medicine

Cite this

Prognosis in Ischemic Heart Disease : Can You Tell as Much at the Bedside as in the Nuclear Laboratory? / Marantz, Paul R.; Tobin, Jonathan N.; Wassertheil Smoller, Sylvia; Ahn, Chul; Steingart, Richard M.; Wexler, John P.

In: Archives of Internal Medicine, Vol. 152, No. 12, 1992, p. 2433-2437.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Marantz, Paul R. ; Tobin, Jonathan N. ; Wassertheil Smoller, Sylvia ; Ahn, Chul ; Steingart, Richard M. ; Wexler, John P. / Prognosis in Ischemic Heart Disease : Can You Tell as Much at the Bedside as in the Nuclear Laboratory?. In: Archives of Internal Medicine. 1992 ; Vol. 152, No. 12. pp. 2433-2437.
@article{888a72f3bb6e4d0c9d384a6146902908,
title = "Prognosis in Ischemic Heart Disease: Can You Tell as Much at the Bedside as in the Nuclear Laboratory?",
abstract = "Background.—While the resting left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) predicts prognosis in ischemic heart disease, clinical evaluation is also useful. Methods.—To compare the prognostic value of LVEF by resting radionuclide ventriculography with that of clinical signs and symptoms of congestive heart failure (CHF), 170 Patients with suspected ischemic heart disease were followed up in this prospective study. Patients had a standardized history and physical examination performed by a study cardiologist immediately before the nuclear scan. Chest roentgenography and radionuclide ventriculography were performed in a standard manner. The diagnosis of CHF was made by validated clinicoradiographic criteria based on the Framingham study. Mortality was determined by means of the National Death Index; median follow-up time was 3 years. Results.—There was CHF at baseline in 70 patients, and baseline LVEF was low (<=0.4) in 63 patients. Low LVEF was significantly associated with CHF. During follow-up, 55 of the subjects died (overall mortality, 32{\%}). Subjects with CHF had a significantly higher risk of death than those without CHF, and subjects with low LVEF had a higher mortality than those with preserved LVEF. Both CHF and LVEF were independent predictors of mortality. In a Cox model, each percentage increase in LVEF was associated with a 2{\%} decreased mortality, while subjects with CHF had a mortality 2.5 times higher than that of those without CHF. Also, CHF with preserved LVEF had a better prognosis than CHF with depressed LVEF, but this prognosis was worse than that in subjects without CHF. Conclusions.—The clinical diagnosis of CHF, based on clinical evaluation and chest roentgenogram, is a valid predictor of mortality and provides information independent of the radionuclide LVEF in determining prognosis in patients with ischemic heart disease.",
author = "Marantz, {Paul R.} and Tobin, {Jonathan N.} and {Wassertheil Smoller}, Sylvia and Chul Ahn and Steingart, {Richard M.} and Wexler, {John P.}",
year = "1992",
doi = "10.1001/archinte.1992.00400240055009",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "152",
pages = "2433--2437",
journal = "JAMA Internal Medicine",
issn = "2168-6106",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Prognosis in Ischemic Heart Disease

T2 - Can You Tell as Much at the Bedside as in the Nuclear Laboratory?

AU - Marantz, Paul R.

AU - Tobin, Jonathan N.

AU - Wassertheil Smoller, Sylvia

AU - Ahn, Chul

AU - Steingart, Richard M.

AU - Wexler, John P.

PY - 1992

Y1 - 1992

N2 - Background.—While the resting left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) predicts prognosis in ischemic heart disease, clinical evaluation is also useful. Methods.—To compare the prognostic value of LVEF by resting radionuclide ventriculography with that of clinical signs and symptoms of congestive heart failure (CHF), 170 Patients with suspected ischemic heart disease were followed up in this prospective study. Patients had a standardized history and physical examination performed by a study cardiologist immediately before the nuclear scan. Chest roentgenography and radionuclide ventriculography were performed in a standard manner. The diagnosis of CHF was made by validated clinicoradiographic criteria based on the Framingham study. Mortality was determined by means of the National Death Index; median follow-up time was 3 years. Results.—There was CHF at baseline in 70 patients, and baseline LVEF was low (<=0.4) in 63 patients. Low LVEF was significantly associated with CHF. During follow-up, 55 of the subjects died (overall mortality, 32%). Subjects with CHF had a significantly higher risk of death than those without CHF, and subjects with low LVEF had a higher mortality than those with preserved LVEF. Both CHF and LVEF were independent predictors of mortality. In a Cox model, each percentage increase in LVEF was associated with a 2% decreased mortality, while subjects with CHF had a mortality 2.5 times higher than that of those without CHF. Also, CHF with preserved LVEF had a better prognosis than CHF with depressed LVEF, but this prognosis was worse than that in subjects without CHF. Conclusions.—The clinical diagnosis of CHF, based on clinical evaluation and chest roentgenogram, is a valid predictor of mortality and provides information independent of the radionuclide LVEF in determining prognosis in patients with ischemic heart disease.

AB - Background.—While the resting left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) predicts prognosis in ischemic heart disease, clinical evaluation is also useful. Methods.—To compare the prognostic value of LVEF by resting radionuclide ventriculography with that of clinical signs and symptoms of congestive heart failure (CHF), 170 Patients with suspected ischemic heart disease were followed up in this prospective study. Patients had a standardized history and physical examination performed by a study cardiologist immediately before the nuclear scan. Chest roentgenography and radionuclide ventriculography were performed in a standard manner. The diagnosis of CHF was made by validated clinicoradiographic criteria based on the Framingham study. Mortality was determined by means of the National Death Index; median follow-up time was 3 years. Results.—There was CHF at baseline in 70 patients, and baseline LVEF was low (<=0.4) in 63 patients. Low LVEF was significantly associated with CHF. During follow-up, 55 of the subjects died (overall mortality, 32%). Subjects with CHF had a significantly higher risk of death than those without CHF, and subjects with low LVEF had a higher mortality than those with preserved LVEF. Both CHF and LVEF were independent predictors of mortality. In a Cox model, each percentage increase in LVEF was associated with a 2% decreased mortality, while subjects with CHF had a mortality 2.5 times higher than that of those without CHF. Also, CHF with preserved LVEF had a better prognosis than CHF with depressed LVEF, but this prognosis was worse than that in subjects without CHF. Conclusions.—The clinical diagnosis of CHF, based on clinical evaluation and chest roentgenogram, is a valid predictor of mortality and provides information independent of the radionuclide LVEF in determining prognosis in patients with ischemic heart disease.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0026476668&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0026476668&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1001/archinte.1992.00400240055009

DO - 10.1001/archinte.1992.00400240055009

M3 - Article

C2 - 1456854

AN - SCOPUS:0026476668

VL - 152

SP - 2433

EP - 2437

JO - JAMA Internal Medicine

JF - JAMA Internal Medicine

SN - 2168-6106

IS - 12

ER -