SwePub
Sök i LIBRIS databas

  Extended search

onr:"swepub:oai:DiVA.org:liu-167396"
 

Search: onr:"swepub:oai:DiVA.org:liu-167396" > A registry-based al...

  • 1 of 1
  • Previous record
  • Next record
  •    To hitlist

A registry-based algorithm to predict ejection fraction in patients with heart failure

Uijl, Alicia (author)
Karolinska Inst, Sweden; Univ Utrecht, Netherlands; UCL, England
Lund, Lars H. (author)
Karolinska Institutet,Karolinska Inst, Sweden; Karolinska Univ Hosp, Sweden
Vaartjes, Ilonca (author)
Univ Utrecht, Netherlands; Univ Utrecht, Netherlands
show more...
Brugts, Jasper J. (author)
Erasmus MC, Netherlands
Linssen, Gerard C. (author)
Hosp Grp Twente, Netherlands
Asselbergs, Folkert W. (author)
UCL, England; Univ Utrecht, Netherlands
Hoes, Arno W. (author)
Univ Utrecht, Netherlands
Dahlström, Ulf, 1946- (author)
Linköpings universitet,Avdelningen för diagnostik och specialistmedicin,Medicinska fakulteten,Region Östergötland, Kardiologiska kliniken US
Koudstaal, Stefan (author)
UCL, England; Univ Utrecht, Netherlands
Savarese, Gianluigi (author)
Karolinska Institutet,Karolinska Inst, Sweden
show less...
 (creator_code:org_t)
2020-06-17
2020
English.
In: ESC Heart Failure. - : WILEY PERIODICALS, INC. - 2055-5822. ; 7:5, s. 2388-2397
  • Journal article (peer-reviewed)
Abstract Subject headings
Close  
  • Aims Left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) is required to categorize heart failure (HF) [i.e. HF with preserved (HFpEF), mid-range (HFmrEF), and reduced (HFrEF) EF] but is often not captured in population-based cohorts or non-HF registries. The aim was to create an algorithm that identifies EF subphenotypes for research purposes. Methods and results We included 42 061 HF patients from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry. As primary analysis, we performed two logistic regression models including 22 variables to predict (i) EF >= vs. <50% and (ii) EF >= vs. <40%. In the secondary analysis, we performed a multivariable multinomial analysis with 22 variables to create a model for all three separate EF subphenotypes: HFrEF vs. HFmrEF vs. HFpEF. The models were validated in the database from the CHECK-HF study, a cross-sectional survey of 10 627 patients from the Netherlands. The C-statistic (discrimination) was 0.78 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77-0.78] for EF >= 50% and 0.76 (95% CI 0.75-0.76) for EF >= 40%. Similar results were achieved for HFrEF and HFpEF in the multinomial model, but the C-statistic for HFmrEF was lower: 0.63 (95% CI 0.63-0.64). The external validation showed similar discriminative ability to the development cohort. Conclusions Routine clinical characteristics could potentially be used to identify different EF subphenotypes in databases where EF is not readily available. Accuracy was good for the prediction of HFpEF and HFrEF but lower for HFmrEF. The proposed algorithm enables more effective research on HF in the big data setting.

Subject headings

MEDICIN OCH HÄLSOVETENSKAP  -- Klinisk medicin -- Kardiologi (hsv//swe)
MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES  -- Clinical Medicine -- Cardiac and Cardiovascular Systems (hsv//eng)

Keyword

Electronic health records; Heart failure; Ejection fraction; Prediction; HFrEF; HFmrEF; HFpEF

Publication and Content Type

ref (subject category)
art (subject category)

Find in a library

To the university's database

  • 1 of 1
  • Previous record
  • Next record
  •    To hitlist

Kungliga biblioteket hanterar dina personuppgifter i enlighet med EU:s dataskyddsförordning (2018), GDPR. Läs mer om hur det funkar här.
Så här hanterar KB dina uppgifter vid användning av denna tjänst.

 
pil uppåt Close

Copy and save the link in order to return to this view