JACC
HOME SUBSCRIPTIONS CURRENT ISSUE PAST ISSUES CARDIOSOURCE SEARCH HELP FEEDBACK
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J Am Coll Cardiol, 2002; 39:210-218
© 2002 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Felker, G. M.
Right arrow Articles by O’Connor, C. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Felker, G. M.
Right arrow Articles by O’Connor, C. M.

CLINICAL STUDY: HEART FAILURE

A standardized definition of ischemic cardiomyopathy for use in clinical research

G. Michael Felker, MDa,*, Linda K. Shaw, MSa and Christopher M. O’Connor, MD, FACCa

a Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina, USA

Manuscript received May 25, 2001; revised manuscript received September 10, 2001, accepted October 18, 2001.

* Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. G. Michael Felker, Duke University Medical Center, Box 31185, Durham, North Carolina, USA 27710.
felke001{at}onyx.dcri.duke.edu


   Abstract
Top
 Abstract
Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 APPENDIX
 References
 
OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the association between the extent of coronary artery disease (CAD) and survival in patients with symptomatic heart failure (HF) and to create the most prognostically powerful clinical definition of ischemic cardiomyopathy.

BACKGROUND: An ischemic etiology of HF is known to be a predictor of adverse outcome; however, there is no uniform definition for ischemic cardiomyopathy.

METHODS: We assessed the clinical history and coronary anatomy of patients with symptomatic HF and ejection fraction ≤40% undergoing diagnostic coronary angiography between 1986 and 1999 (n = 1,921). Five classification schemes were tested to identify the most prognostically powerful method for defining the extent of CAD and to develop the best definition of ischemic cardiomyopathy for prognostic purposes.

RESULTS: A more extensive CAD was independently associated with shorter survival. When the various classification schemes were compared, a modified number-of-diseased-vessels classification, in which patients with single-vessel disease and no prior history of revascularization or myocardial infarction (MI) were classified as nonischemic, provided the most prognostic power. A definition of ischemic cardiomyopathy that incorporated this definition had more prognostic power than the traditional definition.

CONCLUSIONS: Angiographically diagnosed ischemic HF is associated with shorter survival than nonischemic HF. A more extensive CAD is independently associated with shorter survival, and patients with single-vessel disease and no history of MI or revascularization should be classified as nonischemic for prognostic purposes. Standardization of the definition of ischemic cardiomyopathy will be useful in the conduct and interpretation of clinical research in HF.

Abbreviations and Acronyms
  CAD
  coronary artery disease
  EF
  ejection fraction
  HF
  heart failure
  LAD
  left anterior descending coronary artery
  LV
  left ventricle, left ventricular
  MI
  myocardial infarction
  NYHA
  New York Heart Association

Accurate prognostication is an important goal in the management of patients with chronic heart failure (HF), particularly given the limited availability of some therapies such as cardiac transplantation. Among the most important clinical determinants of prognosis in HF is the etiology of left ventricular (LV) dysfunction. The last several decades have seen a shift in the most common underlying etiology of HF from hypertension and valvular disease to ischemic heart disease (1). Ischemic etiology has been shown to be independently associated with worse long-term outcome in patients with LV dysfunction in a variety of studies (2–5). The etiology of HF also impacts the decision to pursue revascularization and may effect the response to some pharmacologic therapies (6). Finally, recent data suggest that the mechanism of sudden death may differ between ischemic and nonischemic HF patients, further emphasizing the potential importance of accurate differentiation between etiologies (7).

Clinically, patients are classified as having HF of ischemic or nonischemic etiology based on a history of myocardial infarction (MI) or based on objective evidence of coronary artery disease (CAD) such as angiography or functional testing. As a practical matter, however, the determination of etiology in an individual patient may be difficult because patients with HF and no CAD may have typical angina or regional wall motion abnormalities on echocardiography (8), whereas patients with severe CAD may have no symptoms of angina or history of MI. This has lead to the recommendation for either noninvasive functional testing or coronary angiography in assessing patients with systolic dysfunction, depending on the clinical presentation and risk factor profile (9). Even with objective information such as angiography, the appropriate classification for a given patient is not always clear. Although HF etiology represents an important variable in the design and interpretation of clinical trials (10), the means by which etiology was determined are often not clear from published reports, and criteria may differ between studies (6). This may be of particular importance in the design and interpretation of clinical trials where etiology of HF is an important covariate and frequently defines subgroups of interest. The lack of a standardized definition of ischemic etiology may lead to unnecessary variability in defining subgroups and inconsistency between different studies. We sought to use data from the Duke Databank for Cardiovascular Diseases to develop the most prognostically powerful clinical definition of ischemic etiology.


   Methods
Top
 Abstract
 Methods
Results
 Discussion
 APPENDIX
 References
 
Data collection.   Patient data was obtained from the Duke Databank for Cardiovascular Diseases, an ongoing databank of all patients undergoing diagnostic cardiac catheterization at Duke University Medical Center. Patients were included in the study population if they had an LV ejection fraction (EF) of ≤40% and a history of symptomatic HF (New York Heart Association [NYHA] functional class II or greater). Patients were excluded from analysis if they had experienced MI within 30 days of the index catheterization, had primary valvular heart disease (defined as severe aortic or mitral insufficiency or severe stenosis of any heart valve) or congenital heart disease. Baseline clinical variables for each patient were stored in the Duke Databank using methods previously described (11). Follow-up on patients with significant coronary disease or revascularization procedures was obtained through self-administered questionnaires, with telephone follow-up to nonresponders. Patients not contacted through this mechanism had vital status determined through a search of the National Death Index (12).

Study definitions.   Data from the index catheterization was prospectively collected. Coronary stenoses were graded by visual consensus of at least two experienced observers. In order to determine the best method for quantifying the angiographic data, several classification schemes were evaluated for their prognostic power. For the traditional binary classification (ischemic vs. nonischemic), an ischemic etiology of HF was defined as the presence of any epicardial coronary vessels with ≥75% stenosis or any history of MI or coronary revascularization (either percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty or coronary artery bypass grafting). The number-of-diseased-vessels classification was defined as the number of vessels with ≥75% stenosis (0, 1, 2 or 3). The CAD prognostic index (see Appendix), which has been previously described and validated in an overlapping HF population (2), considers the number of diseased vessels, the number of vessels with >95% stenosis and the presence of left anterior descending (LAD) or left main coronary disease. In addition, a modified binary definition of ischemic etiology was also evaluated, which reclassified those patients with single-vessel disease who did not have a history of MI or coronary revascularization into the nonischemic group. Patients with ≥75% stenosis of the left main coronary artery or proximal LAD were included in the ischemic group. This also led to a modified number-of-diseased-vessels classification, wherein patients with single-vessel disease were combined with those without any significant coronary lesions (0/1, 2, 3). These modified definitions attempted to define a group of patients with LV dysfunction "out of proportion" to their degree of CAD.

Data analysis.   This study sought to develop the definition of ischemic etiology of HF that would provide the most power to distinguish the differing prognoses between ischemic and nonischemic patients. In so doing, we compared five classification schemes for assessing the extent of CAD: the traditional binary classification (ischemic vs. nonischemic), the number of diseased vessels (0, 1, 2, 3), the CAD prognostic index, the modified binary classification and the modified number-of-diseased-vessels classification (0/1, 2, 3).

Statistical analysis.   Baseline characteristics are described with medians and interquartile ranges for continuous variables and percentages for discrete variables. Pearson chi-square tests were used for group comparisons of unordered categorical variables, and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used for continuous measures. Survival curves for various groups were constructed using the method of Kaplan and Meier, and comparisons were made using the log-rank test. A p value ≤0.05 was used to indicate statistical significance for all comparisons. The association between baseline characteristics and mortality was calculated using a Cox proportional hazards model. Increased risk associated with a given variable was described using hazard ratios, which gives the relative increase in risk associated with the presence of a given characteristic. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to adjust for baseline differences between groups. The overall prognostic power of a given model was assessed by comparing the overall log likelihood ratio chi-square value for each model. The best definition of ischemic cardiomyopathy was considered to be the definition that maximized the chi-square test statistic for the model. All statistical analysis was performed with SAS version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina).


   Results
Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
Discussion
 APPENDIX
 References
 
A total of 1,921 patients met criteria for the study between January 1, 1986, and December 31, 1999. Median follow-up for the cohort was 3.1 years (interquartile range 1.0 to 6.2).

Baseline characteristics.   Baseline characteristics for the ischemic and nonischemic groups are provided in Table 1. Using the traditional definition of ischemic etiology, 1,304 patients (68%) were classified as ischemic and 617 (32%) as nonischemic. As expected, a number of baseline characteristics differed significantly between the ischemic and nonischemic cohorts, with ischemic patients more likely to be older, male, Caucasian, hypertensive, diabetic and smokers. Ejection fraction was slightly higher in the ischemic cohort than it was in the nonischemic cohort. Notably, over 40% of patients classified as nonischemic based on angiography reported a history of anginal chest pain.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 1 Baseline Characteristics

 
Survival.   Overall five-year survival for the study population was 49%. As expected, patients with an ischemic etiology of HF had shorter survival than those with nonischemic HF (five-year survival: 45% for the ischemic group vs. 62% for the nonischemic group, p < 0.001 by log-rank test). Unadjusted survival curves for the two groups are shown in Figure 1. Using unadjusted Cox proportional hazards analysis, a greater extent of CAD was significantly associated with shorter survival regardless of the classification scheme used. Unadjusted relationships between all tested variables and survival are shown in Table 2.



View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 1 Unadjusted Kaplan-Meier survival curves for ischemic versus nonischemic patients.

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 2 Univariable Relation of Baseline Characteristics With Mortality

 
Multivariable analysis.   Variables that were significant in the unadjusted analysis or thought to have clinical relevance were included as candidates in a multivariable survival model. After adjustment for baseline characteristics, ischemic etiology remained a significant independent predictor of long-term survival. Other independent predictors of survival were increasing age, male gender, lower EF, increasing NYHA functional class, diabetes mellitus and valvular heart disease.

Comparing etiology classification schemes.   In order to assess the most prognostically powerful method for describing ischemic etiology, several models were compared. Each model included the independent baseline predictors of survival (age, gender, EF, NYHA functional class, diabetes and valvular heart disease) while varying the etiology classification scheme. Etiology remained independently associated with outcome regardless of which classification scheme was used. The log likelihood ratio chi-squares for each overall model are provided in Table 3, and adjusted survival curves for each of the five methods of classifying ischemia are shown in Figure 2. The modified number-of-diseased-vessels model (zero to one-, two- or three-vessel disease) provided the best prognostic power overall. Among the binary classification models, the modified definition of ischemic etiology provided an increase in the prognostic power of the model (as measured by the overall model chi-square) over the traditional definition. Hazard ratios for each of the independent predictors of outcome are shown in Figure 3.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 3 Comparison of Prognostic Power of Multivariable Models

 




View larger version (69K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 2 Adjusted survival curves for each of the five methods of quantifying coronary artery disease (CAD). All curves additionally adjusted for age, ejection fraction, gender, New York Heart Association functional class, diabetes mellitus and valvular heart disease. (A) Traditional binary classification. (B) Modified binary classification. (C) CAD index. (D) Number-of-diseased-vessels classification. (E) Modified number-of-diseased-vessels classification.

 


View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 3 Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for all independent predictors of survival in the best multivariable model (modified number-of-diseased-vessels model). CHF = congestive heart failure; dz = diseased; EF = ejection fraction.

 

   Discussion
Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
APPENDIX
 References
 
The association of extent of CAD in a large population with both symptomatic and asymptomatic LV dysfunction has been previous reported by Bart et al. (2). That study demonstrated that the extent of CAD provides improved prognostic power over a binary definition in patients with LV dysfunction, with or without the clinical syndrome of HF. The current study examines those relationships in a more clinically applicable population with symptomatic HF (NYHA functional class II or greater), evaluating a large cohort of such patients with up to 14 years of follow-up. In so doing, we sought to develop and assess a more prognostically accurate definition of ischemic etiology that could be used for classification of HF patients in population studies and clinical trials, where etiology of HF is an important variable with substantial prognostic and therapeutic implications.

Our study identified a population of patients who would have traditionally been classified as having an ischemic etiology of HF but who had a prognosis similar to those with nonischemic etiology. These patients, who had single-vessel disease but no history of revascularization or MI, represent patients with HF "out or proportion" to their degree of CAD. Of the 1,304 patients initially classified as ischemic, 140 (11%) were reclassified into the nonischemic category based on this definition. By reclassifying such patients into the nonischemic group, we added prognostic power to the binary classification model and the more detailed number-of-diseased-vessels model. Since a binary classification system remains attractive due to its simplicity, we propose a modified definition of ischemic etiology of HF that includes patients with single-vessel coronary disease only if present in the left main or proximal LAD artery in patients without a history of MI or prior revascularization (Table 4).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 4 Proposed Definition of Ischemic Cardiomyopathy

 
Assigning etiology of HF.   Although the accurate assessment of the etiology of HF may be obvious in many cases, it may be a difficult clinical problem in others. Clinicians may use varying definitions or criteria to assign etiology, resulting in heterogeneity in clinical research as well as clinical practice. Our data point out the difficulty of using clinical assessment for this purpose, as 40% of the patients in the nonischemic group reported a history of typical angina. Quantification of coronary disease by angiography remains the most definitive means for assessing both the presence and the extent of CAD. Although a specific histologic pattern (replacement fibrosis) has been reported in endomyocardial biopsy specimens of patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy, this method lacks sensitivity and is significantly invasive (13). Traditional noninvasive means, such as nuclear imaging and echocardiography, have not been shown to consistently differentiate ischemic from nonischemic HF patients (14,15). Novel noninvasive means for differentiating ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathy such as positron emission tomography and electron-beam computed tomography are under investigation but not yet validated (16,17). Despite the potential attractiveness of noninvasive testing, our data suggest that detailed assessment of the extent of CAD, as can be done only with angiography, can contribute additional prognostic data in patients with symptomatic HF.

Study limitations.   The current study has several limitations. The study cohort was taken from the Duke Databank for Cardiovascular Disease, which contains data only on patients undergoing diagnostic cardiac catheterization. Thus, patients in both the ischemic and nonischemic groups would be weighted toward those with a higher "index of suspicion" for CAD. Although patients thought to be at very low risk for CAD would have been excluded from this analysis, our study population does reflect the patient population in which decision-making about etiology of HF is most difficult. Additionally, the pathophysiology of HF is complex, and many pathologic processes (such as ischemia, hypertension and diabetes mellitus) may contribute to the development of LV dysfunction in a given patient. Although binary classification systems are attractive due to simplicity and clarity, they may represent an oversimplification of a complex biologic phenomenon. Our study is strengthened by the requirement of coronary angiography in all patients, the large cohort of patients and the long-term follow-up.

Conclusions.   We propose a new definition of ischemic cardiomyopathy that reclassifies patients with single-vessel disease as nonischemic unless they have left main or proximal LAD disease or a history of revascularization or MI. The use of such a standardized definition will help limit variability in defining etiologic subgroups for clinical trials and population-based studies. Accurate ascertainment of etiology and its impact on prognosis is important for risk stratification of individual patients and for planning appropriate subgroups for clinical research. Based on these data, coronary angiography should remain a cornerstone of the evaluation of patients with newly diagnosed systolic dysfunction and symptomatic HF.


   APPENDIX
Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 APPENDIX
References
 
The Coronary Artery Disease (CAD) Index.  
The CAD prognostic index is a hierarchical scoring system to describe the extent of CAD on a continuous scale from 1 to 100
Extent of CAD Prognostic Weight(0 to 100)
No CAD ≥50% 0
One-VD 50% to 74% 19
One-VD 50% to 74% 23
One-VD 75% 23
One-VD ≥ 95% 32
Two-VD 37
Two-VD (both ≥ 95%) 42
One-VD ≥ 95%, proximal (LAD) 48
Two-VD ≥ 95% LAD 48
Two-VD ≥ 95% proximal LAD 56
Three-VD 56
Three-VD ≥ 95% in at least one vessel 63
Three-VD 75% proximal LAD 67
Three-VD ≥ 95% proximal LAD 74
Left main (75%) 82
Left main (≥95%) 100

CAD = coronary artery disease; LAD = left anterior descending coronary artery; VD = vessel disease.


   References
Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 APPENDIX
 References
 

  1. Gheorghiade M, Bonow RO. Chronic heart failure in the United States: a manifestation of coronary artery disease. Circulation. 1998;97:282–289[Free Full Text]
  2. Bart BA, Shaw LK, McCants CB, et al. Clinical determinants of mortality in patients with angiographically diagnosed ischemic or nonischemic cardiomyopathy. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997;30:1002–1008[Abstract]
  3. Adams KF, Dunlap SH, Sueta CA, et al. Relation between gender, etiology and survival in patients with symptomatic heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996;28:1781–1788[Abstract]
  4. Likoff MJ, Chandler SL, Kay HR. Clinical determinants of mortality in chronic congestive heart failure secondary to idiopathic dilated or to ischemic cardiomyopathy. Am J Cardiol. 1987;59:634–638[CrossRef][Medline]
  5. Franciosa JA, Wilen M, Ziesche S, Cohn JN. Survival in men with severe chronic left ventricular failure due to either coronary heart disease or idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy. Am J Cardiol. 1983;51:831–836[CrossRef][Medline]
  6. Follath F, Cleland JG, Klein W, Murphy R. Etiology and response to drug treatment in heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;32:1167–1172[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. Uretsky BF, Thygesen K, Armstrong PW, et al. Acute coronary findings at autopsy in heart failure patients with sudden death: results from the Assessment of Treatment with Lisinopril And Survival (ATLAS) trial. Circulation. 2000;102:611–616[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Wallis DE, O’Connell JB, Henkin RE, Costanzo-Nordin MR, Scanlon PJ. Segmental wall motion abnormalities in dilated cardiomyopathy: a common finding and good prognostic sign. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1984;4:674–679[Abstract]
  9. Williams JF, Bristow MR, Fowler MB, et al. Guidelines for the evaluation and management of heart failure: report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on Evaluation and Management of Heart Failure). Circulation. 1995;92:2764–2784[Free Full Text]
  10. Packer M, O’Connor CM, Ghali JK, et al. Effect of amlodipine on morbidity and mortality in severe chronic heart failure. N Engl J Med. 1996;335:1107–1114[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Harris PJ, Lee KL, Harrell FE, Behar VS, Rosati RA. Outcome in medically treated coronary artery disease: nonfatal infarction and death. Circulation. 1980;62:718–726[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Boyle CA, Decoufle P. National sources of vital status information: extent of coverage and possible selectivity in reporting. Am J Epidemiol. 1990;131:160–168[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Hare JM, Walford GD, Hruban RH, Hutchins GM, Deckers JW, Baughman KL. Ischemic cardiomyopathy: endomyocardial biopsy and ventriculographic evaluation of patients with congestive heart failure, dilated cardiomyopathy, and coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1992;20:1318–1325[Abstract]
  14. Greenberg JM, Murphy JH, Okada RD, Pohost GM, Strauss HW, Boucher CA. Value and limitations of radionuclide angiography in determining the cause of reduced left ventricular ejection fraction: comparison of idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy and coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol. 1985;55:541–544[CrossRef][Medline]
  15. Diaz RA, Nihoyannopoulos P, Athanassopoulos G, Oakley CM. Usefulness of echocardiography to differentiate dilated cardiomyopathy from coronary-induced congestive heart failure. Am J Cardiol. 1991;68:1224–1227[CrossRef][Medline]
  16. Mody FV, Brunken RC, Stevenson LW, Nienaber CA, Phelps ME, Schelbert HR. Differentiating cardiomyopathy of coronary artery disease from nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy utilizing positron emission tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1991;17:373–383[Abstract]
  17. Budhoff MJ, Shavelle DM, Lamont DH, et al. Usefulness of electron beam computed tomography scanning for distinguishing ischemic from nonischemic cardiomyopathy. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;32:1173–1178[Abstract/Free Full Text]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Eur Heart JHome page
J.-B. le Polain de Waroux, A.-C. Pouleur, C. Goffinet, A. Pasquet, J.-L. Vanoverschelde, and B. L. Gerber
Combined coronary and late-enhanced multidetector-computed tomography for delineation of the etiology of left ventricular dysfunction: comparison with coronary angiography and contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance imaging
Eur. Heart J., September 1, 2008; (2008) ehn381v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur Heart JHome page
S. Ghostine, C. Caussin, M. Habis, Y. Habib, C. Clement, A. Sigal-Cinqualbre, C.-Y. Angel, B. Lancelin, A. Capderou, and J.-F. Paul
Non-invasive diagnosis of ischaemic heart failure using 64-slice computed tomography
Eur. Heart J., September 1, 2008; 29(17): 2133 - 2140.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
S. Niizuma, Y. Iwanaga, T. Yahata, Y. Goto, T. Kita, S. Miyazaki, and H. Nakahama
Plasma B-type natriuretic peptide levels reflect the presence and severity of stable coronary artery disease in chronic haemodialysis patients
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., August 31, 2008; (2008) gfn491v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Am Coll CardiolHome page
K. C. Wu, R. G. Weiss, D. R. Thiemann, K. Kitagawa, A. Schmidt, D. Dalal, S. Lai, D. A. Bluemke, G. Gerstenblith, E. Marban, et al.
Late gadolinium enhancement by cardiovascular magnetic resonance heralds an adverse prognosis in nonischemic cardiomyopathy.
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., June 24, 2008; 51(25): 2414 - 2421.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Arch Intern MedHome page
E. Zintzaras, G. Raman, G. Kitsios, and J. Lau
Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Insertion/Deletion Gene Polymorphic Variant as a Marker of Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-analysis
Arch Intern Med, May 26, 2008; 168(10): 1077 - 1089.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum Mol GenetHome page
B. S. Sutton, D. R. Crosslin, S. H. Shah, S. C. Nelson, A. Bassil, A. B. Hale, C. Haynes, P. J. Goldschmidt-Clermont, J. M. Vance, D. Seo, et al.
Comprehensive genetic analysis of the platelet activating factor acetylhydrolase (PLA2G7) gene and cardiovascular disease in case-control and family datasets
Hum. Mol. Genet., May 1, 2008; 17(9): 1318 - 1328.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 CirculationHome page
P. G. Camici, S. K. Prasad, and O. E. Rimoldi
Stunning, Hibernation, and Assessment of Myocardial Viability
Circulation, January 1, 2008; 117(1): 103 - 114.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am J EpidemiolHome page
G. Kitsios and E. Zintzaras
Genetic Variation associated with Ischemic Heart Failure: A HuGE Review and Meta-Analysis
Am. J. Epidemiol., September 15, 2007; 166(6): 619 - 633.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Ann. Thorac. Surg.Home page
L. M. Fedoruk, C. G. Tribble, J. A. Kern, B. B. Peeler, and I. L. Kron
Predicting Operative Mortality After Surgery for Ischemic Cardiomyopathy
Ann. Thorac. Surg., June 1, 2007; 83(6): 2029 - 2035.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Am Coll CardiolHome page
D. Andreini, G. Pontone, M. Pepi, G. Ballerini, A. L. Bartorelli, A. Magini, C. Quaglia, E. Nobili, and P. Agostoni
Diagnostic Accuracy of Multidetector Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography in Patients With Dilated Cardiomyopathy
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., May 22, 2007; 49(20): 2044 - 2050.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 CMAJHome page
C. B. Marcu, A. M. Beek, and A. C. van Rossum
Clinical applications of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging.
Can. Med. Assoc. J., October 10, 2006; 175(8): 911 - 917.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 CirculationHome page
M. Gheorghiade, G. Sopko, L. De Luca, E. J. Velazquez, J. D. Parker, P. F. Binkley, Z. Sadowski, K. S. Golba, D. L. Prior, J. L. Rouleau, et al.
Navigating the Crossroads of Coronary Artery Disease and Heart Failure
Circulation, September 12, 2006; 114(11): 1202 - 1213.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur Heart JHome page
F. Ridocci, C. J. Soriano, and J. Estornell
Imaging approach to the assessment of cardiomyopathies using delayed enhancement cardiovascular magnetic resonance
Eur. Heart J., December 1, 2005; 26(23): 2601 - 2602.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur Heart JHome page
H. Mahrholdt, A. Wagner, R. M. Judd, U. Sechtem, and R. J. Kim
Delayed enhancement cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of non-ischaemic cardiomyopathies
Eur. Heart J., August 1, 2005; 26(15): 1461 - 1474.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur Heart JHome page
Authors/Task Force Members, K. Swedberg, Writing Committee:, J. Cleland, H. Dargie, H. Drexler, F. Follath, M. Komajda, L. Tavazzi, O. A. Smiseth, et al.
Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of chronic heart failure: executive summary (update 2005): The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Chronic Heart Failure of the European Society of Cardiology
Eur. Heart J., June 1, 2005; 26(11): 1115 - 1140.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Am Coll CardiolHome page
C. J. Soriano, F. Ridocci, J. Estornell, J. Jimenez, V. Martinez, and J. A. De Velasco
Noninvasive diagnosis of coronary artery disease in patients with heart failure and systolic dysfunction of uncertain etiology, using late gadolinium-enhanced cardiovascular magnetic resonance
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., March 1, 2005; 45(5): 743 - 748.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 CirculationHome page
M. M. Kittleson, S. Q. Ye, R. A. Irizarry, K. M. Minhas, G. Edness, J. V. Conte, G. Parmigiani, L. W. Miller, Y. Chen, J. L. Hall, et al.
Identification of a Gene Expression Profile That Differentiates Between Ischemic and Nonischemic Cardiomyopathy
Circulation, November 30, 2004; 110(22): 3444 - 3451.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Pathol.Home page
S. Gattenlohner, C. Waller, G. Ertl, B.-D. Bultmann, H.-K. Muller-Hermelink, and A. Marx
NCAM(CD56) and RUNX1(AML1) Are Up-Regulated in Human Ischemic Cardiomyopathy and a Rat Model of Chronic Cardiac Ischemia
Am. J. Pathol., September 1, 2003; 163(3): 1081 - 1090.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JAMAHome page
C. deFilippi, S. Wasserman, S. Rosanio, E. Tiblier, H. Sperger, M. Tocchi, R. Christenson, B. Uretsky, M. Smiley, J. Gold, et al.
Cardiac Troponin T and C-Reactive Protein for Predicting Prognosis, Coronary Atherosclerosis, and Cardiomyopathy in Patients Undergoing Long-term Hemodialysis
JAMA, July 16, 2003; 290(3): 353 - 359.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 CirculationHome page
J.A. McCrohon, J.C.C. Moon, S.K. Prasad, W.J. McKenna, C.H. Lorenz, A.J.S. Coats, and D.J. Pennell
Differentiation of Heart Failure Related to Dilated Cardiomyopathy and Coronary Artery Disease Using Gadolinium-Enhanced Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance
Circulation, July 8, 2003; 108(1): 54 - 59.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Ann. Thorac. Surg.Home page
G. Kleikamp, A. Maleszka, N. Reiss, B. Stuttgen, and R. Korfer
Determinants of mid- and long-term results in patients after surgical revascularization for ischemic cardiomyopathy
Ann. Thorac. Surg., May 1, 2003; 75(5): 1406 - 1412.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Am Coll CardiolHome page
G. M. Felker, R. L. Benza, A. B. Chandler, J. D. Leimberger, M. S. Cuffe, R. M. Califf, M. Gheorghiade, C. M. O'Connor, and OPTIME-CHF Investigators
Heart failure etiology and response tomilrinone in decompensated heart failure: Results from the OPTIME-CHF study
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., March 19, 2003; 41(6): 997 - 1003.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Am Coll CardiolHome page
A. Tenenbaum, E. Z. Fisman, and M. Motro
Toward a redefinition of ischemic cardiomyopathy: is it an indivisible entity?
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., July 3, 2002; 40(1): 205 - 206.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Am Coll CardiolHome page
G. M. Felker, L. K. Shaw, and C. M. O'Connor
Reply
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., July 3, 2002; 40(1): 206 - 206.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Am Coll CardiolHome page
T. O. Cheng
Ischemic cardiomyopathy: a historical note
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., May 1, 2002; 39(9): 1564 - 1565.
[Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Felker, G. M.
Right arrow Articles by O’Connor, C. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Felker, G. M.
Right arrow Articles by O’Connor, C. M.

HOME SUBSCRIPTIONS CURRENT ISSUE PAST ISSUES CARDIOSOURCE SEARCH HELP FEEDBACK