Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 241

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Sex-Specific Cardiovascular Structure and Function in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction

Gori, Mauro, Lam, Carolyn S. P., Gupta, Deepak K., Santos, Angela B. S., Cheng, Susan, Shah, Amil M., Claggett, Brian, Zile, Michael R., Kraigher-Krainer, Elisabeth, Pieske, Burkert, Voors, Adriaan A., Packer, Milton, Bransford, Toni, Lefkowitz, Martin, McMurray, John J. V., Solomon, Scott D., for the PARAMOUNT Investigators·2014·European Journal of Heart Failure

Abstract

Aims: Women are more likely to develop heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) than men. We studied the relationship between sex and cardiovascular structure and function in patients with HFpEF. Methods and results: The study included 279 participants from the PARAMOUNT study (57% women) with analysable baseline echocardiograms (mean age 71 years, 94% hypertensive, 38% diabetic). We assessed sex-based differences in baseline clinical characteristics and measures of cardiovascular structure/function. Coronary artery disease was less common in women than in men. Women were more obese and symptomatic, and less likely to have albuminuria. Women had higher indexed left ventricular (LV) wall thicknesses, worse diastolic function (lower E′, P = 0.002; higher E/E′, P < 0.001), while LV mass and LV volumes indexed for height2.7 were similar. Nonetheless, female sex was associated with a trend towards higher prevalence of abnormal LV geometry (defined as concentric hypertrophy, or eccentric hypertrophy, or concentric remodelling) at baseline (unadjusted P = 0.028, adjusted P = 0.056) and 12 weeks' follow up (unadjusted P = 0.001, adjusted P = 0.006), but not at 36 weeks' follow up (unadjusted P = 0.81, adjusted P = 0.99). Despite higher LV ejection fraction in women, global LV strain was similar between the sexes, while Tissue Doppler Imaging S′ mitral velocity was lower in women. Both LV diastolic and systolic stiffness were higher in women than men (P < 0.001), even adjusting for LV concentricity and clinical covariates. We observed no sex differences in systolic arterial–LV coupling, as women also had higher absolute arterial elastance compared with men, although this difference was not significant after adjusting for height2.7. Conclusion: More pronounced diastolic dysfunction may contribute to the greater predisposition for HFpEF in women compared with men.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ejhf.67

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 241

Metadata

Authors
Gori, M., Lam, C. S. P., Gupta, D. K., Santos, A. B. S., Cheng, S., Shah, A. M., Claggett, B., Zile, M. R., Kraigher-Krainer, E., Pieske, B., Voors, A. A., Packer, M., Bransford, T., Lefkowitz, M., McMurray, J. J. V., Solomon, S. D., & for the PARAMOUNT Investigators
Venue
European Journal of Heart Failure
Published
2014-02-23
Volume
16
Issue
5
Pages
535-542
ISSN
  • 1388-9842 (ISSN-L)
  • 1879-0844
OpenAlex
W1909765058
Cited by
241
References
6
FWCI
7.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.