Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 484

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A prospective study of biopsy-proven myocarditis: prognostic relevance of clinical and aetiopathogenetic features at diagnosis

Open access
Caforio, A. L.P., Calabrese, F., Angelini, A., Tona, F., Vinci, A., Bottaro, S., Ramondo, A., Carturan, E., Iliceto, S., Thiene, G., Daliento, L.·2007·European Heart Journal

Abstract

AIMS: Myocarditis may be idiopathic, viral, and/or immune; frequency of these forms and prognosis are ill-defined. We aimed at identifying aetiopathogenetic and prognostic markers in myocarditis, including viral genome on endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and serum anti-heart autoantibodies (AHA). METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied 174 patients, 110 males, aged 36 +/- 18 years, median follow-up 23.5 months, range 10-54; 85 patients had active myocarditis and 89 borderline myocarditis (no diffuse or severe inflammation) (Dallas criteria). Serum AHA were detected by indirect immunofluorescence. PCR was used to detect virus. Six-year actuarial survival was 73%. AHA were found in 56% of patients and positive PCR in 26%. Univariate predictors of death/transplantation were young age, longer symptom duration, giant cell myocarditis, NYHA II-IV, positive PCR, presentation with LV dysfunction, clinical signs/symptoms of heart failure, and echocardiographic and haemodynamic indexes of cardiac dysfunction. By Cox univariate analysis, highest risk was conferred by clinical signs/symptoms of left (HR = 4.3, CI 1.7-10.8, P = 0.002) and right heart failure (HR 3.4, CI 1.5-7.3, P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: In myocarditis, biventricular dysfunction at diagnosis was the main predictor of death/transplantation. AHA identified immune-mediated myocarditis in the majority of cases. Viral genome was a univariate predictor of adverse prognosis. Our approach of using AHA and positive PCR as aetiopathogenetic markers should help patient selection and recruitment in future studies on aetiological therapy.

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 · 10.1093/eurheartj/ehm076

Cites

4 of 4 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

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 484

Metadata

Authors
Caforio, A. L. P., Calabrese, F., Angelini, A., Tona, F., Vinci, A., Bottaro, S., Ramondo, A., Carturan, E., Iliceto, S., Thiene, G., & Daliento, L.
Venue
European Heart Journal
Published
2007-06-01
Volume
28
Issue
11
Pages
1326-1333
ISSN
  • 0195-668X (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-9645
OpenAlex
W2126824733
Cited by
484
References
4
FWCI
11.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A prospective study of biopsy-proven myocarditis: prognostic relevance of clinical and aetiopathogenetic features at diagnosis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/eurheartj/ehm076
The paper
Caforio, A. L. P., Calabrese, F., Angelini, A., Tona, F., Vinci, A., Bottaro, S., Ramondo, A., Carturan, E., Iliceto, S., Thiene, G., & Daliento, L. (2007). A prospective study of biopsy-proven myocarditis: prognostic relevance of clinical and aetiopathogenetic features at diagnosis. European Heart Journal. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehm076

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.