Skip Navigation



European Heart Journal Advance Access published online on March 19, 2008
European Heart Journal, doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehn067
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
29/7/833    most recent
ehn067v1
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
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 Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Møller, J. E.
Right arrow Articles by Køber, L. V.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Møller, J. E.
Right arrow Articles by Køber, L. V.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2008. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Is heart failure the critical warning sign for death following myocardial infarction?

Jacob E. Møller1, Christian Torp-Pedersen2 and Lars V. Køber1,*

1 Department of Cardiology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark
2 Department of Cardiology, Gentofte Hospital, University of Copenhagen, DK-2900 Hellerup, Denmark

* Corresponding author. Tel: 4535458525, Fax: 4570211262, Email: lk@heart.dk

This editorial refers to ‘The timing of development and subsequent clinical course of heart failure after a myocardial infarction’ by A. Torabi et al., doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehn096

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

The prognostic dilemma

We try to predict the future of our patients with myocardial infarction (MI) in order to intervene and improve the prognosis, and this ambition is highlighted by concepts such as a ‘widow-maker stenosis’ or ‘tombstone ST-segment elevation’. However, in reality, our predictions are highly uncertain. With marked—and fortunately—rare exceptions such as cardiogenic shock, the predictive value of our observations are only valuable for groups of patients and highly uncertain for the individual patient. An important sign such as reduced left ventricular systolic function clearly separates groups, but in all groups the majority of patients live for years and the predictive value remains highly uncertain. New risk markers including natriuretic peptides . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Is heart failure the warning sign to track?

Were other warning signs important?

The implication


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?