Dataset Information

Left ventricular ejection time is an independent predictor of incident heart failure in a community-based cohort.

ABSTRACT: AIMS:Systolic time intervals change in the progress of cardiac dysfunction. The usefulness of left ventricular ejection time (LVET) to predict cardiovascular morbidity, however, is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS:We studied middle-aged African-Americans from one of four cohorts of the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study (Jackson cohort, n=1980) who underwent echocardiography between 1993 and 1995. Left ventricular ejection time was measured by pulsed-wave Doppler of the left ventricular outflow tract and related to outcomes. A shorter LVET was associated with younger age, male sex, higher diastolic blood pressure, higher proportion of diabetes, higher heart rate, higher blood glucose levels and worse fractional shortening. During a median follow-up of 17.6 years, 384 (19%) had incident heart failure (HF), 158 (8%) had a myocardial infarction, and 587 (30%) died. In univariable analysis, a lower LVET was significantly associated with increased risk of all events (P<0.05 for all). However, after multivariable adjustment for age, sex, hypertension, diabetes, body mass index, heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, fractional shortening and left atrial diameter, LVET remained an independent predictor only of incident HF [hazard ratio 1.07 (1.02-1.14), P=0.010 per 10 ms decrease]. In addition, LVET provided incremental prognostic information to the known risk factors included in the Framingham risk score, in regard to predicting all outcomes except for myocardial infarction. CONCLUSION:Left ventricular ejection time is an independent predictor of incident HF in a community-based cohort and provides incremental prognostic information on the risk of future HF and death when added to known risk prediction models.

SUBMITTER: Biering-Sorensen T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6685547 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Left ventricular ejection time is an independent predictor of incident heart failure in a community-based cohort.

Biering-Sørensen Tor T Querejeta Roca Gabriela G Hegde Sheila M SM Shah Amil M AM Claggett Brian B Mosley Thomas H TH Butler Kenneth R KR Solomon Scott D SD

European journal of heart failure 20170904 7

<h4>Aims</h4>Systolic time intervals change in the progress of cardiac dysfunction. The usefulness of left ventricular ejection time (LVET) to predict cardiovascular morbidity, however, is unknown.<h4>Methods and results</h4>We studied middle-aged African-Americans from one of four cohorts of the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study (Jackson cohort, n=1980) who underwent echocardiography between 1993 and 1995. Left ventricular ejection time was measured by pulsed-wave Doppler of the left ve ...[more]

PMID: 28872225

Similar Datasets

Project description:Aims: Evidence-based guidelines for heart failure management depend mainly on current left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). However, fewer studies have examined the impact of prior LVEF. Patients may enter the heart failure with midrange ejection fraction (HFmrEF) category when heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) deteriorates or heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) improves. In this study, we examined the association between change in LVEF and adverse outcomes. Methods: HFmrEF patients with at least two or more echocardiograms 3 months apart at the First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University between September 1, 2015 and November 30, 2019 were identified. According to the prior LVEF, the subjects were divided into improved group (prior LVEF < 40%), stable group (prior LVEF between 40 and 50%), and deteriorated group (prior LVEF ≥ 50%). The primary outcomes were cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, hospitalization for worsening heart failure, and composite event of all-cause mortality or all-cause hospitalization. Results: A total of 1,168 HFmrEF patients (67.04% male, mean age 63.60 ± 12.18 years) were included. The percentages of improved, stable, and deteriorated group were 310 (26.54%), 334 (28.60%), and 524 (44.86%), respectively. After a period of follow-up, 208 patients (17.81%) died and 500 patients met the composite endpoint. The rates of all-cause mortality were 35 (11.29%), 55 (16.47%), and 118 (22.52%), and the composite outcome was 102 (32.90%), 145 (43.41%), and 253 (48.28%) for the improved, stable, and deteriorated groups, respectively. Cox regression analysis showed that the deterioration group had higher risk of cardiovascular death (HR: 1.707, 95% CI: 1.064-2.739, P = 0.027), all-cause death (HR 1.948, 95% CI 1.335-2.840, P = 0.001), and composite outcome (HR 1.379, 95% CI 1.096-1.736, P = 0.006) compared to the improvement group. The association still remained significant after fully adjusted for both all-cause mortality (HR = 1.899, 95% CI 1.247-2.893, P = 0.003) and composite outcome (HR: 1.324, 95% CI: 1.020-1.718, P = 0.035). Conclusion: HFmrEF patients are heterogeneous with three different subsets identified, each with different outcomes. Strategies for managing HFmrEF should include previously measured LVEF to allow stratification based on direction changes in LVEF to better optimize treatment.

Project description:ObjectivesTo determine clinical and prognostic differences between preserved and deteriorated systolic function (defined as left ventricular (LV) ejection fractions > or = 50% and < 50%, respectively) in patients with heart failure satisfying modified Framingham criteria.Patients and methodsRecords were studied of 1252 patients with congestive heart failure (CHF) (mean (SD) age 69.4 (11.7) years; 485 women, 767 men) who had been admitted to a cardiology service for CHF in the period 1991-2002 and whose LV systolic function had been echocardiographically evaluated within two weeks of admission. Data were collected on the main clinical findings, supplementary examinations, treatment, and duration of hospitalisation. Whether the patient was alive in the spring of 2003 was evaluated by searching the general archives of the hospital and by telephone survey.ResultsLV systolic function was preserved in 39.8% of patients. Age, female to male sex ratio, and prevalence of atrial fibrillation, valve disease, and other non-ischaemic, non-dilated cardiopathies were all significantly greater in the group with preserved systolic function. New York Heart Association functional class IV, third heart sound, jugular vein congestion, cardiomegaly, radiological signs of lung oedema, pathological Q waves, left bundle branch block, sinus rhythm, ischaemic cardiopathy, and dilated cardiomyopathy were all significantly more prevalent in the group with deteriorated systolic function, as was treatment with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and most other antihypertensive drugs on discharge from hospital. There was no significant difference in survival between the groups with preserved and deteriorated systolic function (either survival regardless of age at admission or in subgroups aged < 75 and > or = 75 years at admission). In the whole group, survival rates after one, three, and five years were 84.0%, 66.7%, and 50.9%, respectively.ConclusionIn view of the poor prognosis of patients with CHF with preserved LV systolic function, who are currently treated empirically, it is to be hoped that relevant controlled clinical trials under way will afford information allowing optimisation of their treatment.

Dataset Information

Left ventricular ejection time is an independent predictor of incident heart failure in a community-based cohort.

Publications

Left ventricular ejection time is an independent predictor of incident heart failure in a community-based cohort.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets