Dataset Information

Novel oral anticoagulant vs. warfarin in elderly atrial fibrillation patients with normal, mid-range, and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction.

ABSTRACT: AIMS:Patients with concomitant atrial fibrillation (AF) and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) have poor prognosis. Outcomes of novel oral anticoagulant (NOAC) in elderly AF patients with normal, mid-range, and reduced LVEF were investigated. METHODS AND RESULTS:Data were retrieved from Chang Gung Research Database during 2010-2017 for patients with AF. We excluded patients with venous thromboembolism within 6 months, total knee/hip replacement and heart valve replacement within 6 months, end-stage renal disease, stroke/systemic embolism (SE)/death within 7 days, age <65 years old, or no records of LVEF. Primary outcomes were ischaemic stroke (IS)/SE, major bleeding, and death from any cause. There was a total of 50 035 elderly AF patients retrieved. After exclusion criteria, 9615 patients with normal LVEF ? 50%, 737 with mid-range LVEF 41-49%, and 908 with reduced LVEF ? 40% were studied. At end of follow-up, patients on NOAC had significantly reduced IS/SE compared with warfarin in LVEF ? 50% [adjusted hazard ration (aHR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71-0.89] and LVEF 41-49% (aHR 0.57, 95% CI 0.36-0.88) after adjusting for covariates, while there was no difference in LVEF ? 40%. Patients on NOAC had significantly reduced major bleeding in all LVEF groups. In addition, patients on NOAC had significantly reduced death compared with warfarin in LVEF ? 50% (aHR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67-0.98). CONCLUSIONS:In elderly AF patients ?65 years, using NOAC was associated with lower IS/SE compared with warfarin in normal and mid-range LVEF but not in reduced LVEF. Using NOACs was associated with lower death compared with warfarin in normal LVEF.

SUBMITTER: Wu VC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7524083 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Novel oral anticoagulant vs. warfarin in elderly atrial fibrillation patients with normal, mid-range, and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction.

Wu Victor Chien-Chia VC Wang Chun-Li CL Lee Cheng-Hung CH Chen Yu-Ling YL Tu Hui-Tzu HT Wu Michael M Kuo Chang-Fu CF Chen Shao-Wei SW Huang Yu-Tung YT Wen Ming-Shien MS Chang Shang-Hung SH

ESC heart failure 20200716 5

<h4>Aims</h4>Patients with concomitant atrial fibrillation (AF) and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) have poor prognosis. Outcomes of novel oral anticoagulant (NOAC) in elderly AF patients with normal, mid-range, and reduced LVEF were investigated.<h4>Methods and results</h4>Data were retrieved from Chang Gung Research Database during 2010-2017 for patients with AF. We excluded patients with venous thromboembolism within 6 months, total knee/hip replacement and heart valve repla ...[more]

PMID: 32677373

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:AimsAtrial fibrillation (AF) increases the risk of heart failure (HF); however, little focus has been placed on the prevention of HF in patients with AF. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is an established echocardiographic parameter in HF patients. We sought to investigate the association of LVEF with HF events in AF patients without pre-existing HF.Methods and resultsThe Fushimi AF Registry is a community-based prospective survey of AF patients in Fushimi-ku, Japan. In this analysis, we excluded patients with pre-existing HF (defined as having one of the following: prior HF hospitalization, New York Heart Association class ≥ 2 in association with heart disease, or LVEF < 40%). Among 3233 AF patients without pre-existing HF, we investigated 2459 patients with the data of LVEF at enrolment. We divided the patients into three groups stratified by LVEF [mildly reduced LVEF (40-49%), below normal LVEF (50-59%), and normal LVEF (≥60%)] and compared the backgrounds and incidence of HF hospitalization between the groups. Of 2459 patients [mean age: 72.4 ± 10.5 years, female: 917 (37%), paroxysmal AF: 1405 (57%), and mean CHA2 DS2 -VASc score: 3.0 ± 1.6], the mean LVEF was 66 ± 8% [mildly reduced LVEF: 114 patients (5%), below normal LVEF: 300 patients (12%), and normal LVEF: 2045 patients (83%)]. Patients with lower LVEF demonstrated lower prevalence of female and paroxysmal AF (both P < 0.01), but age and CHA2 DS2 -VASc score were comparable between the three groups (both P > 0.05). During the median follow-up period of 6.0 years, 255 patients (10%) were hospitalized for HF (annual incidence: 1.9% per person-year). Multivariable Cox regression analysis demonstrated that lower LVEF strata were independently associated with the risk of HF [mildly reduced LVEF (40-49%): hazard ratio = 2.98, 95% confidence interval = 1.99-4.45 and below normal LVEF (50-59%): hazard ratio = 2.01, 95% confidence interval = 1.44-2.82, compared with normal LVEF (≥60%)] after adjustment by age, sex, type of AF, and CHA2 DS2 -VASc score. LVEF < 60% was significantly associated with the higher risk of HF hospitalization across all major subgroups without significant interaction (P for interaction; all P > 0.05). LVEF had an independent and incremental prognostic value for HF hospitalization in addition to natriuretic peptide levels in AF patients without pre-existing HF.ConclusionsLower LVEF was significantly associated with the higher incidence of HF hospitalization in AF patients without pre-existing HF, leading to the future risk stratification for and prevention of incident HF in AF patients.

Project description:AimsExercise intolerance is the leading manifestation of heart failure with preserved or mid-range ejection fraction (HFpEF or HFmrEF), and left atrial (LA) function might contribute to modulating left ventricular filling and pulmonary venous pressures. We aim to assess the association between LA function and maximal exercise capacity in patients with HFpEF or HFmrEF.Methods and resultsSixty-five patients, prospectively enrolled in the German HFpEF Registry, were analysed. Inclusion criteria were New York Heart Association functional class ? II, left ventricular ejection fraction > 40%, structural heart disease or diastolic dysfunction, and elevated levels of N terminal pro brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP). LA function was evaluated through speckle-tracking echocardiography by central reading in the Charité Academic Echocardiography core lab. All patients underwent maximal cardiopulmonary exercise test and were classified according to a peak VO2 cut-off of prognostic value (14 mL/kg/min). NT-pro-BNP was measured. Twenty-nine patients (45%) reached a peak VO2 < 14 mL/kg/min (mean value 12.4 ± 1.5) and 36 patients (55%) peak VO2 ? 14 mL/kg/min (mean value 19.4 ± 3.9). There was no significant difference in left ventricular ejection fraction (60 ± 9 vs. 59 ± 8%), left ventricular mass (109 ± 23 vs. 112 ± 32 g/m2 ), LA volume index (45 ± 17 vs. 47 ± 22 mL/m2 ), or E/e´ (13.1 ± 4.7 vs. 13.0 ± 6.0) between these groups. In contrast, all LA strain measures were impaired in patients with lower peak VO2 (reservoir strain 14 ± 5 vs. 21 ± 9%, P = 0.002; conduit strain 9 ± 2 vs. 13 ± 4%, P = 0.001; contractile strain 7 ± 4 vs. 11 ± 6%, P = 0.02; reported lower limits of normality for LA reservoir, conduit and contractile strains: 26.1%, 12.0%, and 7.7%). In linear regression analysis, lower values of LA reservoir strain were associated with impaired peak VO2 after adjustment for age, sex, body mass index, heart rhythm (sinus/AFib), and log-NTproBNP [? 0.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02-0.30, P = 0.02], with an odds ratio 1.22 (95% CI 1.05-1.42, P = 0.01) for peak VO2 < 14 mL/kg/min for LA reservoir strain decrease after adjustment for these five covariates. Adding left ventricular ejection fraction, it did not influence the results. On the other hand, the addition of LA strain to the adjustment parameters alone described above provided a significant increase of the predictive value for lower peak VO2 values (R2 0.50 vs. 0.45, P = 0.02). With receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, we identified LA reservoir strain < 22% to have 93% sensitivity and 49% specificity in predicting peak VO2 < 14 mL/kg/min. Using this cut-off, LA reservoir strain < 22% was associated with peak VO2 < 14 mL/kg/min in logistic regression analysis after comprehensive adjustment for age, sex, body mass index, heart rhythm, and log-NTproBNP [odds ratio 95% CI 10.4 (1.4-74), P = 0.02].ConclusionsIn this HFpEF and HFmrEF cohort, a reduction in LA reservoir strain was a sensible marker of decreased peak exercise capacity. Therefore, LA reservoir strain might be of clinical value in predicting exercise capacity in patients with HFpEF or HFmrEF.

Dataset Information

Novel oral anticoagulant vs. warfarin in elderly atrial fibrillation patients with normal, mid-range, and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction.

Publications

Novel oral anticoagulant vs. warfarin in elderly atrial fibrillation patients with normal, mid-range, and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets