Embarking upon atrial fibrillation management in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: Charting a course.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Patel RB
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7719059 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundParoxysmal and permanent atrial fibrillation (AF) are common in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).ObjectivesThis study sought to determine the implications of left atrial (LA) myopathy and dysrhythmia across the spectrum of AF burden in HFpEF.MethodsConsecutive patients with HFpEF (n = 285) and control subjects (n = 146) underwent invasive exercise testing and echocardiographic assessment of cardiac structure, function, and pericardial restraint.ResultsPatients with HFpEF were categorized into stages of AF progression: 181 (65%) had no history of AF, 49 (18%) had paroxysmal AF, and 48 (17%) had permanent AF. Patients with permanent AF were more congested with greater pulmonary vascular disease and lower cardiac output. LA volumes increased, while LA compliance, LA reservoir strain, and right ventricular function decreased with increasing AF burden. The presence of permanent AF was characterized by a distinct pathophysiology, with greater total heart volume caused by atrial dilatation, leading to elevated filling pressures through heightened pericardial restraint. Survival decreased with increasing AF burden. Ten-year progression to permanent AF was common, particularly in paroxysmal AF (52%), and the likelihood of AF progression increased with higher AF stage, poorer LA compliance, and lower LA strain.ConclusionsLA compliance and mechanics progressively decline with increasing AF burden in HFpEF, increasing risk for new onset AF and progressive AF. These changes promote development of a unique phenotype of HFpEF characterized by heightened ventricular interaction, right heart failure, and worsening pulmonary vascular disease. Further study is required to identify therapeutic interventions targeting LA myopathy to improve outcomes in HFpEF.
| S-EPMC7455760 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsUnderstanding of the pathophysiology of progressive heart failure (HF) in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is incomplete. We sought to identify factors differentially associated with risk of progressive HF death and hospitalization in patients with HFpEF compared with patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).Methods and resultsProspective cohort study of patients newly referred to secondary care with suspicion of HF, based on symptoms and signs of HF and elevated natriuretic peptides (NP), followed up for a minimum of 6 years. HFpEF and HFrEF were diagnosed according to the 2016 European Society of Cardiology guidelines. Of 960 patients referred, 467 had HFpEF (49%), 311 had HFrEF (32%), and 182 (19%) had neither. Atrial fibrillation (AF) was found in 37% of patients with HFpEF and 34% with HFrEF. During 6 years follow-up, 19% of HFrEF and 14% of HFpEF patients were hospitalized or died due to progressive HF, hazard ratio (HR) 0.67 (95% CI: 0.47-0.96; P = 0.028). AF was the only marker that was differentially associated with progressive HF death or hospitalization in patients with HFpEF HR 2.58 (95% CI: 1.59-4.21; P < 0.001) versus HFrEF HR 1.11 (95% CI: 0.65-1.89; P = 0.7).ConclusionsDe novo patients diagnosed with HFrEF have greater risk of death or hospitalization due to progressive HF than patients with HFpEF. AF is associated with increased risk of progressive HF death or hospitalization in HFpEF but not HFrEF, raising the intriguing possibility that this may be a novel therapeutic target in this growing population.
| S-EPMC9715884 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough ∼20% of the elderly population develops atrial fibrillation (AF), little is known about the mechanisms. Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), which is associated with AF, is more common in aged women than in men.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to identify potential mechanisms of AF in an age-related HFpEF model.MethodsIn aged female Fischer F344 rats (21- to 24-month-old), which are prone to HFpEF, we induced AF by atrial pacing. Young Fischer F344 female rats (3- to 4-month-old) and age-matched Sprague Dawley female rats (27-month-old) served as controls. Phenotyping included echocardiography to assess left ventricular structure/function; in vivo electrophysiology and ex vivo high-resolution optical mapping to assess AF vulnerability; systemic and atrial inflammatory profiling; atrial histology; and expression of inflammasome signaling proteins.ResultsAged rats developed left ventricular hypertrophy, left atrial enlargement, diastolic dysfunction, and pulmonary congestion, without ejection fraction impairment, thus meeting the criteria for HFpEF. Increased serum inflammatory markers, hypertension, and obesity further characterize aged females. Sinoatrial and atrioventricular node dysfunction was associated with the high inducibility of AF in aged rats. Ex vivo electrical activation mapping revealed abnormal β-adrenergic responsiveness and slowed conduction velocity. Atrial inflammasome signaling was enhanced in aged rats, which may contribute to fibrotic remodeling and high AF susceptibility.ConclusionTogether, our data demonstrate that aging-related atrial remodeling and HFpEF are associated with atrial enlargement, fibrosis, conduction abnormalities, and nodal dysfunction, favoring a substrate conducive to AF.
| S-EPMC7802887 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and atrial fibrillation (AF) are very common conditions, particularly in the elderly. However, the mechanisms underlying the two disorders, including their intricate interaction have not been fully resolved. Here, our aim is to review the evidence on the role of the two types of senile amyloidosis in this connection. Two types of senile amyloidosis can be identified: wild-type transthyretin (TTR)-derived amyloidosis (ATTRwt) and isolated atrial amyloidosis (IAA). ATTRwt is an underlying condition that is being increasingly recognized in patients with HFpEF and often accompanied by AF. IAA is an established cause of AF, adding to the mechanism problem. New diagnostic and therapeutic possibilities have emerged that may facilitate clinical management of (senile) amyloidosis, which in turn may have implications for the management of HFpEF and AF.
| S-EPMC6553504 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Device therapy is a nonpharmacological approach that presents a crucial advancement for managing patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). This review investigated the impact of device-based interventions and emphasized their potential for optimizing treatment for this complex patient demographic. Cardiac resynchronization therapy, augmented by atrioventricular node ablation with His-bundle pacing or left bundle-branch pacing, is effective for enhancing cardiac function and establishing atrioventricular synchrony. Cardiac contractility modulation and vagus nerve stimulation represent novel strategies for increasing myocardial contractility and adjusting the autonomic balance. Left ventricular expanders have demonstrated short-term benefits in HFpEF patients but require more investigation for long-term effectiveness and safety, especially in patients with AF. Research gaps regarding complications arising from left ventricular expander implantation need to be addressed. Device-based therapies for heart valve diseases, such as transcatheter aortic valve replacement and transcatheter edge-to-edge repair, show promise for patients with AF and HFpEF, particularly those with mitral or tricuspid regurgitation. Clinical evaluations show that these device therapies lessen AF occurrence, improve exercise tolerance, and boost left ventricular diastolic function. However, additional studies are required to perfect patient selection criteria and ascertain the long-term effectiveness and safety of these interventions. Our review underscores the significant potential of device therapy for improving the outcomes and quality of life for patients with AF and HFpEF.
| S-EPMC10943171 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimNon-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD)-related advanced liver fibrosis (Stage 3 or 4) was reported to be linked to worse prognosis in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). This study aims to assess the relationship between liver fibrosis scores and new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) incidence in patients with HFpEF in the Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure with an Aldosterone Antagonist (TOPCAT) trial.Methods and resultsBaseline liver fibrosis levels, assessed by NAFLD fibrosis score (NFS) or Fibrosis-4 index (FIB-4), with AF incidence were expressed as hazard ratios (HRs) using the Cox proportional hazard model. The risk for advanced fibrosis was estimated to be 21.5% (447/2072) as assessed by FIB-4 (>3.25) and 4.2% (88/2072) as assessed by NFS (>0.676) in HFpEF patients without baseline AF. After a median follow-up of 3.11 years, 106 new-onset AF cases occurred. In multivariate analysis, elevated NFS [NFS = -1.455-0.676: HR 2.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27-4.68; NFS > 0.676: HR 3.36, 95% CI 1.27-6.80; per 1 unit increase: HR 1.15, 95% CI 1.01-1.32], not FIB-4 (FIB-4 = 1.45-3.25: HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.67-1.55; FIB-4 > 3.25: HR 1.69, 95% CI 0.76-3.79; per 1 unit increase: HR 1.13, 95% CI 0.93-1.37), was associated with increased AF incidence. The NFS (C-index 0.662), not FIB-4 (C-index 0.531), had a moderate predictive ability in predicting incident AF.ConclusionsAmong patients with HFpEF, the risk of advanced liver fibrosis is associated with an increased incidence of new-onset AF and may be a novel predictor for new-onset AF. Additional studies are needed to confirm our results.
| S-EPMC9773713 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere are few prospective studies assessing the benefits of rhythm control of atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), which accounts for 50% of all heart failure patients.ObjectiveConduct a meta-analysis to assess the effects of rhythm control (ablation and/or antiarrhythmic medications) vs rate control on all-cause mortality in AF patients with HFpEF.MethodsDatabases were searched for studies reporting the effect of rhythm control vs rate control on mortality in patients with HFpEF (Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and EBSCO CINAHL). The search was not restricted to time or publication status. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. The minimum duration of follow-up required for inclusion was 1 year.ResultsThe literature search identified 1210 candidate studies; 5 studies and 16,825 patients were included. The study population had 57% men with a mean age of 71± 2.5 years. Rhythm control for AF was associated with lower all-cause mortality (odds ratio 0.735, 95% confidence interval 0.665-0.813; P < .001) as compared to rate control.ConclusionRhythm control for AF in patients with HFpEF was associated with decreased all-cause mortality.
| S-EPMC9626734 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The aim of this study was to determine whether left atrial ejection fraction (LAEF) quantified with cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) was different between heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and controls, and its relation to prognosis. As part of our single-centre, prospective, observational study, 188 subjects (HFpEF n?=?140, controls n?=?48) underwent phenotyping with contrast-enhanced CMR, transthoracic echocardiography, blood sampling and six-minute walk testing. LAEF was calculated using the biplane method. Atrial fibrillation (AF) was present in 43 (31%) of HFpEF subjects. Overall, LAEF (%) was lower in HFpEF patients inclusive of AF (32?±?16) or those in sinus rhythm alone (41?±?12) compared to controls (51?±?11), p?<?0.0001. LAEF correlated inversely with maximal and minimal left atrial volumes indexed (r?=??-?0.602, r?=??-?0.762), and plasma N-terminal pro-atrial natriuretic peptide (r?=??-?0.367); p?<?0.0001. During median follow-up (1429 days), there were 67 composite events of all-cause death or hospitalization for heart failure (22 deaths, 45 HF hospitalizations) in HFpEF. Lower LAEF (below median) was associated with an increased risk of composite endpoints (Log-Rank: all p?=?0.028; sinus p?=?0.036). In multivariable Cox regression analysis, LAEF (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.767, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.591-0.996; p?=?0.047) and indexed extracellular volume (HR 1.422, CI 1.015-1.992; p?=?0.041) were the only parameters that remained significant when added to a base prognostic model comprising age, prior HF hospitalization, diastolic blood pressure, lung disease, NYHA, six-minute-walk-test-distance, haemoglobin, creatinine and B-type natriuretic peptide. CMR-derived LAEF is lower in HFpEF compared to healthy controls and is a strong prognostic biomarker.
| S-EPMC6942575 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7529338 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsThis study assessed the prognostic implications of mechanical atrial dysfunction in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) patients with different stages of atrial fibrillation (AF) in detail.Methods and resultsHFpEF patients (n = 258) systemically underwent an extensive clinical characterization, including 24-h Holter monitoring and speckle-tracking echocardiography. Patients were categorized according to rhythm and stages of AF: 112 with no history of AF (no AF), 56 with paroxysmal AF (PAF), and 90 with sustained (persistent/permanent) AF (SAF). A progressive decrease in mechanical atrial function was seen: left atrial reservoir strain (LASr) 30.5 ± 10.5% (no AF), 22.3 ± 10.5% (PAF), and 13.9 ± 7.8% (SAF), P < 0.001. Independent predictors for lower LASr values were AF, absence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, higher N-terminal-pro hormone B-type natriuretic peptide, left atrial volume index, and relative wall thickness, lower left ventricular global longitudinal strain, and echocardiographic signs of elevated left ventricular filling pressure. LASr was an independent predictor of adverse outcome (hazard ratio per 1% decrease =1.049, 95% confidence interval 1.014-1.085, P = 0.006), whereas AF was not when the multivariable model included LASr. Moreover, LASr mediated the adverse outcome associated with AF in HFpEF (P = 0.008).ConclusionMechanical atrial dysfunction has a possible greater prognostic role in HFpEF compared to AF status alone. Mechanical atrial dysfunction is a predictor of adverse outcome independently of AF presence or stage, and may be an underlying mechanism (mediator) for the worse outcome associated with AF in HFpEF. This may suggest mechanical atrial dysfunction plays a crucial role in disease progression in HFpEF patients with AF, and possibly also in HFpEF patients without AF.
| S-EPMC8685598 | biostudies-literature