Prognostic role of anemia in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Majmundar M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8424263 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jul-Aug
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Prognostic role of anemia in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Majmundar Monil M Doshi Rajkumar R Zala Harshvardhan H Shah Palak P Adalja Devina D Shariff Mariam M Kumar Ashish A Kumar Ashish A
Indian heart journal 20210625 4
Similar Datasets
Project description:Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) represents a heterogeneous collection of conditions that are unified by the presence of a left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50%, evidence of impaired diastolic function and elevated natriuretic peptide levels, all within the context of typical heart failure signs and symptoms. However, while HFpEF is steadily becoming the predominant form of heart failure, disease-modifying treatment options for this population remain sparse. This review provides an overview of the diagnosis, management and prevention of HFpEF for general physicians.
| S-EPMC6334030 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is increasing in prevalence as the general population ages. Poorly managed heart failure symptoms of decompensated HFpEF is one of the most common reasons for prolonged hospital admission. The high rate of morbidity and mortality associated with HFpEF is compounded by a poor understanding of the underpinning pathophysiology. Randomized controlled trials have so far been unable to identify an evidence base for reducing morbidity and mortality in patients with HFpEF, although there is some evidence to support quality of life (QOL) improvement. In this review, we described the recent advances on the pathophysiological understanding of HFpEF, the current and emerging treatment strategies, and what this may mean for individual patients. Potential treatments for HFpEF were divided into their relative management strategies and the current evidence assessed for effect on HFpEF mortality, hospital admission frequency, and QOL improvement. Overall, the understanding of HFpEF pathophysiology is improving and has been made a priority in identifying potential therapeutic targets. There is growing evidence that patients with ejection fractions (EF) of less than 60% may obtain a mortality benefit from ACE-inhibitors, angiotensin-neprilysin inhibitors, Angiotensin Receptor Blockers, and Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists. However, this covers only a small proportion of the HFpEF spectrum. Therefore, currently there are no universal treatment strategies recommended for HFpEF, and management should focus on an individualised approach and this should take into account the comorbidities of each patient.
| S-EPMC7186731 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsExercise right heart catheterization (RHC) is considered the gold-standard test to diagnose heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). However, exercise RHC is an insufficiently standardized technique, and current haemodynamic thresholds to define HFpEF are not universally accepted. We sought to describe the exercise haemodynamics profile of HFpEF cohorts reported in literature, as compared with control subjects.Methods and resultsWe performed a systematic literature review until December 2020. Studies reporting pulmonary artery wedge pressure (PAWP) at rest and peak exercise were extracted. Summary estimates of all haemodynamic variables were evaluated, stratified according to body position (supine/upright exercise). The PAWP/cardiac output (CO) slope during exercise was extrapolated. Twenty-seven studies were identified, providing data for 2180 HFpEF patients and 682 controls. At peak exercise, patients with HFpEF achieved higher PAWP (30 [29-31] vs. 16 [15-17] mmHg, P < 0.001) and mean right atrial pressure (P < 0.001) than controls. These differences persisted after adjustment for age, sex, body mass index, and body position. However, peak PAWP values were highly heterogeneous among the cohorts (I2 = 93%), with a relative overlap with controls. PAWP/CO slope was steeper in HFpEF than in controls (3.75 [3.20-4.28] vs. 0.95 [0.30-1.59] mmHg/L/min, P value < 0.0001), even after adjustment for covariates (P = 0.007).ConclusionsDespite methodological heterogeneity, as well as heterogeneity of pooled haemodynamic estimates, the exercise haemodynamic profile of HFpEF patients is consistent across studies and characterized by a steep PAWP rise during exercise. More standardization of exercise haemodynamics may be advisable for a wider application in clinical practice.
| S-EPMC9715813 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a serious disease, only limited options are available for its treatment. Recent studies have analyzed the effects of phosphodiesterase (PDE) inhibitors, especially PDE5 and PDE3 inhibitors, in patients with HFpEF, with mixed outcomes.MethodsWe searched PUBMED and EMBASE databases up to August 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and clinical trials that tested the effects of PDE inhibitors on patients with HFpEF were included as eligible studies. Indicators of left ventricular (LV) function, pulmonary arterial pressure (PAP), right ventricular (RV) function, exercise capacity, and quality of life (QOL) were used to evaluate the efficacy of PDE inhibitors in HFpEF.ResultsSix RCTs that reported in 7 studies were included to evaluate the efficiency of PDE inhibitors on HFpEF patients. In the pooled analysis, PDE inhibitors showed insignificant changes in the ratio of early diastolic mitral inflow to annular velocities, left atrial volume index, pulmonary artery systolic pressure (PASP), pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR), peak oxygen uptake, 6-minute walking test distance, as well as Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score. However, substantial improvement was observed in the tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE). Additionally, the regression analysis showed that PDE inhibitor administration time is a critical factor for the decrease in PASP.ConclusionsPDE inhibitors did not effectively improve LV function, PAP, exercise capacity, and QOL in patients with HFpEF. However, they improved RV function with significant difference, suggesting that PDE inhibitors might be a promising option for HFpEF patients with RV dysfunction.
| S-EPMC9508622 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsWe sought to compare the generalizability and prognostic implications of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) scores (HFA-PEFF and H2 FPEF score) in Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure with an Aldosterone Antagonist (TOPCAT) and Phosphodiesterase-5 Inhibition to Improve Clinical Status and Exercise Capacity in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction (RELAX) trial participants and matched controls from the Atherosclerosis Risk in Community (ARIC) study.Methods and resultsBased on the respective scores, the study participants from the TOPCAT (N = 356), RELAX (N = 216), and ARIC (N = 379) studies were categorized as having a low, intermediate, or high likelihood of HFpEF. Age, sex, and race matched controls free of cardiovascular disease who had unexplained dyspnoea were used to evaluate the diagnostic performance. The prognostic value of scores was assessed using multivariable-adjusted Cox regression analyses. The median HFA-PEFF scores in the TOPCAT, RELAX, and ARIC studies were 5.0 [interquartile range (IQR): 5.0-6.0], 4.0 (IQR: 2.0-4.0), and 3.0 (IQR: 2.0-4.0), respectively. The median H2 FPEF scores in the three studies were 5.5 (IQR: 4.0-7.0), 6.0 (IQR: 4.0-7.0), and 3.0 (IQR: 2.0-5.0), respectively. A low HFA-PEFF and H2 FPEF score can rule out HFpEF with high sensitivity (99.5% and 99.6%, respectively) and negative predictive value (95.7% and 98.3%, respectively). A high HFA-PEFF and H2 FPEF score can rule-in HFpEF with good specificity (82.8% and 95.6%, respectively) and positive predictive value (79.9% and 90.4%, respectively). Among TOPCAT participants, the hazard for adverse cardiovascular events per point increase in HFA-PEFF and H2 FPEF score was 1.26 (95% confidence interval: 0.98-1.63) and 1.01 (95% confidence interval: 0.88-1.15), respectively. A higher H2 FPEF score was associated with lower peak oxygen intake in RELAX trial participants (adjusted P = 0.01).ConclusionsThe HFA-PEFF and the H2 FPEF scores are reliable diagnostic tools for HFpEF. The prognostic utility of HFpEF scores requires further validation in larger rigorously phenotyped populations.
| S-EPMC8120372 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLeft atrial (LA) size is an established marker of risk for adverse outcomes in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). However, the independent prognostic importance of LA function in HFpEF is not known.Methods and resultsWe assessed LA function measured by speckle-tracking echocardiography in 357 patients with HFpEF enrolled in the Treatment Of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure With an Aldosterone Antagonist (TOPCAT) trial who were in sinus rhythm at the time of echocardiography. Lower peak LA strain, indicating LA dysfunction, was associated with older age, higher prevalence of atrial fibrillation and left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy, worse LV and right ventricular systolic function, and worse LV diastolic function. At a mean follow-up of 31 months (interquartile range, 18-43months), 91 patients (25.5%) experienced the primary composite end point of cardiovascular death, HF hospitalization, and aborted sudden death. Lower peak LA strain was associated with a higher risk of the composite end point (hazard ratio, 0.96 per unit of reduction in strain; 95% confidence interval, 0.94-0.99; P=0.009) and of HF hospitalization alone (hazard ratio, 0.95 per unit of reduction in strain; 95% confidence interval, 0.92-0.98; P=0.003). The association of LA strain with incident HF hospitalization remained significant after adjustment for clinical confounders, but not after further adjustment for LV global longitudinal strain and the E/E' ratio, parameters of LV systolic and diastolic function, respectively.ConclusionsLA dysfunction in HFpEF is associated with a higher risk of HF hospitalization independent of potential clinical confounders, but not independent of LV strain and filling pressure. Impairment in LV systolic and diastolic function largely explains the association between impaired LA function and higher risk of HF hospitalization in HFpEF.Clinical trial registrationURL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00094302.
| S-EPMC4826720 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceAccurate risk prediction of morbidity and mortality in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) may help clinicians risk stratify and inform care decisions.ObjectiveTo develop and validate a novel prediction model for clinical outcomes in patients with HFpEF using routinely collected variables and to compare it with a biomarker-driven approach.Design, setting, and participantsData were used from the Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the Lives of Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure (DELIVER) trial to derive the prediction model, and data from the Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibition in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (PARAGON-HF) and the Irbesartan in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction Study (I-PRESERVE) trials were used to validate it. The outcomes were the composite of HF hospitalization (HFH) or cardiovascular death, cardiovascular death, and all-cause death. A total of 30 baseline candidate variables were selected in a stepwise fashion using multivariable analyses to create the models. Data were analyzed from January 2023 to June 2023.ExposuresModels to estimate the 1-year and 2-year risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure, cardiovascular death, and all-cause death.ResultsData from 6263 individuals in the DELIVER trial were used to derive the prediction model and data from 4796 individuals in the PARAGON-HF trial and 4128 individuals in the I-PRESERVE trial were used to validate it. The final prediction model for the composite outcome included 11 variables: N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) level, HFH within the past 6 months, creatinine level, diabetes, geographic region, HF duration, treatment with a sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, transient ischemic attack/stroke, any previous HFH, and heart rate. This model showed good discrimination (C statistic at 1 year, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.71-0.75) in both validation cohorts (C statistic at 1 year, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.69-0.74 in PARAGON-HF and 0.75; 95% CI, 0.73-0.78 in I-PRESERVE) and calibration. The model showed similar discrimination to a biomarker-driven model including high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T and significantly better discrimination than the Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic (MAGGIC) risk score (C statistic at 1 year, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.58-0.63; delta C statistic, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.10-0.15; P < .001) and NT-proBNP level alone (C statistic at 1 year, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.64-0.68; delta C statistic, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.05-0.08; P < .001). Models derived for the prediction of all-cause and cardiovascular death also performed well. An online calculator was created to allow calculation of an individual's risk.Conclusions and relevanceIn this prognostic study, a robust prediction model for clinical outcomes in HFpEF was developed and validated using routinely collected variables. The model performed better than NT-proBNP level alone. The model may help clinicians to identify high-risk patients and guide treatment decisions in HFpEF.
| S-EPMC10974691 | 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:BackgroundObservational series suggest a mortality benefit from metformin in the heart failure (HF) population. However, the benefit of metformin in HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) has yet to be explored. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify whether variation in EF impacts mortality outcomes in HF patients treated with metformin.MethodsMEDLINE and EMBASE were searched up to October 2019. Observational studies and randomised trials reporting mortality in HF patients and the proportion of patients with an EF > 50% at baseline were included. Other baseline variables were used to assess for heterogeneity in treatment outcomes between groups. Regression models were used to determine the interaction between metformin and subgroups on mortality.ResultsFour studies reported the proportion of patients with a preserved EF and were analysed. Metformin reduced mortality in both preserved or reduced EF after adjustment with HF therapies such as angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and beta-blockers (β = - 0.2 [95% CI - 0.3 to - 0.1], p = 0.02). Significantly greater protective effects were seen with EF > 50% (p = 0.003). Metformin treatment with insulin, ACEi and beta-blocker therapy were also shown to have a reduction in mortality (insulin p = 0.002; ACEi p < 0.001; beta-blocker p = 0.017), whereas female gender was associated with worse outcomes (p < 0.001).ConclusionsMetformin treatment is associated with a reduction in mortality in patients with HFpEF.
| S-EPMC7409497 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsBiomarker-driven prognostic models incorporating N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) in heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) are lacking. We aimed to generate a biomarker-driven prognostic tool for patients with chronic HFpEF enrolled in EMPEROR-Preserved.Methods and resultsMultivariable Cox regression models were created for (i) the primary composite outcome of HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death, (ii) all-cause death, (iii) cardiovascular death, and (iv) HF hospitalization. PARAGON-HF was used as a validation cohort. NT-proBNP and hs-cTnT were the dominant predictors of the primary outcome, and in addition, a shorter time since last hospitalization, New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III or IV, history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), insulin-treated diabetes, low haemoglobin, and a longer time since HF diagnosis were key predictors (eight variables, all p < 0.001). The consequent primary outcome risk score discriminated well (c-statistic = 0.75) with patients in the top 10th of risk having an event rate >22× higher than those in the bottom 10th. A model for HF hospitalization alone had even better discrimination (c = 0.79). Empagliflozin reduced the risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for HF in patients across all risk levels. NT-proBNP and hs-cTnT were also the dominant predictors of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality followed by history of COPD, low albumin, older age, left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50%, NYHA class III or IV and insulin-treated diabetes (eight variables, all p < 0.001). The mortality risk model had similar discrimination for all-cause and cardiovascular mortality (c-statistic = 0.72 for both). External validation provided c-statistics of 0.71, 0.71, 0.72, and 0.72 for the primary outcome, HF hospitalization alone, all-cause death, and cardiovascular death, respectively.ConclusionsThe combination of NT-proBNP and hs-cTnT along with a few readily available clinical variables provides effective risk discrimination both for morbidity and mortality in patients with HFpEF. A predictive tool-kit facilitates the ready implementation of these risk models in routine clinical practice.
| S-EPMC9796853 | biostudies-literature