Dataset Information

Prognostic Impact of Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction in Patients With Moderate Aortic Regurgitation: Potential Implications for Treatment Decision-Making

ABSTRACT:

Background:

The prognostic impact and optimal treatment of left ventricular systolic dysfunction in patients with moderate aortic regurgitation (AR) remain unknown. We aimed to assess the prognostic value of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in patients with moderate AR and explore the potential benefits of aortic valve intervention (AVI).

Methods:

In total, 1,211 consecutive patients with moderate AR (jet width, 25–64% of LV outflow tract; vena contracta, 0.3–0.6 cm; regurgitant volume, 30–59 mL/beat; regurgitant fraction, 30–49%; effective regurgitation orifice, 0.10–0.29 cm2) prospectively registered between April and June 2018 at 46 academic hospitals were included. The primary outcome was a composite of death or hospitalization for heart failure (HHF). The optimal LVEF threshold for predicting the primary outcome was determined through the penalized spline shape and maximally selected rank statistics.

Results:

During the 2-year follow-up, 125 deaths or HHF occurred. In the penalized splines, the relative hazard of death or HHF monotonically increased with decreasing LVEF. In the multivariate analysis, LVEF ≤55% was identified as the best threshold for independently predicting death or HHF under medical treatment (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 2.18; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.38–3.42; P = 0.001), with substantial incremental values (integrated discrimination improvement index = 0.018, P = 0.030; net reclassification improvement index = 0.225, P = 0.006; likelihood ratio test P < 0.001). Among patients with LVEF 35–55%, AVI within 6 months of diagnosis was associated with a reduced risk of death or HHF compared with medical treatment alone (adjusted HR: 0.15; 95% CI: 0.04–0.50; P = 0.002), whereas this benefit was markedly attenuated when LVEF was ≤35% (adjusted HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.21–1.97; P = 0.441, P-interaction = 0.010) or >55% (adjusted HR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.14–1.15; P = 0.089, P-interaction = 0.723).

Conclusions:

LVEF is an independent and incremental prognostic factor in patients with moderate AR, with LVEF ≤55% being a robust marker of poor prognosis. Patients with LVEF 35–55% may benefit from early surgical correction of moderate AR. Further studies are warranted to validate our findings in a randomized setting.

Registration:

China Valvular Heart Disease Study (China-VHD study, NCT03484806); clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03484806.

SUBMITTER: Zhao Q

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8802721 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background Moderate aortic stenosis ( MAS ) has not been extensively studied and characterized, as no published study has been specifically devoted to this condition. Methods and Results We aimed to describe the characteristics of patients with MAS and to evaluate their long-term survival compared with that of the general population. This study included 508 patients (mean±SD age, 75±11 years) with MAS (aortic valve area between 1 and 1.5 cm2; mean±SD aortic valve area, 1.2±0.15 cm2) and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction. Patients were mostly (86.4%) asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic, 78.3% had hypertension, 36.2% were diabetics, and 48.3% had dyslipidemia. Each patient with MAS was matched for the average survival (per year) of all patients of the same age and same sex from our region (Somme department, north of France). During follow-up (median 47 months), 113 patients (22.2%) underwent aortic valve replacement for severe AS. The mean±SD time between inclusion and surgery was 37±22 months. During follow-up, 255 patients (50.2%) died. The 6-year survival of patients with MAS was lower than the expected survival (53±2% versus 65%). In multivariate analysis, age (hazard ratio, 1.04 [95% CI, 1.02-1.05]; P<0.001), prior atrial fibrillation (hazard ratio, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.05-1.73]; P=0.019), and Charlson comorbidity index (hazard ratio, 1.11 [95% CI, 1.05-1.18]; P=0.002) were associated with increased mortality. Aortic valve replacement was associated with better survival (hazard ratio, 0.38 [95% CI, 0.27-0.54]; P<0.001). Conclusions The results of this study show that patients with MAS present many cardiovascular risk factors, a high rate of surgery during follow-up, and increased mortality compared with the general population mainly related to associated comorbidities. Patients with MAS should, therefore, be managed for their cardiovascular risk factors and comorbidities. They require close follow-up, especially when the aortic valve area is close to 1 cm2, as aortic valve replacement performed when patients transition to severe AS and develop indications for surgery during follow-up is associated with better survival.

Project description:ImportanceVolumetric measurements by transthoracic echocardiogram may better reflect left ventricular (LV) remodeling than conventional linear LV dimensions. However, the association of LV volumes with mortality in patients with chronic hemodynamically significant aortic regurgitation (AR) is unknown.ObjectiveTo assess whether LV volumes and volume-derived LV ejection fraction (Vol-LVEF) are determinants of mortality in AR.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study included consecutive asymptomatic patients with chronic moderately severe to severe AR from a tertiary referral center (January 2004 through April 2019).ExposuresClinical and echocardiographic data were analyzed retrospectively. Aortic regurgitation severity was graded by comprehensive integrated approach. De novo disk-summation method was used to derive LV volumes and Vol-LVEF.Main outcome and measuresAssociations between all-cause mortality under medical surveillance and the following LV indexes: linear LV end-systolic dimension index (LVESDi), linear LVEF, LV end-systolic volume index (LVESVi), and Vol-LVEF.ResultsOf 492 asymptomatic patients (mean [SD] age, 60 [17] years; 425 men [86%]), ischemic heart disease prevalence was low (41 [9%]), and 453 (92.1%) had preserved linear LVEF (≥50%) with mean (SD) LVESVi of 41 (15) mL/m2. At a median (interquartile range) of 5.4 (2.5-10.1) years, 66 patients (13.4%) died under medical surveillance; overall survival was not different than the age- and sex-matched general population (P = .55). Separate multivariate models, adjusted for age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and AR severity, demonstrated that in addition to linear LVEF and LVESDi, LVESVi and Vol-LVEF were independently associated with mortality under surveillance (all P < .046) with similar C statistics (range, 0.83-0.84). Spline curves showed that continuous risks of death started to rise for both linear LVEF and Vol-LVEF less than 60%, LVESVi more than 40 to 45 mL/m2, and LVESDi above 21 to 22 mm/m2. As dichotomized variables, patients with LVESVi more than 45 mL/m2 exhibited increased relative death risk (hazard ratio, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.10-3.38; P = .02) while LVESDi more than 20 mm/m2 did not (P = .32). LVESVi more than 45 mL/m2 showed a decreased survival trend compared with expected population survival.Conclusions and relevanceIn this large asymptomatic cohort of patients with hemodynamically significant AR, LVESVi and Vol-LVEF worked equally as well as LVESDi and linear LVEF in risk discriminating patients with excess mortality. A LVESVi threshold of 45 mL/m2 or greater was significantly associated with an increased mortality risk.

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.