Dataset Information

Comparison of ventricular structure and function in Chinese patients with heart failure and ejection fractions >55% versus 40% to 55% versus <40%.

ABSTRACT: Subjects with heart failure (HF) and a preserved ejection fraction (EF) are heterogenous and the EF used to define this syndrome varies considerably among studies. We sought to determine if physiologic differences exist between subjects with a normal EF (>55%) or mildly decreased EF (40% to 55%). 357 consecutive Chinese patients who were healthy (n = 93) or had HF (n = 264) underwent comprehensive echocardiography, Doppler analysis, and measurement of neurohormones. Subjects with HF were stratified by EF into those with normal EF (>55%, n = 128), mildly decreased EF (40% to 55%, n = 38), or moderate to severely decreased EF (<40%, n = 100). Employing noninvasive pressure-volume analysis, estimated end-systolic and end-diastolic pressure-volume relations were calculated. Subjects with HF and an EF 40% to 55% more often had a previous myocardial infarction and diabetes than those with HF and an EF >55%. Physiologically, the cohort with a mildly decreased EF had eccentrically enlarged ventricles with evidence of remodeling (rightward shifted end-diastolic pressure-volume relation) and decreased chamber contractility (downward shifted end-systolic pressure-volume relation) most comparable to subjects with overt systolic HF. In conclusion, in subjects with HF and a preserved EF, there are distinct physiologic differences between those with a normal (>55%) and a mildly decreased (40% to 55%) EF.

SUBMITTER: He KL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4940025 | biostudies-other | 2009 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of ventricular structure and function in Chinese patients with heart failure and ejection fractions >55% versus 40% to 55% versus <40%.

He Kun-Lun KL Burkhoff Daniel D Leng Wen-Xiu WX Liang Zhi-Ru ZR Fan Li L Wang Jie J Maurer Mathew S MS

The American journal of cardiology 20090301 6

Subjects with heart failure (HF) and a preserved ejection fraction (EF) are heterogenous and the EF used to define this syndrome varies considerably among studies. We sought to determine if physiologic differences exist between subjects with a normal EF (>55%) or mildly decreased EF (40% to 55%). 357 consecutive Chinese patients who were healthy (n = 93) or had HF (n = 264) underwent comprehensive echocardiography, Doppler analysis, and measurement of neurohormones. Subjects with HF were stratif ...[more]

PMID: 19268743

Similar Datasets

Project description:Higher left ventricular (LV) mass, wall thickness, and internal dimension are associated with increased heart failure (HF) risk. Whether different LV hypertrophy patterns vary with respect to rates and types of HF incidence is unclear. In this study, 4,768 Framingham Heart Study participants (mean age 50 years, 56% women) were classified into 4 mutually exclusive LV hypertrophy pattern groups (normal, concentric remodeling, concentric hypertrophy, and eccentric hypertrophy) using American Society of Echocardiography-recommended thresholds of echocardiographic LV mass indexed to body surface area and relative wall thickness, and these groups were related to HF incidence. Whether risk for HF types (HF with reduced ejection fraction [<45%] vs preserved ejection fraction [?45%]) varied by hypertrophy pattern was then evaluated. On follow-up (mean 21 years), 458 participants (9.6%, 250 women) developed new-onset HF. The age- and gender-adjusted 20-year HF incidence increased from 6.96% in the normal left ventricle group to 8.67%, 13.38%, and 15.27% in the concentric remodeling, concentric hypertrophy, and eccentric hypertrophy groups, respectively. After adjustment for co-morbidities and incident myocardial infarction, LV hypertrophy patterns were associated with higher HF incidence relative to the normal left ventricle group (p = 0.0002); eccentric hypertrophy carried the greatest risk (hazard ratio [HR] 1.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.41 to 2.54), followed by concentric hypertrophy (HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.87). Participants with eccentric hypertrophy had a higher propensity for HF with reduced ejection fraction (HR 2.23, 95% CI 1.48 to 3.37), whereas those with concentric hypertrophy were more prone to HF with preserved ejection fraction (HR 1.66, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.51). In conclusion, in this large community-based sample, HF risk varied by LV hypertrophy pattern, with eccentric and concentric hypertrophy predisposing to HF with reduced and preserved ejection fraction, respectively.

Project description:The angiotensin-receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) reduced cardiovascular deaths and heart failure hospitalization in patients with heart failure of reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Its role in non-HFrEF patients was not clear. This study aims to answer this question.In this retrospective study, we enrolled 928 patients diagnosed with non-HFrEF, 492 of them received angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) and the rest 436 received angiotensin-receptor-neprilysin inhibitor. Outcomes were compared by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and various clinical parameters were investigated using Cox multivariable analysis, followed by interaction analysis. Minnesota living with heart failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) was employed as one of the criteria to assess heart failure outcome.The cardiovascular (CV) death or HF hospitalization at 24 months occurred in 49 patients in ACEI group compared with 31 in ARNI group (Hazard Ratio (HR): 1.231, 95% confidence Interval (CI): 1.080-2.460, P = .031). And ARNI showed better prognosis of HF hospitalization (HR: 1.283, 95%CI: 1.065-1.360, P = .038). Cumulative Kaplan-Meier estimates of endpoints, ARNI could reduce the incidence of CV death or HF hospitalization (P = .042) and HF hospitalization (P = .035). The stratified analysis revealed that participants with age less than 70 years old had a lower incidence of CV death or HF hospitalization (HR: 1.194, 95%CI: 1.011-1992, P = .031) after treated with ARNI. Patients received diuretics could benefit from ARNI (HR: 1.383, 95%CI: 1.082-1.471, P = .019). Similar results were also observed in patients with heart rate lower than 90 bpm (HR: 1.556, 95%CI: 1.045-2.386, P = .003) and patients with atrial fibrillation history (HR: 1.873, 95%CI: 1.420-2.809, P = .011). ARNI could improve the quality of life both from the total, emotional and physical aspects.ARNI is an efficacy treatment strategy to improve the outcome and quality of life in patients with non-HFrEF.

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

Comparison of ventricular structure and function in Chinese patients with heart failure and ejection fractions >55% versus 40% to 55% versus <40%.

Publications

Comparison of ventricular structure and function in Chinese patients with heart failure and ejection fractions >55% versus 40% to 55% versus <40%.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure