The midrange left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is associated with higher all-cause mortality during the 1-year follow-up compared to preserved LVEF among real-world patients with acute heart failure: a single-center propensity score-matched analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 268-278 ◽  
Author(s):  
Josip Anđelo Borovac ◽  
Katarina Novak ◽  
Josko Bozic ◽  
Duska Glavas
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Propensity Score ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Single Center ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
All Cause Mortality

P1167Effect of diabetes on all-cause mortality in CRT patients

EP Europace ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
E D Merkel ◽  
A Behon ◽  
W R Schwertner ◽  
A Pinter ◽  
I Osztheimer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Impaired Left Ventricular Function ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Heart Failure Patients ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Abstract Background Heart failure patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) have a higher risk for all-cause mortality and also for sudden cardiac death. We lack data on the effect of adding an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) on all-cause mortality in diabetic heart failure patients. Purpose We aimed to investigate the risk of DM on all-cause mortality in CRT patients, and to examine the beneficial effect of adding an ICD on all-cause mortality by left ventricular ejection fraction in CRT patients with or without DM. Methods We examined retrospectively 2525 patients who underwent CRT implantation based on the current guidelines at our clinic between June 2000 and September 2018, of which 928 (36%) had diabetes. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality, also expressed as events per 100 person-year by quintiles of ejection fraction (EF) with or without an ICD or DM. Time to event data was investigated by Kaplan Meier and multivariate Cox regressional analysis. Results During our mean follow-up time of 4.6 years, 1432 (56%) patients reached the primary endpoint, of which 553 (38%) had DM. In the DM group, hypertension (82% vs. 66%; p‹0.01), ischemic etiology (56% vs. 44%; p‹0.01), myocardial infarction (43% vs. 36%; p‹0.01) was more frequent compared to non-DM group. There was no difference between the two groups regarding the implantation of an ICD (54% vs. 53%; p = 0,84). Those with DM showed a 25% higher risk of all-cause mortality (HR 1.25; 95% CI 1.12-1.40; p‹0.01), also observable after adjusting for relevant clinical covariates such as age, gender, atrial fibrillation and the addition of an ICD (HR 1.17; 95% CI 1.06-1.31; p‹0.01). Examined as all-cause mortality per 100 person-year follow up, patients with EF›30% and DM (13,7 events/ 100 person-year follow-up for an EF 30-35%) showed similar risk as those without DM and a severely impaired left ventricular function with EF‹25% (14 events/100 person-year follow-up for an EF <25%). Investigating the composite end-point of all-cause mortality and heart failure hospitalization, those with DM showed a 21% higher risk than non-DM CRT patients (HR 1.21; CI 1.09-1.34; p = 0 < 0.001). Adding an ICD for CRT patients with DM reduces the risk of all-cause mortality significantly by 32% (HR 0,68; CI 0,56 to 0,82; p < 0.001) during the first six years but diminished on longer follow-up time. Conclusions Diabetes was found as an independent predictor of all-cause mortality in CRT patients. Those with a left ventricular ejection fraction above 30% have comparable risk of mortality as non-diabetic patients with a severely impaired left ventricular function. In diabetic CRT patients the addition of an ICD reduces the risk of all-cause mortality mostly seen in the first six years. These findings might implicate the relevance of adding an ICD to CRT even at a higher ejection fraction in those with severe comorbidities such as diabetes. Abstract Figure. All-cause mortality in CRT, DM patients

scholarly journals Sex‐Related Differences in Mortality Following Admission for Acute Heart Failure Across the Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Spectrum

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Enrique Santas ◽  
Patricia Palau ◽  
Pau Llácer ◽  
Rafael de la Espriella ◽  
Gema Miñana ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Mortality Risk ◽  
Lower Risk ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Background Following a heart failure (HF)‐decompensation, there is scarce data about sex‐related prognostic differences across left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) status. We sought to evaluate sex‐related differences in 6‐month mortality risk across LVEF following admission for acute HF. Methods and Results We retrospectively evaluated 4812 patients consecutively admitted for acute HF in a multicenter registry from 3 hospitals. Study end points were all‐cause, cardiovascular, and HF‐related mortality at 6‐month follow‐up. Multivariable Cox regression models were fitted to investigate sex‐related differences across LVEF. A total of 2243 (46.6%) patients were women, 2569 (53.4%) were men, and 2608 (54.2%) showed LVEF≥50%. At 6‐month follow‐up, 645 patients died (13.4%), being 544 (11.3%) and 416 (8.6%) cardiovascular and HF‐related deaths, respectively. LVEF was not independently associated with mortality (HR, 1.02; 95% CI 0.99–1.05; P =0.135). After multivariable adjustment, we found no sex‐related differences in all‐cause mortality ( P value for interaction=0.168). However, a significant interaction between sex and cardiovascular and HF mortality risks was found across LVEF ( P value for interaction=0.030 and 0.007, respectively). Compared with men, women had a significantly lower risk of cardiovascular and HF‐mortality at LVEF<25% and <43%, respectively. On the contrary, women showed a higher risk of HF‐mortality at the upper extreme of LVEF (>80%). Conclusions Following an admission for acute HF, no sex‐related differences were found in all‐cause mortality risk. However, when compared with men, women showed a lower risk of cardiovascular and HF‐mortality at the lower extreme of LVEF. On the contrary, they showed a higher risk of HF death at the upper extreme.

4181Prognosis of patients with mid-range left ventricular ejection fraction treated with PCI: insight from the global leaders study

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
P Chichareon ◽  
R Modolo ◽  
N Kogame ◽  
M Tomaniak ◽  
E Teiger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Stent Thrombosis ◽  
Composite Endpoint ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Abstract Background Heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction (left ventricular ejection fraction between 40 to 49%) was introduced in the 2016 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for heart failure. The prognosis of the mid-range of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was less well assessed in patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Purpose We aimed to assess the 2-year outcomes of patients with mid-range ejection fraction (LVEF between 40 to 49%) after PCI compared with reduced LVEF (<40%) and preserved LVEF (≥50) in the GLOBAL LEADERS study. Methods The GLOBAL LEADERS study was a multicenter, randomized trial comparing the efficacy and safety of two antiplatelet strategies in all-comers patients undergoing PCI with biolimus-A9 eluting stent. Patients with available information of LVEF were eligible in the present analysis. Patients were classified according to their LVEF into three groups; preserved (LVEF ≥50), mid-range (LVEF 40–49%) and reduced (LVEF <40%) left ventricular ejection fraction. Clinical outcomes at 2 years after PCI were compared among three groups in the multivariable Cox regression analysis. The primary outcome of present study was all-cause mortality at 2 years after PCI. The secondary outcomes were patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE). Individual components of the composite endpoint, definite or probable stent thrombosis and bleeding academic research consortium (BARC) type 3 or 5 were also reported. Results Out of 15968 patients included in the GLOBAL LEADERS study, information of LVEF was available in 15008 patients (93.99%); 12,128 patients (80.81%) were in the group of preserved LVEF, 1,737 patients (11.57%) were in the mid-range LVEF group and 1,143 patients (7.62%) were in the reduced LVEF group. The risk of all-cause mortality and POCE at 2 years were significantly different among the three groups. In an adjusted model, compared with the group of preserved LVEF, the hazard ratio for the all-cause mortality at 2 years rose from 1.89 (95% CI, 1.46–2.45) to 3.72 (95% CI, 2.95–4.70) in the group of mid-range and reduced LVEF respectively. Similar rises were observed for the POCE at 2 years from 1.27 (95% CI, 1.11–1.44) in the group of mid-range LVEF to 1.63 (95% CI, 1.42–1.87) in the group of reduced LVEF. The risk of stroke, myocardial infarction, and definite or probable stent thrombosis in patients with mid-range LVEF was not different from patients with reduced LVEF (see figure). A similar risk of revascularization was observed among the three groups. Outcomes among three LVEF categories Conclusion Patients with mid-range LVEF undergoing PCI had a different prognosis from patients with reduced LVEF and preserved LVEF in term of survival and composite ischemic endpoints at 2 years.

Abstract P232: Screening Past B-Type Natriuretic Peptide (BNP) Values to Identify Candidates for Treatment of Systolic Dysfunction

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Parisa Gholami ◽  
Shoutzu Lin ◽  
Paul Heidenreich
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Mean

Background: BNP testing is now common though it is not clear if the test results are used to improve patient care. A high BNP may be an indicator that the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is low (<40%) such that the patient will benefit from life-prolonging therapy. Objective: To determine how often clinicians obtained a measure of LVEF (echocardiography, nuclear) following a high BNP value when the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was not known to be low (<40%). Methods and Results: We reviewed the medical records of 296 consecutive patients (inpatient or outpatient) with a BNP values of at least 200 pg/ml at a single medical center (tertiary hospital with 8 community clinics). A prior diagnosis of heart failure was made in 65%, while 42% had diabetes, 79% had hypertension, 59% had ischemic heart disease and 31% had chronic lung disease. The mean age was 73 ± 12 years, 75% were white, 10% black, 15% other and the mean BNP was 810 ± 814 pg/ml. The LVEF was known to be < 40% in 84 patients (28%, mean BNP value of 1094 ± 969 pg/ml). Of the remaining 212 patients without a known low LVEF, 161 (76%) had a prior LVEF >=40% ( mean BNP value of 673 ± 635 pg/ml), and 51 (24%) had no prior LVEF documented (mean BNP 775 ± 926 pg/ml). Following the high BNP, a measure of LVEF was obtained (including outside studies documented by the primary care provider) within 6 months in only 53% (113 of 212) of those with an LVEF not known to be low. Of those with a follow-up echocardiogram, the LVEF was <40% in 18/113 (16%) and >=40% in 95/113 (84%). There was no significant difference in mean initial BNP values between those with a follow-up LVEF <40% (872 ± 940pg/ml), >=40% (704 ± 737 pg/ml), or not done (661 ± 649 pg/ml, p=0.5). Conclusions: Follow-up measures of LVEF did not occur in almost 50% of patients with a high BNP where the information may have led to institution of life-prolonging therapy. Of those that did have a follow-up study a new diagnosis of depressesd LVEF was noted in 16%. Screening of existing BNP and LVEF data and may be an efficient strategy to identify patients that may benefit from life-prolonging therapy for heart failure.

Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Recovery in Patients with Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction Treated with Sacubitril/Valsartan

Cardiology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 145 (5) ◽  
pp. 275-282 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pablo Díez-Villanueva ◽  
Lourdes Vicent ◽  
Francisco de la Cuerda ◽  
Alberto Esteban-Fernández ◽  
Manuel Gómez-Bueno ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Functional Class ◽  
Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Cardiac Resynchronization ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction

Background: A significant number of heart failure (HF) patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) experience ventricular function recovery during follow-up. We studied the variables associated with LVEF recovery in patients treated with sacubitril/valsartan (SV) in clinical practice. Methods: We analyzed data from a prospective and multicenter registry including 249 HF outpatients with reduced LVEF who started SV between October 2016 and March 2017. The patients were classified into 2 groups according to LVEF at the end of follow-up (>35%: group R, or ≤35%: group NR). Results: After a mean follow-up of 7 ± 0.1 months, 62 patients (24.8%) had LVEF >35%. They were older (71.3 ± 10.8 vs. 67.5 ± 12.1 years, p = 0.025), and suffered more often from hypertension (83.9 vs. 73.8%, p = 0.096) and higher blood pressure before and after SV (both, p < 0.01). They took more often high doses of beta-blockers (30.6 vs. 27.8%, p = 0.002), with a smaller proportion undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (14.8 vs. 29.0%, p = 0.028) and fewer implanted cardioverter defibrillators (ICD; 32.8 vs. 67.9%, p < 0.001), this being the only predictive variable of NR in the multivariate analysis (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.13–0.47, p < 0.0001). At the end of follow-up, the mean LVEF in group R was 41.9 ± 8.1% (vs. 26.3 ± 4.7% in group NR, p < 0.001), with an improvement compared with the initial LVEF of 14.6 ± 10.8% (vs. 0.8 ± 4.5% in group NR, p < 0.0001). Functional class improved in both groups, mainly in group R (p = 0.035), with fewer visits to the emergency department (11.5 vs. 21.6%, p = 0.07). Conclusions: In patients with LVEF ≤35% treated with SV, not carrying an ICD was independently associated with LVEF recovery, which was related to greater improvement in functional class.

scholarly journals Prognostic impacts of changes in left ventricular ejection fraction in heart failure patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction

Open Heart ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. e001112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akiomi Yoshihisa ◽  
Yu Sato ◽  
Yuki Kanno ◽  
Mai Takiguchi ◽  
Tetsuro Yokokawa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Cardiac Event ◽  
Troponin I ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
All Cause Mortality

BackgroundIt has been reported that recovery of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is associated with better prognosis in heart failure (HF) patients with reduced EF (rEF). However, change of LVEF has not yet been investigated in cases of HF with preserved EF (HFpEF).Methods and resultsConsecutive 1082 HFpEF patients, who had been admitted to hospital due to decompensated HF (EF >50% at the first LVEF assessment at discharge), were enrolled, and LVEF was reassessed within 6 months in the outpatient setting (second LVEF assessment). Among the HFpEF patients, LVEF of 758 patients remained above 50% (pEF group), 138 patients had LVEF of 40%–49% (midrange EF, mrEF group) and 186 patients had LVEF of less than 40% (rEF group). In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, younger age and presence of higher levels of troponin I were predictors of rEF (worsened HFpEF). In the Kaplan-Meier analysis, the cardiac event rate of the groups progressively increased from pEF, mrEF to rEF (log-rank, p<0.001), whereas all-cause mortality did not significantly differ among the groups. In the multivariable Cox proportional hazard analysis, rEF (vs pEF) was not a predictor of all-cause mortality, but an independent predictor of increased cardiac event rates (HR 1.424, 95% CI 1.020 to 1.861, p=0.039).ConclusionAn initial assessment of LVEF and LVEF changes are important for deciding treatment and predicting prognosis in HFpEF patients. In addition, several confounding factors are associated with LVEF changes in worsened HFpEF patients.

scholarly journals The subclinical hypothyroid state might predict 30-day readmission in patients admitted with acute heart failure syndrome and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 175394472097774
Author(s):  
Muhammad Saad ◽  
Andrisael Garcia Lacoste ◽  
Pooja Balar ◽  
Aiyi Zhang ◽  
Timothy J. Vittorio
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Hospital Readmission ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Introduction: Thyroid hormone (TH) has an essential role on the functional capability of cardiac muscle with its gene modulation and induction of vasodilatory effects. There is considerable evidence to suggest the role of TH in patients with acute coronary syndrome, but less is known about its prognostic role in heart failure (HF) patients. We aim to evaluate the association between subclinical hypothyroid state (SCHS) and event rates including 30-day all-cause and HF readmission in patients with an index hospitalization for acute HF syndrome (AHFS). Methodology: A retrospective chart review analysis of 2335 patients admitted with the diagnosis of AHFS between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2017 was conducted. SCHS was defined as thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) level >4.50 mIU/L with a normal thyroxine (T4) level. Patients with pre-existing thyroid disease or receiving thyroid replacement therapy were excluded. HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) was defined as left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) >40% and HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) was defined as having LVEF ⩽40%. Percentage of 30-day, 3-month and 6-month all-cause readmission and mortality rates were calculated in both cohorts of AHFS (HFpEF and HFrEF) with and without SCHS. Results: The mean age of the 2335 AHFS population was 65 (±14.8) years. Of the 2335 patients admitted with AHFS, 1228 (52.6%) patients were found to have HFrEF and 1107 (47.4%) with HFpEF. There were 170 (7.3%) patients with AHFS found to have SCHS. There were more males than females (54% versus 46%). The percentage of hospital readmission within 30 days was higher for patients with SCHS compared with those without SCHS in the HFrEF group (42% versus 30%, p = 0.001). Hospital readmission within 30 days for patients with SCHS compared with those without SCHS in the HFpEF group did not differ (36.5% versus 31%, p = 0.47). Additionally, all-cause mortality was higher among patients with SCHS compared with patients without SCHS in the HFrEF group (18.7% versus 7.0%, p < 0.001). All-cause mortality was found similar in both arms of the HFpEF group (9.5% versus 7.7%, p = 0.73). Conclusion: During an index hospital admission for AHFS, SCHS was an independent predictor of readmission in 30 days in patients with HFrEF but not in patients with HFpEF. Additionally, it was related to adverse outcome such as all-cause mortality in HFrEF patients but not in HFpEF patients. Further studies regarding the concept of tissue thyroid and the potential for a therapeutic target are warranted.

Abstract 16085: Digoxin is Associated With Increased Mortality in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Without Concomitant Heart Failure

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maciej Tysarowski ◽  
Nigri Rafael ◽  
Hyoeun Kim ◽  
Emad Aziz
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Introduction: There is conflicting data on the effect of digoxin on all-cause mortality in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), especially in patients with heart failure (HF). Hypothesis: We hypothesized that in patients with AF, mortality rates associated with digoxin treatment are different among patients with HF and without HF. Methods: We conducted a cohort study of hospitalized patients with AF assessing the effects of digoxin on all-cause mortality. We divided patients into two groups: with and without HF. We performed Cox regression analysis to assess hazard ratios (HR) for all-cause mortality depending on digoxin treatment and used propensity score matching to adjust for differences in background characteristics between treatment groups. Results: Among 2179 consecutive patients, the median age was 73 ± 14 (table), 53% patient were male, 49% had HF, 19% were discharged on digoxin. Median left ventricular ejection fraction in the cohort was 60 (IQR 40-65). Among patients with HF, 35% had preserved, 18% had mid-range and 48% had reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. The mean follow-up time was 3 ± 2.1 years. After adjustment, in patients with HF, there was no statistically significant difference in mortality between the digoxin subgroups ( A , HR=1.01 [95% CI 0.76 to 1.35], p=0.92). In contrast, after adjustment, in patients without HF there was a statistically significant increased mortality in the digoxin subgroup ( B , HR=2.23, [95% CI 1.42 to 3.51], p<0.001). Conclusions: Digoxin use was associated with increased mortality in patients with AF and without concomitant HF. This suggests that clinicians should be careful in prescribing digoxin for rate control in AF, especially in patients without concomitant HF.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document