scholarly journals Different impact of elevated heart rate on cardiovascular events between heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and preserved ejection fraction - a report from the CHART-2 study

2013 ◽  
Vol 34 (suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1940-1940
Author(s):  
T. Takada ◽  
Y. Sakata ◽  
S. Miyata ◽  
J. Takahashi ◽  
K. Nochioka ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 131 (12) ◽  
pp. 1473-1481 ◽  
Author(s):  
Phillip H. Lam ◽  
Neha Gupta ◽  
Daniel J. Dooley ◽  
Steven Singh ◽  
Prakash Deedwania ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (11) ◽  
pp. e246011
Author(s):  
Yusuke Nakano ◽  
Hirohiko Ando ◽  
Wataru Suzuki ◽  
Tetsuya Amano

A 65-year-old man with a history of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and renal failure was admitted due to difficulty in fluid volume control during haemodialysis. He had frequent episodes of intradialytic hypotension (IDH) with presyncope during haemodialysis despite using a vasopressor agent. Before haemodialysis, his blood pressure was 130–150/60–70 mm Hg, and his heart rate was 80–100 beats/min. There were no specific causes of IDH. For refractory IDH, he was treated with oral ivabradine (2.5 mg two times per day), which resulted in reduced heart rate and decreased occurrence of IDH. This is the first report to describe a dialysis case with HFrEF presenting with an elevated heart rate and impaired fluid management as manifested by recurring IDH, which improved after ivabradine treatment. Ivabradine therapy may assist in increasing stroke volume by lowering the sinus heart rate, thus resulting in the prevention of IDH.


2021 ◽  
Vol 102 (3) ◽  
pp. 293-301
Author(s):  
O V Bulashova ◽  
A A Nasybullina ◽  
E V Khazova ◽  
V M Gazizyanova ◽  
V N Oslopov

Aim. To analyze clinical and echocardiographic characteristics and prognosis in patients with heart failure mid-range ejection fraction. Methods. The study included 76 patients with stable heart failure IIV functional class, with a mean age of 66.110.4 years. All patients were divided into 3 subgroups based on the left ventricular ejection fraction: the first group heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction (below 40%), 21.1%; the second group patients with mid-range ejection fraction (from 40 to 49%), 23.7%; the third group patients with preserved ejection fraction (50%), 55.3%. The clinical characteristics of all groups were compared. The quality of life was assessed by the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ), the clinical condition was determined by using the clinical condition assessment scale (Russian Shocks). The prognosis was studied according to the onset of cardiovascular events one year after enrollment in the study. The endpoints were cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, hospitalization for acutely decompensated heart failure, thrombotic complications. Statistical analysis was performed by using IBM SPSS Statistics 20 software. Normal distribution of the data was determined by the ShapiroWilk test, nominal indicators were compared between groups by using chi-square tests, normally distributed quantitative indicators by ANOVA. The KruskalWallis test was performed to comparing data with non-normal distribution. Results. Analysis showed that the most of clinical characteristics (etiological structure, age, gender, quality of life, results on the clinical condition assessment scale for patients with chronic heart failure and a 6-minute walk test, distribution by functional classes of heart failure) in patients with mid-range ejection fraction (HFmrEF) were similar to those in patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). At the same time, they significantly differed from the characteristics of patients with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Echocardiographic data from patients with mid-range ejection fraction ranks in the middle compared to patients with reduced and preserved ejection fraction. In heart failure patients with mid-range ejection fraction, the incidence of adverse outcomes during the 1st year also was intermediate between heart failure patients with preserved ejection fraction and patients with reduced ejection fraction: for all cardiovascular events in the absence of significant differences (17.6; 10.8 and 18.8%, respectively), myocardial infarction (5,9; 0 and 6.2%), thrombotic complications (5.9; 5.4 and 6.2%). Heart failure patients with mid-range ejection fraction in comparison to patients with preserved ejection fraction and reduced ejection fraction had significantly lower cardiovascular mortality (0; 2.7 and 12.5%, p 0.05) and the number of hospitalization for acutely decompensated heart failure (0; 2,7 and 6.2%). Conclusion. Clinical characteristics of heart failure patients with mid-range and heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction are similar but significantly different from those in the group of patients with preserved ejection fraction; echocardiographic data in heart failure patients with mid-range ejection fraction is intermediate between those in patients with reduced ejection fraction and patients with preserved ejection fraction; the prognosis for all cardiovascular events did not differ significantly in the groups depending on the left ventricular ejection fraction.


2016 ◽  
Vol 117 (6) ◽  
pp. 946-951 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam D. DeVore ◽  
Phillip J. Schulte ◽  
Robert J. Mentz ◽  
N. Chantelle Hardy ◽  
Jacob P. Kelly ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 21 (8) ◽  
pp. S121-S122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam D. DeVore ◽  
Phillip J. Schulte ◽  
Robert J. Mentz ◽  
N. Chantelle Hardy ◽  
Jacob P. Kelly ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document