LONG-TERM FOLLOW-UP OF LEFT VENTRICULAR REMODELING IN TREATED AND UNTREATED HYPERTENSIVE PATIENTS

2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (Suppl. 2) ◽  
pp. S181-S182
Author(s):  
A. O. Conrady ◽  
O. G. Rudomanov ◽  
D. V. Zakharov ◽  
O. A. Ovchinnicova ◽  
N. V. Vahrameeva ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (12) ◽  
pp. 2126 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marijana Tadic ◽  
Cesare Cuspidi ◽  
Vera Celic ◽  
Biljana Pencic ◽  
Giuseppe Mancia ◽  
...  

We aimed to investigate the predictive value of 24 h blood pressure (BP) patterns on adverse cardiovascular (CV) outcome in the initially untreated hypertensive patients during long-term follow-up. This study included 533 initially untreated hypertensive patients who were involved in this study in the period between 2007 and 2012. All participants underwent laboratory analysis, 24 h BP monitoring, and echocardiographic examination at baseline. The patients were followed for a median period of nine years. The adverse outcome was defined as the hospitalization due to CV events (atrial fibrillation, myocardial infarction, myocardial revascularization, heart failure, stroke, or CV death). During the nine-year follow-up period, adverse CV events occurred in 85 hypertensive patients. Nighttime SBP, non-dipping BP pattern, LV hypertrophy (LVH), left atrial enlargement (LAE), and LV diastolic dysfunction (LV DD) were risk factors for occurrence of CV events. However, nighttime SBP, non-dipping BP pattern, LVH, and LV DD were the only independent predictors of CV events. When all four BP pattern were included in the model, non-dipping and reverse dipping BP patterns were associated with CV events, but only reverse-dipping BP pattern was independent predictor of CV events. The current study showed that reverse-dipping BP pattern was predictor of adverse CV events independently of nighttime SBP and LV remodeling during long-term follow-up. The assessment of BP patterns has very important role in the long-time prediction in hypertensive population.


2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
S Zhang ◽  
X Xie ◽  
C He ◽  
X Lin ◽  
M Luo ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Late left ventricular remodeling (LLVR) after the index acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is a common complication, and is associated with poor outcome. However, the optimal definition of LLVR has been debated because of its different incidence and influence on prognosis. At present, there are limited data regarding the influence of different LLVR definitions on long-term outcomes in AMI patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Purpose To explore the impact of different definitions of LLVR on long-term mortality, re-hospitalization or an urgent visit for heart failure, and identify which definition was more suitable for predicting long-term outcomes in AMI patients undergoing PCI. Methods We prospectively observed 460 consenting first-time AMI patients undergoing PCI from January 2012 to December 2018. LLVR was defined as a ≥20% increase in left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV), or a >15% increase in left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) from the initial presentation to the 3–12 months follow-up, or left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <50% at follow up. These parameters of the cardiac structure and function were measuring through the thoracic echocardiography. The association of LLVR with long-term prognosis was investigated by Cox regression analysis. Results The incidence rate of LLVR was 38.1% (n=171). The occurrence of LLVR according to LVESV, LVEDV and LVEF definition were 26.6% (n=117), 31.9% (n=142) and 11.5% (n=51), respectively. During a median follow-up of 2 years, after adjusting other potential risk factors, multivariable Cox regression analysis revealed LLVR of LVESV definition [hazard ratio (HR): 2.50, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.19–5.22, P=0.015], LLVR of LVEF definition (HR: 16.46, 95% CI: 6.96–38.92, P<0.001) and LLVR of Mix definition (HR: 5.86, 95% CI: 2.45–14.04, P<0.001) were risk factors for long-term mortality, re-hospitalization or an urgent visit for heart failure. But only LLVR of LVEF definition was a risk predictor for long-term mortality (HR: 6.84, 95% CI: 1.98–23.65, P=0.002). Conclusions LLVR defined by LVESV or LVEF may be more suitable for predicting long-term mortality, re-hospitalization or an urgent visit for heart failure in AMI patients undergoing PCI. However, only LLVR defined by LVEF could be used for predicting long-term mortality. FUNDunding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None. Association Between LLVR and outcomes Kaplan-Meier Estimates of the Mortality


2020 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Valvano ◽  
Giorgio Bosso ◽  
Valentina Apuzzi ◽  
Valentina Mercurio ◽  
Valeria Di Simone ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document