Abstract 13104: The Concomitant Inflammation Affect the Ratio of N-terminal Pro B-type Natriuretic Peptide to B-type Natriuretic Peptide in Patients With Heart Failure and Preserved Ejection Fraction

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tsutomu Kawai ◽  
Takahisa Yamada ◽  
Tetsuya Watanabe ◽  
Shunsuke Tamaki ◽  
Shungo Hikoso ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Natriuretic Peptide ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Preserved Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Inflammatory Status ◽  
Patients With Heart Failure ◽  
Multicenter Prospective Observational Study

Backgrounds: Although B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP ) are interrelated parameters in assessment heart failure severity and prognosis, the ratio of NT-proBNP to BNP (NT-proBNP/BNP) are affected by various clinical factors, such as renal function. However, little is known about the influence of inflammation on NT-proBNP/BNP in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Methods and Results: Patients data were extracted from PURSUIT-HFpEF registry, which is a multicenter prospective observational study including patients hospitalized for acute heart failure with left ventricular ejection fraction of >50%. Of 871 patients, data of BNP and NT-proBNP was available in 654 patients. The median baseline concentration of BNP was 474 pg/ml (299-720), NT-proBNP was 3310 pg/ml (1740-6840), and NT-proBNP/BNP was 7.6 (5.0-11.8). In multivariable linear regression analyses, older age [odds ratio (OR); 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI); 1.02-1.09, p=0.001], higher creatinine [OR; 2.63, 95% CI; 1.66-4.16, p<0.001], and higher C-reactive protein (CRP) [OR; 1.17, 95% CI; 1.06-1.28, p<0.001] were significantly associated with a higher NT-proBNP/BNP (>median value of 7.6). However, other factors expected to affect NT-proBNP/BNP, such as atrial fibrillation and body mass index, were not associated with a higher NT-proBNP/BNP in this study. Patients in the highest CRP quartile had significantly higher NT-proBNP/BNP than those with other quartiles. Conclusion: In HFpEF patients, concomitant inflammation was associated with high NT-proBNP/BNP, which indicated that we need a careful interpretation on these two natriuretic peptides of patients with HFpEF and inflammatory status, such as infection.

Abstract 17311: Ventricular Arrhythmias and Fibrosis in Patients With Heart Failure and Preserved Ejection Fraction

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Natasha Cuk ◽  
Jae H Cho ◽  
Donghee Han ◽  
Joseph E Ebinger ◽  
Eugenio Cingolani
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Cardiac Mri ◽  
Ventricular Arrhythmias ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Preserved Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Patients With Heart Failure ◽  
Ventricular Fibrosis

Introduction: Sudden death due to ventricular arrhythmias (VA) is one of the main causes of mortality in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Ventricular fibrosis in HFpEF has been suspected as a substrate of VA, but the degree of fibrosis has not been well characterized. Hypothesis: HFpEF patients with increased degree of fibrosis will manifest more VA. Methods: Cedars-Sinai medical records were probed using Deep 6 artificial intelligence data extraction software to identify patients with HFpEF who underwent cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MRI of identified patients were reviewed to measure extra-cellular volume (ECV) and degree of fibrosis. Ambulatory ECG monitoring (Ziopatch) of those patients were also reviewed to study the prevalence of arrhythmias. Results: A total of 12 HFpEF patients who underwent cardiac MRI were identified. Patients were elderly (mean age 70.3 ± 7.1), predominantly female (83%), and overweight (mean BMI 32 ± 9). Comorbidities included hypertension (83%), dyslipidemia (75%), and coronary artery disease (67%). Mean left ventricular ejection fraction by echocardiogram was 63 ± 8.7%. QTc as measured on ECG was not significantly prolonged (432 ± 15 ms). ECV was normal in those patients for whom it was available (24.2 ± 3.1, n = 9) with 3/12 patients (25%) demonstrating ventricular fibrosis by MRI (average burden of 9.6 ± 5.9%). Ziopatch was obtained in 8/12 patients (including all 3 patients with fibrosis) and non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT) was identified in 5/8 (62.5%). One patient with NSVT and without fibrosis on MRI also had a sustained VA recorded. In those patients who had Ziopatch monitoring, there was no association between presence of fibrosis and NSVT (X2 = 0.035, p = 0.85). Conclusions: Ventricular fibrosis was present in 25% of HFpEF patients in this study and NSVT was observed in 62.5% of those patients with HFpEF who had Ziopatch monitoring. The presence of fibrosis by Cardiac MRI was not associated with NSVT in this study; however, the size of the cohort precludes broadly generalizable conclusions about this association. Further investigation is required to better understand the relationship between ventricular fibrosis by MRI and VA in patients with HFpEF.

scholarly journals How to diagnose heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: the HFA–PEFF diagnostic algorithm: a consensus recommendation from the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC)

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (40) ◽  
pp. 3297-3317 ◽  
Author(s):  
Burkert Pieske ◽  
Carsten Tschöpe ◽  
Rudolf A de Boer ◽  
Alan G Fraser ◽  
Stefan D Anker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Natriuretic Peptide ◽  
Diagnostic Algorithm ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Exercise Stress ◽  
Volume Index ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Preserved Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction

Abstract Making a firm diagnosis of chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains a challenge. We recommend a new stepwise diagnostic process, the ‘HFA–PEFF diagnostic algorithm’. Step 1 (P=Pre-test assessment) is typically performed in the ambulatory setting and includes assessment for HF symptoms and signs, typical clinical demographics (obesity, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, elderly, atrial fibrillation), and diagnostic laboratory tests, electrocardiogram, and echocardiography. In the absence of overt non-cardiac causes of breathlessness, HFpEF can be suspected if there is a normal left ventricular ejection fraction, no significant heart valve disease or cardiac ischaemia, and at least one typical risk factor. Elevated natriuretic peptides support, but normal levels do not exclude a diagnosis of HFpEF. The second step (E: Echocardiography and Natriuretic Peptide Score) requires comprehensive echocardiography and is typically performed by a cardiologist. Measures include mitral annular early diastolic velocity (e′), left ventricular (LV) filling pressure estimated using E/e′, left atrial volume index, LV mass index, LV relative wall thickness, tricuspid regurgitation velocity, LV global longitudinal systolic strain, and serum natriuretic peptide levels. Major (2 points) and Minor (1 point) criteria were defined from these measures. A score ≥5 points implies definite HFpEF; ≤1 point makes HFpEF unlikely. An intermediate score (2–4 points) implies diagnostic uncertainty, in which case Step 3 (F1: Functional testing) is recommended with echocardiographic or invasive haemodynamic exercise stress tests. Step 4 (F2: Final aetiology) is recommended to establish a possible specific cause of HFpEF or alternative explanations. Further research is needed for a better classification of HFpEF.

Abstract 14990: Sudden Death in Patients with Heart Failure and Preserved Ejection Fraction

Circulation ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 130 (suppl_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyndaron Reinier ◽  
Audrey Uy-Evanado ◽  
Carmen Teodorescu ◽  
Eloi Marijon ◽  
Kumar Narayanan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Clinical History ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Preserved Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Patients With Heart Failure ◽  
History Of ◽  
Age And Sex

Introduction: Severely reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) is an established risk factor for sudden cardiac death (SCD), but has limited sensitivity and specificity. We evaluated the contribution of heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction toward risk of SCD in the general population. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that HF would predict risk of SCD, even among patients with preserved EF. Methods: Subjects from an ongoing community-based study of SCD in the northwest US (pop. approx. one million) were included if age ≥18 (2002 - 2012) with clinical history and assessment of EF. Clinical history of heart failure (HF) was determined by physician report. Ejection fraction (EF) was determined from echocardiogram, angiogram, or multigated acquisition scan, and categorized as EF <20%, 20-34%, 35-44%, 45-54%, and ≥55%. Laboratory values of brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) were obtained from routine clinical laboratory testing for a subset of patients. Results: Cases (n=628, mean age 69.9, 65% male) were more likely than controls (n = 580, mean age 66.8, 66% male) to have a history of clinically-recognized HF (58% vs. 24%, p<0.0001) and to have an EF ≤ 35% (27% vs. 12%, p<0.0001). At each EF level above 20%, HF was approximately twice as prevalent in cases compared to controls (Figure, p≤0.002). Median BNP levels were significantly higher for patients with HF vs. those without, across EF categories. Adjusting for age and sex, each category of decreasing EF was associated with an increased risk of SCD (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.3 - 1.6, p<0.0001), but the association was diminished by adjustment for HF, and for BNP. Odds of SCD were 4-fold higher (p<0.0001) in the presence HF, adjusting for age and sex, across all categories of EF. Conclusions: In this population, the significant role of HF with preserved EF in SCD was confirmed by BNP level trends. Improvements in SCD prevention will require focused investigation of high risk SCD markers in patients with heart failure and preserved EF.

Abstract 15164: Impact of Conventional Right Ventricular Pacing in Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: Insights From Pursuit-hfpef Registry

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tetsuya Watanabe ◽  
Shungo Hikoso ◽  
Daisaku D Nakatani ◽  
Masamichi Yano ◽  
Shunsuke Tamaki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Right Ventricular ◽  
Pacemaker Implantation ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Lv Function ◽  
Preserved Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Patients With Heart Failure

Introduction: Previous studies suggest that conventional right ventricular (RV) pacing may have a deleterious effect on left ventricular (LV) function. However, there are no reports examining the effects of permanent pacemakers (PM) in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) admitted with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). Methods and Results: Patients' data were extracted from The Prospective mUlticenteR obServational stUdy of patIenTs with Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction (PURSUIT-HFpEF) study, which is a prospective multicenter observational registry for ADHF patients with LVEF ≥50% in Osaka. Echocardiographic measurements were performed just before and 1 year after discharge. We analyzed 623 patients (median age: 81[30-101] years) after exclusion of patients on dialysis. At the admission, 55 of 623 patients had a previously implanted pacemaker (PM(+)). There were no significant differences in baseline clinical characteristics before discharge such as age, gender, renal function, echocardiographic parameters between PM(+) and PM(-) groups. One year after discharge, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in PM(+) group was significantly lower (58.3±8.6 vs 62.3±8.4%, p=0.005) than those in PM(-) group. During a mean follow-up period of 1.25±0.84years, 171patients had heart failure hospitalization (HFH). At the multivariate Cox analysis, pacemaker was significantly associated with HFH, independently of age, serum NT-proBNP level, and LVEF after the adjustment with NYHA functional class, sex, and hemoglobin. Kaplan-Meier curve analysis revealed that patients in PM(+) group had a significantly higher risk of HFH than those in PM(-) group. Conclusion: The development of cardiac systolic and diastolic dysfunction occurred in patients with HFpEF with a RV pacemaker implantation, which would be associated with poor outcome.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document