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.

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.

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.

scholarly journals Reduction in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction is Associated with Subsequent Cardiac Events in Outpatients with Chronic Heart Failure

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshitaka Okuhara ◽  
Masanori Asakura ◽  
Yoshiyuki Orihara ◽  
Daisuke Morisawa ◽  
Yuki Matsumoto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Operating Characteristics ◽  
Cardiac Events ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Significant Difference

AbstractLeft ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is critical for determining the prognosis and treatment of patients with heart failure (HF). However, the influence of serial LVEF changes in patients with stable chronic HF (CHF) has not yet been completely investigated. We analyzed data of 263 outpatients with CHF from the J-MELODIC study cohort and evaluated the frequency of cardiac events. We stratified patients into tertiles based on the relative difference in LVEF in 1 year and that at baseline. We found a significant difference in the cardiac event rate among the three groups (log-rank test, p = 0.042). We identified a relative 11% LVEF reduction as the optimal cutoff value based on the receiver operating characteristics analysis. LVEF (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01–1.07; p = 0.015) and E/e′ (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01–1.12; p = 0.023) at baseline were predictors of >11% LVEF reduction. After adjusting the variables including age and sex, >11% LVEF reduction was an independent predictor of subsequent cardiac events (HR, 5.79; 95% CI, 2.49–13.2; p < 0.001). In conclusion, patients with 1-year relative >11% LVEF reduction may have subsequent worsening outcomes. Such patients should be carefully followed-up as high risk population for development of cardiac events.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document