A prospective, observational study to explore health disparities in patients with heart failure—ethnicity and financial status

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 70-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jia-Rong Wu ◽  
Terry A Lennie ◽  
Debra K Moser
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marieke E. van Vessem ◽  
Saskia L. M. A. Beeres ◽  
Rob B. P. de Wilde ◽  
René de Vries ◽  
Remco R. Berendsen ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Vasoplegia is a severe complication which may occur after cardiac surgery, particularly in patients with heart failure. It is a result of activation of vasodilator pathways, inactivation of vasoconstrictor pathways and the resistance to vasopressors. However, the precise etiology remains unclear. The aim of the Vasoresponsiveness in patients with heart failure (VASOR) study is to objectify and characterize the altered vasoresponsiveness in patients with heart failure, before, during and after heart failure surgery and to identify the etiological factors involved. Methods This is a prospective, observational study conducted at Leiden University Medical Center. Patients with and patients without heart failure undergoing cardiac surgery on cardiopulmonary bypass are enrolled. The study is divided in two inclusion phases. During phase 1, 18 patients with and 18 patients without heart failure are enrolled. The vascular reactivity in response to a vasoconstrictor (phenylephrine) and a vasodilator (nitroglycerin) is assessed in vivo on different timepoints. The response to phenylephrine is assessed on t1 (before induction), t2 (before induction, after start of cardiotropic drugs and/or vasopressors), t3 (after induction), t4 (15 min after cessation of cardiopulmonary bypass) and t5 (1 day post-operatively). The response to nitroglycerin is assessed on t1 and t5. Furthermore, a sample of pre-pericardial fat tissue, containing resistance arteries, is collected intraoperatively. The ex vivo vascular reactivity is assessed by constructing concentrations response curves to various vasoactive substances using isolated resistance arteries. Next, expression of signaling proteins and receptors is assessed using immunohistochemistry and mRNA analysis. Furthermore, the groups are compared with respect to levels of organic compounds that can influence the cardiovascular system (e.g. copeptin, (nor)epinephrine, ANP, BNP, NTproBNP, angiotensin II, cortisol, aldosterone, renin and VMA levels). During inclusion phase 2, only the ex vivo vascular reactivity test is performed in patients with (N = 12) and without heart failure (N = 12). Discussion Understanding the difference in vascular responsiveness between patients with and without heart failure in detail, might yield therapeutic options or development of preventive strategies for vasoplegia, leading to safer surgical interventions and improvement in outcome. Trial registration The Netherlands Trial Register (NTR), NTR5647. Registered 26 January 2016.


2017 ◽  
Vol 72 (2) ◽  
pp. 188-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hua Wang ◽  
Qingyong Chen ◽  
Yingying Li ◽  
Xianchao Jing ◽  
Tianya Liang ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 314 (5) ◽  
pp. H1033-H1042 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn Dryer ◽  
Mark Gajjar ◽  
Nikhil Narang ◽  
Margaret Lee ◽  
Jonathan Paul ◽  
...  

There are multiple proposed mechanisms for the pathophysiology of heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). We hypothesized that coronary microvascular dysfunction is common in these patients. In a prospective, observational study, patients undergoing cardiac catheterization with HFpEF [left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction ≥ 50% and with clinical HF] were compared with similar patients without HFpEF. Patients with ≥50% stenosis were excluded, and coronary flow reserve (CFR) and the index of microvascular resistance (IMR) were measured after adenosine administration using a guidewire, with CFR ≤ 2 and IMR ≥ 23 being abnormal. Baseline characteristics and CFR and IMR were compared in 30 HFpEF patients and 14 control subjects. Compared with control subjects, HFpEF patients were older (65.4 ± 9.6 vs. 55.1 ± 3.1 yr, P < 0.01), had higher numbers of comorbidities (4.4 ± 1.5 vs. 2.6 ± 1.9, P = 0.002), had higher median B-type natriuretic peptide [161 (interquartile range: 75–511) pg/dl vs. 37 (interquartile range: 18.5–111) pg/dl, P < 0.01], and had higher LV end-diastolic pressure (17.8 ± 4.2 vs. 8.4 ± 4.2, P < 0.01). HFpEF patients had lower CFR (2.55 ± 1.60 vs. 3.84 ± 1.89, P = 0.024) and higher IMR (26.7 ± 10.3 vs. 19.7 ± 9.7 units, P = 0.037) than control subjects. Most (71.4%) control subjects had normal coronary physiology, whereas 36.7% of HFpEF patients had both abnormal CFR and IMR and another 36.7% had either abnormal CFR or IMR. In conclusion, this is the first study that has reported invasively determined CFR and IMR in HFpEF patients. We demonstrated the presence of four distinct coronary physiology groups in HFpEF patients. Investigation into the potential mechanisms for these findings is needed. NEW & NOTEWORTHY In this prospective observational study of patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), we found that patients with HFpEF had more abnormalities of coronary flow and resistance than asymptomatic control patients, indicating that coronary microvascular dysfunction may play a role in the HFpEF disease process.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document