scholarly journals Heart failure on peritoneal dialysis: Where do we stand?

2021 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Reis ◽  
◽  
Catarina Almeida ◽  
Ana Gomes ◽  
João Fernandes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Peritoneal Dialysis ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
New Drugs ◽  
Preserved Ejection Fraction ◽  
Dialysis Patients ◽  
Heart Failure Treatment ◽  
Failure Treatment ◽  
Uremic Cardiomyopathy

Cardiovascular disease continues to be the most frequent cause of death in peritoneal dialysis patients and an important obstacle for the improvement of technique survival. Heart failure diagnosis and management is particularly challenging among dialysis patients, and this condi‑ tion remains underdiagnosed and undertreated in this population. The most common phenotype of heart failure among peritoneal dialysis patients is heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, diastolic disfunction and left ventricular hypertrophy. Unfortunately, unlike what happens with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, there is lack of evidence to support a specific drug regimen to treat heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Several conditions associated with end stage kidney disease, such as anemia, hyperphosphatemia, secondary hyperparathyroidism, inflammation, and insulin resistance seem to be involved in the pathogenesis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and for this reason, the term uremic cardiomyopathy has been proposed. There is a lack of evidence regarding the optimal heart failure treatment for peritoneal dialysis patients and more studies are needed to assess the efficacy and safety of the new drugs available for heart failure treatment. This review explores the spectrum of heart failure on peritoneal dialysis, its pathogenesis, risk factors and possible therapeutic and preventive measures.

scholarly journals P1236EFFECTS OF SACUBITRIL-VALSARTAN IN HEART FAILURE WITH PRESERVED EJECTION FRACTION IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING PERITONEAL DIALYSIS

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (Supplement_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sha Fu ◽  
Zhenjian Xu ◽  
Baojuan Lin ◽  
Junzhe Chen ◽  
Qiuyan Huang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Peritoneal Dialysis ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Matched Pair ◽  
Preserved Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Nyha Classification ◽  
Neprilysin Inhibitor

Abstract Background and Aims Angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) sacubitril–valsartan is a landmark drug in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), however, it remains unclear in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), especially the data of ARNI treatment on peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients with HFpEF are lacking. The present study was designed to determine the efficacy and safety of sacubitril–valsartan in patients with HFpEF undergoing peritoneal dialysis. Method We assigned end stage renal disease (ESRD)patients, receiving peritoneal dialysis for 3 months, with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II to IV heart failure, left ventricular ejection fraction ≥ 50%, and elevated level of N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) to receive sacubitril/valsartan treatment. Patients were regularly followed up after medication treatment. Wilcoxon matched-pair signed-rank (2 samples) tests were applied to investigate the alterations in Clinical and biochemical parameters as the efficacy before and after taking sacubitril–valsartan, and safety was also assessed. Results Twenty-one patients were recruited in this study. Compared with baseline levels, NT-proBNP levels (p=0.002) and heart rate (p=0.031) were markedly decreased after treatment with sacubitril/valsartan, signs and symptoms of heart failure (21/21 versus 15/21, p=0.021) and NYHA classification were notably improved after 3-12 months follow-up. Conclusion The present data suggested that sacubitril/valsartan treatment in the patients with HFpEF undergoing peritoneal dialysis was effective and safe, which is the first study about sacubitril/valsartan treatment for the PD patients with HFpEF, and it may bring the hope for these patients due to no other effective methods at present.

Worsening Renal Function during Index Hospitalization Does Not Predict Prognosis in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction Patients

Cardiology ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Ravi Rasalingam ◽  
Rachel Parker ◽  
Katherine E. Kurgansky ◽  
Luc Djousse ◽  
David Gagnon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Renal Function ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Incidence Density ◽  
Preserved Ejection Fraction ◽  
Index Hospitalization ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Worsening Renal Function ◽  
Group 1

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Worsening renal function (WRF) predicts poor prognosis in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction. The effect of WRF in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is unclear. <b><i>Objective:</i></b> The objective of this study was to determine whether WRF during index hospitalization for HFpEF is associated with increased death or readmission for heart failure. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> National Veterans Affairs electronic medical data recorded between January 1, 2002, and December 31, 2014, were screened to identify index hospitalizations for HFpEF using an iterative algorithm. Patients were divided into 3 groups based on changes in serum Cr (sCr) during this admission. WRF was defined as a rise in sCr ≥0.3 mg/dL. Group 1 had no evidence of WRF, group 2 had transient WRF, and group 3 had persistent WRF at the time of discharge. <b><i>Results:</i></b> A total of 10,902 patients with index hospitalizations for HFpEF were identified (mean age 72, 97% male). Twenty-nine percent had WRF during this hospital admission, with 48% showing recovery of sCr and 52% with no recovery at discharge. The mortality rate over a mean follow-up duration of 3.26 years was 72%. Compared to group 1, groups 2 and 3 showed no significant difference in risk of death from any cause (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.95 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.87, 1.03] and 1.02 [95% CI: 0.93, 1.11], respectively), days hospitalized for any cause (incidence density ratio [IDR] = 1.01 [95% CI: 0.92, 1.11] and 1.01 [95% CI: 0.93, 1.11], respectively), or days hospitalized for heart failure (IDR = 0.94 [95% CI: 0.80, 1.10] and 0.94 [95% CI: 0.81, 1.09], respectively) in analyses adjusted for covariates affecting renal function and outcomes. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> While there is a high incidence of WRF during index hospitalizations for HFpEF, WRF is not associated with an increased risk of death or hospitalization. This suggests that WRF alone should not influence decisions regarding heart failure management.

scholarly journals The link between left ventricular extracellular volume determined by T1 myocardial mapping and gut microbiota composition in individuals with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
A.N Kaburova ◽  
O.M Drapkina ◽  
S.M Uydin ◽  
M.V Vishnyakova ◽  
M.S Pokrovskaya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Gut Microbiota ◽  
Myocardial Fibrosis ◽  
Volume Fraction ◽  
Extracellular Volume ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Diffuse Myocardial Fibrosis ◽  
Rrna Gene ◽  
Preserved Ejection Fraction

Abstract Introduction Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) represents a major challenge in modern cardiology. As described previously, in HFpEF comorbidities promote a systemic inflammatory state, leading to diffuse myocardial fibrosis resulting in myocardial stiffening. Gut dysbiosis which is considered as the novel source of chronic systemic inflammation has been actively investigated as the risk factor for the development and aggravation of cardiovascular diseases including heart failure. Cardiac magnetic resonance T1-mapping is a novel tool, which allows noninvasive quantification of the extracellular space and diffuse myocardial fibrosis. Moreover, the extracellular volume (ECV) fraction can be calculated, providing information on the relative expansion of the extracellular matrix, thus being a noninvasive alternative to myocardial biopsy studies. Purpose The research was aimed at investigating the correlation between the left ventricular ECV and gut microbial genera in patients with HFpEF. Methods 42 patients with confirmed HF-pEF (mediana and interquartile range of age 67 [64; 72] years, 47% men, body mass index &lt;35 kg/m2 with no history of myocardial infarction or diabetes mellitus) were enrolled in the study. The patients underwent transthoracic echocardiography with Doppler study, HF-pEF was confirmed according to the recent ESC guidelines (based on E/e' ratio, N-terminal pro-B type natriuretic peptide &gt;125 pg/ml and symptoms of heart failure). The intestinal microbiome was investigated using high-throughput sequencing of bacterial 16S rRNA gene. As the last step of research T1-myocardial mapping with the modified look-locker inversion-recovery protocol (MOLLI) sequence at 1.5 Tesla was performed to assess left ventricular extracellular volume fraction. Results The mean±std in ECV was 31.02±4.4%. The relative abundance (%) of the most prevalent phyla in gut microbiota was 48±22.5 for Firmicutes, 47.4±22.8 for Bacteroidetes and 1.5 [1.5; 2.5] for Proteobacteria. The analysis showed significant negative correlations between ECV and the following bacterial genera: Faecalibacterium (r=−0.35), Blautia (r=−0.43), Lachnoclostridium (r=−0.32). Moreover ECV positively correlated with Holdemania (r=0.4), Victivallis (r=0.38), Dehalobacterium (r=0.38), Enterococcus (r=0.33) and Catabacter (r=0.32). All correlation values with p&lt;0.05. Conclusion We discovered both negative and positive significant correlations between ECV – the non-invasive marker of myocardial fibrosis and several bacterial genera, which may have negative impact on myocardial remodeling in HF-pEF. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

scholarly journals Left ventricular fibrosis and hypertrophy are associated with mortality in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pankaj Garg ◽  
Hosamadin Assadi ◽  
Rachel Jones ◽  
Wei Bin Chan ◽  
Peter Metherall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
T1 Mapping ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Preserved Ejection Fraction ◽  
Native T1 ◽  
Lv Mass ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Ventricular Fibrosis

AbstractCardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is emerging as an important tool in the assessment of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). This study sought to investigate the prognostic value of multiparametric CMR, including left and right heart volumetric assessment, native T1-mapping and LGE in HFpEF. In this retrospective study, we identified patients with HFpEF who have undergone CMR. CMR protocol included: cines, native T1-mapping and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE). The mean follow-up period was 3.2 ± 2.4 years. We identified 86 patients with HFpEF who had CMR. Of the 86 patients (85% hypertensive; 61% males; 14% cardiac amyloidosis), 27 (31%) patients died during the follow up period. From all the CMR metrics, LV mass (area under curve [AUC] 0.66, SE 0.07, 95% CI 0.54–0.76, p = 0.02), LGE fibrosis (AUC 0.59, SE 0.15, 95% CI 0.41–0.75, p = 0.03) and native T1-values (AUC 0.76, SE 0.09, 95% CI 0.58–0.88, p < 0.01) were the strongest predictors of all-cause mortality. The optimum thresholds for these were: LV mass > 133.24 g (hazard ratio [HR] 1.58, 95% CI 1.1–2.2, p < 0.01); LGE-fibrosis > 34.86% (HR 1.77, 95% CI 1.1–2.8, p = 0.01) and native T1 > 1056.42 ms (HR 2.36, 95% CI 0.9–6.4, p = 0.07). In multivariate cox regression, CMR score model comprising these three variables independently predicted mortality in HFpEF when compared to NTproBNP (HR 4 vs HR 1.65). In non-amyloid HFpEF cases, only native T1 > 1056.42 ms demonstrated higher mortality (AUC 0.833, p < 0.01). In patients with HFpEF, multiparametric CMR aids prognostication. Our results show that left ventricular fibrosis and hypertrophy quantified by CMR are associated with all-cause mortality in patients with HFpEF.

scholarly journals Central and obstructive apneas prevalence in heart failure with reduced, mid-range and preserved ejection fraction

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
C Borrelli ◽  
P Sciarrone ◽  
F Gentile ◽  
N Ghionzoli ◽  
G Mirizzi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction ◽  
Systolic Function ◽  
Systolic Dysfunction ◽  
Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Apnea Hypopnea Index ◽  
Preserved Ejection Fraction ◽  
2D Echocardiography

Abstract Background Central apneas (CA) and obstructive apneas (OA) are highly prevalent in heart failure (HF) both with reduced and preserved systolic function. However, a comprehensive evaluation of apnea prevalence across HF according to ejection fraction (i.e HF with patients with reduced, mid-range and preserved ejection fraction- HFrEf, HFmrEF and HFpEF, respectively) throughout the 24 hours has never been done before. Materials and methods 700 HF patients were prospectively enrolled and then divided according to left ventricular EF (408 HFrEF, 117 HFmrEF, 175 HFpEF). All patients underwent a thorough evaluation including: 2D echocardiography; 24-h Holter-ECG monitoring; cardiopulmonary exercise testing; neuro-hormonal assessment and 24-h cardiorespiratory monitoring. Results In the whole population, prevalence of normal breathing (NB), CA and OA at daytime was 40%, 51%, and 9%, respectively, while at nighttime 15%, 55%, and 30%, respectively. When stratified according to left ventricular EF, CA prevalence decreased from HFrEF to HFmrEF and HFpEF: (daytime CA: 57% vs. 43% vs. 42%, respectively, p=0.001; nighttime CA: 66% vs. 48% vs. 34%, respectively, p&lt;0.0001), while OA prevalence increased (daytime OA: 5% vs. 8% vs. 18%, respectively, p&lt;0.0001; nighttime OA: 20 vs. 29 vs. 53%, respectively, p&lt;0.0001). When assessing moderte-severe apneas, defined with an apnea/hypopnea index &gt;15 events/hour, prevalence of CA was again higher in HFrEF than HFmrEF and HFpEF both at daytime (daytime moderate-severe CA: 28% vs. 19% and 23%, respectively, p&lt;0.05) and at nighttime (nighttime moderate-severe CA: 50% vs. 39% and 28%, respectively, p&lt;0.05). Conversely, moderate-severe OA decreased from HFrEF to HFmrEF to HFpEF both at daytime (daytime moderate-severe OA: 1% vs. 3% and 8%, respectively, p&lt;0.05) and nighttime (noghttime moderate-severe OA: 10% vs. 11% and 30%, respectively, p&lt;0.05). Conclusions Daytime and nighttime apneas, both central and obstructive in nature, are highly prevalent in HF regardless of EF. Across the whole spectrum of HF, CA prevalence increases and OA decreases as left ventricular systolic dysfunction progresses, both during daytime and nighttime. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document