CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Treating Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Why, How, and When? Know Diabetes by Heart: A Partnership to Improve Cardiovascular Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus The Current State of Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Mortality Differences Associated With Treatment Responses in CANTOS and FOURIER: Insights and Implications Comparative Accuracy of Focused Cardiac Ultrasonography and Clinical Examination for Left Ventricular Dysfunction and Valvular Heart Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Impact of different final optimization techniques on long-term clinical outcomes of left main cross-over stenting Glucose-lowering Drugs or Strategies, Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Events, and Heart Failure in People With or at Risk of Type 2 Diabetes: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Cardiovascular Outcome Trials Chronic Kidney Disease and Coronary Artery Disease Antiinflammatory Therapy with Canakinumab for Atherosclerotic Disease Catheterization Laboratory Considerations During the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic: From the ACC’s Interventional Council and SCAI

Original ResearchVolume 7, Issue 3, March 2019

JOURNAL:JACC: Heart Failure Article Link

Sex Differences in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction Pathophysiology: A Detailed Invasive Hemodynamic and Echocardiographic Analysis

AL Beale, S Nanayakkara, L Segan et al. Keywords: echocardiography; heart failure with preserved ejection fraction; hemodynamics; sex differences; women

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVES - This study sought to identify sex differences in central and peripheral factors that contribute to the pathophysiology of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) by using complementary invasive hemodynamic and echocardiographic approaches.

BACKGROUND - Women are overrepresented among patients with HFpEF, and there are established sex differences in myocardial structure and function. Exercise intolerance is a fundamental feature of HFpEF; however, sex differences in the physiological determinants of exercise capacity in HFpEF are yet to be established.

METHODS - Patients with exertional intolerance with confirmed HFpEF were included in this study. Evaluation of the subjects included resting and exercise hemodynamics, echocardiography, and mixed venous blood gas sampling.

RESULTS - A total of 161 subjects included 114 females (71%). Compared to males, females had a higher pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) indexed to peak exercise workload (0.8 [0.5 to 1.2] mm Hg/W vs. 0.6 [0.4 to 1] mm Hg/W, respectively; p = 0.001) and lower systemic (1.1 [0.9 to 1.5] ml/mm Hg vs. 1 [0.7 to 1.2] ml/mm Hg, respectively; p = 0.019) and pulmonary (2.9 [2.2 to 4.2] ml/mm Hg vs. 2.4 [1.9 to 3] ml/mm Hg, respectively; p = 0.032) arterial compliance at exercise. Mixed venous blood gas analysis demonstrated a greater rise in lactate indexed to peak workload (0.05 [0.04 to 0.09] mmol/l/W vs. 0.04 [0.03 to 0.06] mmol/l/W, respectively; p = 0.007) in women compared to men. Women had higher mitral inflow velocity to diastolic mitral annular velocity at early filling (E/e) ratios at rest and peak exercise, along with a higher ejection fraction and smaller ventricular dimensions.

CONCLUSIONS - Women with HFpEF demonstrate poorer diastolic reserve with higher echocardiographic and invasive measurements of left ventricular filling pressures at exercise, accompanied by lower systemic and pulmonary arterial compliance and poorer peripheral oxygen kinetics.