CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Congestive Heart Failure

Abstract

Recommended Article

A Fully Magnetically Levitated Left Ventricular Assist Device — Final Report Phenomapping for Novel Classification of Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction Sex Differences in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction Pathophysiology: A Detailed Invasive Hemodynamic and Echocardiographic Analysis Risk of Mortality Following Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation Permanent pacemaker use among patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction: Findings from the Acute Decompensated Heart Failure National Registry (ADHERE) National Registry Prior Pacemaker Implantation and Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Heart Failure and Preserved Ejection Fraction Transcatheter Interatrial Shunt Device for the Treatment of Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (REDUCE LAP-HF I [Reduce Elevated Left Atrial Pressure in Patients With Heart Failure]): A Phase 2, Randomized, Sham-Controlled Trial SPECT and PET in ischemic heart failure
|<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ...>>|

Review Article19 December 2020

JOURNAL：https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/e Article Link

Is Acute heart failure a distinctive disorder? An analysis from BIOSTAT-CHF

BA Davison, S Senger, IE Sama et al. Keywords: acute heart failure; HF outpatients; diagnosis; treatment;

ABSTRACT

AIMS -This retrospective analysis sought to identify markers that might distinguish between acute heart failure (HF) and worsening HF in chronic outpatients.


METHODS AND RESULTS -The BIOSTAT‐CHF index cohort included 2516 patients with new or worsening HF symptoms: 1694 enrolled as inpatients (acute HF) and 822 as outpatients (worsening HF in chronic outpatients). A validation cohort included 935 inpatients and 803 outpatients. Multivariable models were developed in the index cohort using clinical characteristics, routine laboratory values, and proteomics data to examine which factors predict adverse outcomes in both conditions and to determine which factors differ between acute HF and worsening HF in chronic outpatients, validated in the validation cohort.

Patients with acute HF had substantially higher morbidity and mortality (6 months mortality was 12..3% for acute HF and 4..7% for worsening HF in chronic outpatients). Multivariable models predicting 180‐day mortality and 180‐day HF re‐admission differed substantially between acute HF and worsening HF in chronic outpatients. CA‐125 was the strongest single biomarker to distinguish acute HF from worsening HF in chronic outpatients, but only yielded a C‐index of 0..71. A model including multiple biomarkers and clinical variables achieved a high degree of discrimination with a C‐index of 0..913 in the index cohort and 0..901 in the validation cohort.


CONCLUSION - The study identifies different characteristics and predictors of outcome in acute HF patients as compared to outpatients with chronic HF developing worsening HF. The markers identified may be useful in better diagnosing acute HF and may become targets for treatment development.

>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 REGISTRATION

> CBS 2019 PROGRAM

> CBS 2019 CALL FOR SCIENCE

> CBS 2019 SPOTLIGHTS

 CBSMD

> CBSMD WEBSITE REGISTRATION

> EDUCATION CENTER

> RECOMMANDED PAPER

> TOP 10 RESEARCH PAPER

> PRE-READING

CBS 2019 CBS 2019 FACULTY Education Resource CBSMD Scientific Library
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top