CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Epinephrine Versus Norepinephrine for Cardiogenic Shock After Acute Myocardial Infarction Myocardial infarction with non-obstructive coronary arteries as compared with myocardial infarction and obstructive coronary disease: outcomes in a Medicare population 4-Step Protocol for Disparities in STEMI Care and Outcomes in Women Prevalence of anginal symptoms and myocardial ischemia and their effect on clinical outcomes in outpatients with stable coronary artery disease: data from the International Observational CLARIFY Registry Improved Outcomes Associated with the use of Shock Protocols: Updates from the National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing: What Is its Value? Use of Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices Among Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock Chronic total occlusion intervention of the non-infarct-related artery in acute myocardial infarction patients: the Korean multicenter chronic total occlusion registry A Test in Context: E/A and E/e' to Assess Diastolic Dysfunction and LV Filling Pressure Heart Regeneration by Endogenous Stem Cells and Cardiomyocyte Proliferation: Controversy, Fallacy, and Progress

Original Research25 April 2019

JOURNAL:Eur Heart J. Article Link

Frequency, predictors, and prognosis of ejection fraction improvement in heart failure: an echocardiogram-based registry study

A Ghimire, N Fine, FA McAlister et al. Keywords: echocardiography; epidemiology; heart failure; ejection fraction; HFrecEF

ABSTRACT


AIMS - To identify variables predicting ejection fraction (EF) recovery and characterize prognosis of heart failure (HF) patients with EF recovery (HFrecEF).


METHODS AND RESULTS - RETROSPECTIVE study of adults referred for 2 echocardiograms separated by 6 months between 2008 and 2016 at the two largest echocardiography centres in Alberta who also had physician-assigned diagnosis of HF. Of 10 641 patients, 3124 had heart failure reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) (EF40%) at baseline: while mean EF declined from 30.2% on initial echocardiogram to 28.6% on the second echocardiogram in those patients with persistent HFrEF (defined by <10% improvement in EF), it improved from 26.1% to 46.4% in the 1174 patients (37.6%) with HFrecEF (defined by EF absolute improvement 10%). On multivariate analysis, female sex [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.401.96], younger age (aOR per decade 1.16, 95% CI 1.091.23), atrial fibrillation (aOR 2.00, 95% CI 1.682.38), cancer (aOR 1.52, 95% CI 1.032.26), hypertension (aOR 1.38, 95% CI 1.181.62), lower baseline ejection fraction (aOR per 1% decrease 1.07 (1.061.08), and using hydralazine (aOR 1.69, 95% CI 1.192.40) were associated with EF improvements 10%. HFrecEF patients demonstrated lower rates per 1000 patient years of mortality (106 vs. 164, adjusted hazard ratio, aHR 0.70 [0.620.79]), all-cause hospitalizations (300 vs. 428, aHR 0.87 [0.790.95]), all-cause emergency room (ER) visits (569 vs. 799, aHR 0.88 [0.810.95]), and cardiac transplantation or left ventricular assist device implantation (2 vs. 10, aHR 0.21 [0.100.45]) compared to patients with persistent HFrEF. Females with HFrEF exhibited lower mortality risk (aHR 0.94 [0.880.99]) than males after adjusting for age, time between echocardiograms, clinical comorbidities, medications, and whether their EF improved or not during follow-up.


CONCLUSION - HFrecEF patients tended to be younger, female, and were more likely to have hypertension, atrial fibrillation, or cancer. HFrecEF patients have a substantially better prognosis compared to those with persistent HFrEF, even after multivariable adjustment, and female patients exhibit lower mortality risk than men within each subgroup (HFrecEF and persistent HFrEF) even after multivariable adjustment.