scholarly journals Clinical features and long-term prognosis of patients with congestive heart failure taking tolvaptan: a comparison of patients with preserved and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toshiki Seki ◽  
Yoshiaki Kubota ◽  
Junya Matsuda ◽  
Yukichi Tokita ◽  
Yu-ki Iwasaki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Univariate Analysis ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Reduced Ejection Fraction ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Long Term Prognosis

AbstractFew studies have investigated the clinical benefit of the long-term use of tolvaptan (TLV) for heart failure (HF). This study evaluated the long-term prognosis of patients administered TLV for > 1 year among patients who had HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and those who had HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Overall, 591 consecutive patients were admitted to our hospital and administered TLV for HF between 2011 and 2018. We retrospectively enrolled 147 patients who were administered TLV for > 1 year. We divided them into the HFpEF group (n = 77, 52.4%) and the HFrEF group (n = 70; 47.6%). Their clinical backgrounds and long-term prognosis were examined. Compared with the patients in the HFrEF group, the patients in the HFpEF group were significantly older and included more women. Moreover, the HFpEF group showed significantly lower all-cause mortality (38.6% vs. 24.7%; log-rank, P = 0.014) and cardiovascular mortality during the average 2.7-year follow-up. Univariate analysis revealed that all-cause mortality was correlated with male sex, HFpEF, and changes in serum creatinine levels from baseline. Multivariate analysis revealed that HFpEF was an independent influencing factor for all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.44; 95% confidence interval, 0.23–0.86; P = 0.017). Long-term administration of TLV may be more beneficial for HFpEF than for HFrEF.

scholarly journals Clinical features and long-term prognosis of patients with congestive heart failure taking tolvaptan: a comparison between preserved and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
T Seki ◽  
Y Kubota ◽  
J Matsuda ◽  
Y Tokita ◽  
Y Iwasaki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Univariate Analysis ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Long Term Prognosis ◽  
Stratified Analysis

Abstract Background There were few reports which investigated the clinical benefit of long-term use of tolvaptan (TLV) for heart failure (HF). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term prognosis of patients administrated TLV for more than 1 year in the HF patients with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Method In a total of 591 consecutive patients who were admitted to our hospital and administered TLV for HF between 2011 and 2018, we retrospectively enrolled 147 patients who were administered TLV for more than 1 year. The patients were classified into 2 groups, the HFpEF group (n=77, 52.4%) and the HFrEF group (n=70, 47.6%), and clinical backgrounds and long-term prognosis were examined. Furthermore, we performed stratified analysis based on the response to TLV defined by urine osmolality (The responder group n=40, the non-responder group n=52). Results The HFpEF group was significantly older (77.7±9.2 vs. 71.3±11.5 years, P<0.01) and included more female (41.6 vs. 21.4%, P<0.01) compared with the HFrEF group. Other baseline characteristics were not different between the two groups. During the average 2.7 years follow up, the HFpEF group showed significantly lower all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality compared to the HFrEF group (24.7 vs. 38.6%, Log-Rank P=0.014, 13.0 vs. 25.7%, Log-Rank P=0.007, respectively). Univariate analysis revealed that male, HFpEF, serum creatinine changes from baseline (ΔCre) were the factors correlated with all-cause mortality (HR 2.12, 95% CI 1.02 – 4.40, P=0.045, HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.26 - 0.87, P=0.016 and HR 1.50, 95% CI 1.00 - 2.24, P=0.049, respectively). According to multivariate analysis, HFpEF was the independent influencing factor of all-cause mortality (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.23 - 0.86, P=0.017). Stratified analysis revealed that in the non-responder group all-cause mortality was significantly lower in the HFpEF group than in the HFrEF group (24.2% vs 48.3%, P=0.049). Conclusion Long-term administration of TLV maybe more beneficial for HFpEF compared with HFrEF. This tendency was remarkable at non-responder group. FUNDunding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.

Effect of Sacubitril/Valsartan Combined with Dapagliflozin on Long-Term Cardiac Mortality in Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction

Angiology ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 000331972110473
Author(s):  
Umut Karabulut ◽  
Kudret Keskin ◽  
Dilay Karabulut ◽  
Ece Yiğit ◽  
Zerrin Yiğit
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Cardiac Mortality ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Reduced Ejection Fraction ◽  
Neprilysin Inhibitor

The angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) sacubitril/valsartan and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitor dapagliflozin have been shown to reduce rehospitalization and cardiac mortality in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). We aimed to compare the long-term cardiac and all-cause mortality of ARNI and dapagliflozin combination therapy against ARNI monotherapy in patients with HFrEF. This retrospective study involved 244 patients with HF with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II–IV symptoms and ejection fraction ≤40%. The patients were divided into 2 groups: ARNI monotherapy and ARNI+dapagliflozin. Median follow-up was 2.5 (.16–3.72) years. One hundred and seventy-five (71.7%) patients were male, and the mean age was 65.9 (SD, 10.2) years. Long-term cardiac mortality rates were significantly lower in the ARNI+dapagliflozin group (7.4%) than in the ARNI monotherapy group (19.5%) ( P = .01). Dapagliflozin [Hazard Ratio (HR) [95% Confidence Interval (CI)] = .29 [.10–.77]; P = .014] and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) [HR (95% CI) = .89 (.85–.93); P < .001] were found to be independent predictors of cardiac mortality. Our study showed a significant reduction in cardiac mortality with ARNI and dapagliflozin combination therapy compared with ARNI monotherapy.

scholarly journals Digoxin is Associated with Increased Mortality in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation without Concomitant Heart Failure

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maciej Tysarowski ◽  
Rafael Nigri ◽  
Brijesh Patel ◽  
Giselle A Suero-Abreu ◽  
Balaji Pratap ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Introduction: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia encountered in clinical practice and is a significant risk factor for ischemic stroke and death. Digitalis has been used for more than 200 years to treat heart conditions, including AF, and its use remains controversial due to uncertain long-term morbidity and mortality. Methods: We conducted a cohort study of hospitalized patients with AF assessing the effects of digoxin on long-term all-cause mortality. Patients were divided into two groups: with and without heart failure (HF). We performed multivariable Cox regression analysis to assess hazard ratios (HR) for all-cause mortality depending on digoxin treatment and used propensity score matching to adjust for differences in background characteristics between treatment groups. Results: Among 2179 consecutive patients hospitalized with AF, the median age was 73 ± 14, and 52.5% of patients were male, 49% had HF, and 18.8% were discharged on digoxin. Median left ventricular ejection fraction in the whole cohort was 60 (IQR 40-65). Among patients with HF, 34.5% had preserved, 17.3% had mid-range and 48.1% had reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. The mean follow-up time was 3 ± 2.05 years. In patients without HF there was a statistically significant increased mortality in the digoxin subgroup after propensity score matching (HR = 2.23, 95% CI 1.42-3.51, p < 0.001). In contrast, in patients with HF, there was no difference in mortality between the treatment groups (p = 0.92). Conclusions: Digoxin use in our study was associated with increased mortality in patients with AF and without concomitant HF.

Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction – A Review

2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 90-95 ◽  
Author(s):  
Otto A Smiseth ◽  
Anders Opdahl ◽  
Espen Boe ◽  
Helge Skulstad
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Diastolic Heart Failure ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Filling Pressure ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Reduced Ejection Fraction ◽  
Objective Evidence

Heart failure with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (HF-PEF), sometimes named diastolic heart failure, is a common condition most frequently seen in the elderly and is associated with arterial hypertension and left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy. Symptoms are attributed to a stiff left ventricle with compensatory elevation of filling pressure and reduced ability to increase stroke volume by the Frank-Starling mechanism. LV interaction with stiff arteries aggravates these problems. Prognosis is almost as severe as for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HF-REF), in part reflecting co-morbidities. Before the diagnosis of HF-PEF is made, non-cardiac etiologies must be excluded. Due to the non-specific nature of heart failure symptoms, it is essential to search for objective evidence of diastolic dysfunction which, in the absence of invasive data, is done by echocardiography and demonstration of signs of elevated LV filling pressure, impaired LV relaxation, or increased LV diastolic stiffness. Antihypertensive treatment can effectively prevent HF-PEF. Treatment of HF-PEF is symptomatic, with similar drugs as in HF-REF.

scholarly journals Systolic blood pressure and outcome in patients admitted with acute heart failure: a pooled analysis from 4 randomized clinical trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
J Grand ◽  
K Miger ◽  
A Sajadieh ◽  
L Kober ◽  
C Torp-Pedersen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Composite Endpoint ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Term Outcome ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Long Term Outcome ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Short And Long Term

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: Foundation. Main funding source(s): The Danish Heart Foundation Background In acute heart failure (AHF), low systolic blood pressure (SBP) has been associated with poor outcome. Less is known of the risk related to normal versus elevated SBP and interaction with left ventricular ejection fraction. Purpose The aim of the present study was to assess the association between baseline SBP and short- and long-term outcome in a large cohort of AHF-patients. Methods A pooled cohort of four randomized controlled trials investigating the vasodilator serelaxin versus placebo in patients admitted with AHF and an SBP from 125 to 180 mmHg. Endpoints were 180-day all-cause mortality and a short-term composite endpoint (worsening heart failure, all-cause mortality or hospital readmission for HF through Day 14). Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was categorized into HFrEF (&lt;40%) and HFpEF (= &gt;40%). Multivariable Cox regression was used and adjusted for age, sex, baseline body mass index, HFrEF, serum estimated glomerular filtration rate, allocated treatment (placebo/serelaxin), diabetes mellitus, ischemic heart disease, and atrial fibrillation/flutter. Measurements and Main Results A total of 10.533 patients with a mean age of 73 (±12) years and median SBP of 140 (130-150) mmHg were included within mean 8.2 hours from admission. LVEF was assessed in 8493 (81%), and of these, 4294 (51%) had HFrEF. Increasing SBP as a continuous variable was inversely associated with 180-day mortality (HRadjusted: 0.93 [0.88-0.98], p = 0.004 per 10 mmHg increase) and with the composite endpoint (HRadjusted: 0.90 [0.85-0.95], p &lt; 0.0001 per 10 mmHg increase). A significant interaction was observed regarding LVEF, revealing that SBP was not associated with mortality in patients with HFpEF  (HRadjusted: 1.01 [0.94-1.09], p = 0.83 per 10 mmHg increase), but SBP was associated with increased mortality in HFrEF (HRadjusted: 0.80 [0.73-0.88], p &lt; 0.001 per 10 mmHg increase) (Figure). Conclusions Elevated SBP is independently associated with favorable short- and long-term outcome in AHF-patients. The association between SBP and mortality was, however, not present in patients with preserved LVEF. Abstract Figure. Survival plots by SBP and LVEF

4181Prognosis of patients with mid-range left ventricular ejection fraction treated with PCI: insight from the global leaders study

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
P Chichareon ◽  
R Modolo ◽  
N Kogame ◽  
M Tomaniak ◽  
E Teiger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Stent Thrombosis ◽  
Composite Endpoint ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Abstract Background Heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction (left ventricular ejection fraction between 40 to 49%) was introduced in the 2016 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for heart failure. The prognosis of the mid-range of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was less well assessed in patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Purpose We aimed to assess the 2-year outcomes of patients with mid-range ejection fraction (LVEF between 40 to 49%) after PCI compared with reduced LVEF (<40%) and preserved LVEF (≥50) in the GLOBAL LEADERS study. Methods The GLOBAL LEADERS study was a multicenter, randomized trial comparing the efficacy and safety of two antiplatelet strategies in all-comers patients undergoing PCI with biolimus-A9 eluting stent. Patients with available information of LVEF were eligible in the present analysis. Patients were classified according to their LVEF into three groups; preserved (LVEF ≥50), mid-range (LVEF 40–49%) and reduced (LVEF <40%) left ventricular ejection fraction. Clinical outcomes at 2 years after PCI were compared among three groups in the multivariable Cox regression analysis. The primary outcome of present study was all-cause mortality at 2 years after PCI. The secondary outcomes were patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE). Individual components of the composite endpoint, definite or probable stent thrombosis and bleeding academic research consortium (BARC) type 3 or 5 were also reported. Results Out of 15968 patients included in the GLOBAL LEADERS study, information of LVEF was available in 15008 patients (93.99%); 12,128 patients (80.81%) were in the group of preserved LVEF, 1,737 patients (11.57%) were in the mid-range LVEF group and 1,143 patients (7.62%) were in the reduced LVEF group. The risk of all-cause mortality and POCE at 2 years were significantly different among the three groups. In an adjusted model, compared with the group of preserved LVEF, the hazard ratio for the all-cause mortality at 2 years rose from 1.89 (95% CI, 1.46–2.45) to 3.72 (95% CI, 2.95–4.70) in the group of mid-range and reduced LVEF respectively. Similar rises were observed for the POCE at 2 years from 1.27 (95% CI, 1.11–1.44) in the group of mid-range LVEF to 1.63 (95% CI, 1.42–1.87) in the group of reduced LVEF. The risk of stroke, myocardial infarction, and definite or probable stent thrombosis in patients with mid-range LVEF was not different from patients with reduced LVEF (see figure). A similar risk of revascularization was observed among the three groups. Outcomes among three LVEF categories Conclusion Patients with mid-range LVEF undergoing PCI had a different prognosis from patients with reduced LVEF and preserved LVEF in term of survival and composite ischemic endpoints at 2 years.

scholarly journals Long-Term clinical outcomes of subcutaneous implantable defibrillator therapy in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: a single center experience

EP Europace ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
M Ben Kilani ◽  
P Jacon ◽  
A Carabelli ◽  
S Venier ◽  
P Defaye
Keyword(s):  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Reduced Ejection Fraction ◽  
Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Patients With Heart Failure ◽  
The Mean

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: Private company. Main funding source(s): P. JACON consultant: Boston Scientific France Introduction The implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is the most effective therapy for prevention of sudden cardiac death in high-risk patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) has been considered as a comparable and relatively safer alternative to transvenous ICD in patients (pts) without pacing indication. Purpose Our aim was to assess the clinical "real-life" outcomes of S-ICD in patients with HFrEF and primary or secondary prevention, over a long-term follow-up (FU) period after S-ICD implantation. Methods All pts with HFrEF (left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35%) implanted with a S-ICD and a FU above 6 months were included in a cross-sectional monocentric study. Pts were followed by remote monitoring. Results 88 pts were included (52 ± 12.8 years old, male 87.5%). Indications were: primary 92% and secondary 8% prevention  (ischemic cardiopathy 46%; dilated 46%; hypertrophic 5%; congenital 2%; valvular 1%). The mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 27%. 9 pts had a previous transvenous ICD implanted, but required revision because of infection or lead defects. The mean FU period was 33 ± 18 months with a mortality rate of 10% (S-ICD-related death secondary to inappropriate (inap) shocks for one patient). 5 pts underwent S-ICD system extraction after a mean FU period of 30 ± 21 months. Reasons were infectious complication (1 pt), pacing indication (2 pts) and S-ICD lead dysfunction (2 pts). Extraction after heart transplant was performed in 4 pts. During FU, 18 pts (20.5%) experienced at least one therapy: 8 pts (9%) with appropriate (ap) (3.3% per year) and 11 pts (12%) with inap shocks (4.36% per year). A total number of 24 ap shocks have been observed (3 ± 4 ap shocks per patient, several shocks for 3 pts), the first shock occurred after a mean FU period of 24 ± 14 months. 2 pts were referred to VT ablation and no recurrence of events was observed after medical therapy modification for the other pts. For the 11 pts with inap shocks, time to the first event was 19 ± 20 months. Reasons were: supraventricular arrhythmias (18%), T wave (36%) and noise (54%) oversensing. There was 1.8 ± 1.6 shock per patient with several shocks for 4 pts. Among pts with inap shocks, 2 pts required S-ICD system extraction, 1 pt died, while reprogramming and medical therapy options were efficient in other pts. Conclusion In pts with HFrEF at high risk of sudden cardiac death, S-ICD has proven to be effective in treating ventricular arrhythmias. However, more investigations must be conducted to explain the real-life high rate of inappropriate therapies. Abstract Figure. Survival-free from therapies curve

scholarly journals Prognostic value of atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure and different left ventricular ejection fraction: results of the multicenter RIF-CHF register

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 4200
Author(s):  
I. V. Zhirov ◽  
N. V. Safronova ◽  
Yu. F. Osmolovskaya ◽  
S. N. Тereschenko
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Cardiovascular Mortality ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Reduced Ejection Fraction ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Increased Risk

Heart failure (HF) and atrial fibrillation (AF) are the most common cardiovascular conditions in clinical practice and frequently coexist. The number of patients with HF and AF is increasing every year.Aim. To analyze the effect of clinical course and management of HF and AF on the outcomes.Material and methods. The data of 1,003 patients from the first Russian register of patients with HF and AF (RIF-CHF) were analyzed. The endpoints included hospitalization due to decompensated HF, cardiovascular mortality, thromboembolic events, and major bleeding. Predictors of unfavorable outcomes were analyzed separately for patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction (AF+HFpEF), mid-range ejection fraction (AF+HFmrEF), and reduced ejection fraction (AF+HFrEF).Results. Among all patients with HF, 39% had HFpEF, 15% — HFmrEF, and 46% — HFrEF. A total of 57,2% of patients were rehospitalized due to decompensated HF within one year. Hospitalization risk was the highest for HFmrEF patients (66%, p=0,017). Reduced ejection fraction was associated with the increased risk of cardiovascular mortality (15,5% vs 5,4% in other groups, p<0,001) but not ischemic stroke (2,4% vs 3%, p=0,776). Patients with HFpEF had lower risk to achieve the composite endpoint (stroke+MI+cardiovascular death) as compared to patients with HFmrEF and HFrEF (12,7% vs 22% and 25,5%, p<0,001). Regression logistic analysis revealed that factors such as demographic characteristics, disease severity, and selected therapy had different effects on the risk of unfavorable outcomes depending on ejection fraction group.Conclusion. Each group of patients with different ejection fractions is characterized by its own pattern of factors associated with unfavorable outcomes. The demographic and clinical characteristics of patients with mid-range ejection fraction demonstrate that these patients need to be studied as a separate cohort.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document