scholarly journals Impact of Redefinition of Normal Limits for Echocardiographic Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction on All-Cause Mortality

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jordan B. Strom ◽  
Lawrence J. Markson ◽  
Connie W. Tsao ◽  
Warren J. Manning
Keyword(s):  
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Normal Limits ◽  
All Cause Mortality

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 Prognostic impacts of changes in left ventricular ejection fraction in heart failure patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction

Open Heart ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. e001112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akiomi Yoshihisa ◽  
Yu Sato ◽  
Yuki Kanno ◽  
Mai Takiguchi ◽  
Tetsuro Yokokawa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Cardiac Event ◽  
Troponin I ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
All Cause Mortality

BackgroundIt has been reported that recovery of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is associated with better prognosis in heart failure (HF) patients with reduced EF (rEF). However, change of LVEF has not yet been investigated in cases of HF with preserved EF (HFpEF).Methods and resultsConsecutive 1082 HFpEF patients, who had been admitted to hospital due to decompensated HF (EF >50% at the first LVEF assessment at discharge), were enrolled, and LVEF was reassessed within 6 months in the outpatient setting (second LVEF assessment). Among the HFpEF patients, LVEF of 758 patients remained above 50% (pEF group), 138 patients had LVEF of 40%–49% (midrange EF, mrEF group) and 186 patients had LVEF of less than 40% (rEF group). In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, younger age and presence of higher levels of troponin I were predictors of rEF (worsened HFpEF). In the Kaplan-Meier analysis, the cardiac event rate of the groups progressively increased from pEF, mrEF to rEF (log-rank, p<0.001), whereas all-cause mortality did not significantly differ among the groups. In the multivariable Cox proportional hazard analysis, rEF (vs pEF) was not a predictor of all-cause mortality, but an independent predictor of increased cardiac event rates (HR 1.424, 95% CI 1.020 to 1.861, p=0.039).ConclusionAn initial assessment of LVEF and LVEF changes are important for deciding treatment and predicting prognosis in HFpEF patients. In addition, several confounding factors are associated with LVEF changes in worsened HFpEF patients.

scholarly journals The subclinical hypothyroid state might predict 30-day readmission in patients admitted with acute heart failure syndrome and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 175394472097774
Author(s):  
Muhammad Saad ◽  
Andrisael Garcia Lacoste ◽  
Pooja Balar ◽  
Aiyi Zhang ◽  
Timothy J. Vittorio
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Hospital Readmission ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Introduction: Thyroid hormone (TH) has an essential role on the functional capability of cardiac muscle with its gene modulation and induction of vasodilatory effects. There is considerable evidence to suggest the role of TH in patients with acute coronary syndrome, but less is known about its prognostic role in heart failure (HF) patients. We aim to evaluate the association between subclinical hypothyroid state (SCHS) and event rates including 30-day all-cause and HF readmission in patients with an index hospitalization for acute HF syndrome (AHFS). Methodology: A retrospective chart review analysis of 2335 patients admitted with the diagnosis of AHFS between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2017 was conducted. SCHS was defined as thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) level >4.50 mIU/L with a normal thyroxine (T4) level. Patients with pre-existing thyroid disease or receiving thyroid replacement therapy were excluded. HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) was defined as left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) >40% and HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) was defined as having LVEF ⩽40%. Percentage of 30-day, 3-month and 6-month all-cause readmission and mortality rates were calculated in both cohorts of AHFS (HFpEF and HFrEF) with and without SCHS. Results: The mean age of the 2335 AHFS population was 65 (±14.8) years. Of the 2335 patients admitted with AHFS, 1228 (52.6%) patients were found to have HFrEF and 1107 (47.4%) with HFpEF. There were 170 (7.3%) patients with AHFS found to have SCHS. There were more males than females (54% versus 46%). The percentage of hospital readmission within 30 days was higher for patients with SCHS compared with those without SCHS in the HFrEF group (42% versus 30%, p = 0.001). Hospital readmission within 30 days for patients with SCHS compared with those without SCHS in the HFpEF group did not differ (36.5% versus 31%, p = 0.47). Additionally, all-cause mortality was higher among patients with SCHS compared with patients without SCHS in the HFrEF group (18.7% versus 7.0%, p < 0.001). All-cause mortality was found similar in both arms of the HFpEF group (9.5% versus 7.7%, p = 0.73). Conclusion: During an index hospital admission for AHFS, SCHS was an independent predictor of readmission in 30 days in patients with HFrEF but not in patients with HFpEF. Additionally, it was related to adverse outcome such as all-cause mortality in HFrEF patients but not in HFpEF patients. Further studies regarding the concept of tissue thyroid and the potential for a therapeutic target are warranted.

Abstract 16085: Digoxin is Associated With Increased Mortality in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Without Concomitant Heart Failure

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maciej Tysarowski ◽  
Nigri Rafael ◽  
Hyoeun Kim ◽  
Emad Aziz
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Introduction: There is conflicting data on the effect of digoxin on all-cause mortality in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), especially in patients with heart failure (HF). Hypothesis: We hypothesized that in patients with AF, mortality rates associated with digoxin treatment are different among patients with HF and without HF. Methods: We conducted a cohort study of hospitalized patients with AF assessing the effects of digoxin on all-cause mortality. We divided patients into two groups: with and without HF. We performed 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, the median age was 73 ± 14 (table), 53% patient were male, 49% had HF, 19% were discharged on digoxin. Median left ventricular ejection fraction in the cohort was 60 (IQR 40-65). Among patients with HF, 35% had preserved, 18% had mid-range and 48% had reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. The mean follow-up time was 3 ± 2.1 years. After adjustment, in patients with HF, there was no statistically significant difference in mortality between the digoxin subgroups ( A , HR=1.01 [95% CI 0.76 to 1.35], p=0.92). In contrast, after adjustment, in patients without HF there was a statistically significant increased mortality in the digoxin subgroup ( B , HR=2.23, [95% CI 1.42 to 3.51], p<0.001). Conclusions: Digoxin use was associated with increased mortality in patients with AF and without concomitant HF. This suggests that clinicians should be careful in prescribing digoxin for rate control in AF, especially in patients without concomitant HF.

Abstract 14597: High Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction and All-cause Mortality in Women With Ischemia: Data From the WISE (Women's Ischemia Syndrome Evaluation)

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie Wu ◽  
Marie Lauzon ◽  
Jenna Maughan ◽  
Leslee J Shaw ◽  
Sheryl F Kelsey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Coronary Angiography ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Original Cohort ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Noninvasive Coronary Angiography ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Background: Relatively high left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) (>65%) was recently associated with higher all-cause mortality in women but not men undergoing noninvasive coronary angiography in the CONFIRM study, although this did not remain significant following adjustment for risk variables and mortality was not adjudicated. We investigated high EF and adjudicated all-cause mortality in the Women’s Ischemia Syndrome Evaluation (WISE) study. Methods: The WISE original cohort (enrolled 1996-2000), is a multicenter prospective study of women with suspected ischemic heart disease undergoing clinically indicated coronary angiography. EF was calculated by invasive left ventriculography. We investigated the relationship among high (>65%), normal (55-65%) and low (<55%) EF and adjudicated all-cause mortality using Kaplan Meier and regression analyses. Results: Overall 734 women included 298 (41%) high, 355 (48%) normal, and 81 (11%) low EF. The mean age was 58±11 years and mean EF was 65±11% (43%, 63% and 75% in the low, normal and high groups respectively). Over 10 years of follow-up, all-cause mortality occurred in 18% of patients, ranging from 12% in the high EF group to 41% in the low EF group. EF was associated with mortality among groups ( Figure ). Low EF remained a significant predictor of mortality compared to high EF, but normal EF compared to high EF did not in a multivariable regression model. Compared to women in the CONFIRM study, our cohort had higher mean EF (65% v. 62%), higher rates of obstructive CAD and diabetes, and lower rates of hypertension and dyslipidemia. Conclusions: Higher EF was not associated with higher all-cause mortality adjudicated predominantly cardiovascular in women with evidence of ischemia. Potential explanations for the lack of concordance with the CONFIRM study may include lack of death adjudication, differences in comorbidities, or other unknown factors.

Rational and design of the ROTAS study: a randomized study for the optimal treatment of symptomatic patients with low-gradient severe aortic valve stenosis and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Galli ◽  
Florent Le Ven ◽  
Augustin Coisne ◽  
Catherine Sportouch ◽  
Thierry Le Tourneau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Severe Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Abstract Aims Fifteen to thirty percentage of patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) have preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and a discordant AS pattern at Doppler echocardiography, which is characterized by a small (&lt;1 cm2) aortic area and low mean aortic gradient (&lt;40 mmHg). The ‘Randomized study for the Optimal Treatment of symptomatic patients with low-gradient severe Aortic Stenosis and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction’ (ROTAS trial) aims at demonstrating the superiority of aortic valve replacement vs. a ‘watchful waiting strategy’ in symptomatic patients with low-gradient (LS), severe AS, and preserved LVEF, stratified according to indexed stroke volume, in terms of all-cause mortality or cardiovascular-related hospitalization during follow-up (FU). Methods and results The ROTAS trial will be a multicentre randomized non-blinded study involving 16 reference centres. AS severity will be confirmed by a multimodality approach (rest and stress echocardiography, calcium scoring, and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for optimally characterize the population), which could provide important inputs to improve the pathophysiological understanding of this complex disease. Well-characterized patients will be randomized according to the management strategy. The primary endpoint will be the occurrence of all-cause mortality or cardiac related-hospitalizations during 2-year FU. One hundred and eighty subjects per group will be included. Conclusion The management of patients with LS severe AS and preserved LVEF is largely debated. ROTAS trial will allow a comprehensive evaluation of this particular pattern of AS and will establish which is the most appropriate management of these patients.

scholarly journals Heart Failure With Midrange Ejection Fraction: Prior Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction and Prognosis

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xinxin Zhang ◽  
Yuxi Sun ◽  
Yanli Zhang ◽  
Feifei Chen ◽  
Shuyuan Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Cardiovascular Death ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Composite Outcome ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Aims: Evidence-based guidelines for heart failure management depend mainly on current left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). However, fewer studies have examined the impact of prior LVEF. Patients may enter the heart failure with midrange ejection fraction (HFmrEF) category when heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) deteriorates or heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) improves. In this study, we examined the association between change in LVEF and adverse outcomes.Methods: HFmrEF patients with at least two or more echocardiograms 3 months apart at the First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University between September 1, 2015 and November 30, 2019 were identified. According to the prior LVEF, the subjects were divided into improved group (prior LVEF &lt; 40%), stable group (prior LVEF between 40 and 50%), and deteriorated group (prior LVEF ≥ 50%). The primary outcomes were cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, hospitalization for worsening heart failure, and composite event of all-cause mortality or all-cause hospitalization.Results: A total of 1,168 HFmrEF patients (67.04% male, mean age 63.60 ± 12.18 years) were included. The percentages of improved, stable, and deteriorated group were 310 (26.54%), 334 (28.60%), and 524 (44.86%), respectively. After a period of follow-up, 208 patients (17.81%) died and 500 patients met the composite endpoint. The rates of all-cause mortality were 35 (11.29%), 55 (16.47%), and 118 (22.52%), and the composite outcome was 102 (32.90%), 145 (43.41%), and 253 (48.28%) for the improved, stable, and deteriorated groups, respectively. Cox regression analysis showed that the deterioration group had higher risk of cardiovascular death (HR: 1.707, 95% CI: 1.064–2.739, P = 0.027), all-cause death (HR 1.948, 95% CI 1.335–2.840, P = 0.001), and composite outcome (HR 1.379, 95% CI 1.096–1.736, P = 0.006) compared to the improvement group. The association still remained significant after fully adjusted for both all-cause mortality (HR = 1.899, 95% CI 1.247–2.893, P = 0.003) and composite outcome (HR: 1.324, 95% CI: 1.020–1.718, P = 0.035).Conclusion: HFmrEF patients are heterogeneous with three different subsets identified, each with different outcomes. Strategies for managing HFmrEF should include previously measured LVEF to allow stratification based on direction changes in LVEF to better optimize treatment.

scholarly journals Impact of Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction on Recurrent Ventricular Tachyarrhythmias in Recipients of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators

Cardiology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 145 (6) ◽  
pp. 359-369
Author(s):  
Jonas Rusnak ◽  
Michael Behnes ◽  
Christel Weiß ◽  
Christoph Nienaber ◽  
Linda Reiser ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Tachyarrhythmias ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
The Impact

Objective: This study evaluates the impact of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) on recurrences of ventricular tachyarrhythmias in recipients of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). Background: Data regarding recurrences of ventricular tachyarrhythmias in ICD recipients according to LVEF is limited. Methods: A large retrospective registry was used, including all consecutive ICD recipients with episodes of ventricular tachycardia (VT) or fibrillation (VF) from 2002 to 2016. Patients with LVEF <35% were compared to patients with LVEF ≥35%. The primary end point was first recurrences of ventricular tachyarrhythmias at 5 years. Secondary end points were ICD-related therapies, rehospitalization, and all-cause mortality at 5 years. Cox regression, Kaplan Meier, and propensity score matching analyses were applied. Results: A total of 528 consecutive ICD recipients were included (51% with LVEF ≥35% and 49% with LVEF <35%). LVEF <35% was associated with reduced freedom from recurrent ventricular tachyarrhythmias (40 vs. 49%, log rank p = 0.014; hazard ratio [HR] = 1.381; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.066–1.788; p = 0.034), mainly attributed to recurrent sustained VT in primary preventive ICD recipients. Accordingly, LVEF <35% was associated with reduced freedom from first appropriate ICD therapies (28 vs. 41%, log rank p = 0.001; HR = 1.810; 95% CI 1.185–2.766; p = 0.001). Finally, LVEF <35% was associated with a higher rate of rehospitalization (23 vs. 34%; p = 0.005) and all-cause mortality at 5 years (13 vs. 29%; p = 0.001). Conclusion: LVEF <35% was associated with reduced freedom from recurrent ventricular tachyarrhythmias, appropriate device therapies, rehospitalization and all-cause mortality secondary to index ventricular tachyarrhythmias.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document