scholarly journals Atrial Electrophysiological Remodeling and Fibrillation in Heart Failure

2016 ◽  
Vol 10s1 ◽  
pp. CMC.S39713 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandeep V. Pandit ◽  
Antony J. Workman
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Molecular Mechanisms ◽  
Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction ◽  
Systolic Dysfunction ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Calcium Handling ◽  
Ion Currents ◽  
Multiple Variables ◽  
The Individual ◽  
And Function

Heart failure (HF) causes complex, chronic changes in atrial structure and function, which can cause substantial electrophysiological remodeling and predispose the individual to atrial fibrillation (AF). Pharmacological treatments for preventing AF in patients with HF are limited. Improved understanding of the atrial electrical and ionic/molecular mechanisms that promote AF in these patients could lead to the identification of novel therapeutic targets. Animal models of HF have identified numerous changes in atrial ion currents, intracellular calcium handling, action potential waveform and conduction, as well as expression and signaling of associated proteins. These studies have shown that the pattern of electrophysiological remodeling likely depends on the duration of HF, the underlying cardiac pathology, and the species studied. In atrial myocytes and tissues obtained from patients with HF or left ventricular systolic dysfunction, the data on changes in ion currents and action potentials are largely equivocal, probably owing mainly to difficulties in controlling for the confounding influences of multiple variables, such as patient's age, sex, disease history, and drug treatments, as well as the technical challenges in obtaining such data. In this review, we provide a summary and comparison of the main animal and human electrophysiological studies to date, with the aim of highlighting the consistencies in some of the remodeling patterns, as well as identifying areas of contention and gaps in the knowledge, which warrant further investigation.

scholarly journals Cross sectional study estimating prevalence of heart failure and left ventricular systolic dysfunction in community patients at risk

Heart ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 86 (2) ◽  
pp. 172-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
O W Nielsen ◽  
J Hilden ◽  
C T Larsen ◽  
J F Hansen
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
General Practice ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction ◽  
Systolic Dysfunction ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
General Practices

OBJECTIVETo examine a general practice population to measure the prevalence of signs and symptoms of heart failure (SSHF) and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD).DESIGNCross sectional screening study in three general practices followed by echocardiography.SETTING AND PATIENTSAll patients ⩾ 50 years in two general practices and ⩾ 40 years in one general practice were screened by case record reviews and questionnaires (n = 2158), to identify subjects with some evidence of heart disease. Among these, subjects were sought who had SSHF (n = 115). Of 357 subjects with evidence of heart disease, 252 were eligible for examination, and 126 underwent further cardiological assessment, including 43 with SSHF.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURESPrevalence of SSHF as defined by a modified Boston index, LVSD defined as an indirectly measured left ventricular ejection fraction ⩽ 0.45, and numbers of subjects needing an echocardiogram to detect one case with LVSD.RESULTSSSHF afflicted 0.5% of quadragenarians and rose to 11.7% of octogenarians. Two thirds were handled in primary care only. At ⩾ 50 years of age 6.4% had SSHF, 2.9% had LVSD, and 1.9% (95% confidence interval 1.3% to 2.5%) had both. To detect one case with LVSD in primary care, 14 patients with evidence of heart disease without SSHF and 5.5 patients with SSHF had to be examined.CONCLUSIONSSHF is extremely prevalent in the community, especially in primary care, but more than two thirds do not have LVSD. The number of subjects with some evidence of heart disease needing an echocardiogram to detect one case of LVSD is 14.

scholarly journals Central and obstructive apneas prevalence in heart failure with reduced, mid-range and preserved ejection fraction

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
C Borrelli ◽  
P Sciarrone ◽  
F Gentile ◽  
N Ghionzoli ◽  
G Mirizzi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction ◽  
Systolic Function ◽  
Systolic Dysfunction ◽  
Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Apnea Hypopnea Index ◽  
Preserved Ejection Fraction ◽  
2D Echocardiography

Abstract Background Central apneas (CA) and obstructive apneas (OA) are highly prevalent in heart failure (HF) both with reduced and preserved systolic function. However, a comprehensive evaluation of apnea prevalence across HF according to ejection fraction (i.e HF with patients with reduced, mid-range and preserved ejection fraction- HFrEf, HFmrEF and HFpEF, respectively) throughout the 24 hours has never been done before. Materials and methods 700 HF patients were prospectively enrolled and then divided according to left ventricular EF (408 HFrEF, 117 HFmrEF, 175 HFpEF). All patients underwent a thorough evaluation including: 2D echocardiography; 24-h Holter-ECG monitoring; cardiopulmonary exercise testing; neuro-hormonal assessment and 24-h cardiorespiratory monitoring. Results In the whole population, prevalence of normal breathing (NB), CA and OA at daytime was 40%, 51%, and 9%, respectively, while at nighttime 15%, 55%, and 30%, respectively. When stratified according to left ventricular EF, CA prevalence decreased from HFrEF to HFmrEF and HFpEF: (daytime CA: 57% vs. 43% vs. 42%, respectively, p=0.001; nighttime CA: 66% vs. 48% vs. 34%, respectively, p<0.0001), while OA prevalence increased (daytime OA: 5% vs. 8% vs. 18%, respectively, p<0.0001; nighttime OA: 20 vs. 29 vs. 53%, respectively, p<0.0001). When assessing moderte-severe apneas, defined with an apnea/hypopnea index >15 events/hour, prevalence of CA was again higher in HFrEF than HFmrEF and HFpEF both at daytime (daytime moderate-severe CA: 28% vs. 19% and 23%, respectively, p<0.05) and at nighttime (nighttime moderate-severe CA: 50% vs. 39% and 28%, respectively, p<0.05). Conversely, moderate-severe OA decreased from HFrEF to HFmrEF to HFpEF both at daytime (daytime moderate-severe OA: 1% vs. 3% and 8%, respectively, p<0.05) and nighttime (noghttime moderate-severe OA: 10% vs. 11% and 30%, respectively, p<0.05). Conclusions Daytime and nighttime apneas, both central and obstructive in nature, are highly prevalent in HF regardless of EF. Across the whole spectrum of HF, CA prevalence increases and OA decreases as left ventricular systolic dysfunction progresses, both during daytime and nighttime. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document