-
Multicenter Study Observational Study
Clinical characteristics, one-year change in ejection fraction and long-term outcomes in patients with heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction: a multicentre prospective observational study in Catalonia (Spain).
- Nuria Farré, Josep Lupon, Eulàlia Roig, Jose Gonzalez-Costello, Joan Vila, Silvia Perez, Marta de Antonio, Eduard Solé-González, Cristina Sánchez-Enrique, Pedro Moliner, Sonia Ruiz, C Enjuanes, Sonia Mirabet, Antoni Bayés-Genís, Josep Comin-Colet, and GICCAT Investigators.
- Heart Failure Unit, Department of Cardiology, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain.
- BMJ Open. 2017 Dec 21; 7 (12): e018719.
ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to analyse baseline characteristics and outcome of patients with heart failure and mid-range left ventricular ejection fraction (HFmrEF, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 40%-49%) and the effect of 1-year change in LVEF in this group.SettingMulticentre prospective observational study of ambulatory patients with HF followed up at four university hospitals with dedicated HF units.ParticipantsFourteen per cent (n=504) of the 3580 patients included had HFmrEF.InterventionsBaseline characteristics, 1-year LVEF and outcomes were collected. All-cause death, HF hospitalisation and the composite end-point were the primary outcomes.ResultsMedian follow-up was 3.66 (1.69-6.04) years. All-cause death, HF hospitalisation and the composite end-point were 47%, 35% and 59%, respectively. Outcomes were worse in HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) (LVEF>50%), without differences between HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) (LVEF<40%) and HFmrEF (all-cause mortality 52.6% vs 45.8% and 43.8%, respectively, P=0.001). After multivariable Cox regression analyses, no differences in all-cause death and the composite end-point were seen between the three groups. HF hospitalisation and cardiovascular death were not statistically different between patients with HFmrEF and HFrEF. At 1-year follow-up, 62% of patients with HFmrEF had LVEF measured: 24% had LVEF<40%, 43% maintained LVEF 40%-49% and 33% had LVEF>50%. While change in LVEF as continuous variable was not associated with better outcomes, those patients who evolved from HFmrEF to HFpEF did have a better outcome. Those who remained in the HFmrEF and HFrEF groups had higher all-cause mortality after adjustment for age, sex and baseline LVEF (HR 1.96 (95% CI 1.08 to 3.54, P=0.027) and HR 2.01 (95% CI 1.04 to 3.86, P=0.037), respectively).ConclusionsPatients with HFmrEF have a clinical profile in-between HFpEF and HFrEF, without differences in all-cause mortality and the composite end-point between the three groups. At 1 year, patients with HFmrEF exhibited the greatest variability in LVEF and this change was associated with survival.© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.