Background-When advanced, heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is readily apparent. However, diagnosis of earlier disease may be challenging because exertional dyspnea is not specific for heart failure, and biomarkers and hemodynamic indicators of volume overload may be absent at rest. Methods and Results-Patients with exertional dyspnea and ejection fraction Ͼ50% were referred for hemodynamic catheterization. Those with no significant coronary disease, normal brain natriuretic peptide assay, and normal resting hemodynamics (mean pulmonary artery pressure Ͻ25 mm Hg and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure [PCWP] Ͻ15 mm Hg) (nϭ55) underwent exercise study. The exercise PCWP was used to classify patients as having HFpEF (PCWP Ն25 mm Hg) (nϭ32) or noncardiac dyspnea (PCWP Ͻ25 mm Hg) (nϭ23). At rest, patients with HFpEF had higher resting pulmonary artery pressure and PCWP, although all values fell within normal limits. Exercise-induced elevation in PCWP in HFpEF was confirmed by greater increases in left ventricular end-diastolic pressure and was associated with blunted increases in heart rate, systemic vasodilation, and cardiac output. Exercise-induced pulmonary hypertension was present in 88% of patients with HFpEF and was related principally to elevated PCWP, as pulmonary vascular resistances dropped similarly in both groups. Exercise PCWP and pulmonary artery systolic pressure were highly correlated. An exercise pulmonary artery systolic pressure Ն45 mm Hg identified HFpEF with 96% sensitivity and 95% specificity. Conclusions-Euvolemic patients with exertional dyspnea, normal brain natriuretic peptide, and normal cardiac filling pressures at rest may have markedly abnormal hemodynamic responses during exercise, suggesting that chronic symptoms are related to heart failure. Earlier and more accurate diagnosis using exercise hemodynamics may allow better targeting of interventions to treat and prevent HFpEF progression. (Circ Heart Fail. 2010;3:588-595.)

The HFPEF score, which relies on simple clinical characteristics and echocardiography, enables discrimination of HFpEF from noncardiac causes of dyspnea and can assist in determination of the need for further diagnostic testing in the evaluation of patients with unexplained exertional dyspnea.

No abstract

Half of patients with heart failure (HF) have a preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (HFpEF). Morbidity and mortality in HFpEF are similar to values observed in patients with HF and reduced EF, yet no effective treatment has been identified. While early research focused on the importance of diastolic dysfunction in the pathophysiology of HFpEF, recent studies have revealed that multiple non-diastolic abnormalities in cardiovascular function also contribute. Diagnosis of HFpEF is frequently challenging and relies upon careful clinical evaluation, echo-Doppler cardiography, and invasive haemodynamic assessment. In this review, the principal mechanisms, diagnostic approaches, and clinical trials are reviewed, along with a discussion of novel treatment strategies that are currently under investigation or hold promise for the future.

Background Heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a heterogeneous syndrome. Phenotyping patients into pathophysiologically homogenous groups may enable better targeting of treatment. Obesity is common in HFpEF and has many cardiovascular effects, suggesting it may be a viable candidate for phenotyping. We compared cardiovascular structure, function, and reserve capacity in subjects with obese HFpEF, non-obese HFpEF, and controls. Methods Subjects with obese HFpEF (BMI≥35kg/m2, n=99), non-obese HFpEF (BMI<30kg/m2, n=96), and non-obese controls free of HF (n=71) underwent detailed clinical assessment, echocardiography and invasive hemodynamic exercise testing. Results Compared to both non-obese HFpEF and controls, subjects with obese HFpEF displayed increased plasma volume (3907 [3563,4333] vs. 2772 [2555,3133] and 2680 [2380,3006] ml, p<0.0001), more concentric left ventricular remodeling, greater right ventricular dilatation (base 34±7 vs. 31±6 and 30±6 mm, p=0.0005; length 66±7 vs. 61±7 and 61±7 mm, p<0.0001), more right ventricular dysfunction, increased epicardial fat thickness (10±2 vs. 7±2 and 6±2 mm, p<0.0001), and greater total epicardial heart volume (945 [831,1105] vs. 797 [643,979] and 632 [517,768] ml, p<0.0001), despite lower NT-proBNP levels. Pulmonary capillary wedge pressure was correlated with body mass and plasma volume in obese HFpEF (r=0.22 and 0.27, both p<0.05), but not in non-obese HFpEF (p≥0.3). The increase in heart volumes in obese HFpEF was associated with greater pericardial restraint and heightened ventricular interdependence, reflected by increased ratio of right to left heart filling pressures (0.64±0.17 vs. 0.56±0.19 and 0.53±0.20, p=0.0004), higher pulmonary venous pressure relative to left ventricular transmural pressure, and greater left ventricular eccentricity index (1.10±0.19 vs 0.99±0.06 and 0.97±0.12, p<0.0001). Interdependence was enhanced as pulmonary artery pressure load increased (interaction p<0.05). As compared to non-obese HFpEF and controls, obese HFpEF subjects displayed worse exercise capacity (peak oxygen consumption 7.7±2.3 vs. 10.0±3.4 and12.9±4.0 ml/min*kg, p<0.0001), higher biventricular filling pressures with exercise and depressed pulmonary artery vasodilator reserve. Conclusions Obesity-related HFpEF is a genuine form of cardiac failure and a clinically relevant phenotype that may require specific treatments.