No abstract

No abstract

Background Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a syndrome with a heterogeneous cluster of causes, including non-resolving inflammation, endothelial dysfunction, and multi-organ defects. The present study’s objective was to identify novel predictors of HFpEF. Methods The study analyzed the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) to assess the association of specific markers of inflammation with new onset of HFpEF (interleukin-2 [IL-2], matrix metalloproteinase 3 [MMP3], large low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C], and medium high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C]). The study included men and women 45 to 84 years of age without cardiovascular disease at baseline. The primary outcome was the multivariate association of the hypothesized markers of inflammation with new-onset of HFpEF versus participants without new-onset heart failure. Participants with missing data were excluded. Results The present analysis included 6814 participants, 53% female, with a mean age of 62 years. Among the entire cohort, HFpEF was diagnosed in 151 (2.2%) participants and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) was diagnosed in 146 (2.1%) participants. Participants were followed for the outcome of heart failure for a median 13.9 years. Baseline IL-2 was available for 2861 participants. The multivariate analysis included 2792 participants. Of these, 2668 did not develop heart failure, 62 developed HFpEF, 47 developed HFrEF, and 15 developed unclassified heart failure. In the multivariate regression model, IL-2 was associated with new-onset HFpEF (OR, 1.00058; 95% confidence interval, 1.00014 to 1.00102, p = 0.009) but not new-onset HFrEF. In multivariate analysis, MMP3, large LDL-C, and medium HDL-C were not associated with HFpEF or HFrEF. Conclusion These findings portend IL-2 as an important component of suboptimal inflammation in the pathogenesis of HFpEF.

No abstract

Letters to the Editor recommendation for replacing CO 2 absorbent that had been identified. 1 As mentioned in our other response, the threshold of 0.05% for changing CO 2 absorbent should have been 0.5% and not 0.05%. We recognize this threshold in percent to be different from 5 mm Hg, but the intention was to provide a threshold that is easy to remember. Dr Gross 1 also identified that mm Hg should be used as the units of partial pressure rather than torr. We included torr to ensure that the information was complete, as some may still use that term, although we agree it is not a recommended unit.