Cardiac remodeling is generally accepted as a determinant of the clinical course of heart failure (HF). Defined as genome expression resulting in molecular, cellular and interstitial changes and manifested clinically as changes in size, shape and function of the heart resulting from cardiac load or injury, cardiac remodeling is influenced by hemodynamic load, neurohormonal activation and other factors still under investigation. Although patients with major remodeling demonstrate progressive worsening of cardiac function, slowing or reversing remodeling has only recently become a goal of HF therapy. Mechanisms other than remodeling can also influence the course of heart disease, and disease progression may occur in other ways in the absence of cardiac remodeling. Left ventricular end-diastolic and end-systolic volume and ejection fraction data provide support for the beneficial effects of therapeutic agents such as angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and beta-adrenergic blocking agents on the remodeling process. These agents also provide benefits in terms of morbidity and mortality. Although measurement of ejection fraction can reliably guide initiation of treatment in HF, opinions differ regarding the value of ejection fraction data in guiding ongoing therapy. The role of echocardiography or radionuclide imaging in the management and monitoring of HF is as yet unclear. To fully appreciate the potential benefits of HF therapies, clinicians should understand the relationship between remodeling and HF progression. Their patients may then, in turn, acquire an improved understanding of their disease and the treatments they are given.
Aims
The objectives of the present study were to describe epidemiology and outcomes in ambulatory heart failure (HF) patients stratified by left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and to identify predictors for mortality at 1 year in each group.
Methods and results
The European Society of Cardiology Heart Failure Long‐Term Registry is a prospective, observational study collecting epidemiological information and 1‐year follow‐up data in 9134 HF patients. Patients were classified according to baseline LVEF into HF with reduced EF [EF <40% (HFrEF)], mid‐range EF [EF 40–50% (HFmrEF)] and preserved EF [EF >50% (HFpEF)]. In comparison with HFpEF subjects, patients with HFrEF were younger (64 years vs. 69 years), more commonly male (78% vs. 52%), more likely to have an ischaemic aetiology (49% vs. 24%) and left bundle branch block (24% vs. 9%), but less likely to have hypertension (56% vs. 67%) or atrial fibrillation (18% vs. 32%). The HFmrEF group resembled the HFrEF group in some features, including age, gender and ischaemic aetiology, but had less left ventricular and atrial dilation. Mortality at 1 year differed significantly between HFrEF and HFpEF (8.8% vs. 6.3%); HFmrEF patients experienced intermediate rates (7.6%). Age, New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III/IV status and chronic kidney disease predicted mortality in all LVEF groups. Low systolic blood pressure and high heart rate were predictors for mortality in HFrEF and HFmrEF. A lower body mass index was independently associated with mortality in HFrEF and HFpEF patients. Atrial fibrillation predicted mortality in HFpEF patients.
Conclusions
Heart failure patients stratified according to different categories of LVEF represent diverse phenotypes of demography, clinical presentation, aetiology and outcomes at 1 year. Differences in predictors for mortality might improve risk stratification and management goals.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.