Ischemic heart disease was prevalent in 60% of HFrEF and 61% of HFmrEF patients, correlating with higher IHD event risk compared to HFpEF (52%).
Does the presence of baseline ischemic heart disease increase the risk of adverse clinical outcomes in patients with HFpEF, HFmrEF, and HFrEF?
42,987 patients with clinician-judged heart failure from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry (SwedeHF), including 23.2% with HFpEF (EF ≥50%), 21.4% with HFmrEF (EF 40–49%), and 55.4% with HFrEF (EF ≤39%).
Presence of baseline ischemic heart disease (IHD)
Absence of baseline ischemic heart disease (IHD)
Time to a fatal or nonfatal IHD event (with censoring at non-IHD death)hard clinical
HFmrEF resembles HFrEF more than HFpEF regarding the prevalence and prognostic impact of ischemic heart disease, which remains a major risk factor for adverse outcomes across all heart failure phenotypes.
Absolute Event Rate: 0% vs 0%
Background— The pathogenic role of ischemic heart disease (IHD) in heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF; EF <40%) is well established, but its pathogenic and prognostic significance in HF with midrange (HFmrEF; EF 40%–50%) and preserved EF (HFpEF; EF ≥50%) has been much less explored. Methods and Results— We evaluated 42 987 patients from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry with respect to baseline IHD, outcomes (IHD, HF, cardiovascular events, and all-cause death), and EF change during a median follow-up of 2.2 years. Overall, 23% had HFpEF (52% IHD), 21% had HFmrEF (61% IHD), and 55% had HFrEF (60% IHD). After multivariable adjustment, associations with baseline IHD were similar for HFmrEF and HFrEF and lower in HFpEF (risk ratio, 0.91 0.89–0.93 versus HFmrEF and risk ratio, 0.90 0.88–0.92 versus HFrEF). The adjusted risk of IHD events was similar for HFmrEF versus HFrEF and lower in HFpEF (hazard ratio, 0.89 0.84–0.95 versus HFmrEF and hazard ratio, 0.84 0.80–0.90 versus HFrEF). After adjustment, prevalent IHD was associated with increased risk of IHD events and all other outcomes in all EF categories except all-cause mortality in HFpEF. Those with IHD, particularly new IHD events, were also more likely to change to a lower EF category and less likely to change to a higher EF category over time. Conclusions— HFmrEF resembled HFrEF rather than HFpEF with regard to both a higher prevalence of IHD and a greater risk of new IHD events. Established IHD was an important prognostic factor across all HF types.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Ola Vedin
Heart Failure & Transplant
Carolyn S.P. Lam
Heart Failure & Transplant
Angela S. Koh
Cardiac Imaging
Circulation Heart Failure
Karolinska Institutet
Uppsala University
The University of Western Australia
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Vedin et al. (Thu,) reported a other. Ischemic heart disease was prevalent in 60% of HFrEF and 61% of HFmrEF patients, correlating with higher IHD event risk compared to HFpEF (52%).
synapsesocial.com/papers/696910e587f73b5c2af0cee2 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/circheartfailure.117.003875
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: