Key result
Metabolic risk factors linked to decreased LV mechano-energetic efficiency and peak strain in ischemic cardiomyopathy.
Why the study?
In patients with prior myocardial ischemia or infarction, whether and how metabolic risk factors affect the heart remained to be elucidated.
Does the presence of metabolic risk factors worsen left ventricular myocardial mechano-energetic efficiency and strain in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy?
Observational (n=201)
No
Does the presence of metabolic risk factors worsen left ventricular myocardial mechano-energetic efficiency and strain in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy?
Effect estimate: β -0.093 (95% CI -0.183 to -0.003)
p-value: p=0.018
Metabolic risk factors may impair LV efficiency and strain in ischemic cardiomyopathy; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation.
PURPOSE: Metabolic risk factors (MetF) have emerged as the leading drivers of ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) worldwide. However, in patients who have already experienced myocardial ischemia/infarction, whether and in what pattern the MetF act on the heart needs to be further elucidated. This study aims to determine the adverse effects of MetF on left ventricular (LV) indexed myocardial mechano-energetic efficiency (MEEi) and dysfunction in patients with ICM, and further clarify which MetF classification is more clinically significant. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study retrospectively included 201 patients with ICM who underwent cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations, and further divided them into the following three groups according to the number of coexisting MetF: The groups with no MetF (MetF-0 group, n = 32), with 1-2 MetF (MetF-1, n = 92) and with 3-5 MetF (MetF-2, n = 77). The clinical variables and MRI-derived parameters were measured and compared among the three groups. Multivariate linear regression analysis was performed to determine independent correlation of MetF on LV MEEi and strain in ICM patients. RESULTS: LV global circumferential peak strain (PS) gradually decreased from MetF-0 group, through MetF-1 group, to MetF-2 group (- 9.52 ± 2.70% vs. - 7.62 ± 2.73% vs. - 6.50 ± 2.70%, P < 0.001). MetF-1 and MetF-2 groups both showed lower MEEi, lower LV global radial and longitudinal PS than MetF-0 group (Both P < 0.001), while there was no statistically significant difference between MetF-1 and MetF-2 groups (P > 0.05). Multivariate analyses indicated that the coexisting any MetF was independently associated with decreased LV MEEi (β = - 0.093, P = 0.018) and PS (Radial, β = - 0.232, P < 0.001; Circumferential, β = 0.156, P = 0.002; Longitudinal, β = 0.192, P = 0.008), and the increase in the number of coexisting MetF was only related to the reduction of circumferential PS (β = 0.238, P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Our results revealed whether coexisting any MetF, rather than coexisting a greater number of MetF, is associated with the reduction of LV myocardial mechano-energetic efficiency and dysfunction in patients with ICM, suggesting that clinicians should promptly identify and treat any coexisting MetF in the management of ICM patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2025) conducted an observational in Ischemic cardiomyopathy (n=201). Coexisting metabolic risk factors vs. No metabolic risk factors was evaluated on Left ventricular indexed myocardial mechano-energetic efficiency (MEEi) (β -0.093, 95% CI -0.183 to -0.003, p=0.018). Coexisting any metabolic risk factor was independently associated with decreased left ventricular myocardial mechano-energetic efficiency (β = -0.093) and peak strain in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: