Key result
Non-invasive plasma volume estimates fail to consistently predict congestion or clinical outcomes after adjustment.
Why the study?
To evaluate associations between different formulae for estimating plasma volume status and clinical and ultrasound markers of congestion in chronic heart failure.
Do non-invasive estimations of plasma volume (HPVS and DPVS) predict mortality and heart failure hospitalization in patients with chronic heart failure?
Cohort (n=3,505)
No
Do non-invasive estimations of plasma volume (HPVS and DPVS) predict mortality and heart failure hospitalization in patients with chronic heart failure?
Effect estimate: HR 1.02 (95% CI 1.01-1.03)
p-value: p=<0.001
Non-invasive plasma volume estimates should not guide congestion assessment or prognosis in chronic HF; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation.
AIMS: We report associations between different formulae for estimating plasma volume status (PVS) and clinical and ultrasound markers of congestion in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) enrolled in the Hull Lifelab registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: Cohort 1 comprised patients with data on signs and symptoms at initial evaluation (n = 3505). Cohort 2 included patients with ultrasound assessment of congestion [lung B-line count, inferior vena cava (IVC) diameter, jugular vein distensibility (JVD) ratio] (N = 341). Two formulae for PVS were used: (a) Hakim (HPVS) and (b) Duarte (DPVS). Results were compared with clinical and ultrasound markers of congestion. Outcomes assessed were mortality and the composite of heart failure (HF) hospitalisation and all-cause mortality. In cohort 1, HPVS was associated with mortality [hazard ratio (HR) per unitary increase = 1.02 (1.01-1.03); P < 0.001]. In cohort 2, HPVS was associated with B-line count (HR) = 1.05 [95% confidence interval (CI) (1.01-1.08); P = 0.02] and DPVS with the composite outcome [HR = 1.26 (1.01-1.58); P = 0.04]. HPVS and DPVS were strongly related to haemoglobin concentration and HPVS to weight. After multivariable analysis, there were no strong or consistent associations between PVS and measures of congestion, severity of symptoms, or outcome. By contrast, log[NTproBNP] was strongly associated with all three. CONCLUSION: Amongst patients with CHF, HPVS and DPVS are not strongly or consistently associated with clinical or ultrasound evidence of congestion, nor clinical outcomes after multivariable adjustment. They appear only to be surrogates of the variables from which they are calculated with no intrinsic clinical utility.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cuthbert et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in Chronic heart failure (n=3,505). Hakim plasma volume status (HPVS) and Duarte plasma volume status (DPVS) vs. Clinical and ultrasound markers of congestion was evaluated on Mortality (per unitary increase in HPVS, univariable analysis) (HR 1.02, 95% CI 1.01-1.03, p=<0.001). Non-invasive estimations of plasma volume (HPVS and DPVS) are not strongly or consistently associated with clinical or ultrasound evidence of congestion or clinical outcomes after multivariable adjustment.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: