Key result
Heart failure with unknown ejection fraction was associated with significantly greater all-cause mortality (HR 1.60) compared to heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.
Why the study?
Heart failure databases are assembled based on left ventricular ejection fraction, leaving patients without ejection fraction determination unanalyzed.
Does the phenotype of heart failure with unknown ejection fraction (HFunEF) have different clinical characteristics and prognosis compared to HFpEF and HFrEF?
Cohort (n=820)
No
Does the phenotype of heart failure with unknown ejection fraction (HFunEF) have different clinical characteristics and prognosis compared to HFpEF and HFrEF?
Effect estimate: HR 1.60 (95% CI 1.16-2.29)
Absolute Event Rate: 43.4% vs 26.7%
p-value: p=0.004
Patients with heart failure with unknown ejection fraction (HFunEF) represent a high-risk phenotype with significantly greater all-cause mortality compared to HFpEF, highlighting the critical need for routine LV ejection fraction assessment.
Background: Heart Failure (HF) is a frequent cause of mortality and recurrent hospitalization. Although HF databases are assembled based on left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction, patients without LV ejection fraction determination are not further analyzed. Objective: The purpose of this study is to characterize patient attributes and outcomes in this group-HF with unknown Ejection Fraction (HFunEF). Methods: We queried the electronic medical record from a community-based university practice for patients with a HF diagnosis. We included patients with >60 days follow-up and had interpretable Doppler-echocardiograms. We recorded demographic, Doppler-echocardiographic, and outcome variables (up to 2083 days). Results: There were 820 patients: 269 with HF with preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF), 364 with HF with reduced Ejection Fraction (HFrEF), of which 231 had a LV ejection fraction=40-49% and 133 had a LV ejection fraction<40%, and 187 with HFunEF. As compared to patients with HFunEF, HFpEF patients were younger, had a higher coronary disease and hyperlipidemia prevalence. Patients with HFrEF had more prevalent coronary disease, myocardial infarction, and hyperlipidemia. Patients with HFunEF were more likely to be seen by non-cardiology providers. All-cause mortality (ACM) was greater in HFunEF patients than patients with HFpEF (Hazard Ratio (HR)=1.60 (1.16-2.29), p=0.004). Furthermore, HF readmission rates were lower in HFunEF as compared to HFpEF (HR=0.33 (0.27-0.54), p<0.0001) and HFrEF (HR=0.30 (0.028-0.50), p<0.0001). Conclusion: Patients with HFunEF have greater ACM and lower HF re-admission than other HF phenotypes. Adherence to core measures, including LV ejection fraction assessment, may improve outcomes in this cohort of patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lavine et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in Heart Failure (n=820). Heart failure with unknown ejection fraction (HFunEF) vs. Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) was evaluated on All-cause mortality (HR 1.60, 95% CI 1.16-2.29, p=0.004). Heart failure with unknown ejection fraction was associated with significantly greater all-cause mortality (HR 1.60) compared to heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: