Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
PulseExploreClubsResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeClubsExplore
August 10, 2022Acta cardiologica. Supplementum

The most common phenotype was HFpEF (58.1%), followed by HFrEF (21.7%) and HFmrEF (20.2%), with no differences in HF outcomes observed among the three phenotypes.

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Why the study?

The clinical profile of heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction needed to be characterized and compared with reduced and preserved ejection fraction.

Population

267 HF patients admitted to an Internal Medicine department of a tertiary hospital

Comparison

HFmrEF (40-49%) vs HFrEF (<40%) vs HFpEF (≥50%)

Design

Descriptive, observational study

Authors

AGAnyuli Gracia GutiérrezDSDaniel Grados SasoECElena I. Esteban Cabello

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Overview

No outcome differences by HF phenotype in elderly inpatients; leaves open whether HFmrEF warrants distinct management.

Structured PICO

P
Population
267 heart failure patients admitted to the Internal Medicine department of a tertiary hospital during 2010-2016, mean age 79.5, 56.6% male. Divided into HFrEF (<40%), HFmrEF (40-49%), and HFpEF (≥50%).
O
Outcome
Demographic, clinical, and analytical characteristics, and HF outcomes

HFmrEF represents approximately 20% of hospitalized heart failure patients and shares clinical characteristics with both HFrEF (ischaemic aetiology) and HFpEF (hypertension), with similar overall HF outcomes.

Limitations

  • small sample size
  • short follow-up

Cite This Study

Gutiérrez et al. (2022) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1e084f520f01455d601d77https://doi.org/10.1080/00015385.2022.2059135
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share