Key result
LVEF <40% was associated with higher long-term mortality compared to LVEF ≥50% in CAD patients with moderate/severe MR (HR 1.57; 95% CI 1.29-1.91) and none/mild MR (HR 1.79; 95% CI 1.56-2.05).
Why the study?
The association between LVEF and prognosis in patients with moderate or severe mitral regurgitation remains controversial.
Does LVEF <40% predict long-term all-cause mortality in CAD patients with varying severities of mitral regurgitation?
Cohort (n=30,775)
Does LVEF <40% predict long-term all-cause mortality in CAD patients with varying severities of mitral regurgitation?
LVEF remains a reliable prognostic indicator for long-term mortality in CAD patients, regardless of the presence of moderate or severe mitral regurgitation.
LVEF <40% was associated with higher mortality in CAD across MR severities; supports LVEF as prognostic marker but leaves open therapeutic implications.
Background Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is a vital variable to describe left ventricle systolic function and contractility of left ventricle. However, the association between LVEF and the prognostic effect in patients with moderate or severe mitral regurgitation (MR) is still controversial. Methods This study comprised 30,775 coronary artery disease (CAD) patients who underwent coronary arteriography (CAG) in the Cardiorenal ImprovemeNt (CIN) registry from January 2007 to December 2018. Patients were divided into none or mild MR group and moderate or severe MR group, and 3 levels of LVEF ≥50, 40–50%, and <40% were further distinguished according to hospital baseline. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional analyses were used to investigate the association between LVEF levels and long-term all-cause mortality in patients with different MR severities. Results Of 30,775 CAD patients (62.9 ± 10.6 years, females 23.8%), 26,474 (86.0%) patients had none or mild MR. Compared with none or mild MR patients, patients with moderate or severe MR were older and had worse cardio-renal function. In multivariable Cox proportional analysis, LVEF <40% was independently associated with higher mortality compared with LVEF ≥ 50% in all kinds of MR severity {none or mild MR [adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 1.79; 95% CI: 1.56–2.05, p < 0.001], moderate or severe MR [adjusted HR: 1.57; 95% CI: 1.29–1.91, p < 0.001]}. Conclusions LVEF is a reliable prognostic index in CAD patients, even in those with moderate or severe MR. LVEF monitoring would still be clinically useful in CAD patients with moderate or severe MR. Clinical trials are needed to prospectively evaluate the optimal threshold for LVEF in patients with moderate or severe MR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in Coronary artery disease (n=30,775). LVEF <40% vs. LVEF ≥50% was evaluated on long-term all-cause mortality (HR 1.57, 95% CI 1.29-1.91, p=<0.001). LVEF <40% was associated with higher long-term mortality compared to LVEF ≥50% in CAD patients with moderate/severe MR (HR 1.57; 95% CI 1.29-1.91) and none/mild MR (HR 1.79; 95% CI 1.56-2.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: