Key result
Arrhythmic etiology in HFmrEF links to ~430% higher all-cause mortality compared to ischemic etiology.
Why the study?
Associations between heart failure etiology and all-cause mortality across HFpEF, HFmrEF, and HFrEF are inconsistent.
Does heart failure etiology impact all-cause mortality differently across the ejection fraction spectrum (HFpEF, HFmrEF, HFrEF)?
Cohort (n=1,210)
Yes
Does heart failure etiology impact all-cause mortality differently across the ejection fraction spectrum (HFpEF, HFmrEF, HFrEF)?
Hazard Ratio: 5.3 (95% CI 1.57–17.92)
p-value: p=<0.001
Heart failure etiology significantly impacts mortality in HFmrEF, where ischemic etiology confers the best survival, but has minimal independent prognostic influence in HFpEF and HFrEF.
Non-ischemic HFmrEF etiologies linked to higher mortality; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation before practice change.
PURPOSE: The associations between heart failure (HF) etiology in patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), HF with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF), HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and all-cause mortality are inconsistent. We performed a comparative assessment of the different HF etiologies and their impact on the long-term prognosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Hospitalized patients and outpatients were enrolled in the HEart failuRe ObsErvational Study (HEROES), a prospective, multicenter cohort study. Patients were categorized according to HF etiology (ischemic, valvular, hypertensive, arrhythmic, and other) and HF subtype. Follow-up included all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Among included 1,210 patients (26.5% HFpEF, 21.7% HFmrEF, 51.8% HFrEF, 41.2% ischemic, 11.6% hypertensive, 11.3% arrhythmic, 10.7% valvular, and 25.5% other etiologies), over a median follow-up of 14.7 months (interquartile range 11.6-18.4), 183 deaths (15.1%) were observed. Considering ischemic etiology as the reference, the adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for all-cause mortality were: HFpEF - arrhythmic 1.00 [0.35-2.88], hypertensive 0.42 [0.14-1.30], valvular 0.54 [0.17-1.67], other 1.03 [0.25-4.29], P=0.40; HFrEF - arrhythmic 0.76 [0.26-2.32], hypertensive 1.65 [0.60-4.65], valvular 0.80 [0.32-2.04], other 0.79 [0.47-1.35], P=0.30. In HFmrEF, ischemic etiology conferred the best survival, with significantly higher risks for arrhythmic (aHR 5.30 [1.57-17.92]), hypertensive (4.33 [1.33-14.11]), and valvular (6.82 [1.95-23.82]) groups, P<0.001. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, etiology exerts minimal independent influence on mortality in HFpEF and HFrEF, and HFmrEF exhibited marked divergence, with ischemic etiology conferring the best survival and significantly higher risks for arrhythmic, hypertensive, and valvular groups.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tarnowski et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Heart failure (n=1,210). Non-ischemic heart failure etiology (e.g., arrhythmic, hypertensive, valvular) vs. Ischemic etiology was evaluated on All-cause mortality (aHR 5.30, 95% CI 1.57-17.92, p=<0.001). In patients with HFmrEF, non-ischemic etiologies like arrhythmic (aHR 5.30; 95% CI 1.57-17.92) were associated with significantly higher all-cause mortality compared to ischemic etiology.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: