Key result
Persistent restrictive LV filling at 3 months in DCM is linked to higher mortality and transplants.
Why the study?
Restrictive left ventricular filling pattern in DCM is linked to poor prognosis, but few data exist on the prognostic implications of its evolution.
Cohort (n=110)
p-value: p=<0.0001
Persistent restrictive LV filling may identify higher-risk DCM patients; leaves open whether targeting diastolic patterns improves outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess the prognostic implications of the evolution of restrictive left ventricular filling pattern (RFP) in dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM). BACKGROUND: Previous work has demonstrated that a RFP in DCM is associated with a poor prognosis. Few data are available on the prognostic implications of the evolution of this pattern. METHODS: The evolution of left ventricular filling was studied by Doppler echocardiography in 110 patients with DCM. According to the left ventricular filling pattern at presentation and after 3 months of treatment, the patients were classified into three groups: Group 1A (n = 24) had persistent restrictive filling; Group 1B (n = 29) had reversible restrictive filling; and Group 2 (n = 57) had nonrestrictive filling. RESULTS: During follow-up (41 +/- 20 months), mortality plus heart transplantations was significantly higher in Group 1A than in Groups 1B and 2 (p < 0.0001). On multivariate analysis, the model incorporating E wave deceleration time at 3 months was more powerful at predicting mortality with respect to this variable at baseline (p = 0.0039). Clinical improvement at 1 and 2 years was significantly more frequent in Groups 1B and 2 than in Group 1A (p < 0.0001 at 2 years). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with DCM, the persistence of restrictive filling at 3 months is associated with a high mortality and transplantation rate. The patients with reversible restrictive filling have a high probability of improvement and excellent survival. Doppler echocardiographic reevaluation of these patients after 3 months of therapy gives additional prognostic information with respect to the initial study.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pinamonti et al. (1997) conducted a cohort in Dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) (n=110). Persistent restrictive left ventricular filling pattern vs. Reversible restrictive filling or nonrestrictive filling was evaluated on Mortality plus heart transplantations (p=<0.0001). Persistent restrictive left ventricular filling at 3 months in dilated cardiomyopathy was associated with significantly higher mortality and transplantation rates than other filling patterns (p<0.0001).
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: