Key result
Compared with HFpEF, patients with HFrEF had significantly higher incidence rates for heart failure hospitalization (59% greater), mortality (31% greater), and incident CKD (55% greater) (p<0.001).
Why the study?
Contemporary analyses of heart failure patient distribution by ejection fraction groups were unavailable or limited to hospitalized patients, leaving the broad clinical burden unquantified.
Does the clinical burden and incidence of major outcomes differ between HFrEF and HFpEF in patients with newly diagnosed heart failure?
Cohort (n=16,516)
Does the clinical burden and incidence of major outcomes differ between HFrEF and HFpEF in patients with newly diagnosed heart failure?
Effect estimate: 59% greater HHF, 31% greater mortality, 55% greater CKD incidence
p-value: p=<0.001
While individual risk of adverse outcomes is higher in HFrEF, HFpEF creates a substantially larger overall burden on the healthcare system due to its higher prevalence.
Characterizes HF burden across EF groups in a large EMR cohort; leaves open generalizability and need for targeted interventions.
Background: Contemporary analyses of the distribution of heart failure (HF) patients by groups of ejection fraction are not available or are limited to hospitalized patients. Our objective was to quantify the per-person and system level clinical burden of a broad population of HF patients. Methods: We studied 16,516 patients with a new HF diagnosis recorded in the electronic medical record of a U.S. integrated delivery system between 2005 and 2017. We used the diagnosis date as the index date and the nearest echocardiogram result to classify patients as HFrEF (n = 2,430), HFmrEF (n = 1,646), HFpEF (n = 12,440) and followed them through 2019 for major clinical outcomes (all-cause mortality, HF hospitalizations [HHF], all-cause hospitalizations, incident chronic kidney disease [CKD], progression of eGFR category, progression of CKD, incident type 2 diabetes [T2D], and progression to insulin use). We compared age and sex adjusted incidence rates and rate ratios of the outcomes between the HF types. Results: Incidence rates for most outcomes were significantly higher among patients with HFrEF compared with HFpEF. HHF was 59 % greater, mortality 31 % greater, and CKD incidence 55 % greater, (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). However, the larger size of the HFpEF group generated 4.7-6.7 times as many total outcomes. Conclusions: Regardless of subtype, the presence of HF was associated with poor clinical outcomes. Incidence rates were higher for HFrEF than HFpEF, but as the latter represented 75% of the study population, HFpEF caused a greater overall burden on the health care system, reflecting the high unmet need of target therapies for HFpEF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nichols et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Heart failure (n=16,516). Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) vs. Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) was evaluated on Major clinical outcomes including all-cause mortality, HF hospitalizations, and incident CKD (59% greater HHF, 31% greater mortality, 55% greater CKD incidence, p=<0.001). Compared with HFpEF, patients with HFrEF had significantly higher incidence rates for heart failure hospitalization (59% greater), mortality (31% greater), and incident CKD (55% greater) (p<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: