Key result
Severely impaired right ventricular reserve predicted adverse clinical outcomes compared to normal reserve (48% vs 9%; adjusted HR 3.7, 95% CI 1.1-13.0, p=0.039).
Why the study?
Does impaired right ventricular reserve predict adverse cardiac outcomes in adults with congenital heart disease?
Cohort (n=147)
No
Does impaired right ventricular reserve predict adverse cardiac outcomes in adults with congenital heart disease?
In adults with congenital heart disease, severely impaired right ventricular reserve during exercise strongly predicts adverse cardiovascular outcomes independently of resting systolic function.
Impaired RV reserve may identify higher-risk ACHD patients; hypothesis-generating for management trials.
Objective The prevalence of heart failure (HF) among adult patients with congenital heart disease (ACHD) is rising. Right ventricle (RV) exercise reserve and its relationship to outcomes have not been characterised. We aim to evaluate the prognostic impact of impaired RV reserve in an ACHD population referred for cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET). Methods This retrospective study evaluates patients with ACHD who underwent CPET (n=147) with first-pass radionuclide ventriculography at a single tertiary care centre. RV reserve was categorised as normal, mild to moderately or severely impaired. The primary composite clinical outcome included clinical right HF, arrhythmia, transplantation or death. Results Patients were median age 41±13 years, 50% were female and median follow-up was 1.1 (IQR: 0.7–2.0) years. Exercise RV reserve was impaired in 103 patients (70%), of whom 32% were asymptomatic. Resting RV systolic function poorly predicted RV reserve, with 52% of patients with severe impairment having a qualitatively normal echocardiographic assessment. The severely impaired reserve group had lower peak oxygen consumption (VO 2 )(17.2 vs 22.5 mL/kg/min, p<0.0001) compared with the normal reserve group, and was more likely to develop the composite outcome (48% vs 9%, log-rank p<0.001). Severely impaired RV reserve predicted event-free survival after adjusting for peak VO 2 , age, sex, RV pathology, QRS duration, New York Heart Association class, resting RV ejection fraction and RV dilation by echocardiography or MRI (HR 3.7, 95% CI 1.1 to 13.0, p=0.039). Conclusion Impaired RV reserve, occurred in asymptomatic patients, was not well predicted by resting systolic function assessment, and strongly predicted adverse cardiovascular outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yeh et al. (2018) conducted a cohort in Congenital heart disease (n=147). Severely impaired right ventricular reserve vs. Normal right ventricular reserve was evaluated on Composite of clinical right heart failure, arrhythmia, transplantation or death (HR 3.7, 95% CI 1.1 to 13.0, p=0.039). Severely impaired right ventricular reserve predicted adverse clinical outcomes compared to normal reserve (48% vs 9%; adjusted HR 3.7, 95% CI 1.1-13.0, p=0.039).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: