Why the study?
Diagnosing HFpEF remains challenging, and proposed noninvasive diagnostic algorithms had not been tested against the gold standard of invasive left ventricular pressure-volume loops.
Does invasive LV pressure-volume loop measurement improve the diagnosis of HFpEF compared to noninvasive algorithms in patients with unexplained dyspnea?
Does invasive LV pressure-volume loop measurement improve the diagnosis of HFpEF compared to noninvasive algorithms in patients with unexplained dyspnea?
Invasive LV pressure-volume loop measurement reveals a high prevalence of HFpEF in patients with unexplained dyspnea, highlighting the limited sensitivity of current noninvasive diagnostic scores.
Noninvasive scores may miss most HFpEF in unexplained dyspnea; leaves open need for better diagnostics and prospective invasive validation.
Background Diagnosing heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains challenging. Noninvasive diagnostic algorithms have been proposed but not tested against the gold standard, ie, invasive measurement of left ventricular (LV) pressure-volume loops (PVL). This study's aim was to estimate the prevalence of HFpEF in euvolemic patients with unexplained exertional dyspnea by using LV PVL and to validate noninvasive diagnostic algorithms. Methods and Results We included patients with unexplained exertional dyspnea, preserved LV ejection fraction ≥ 50% and without hemodynamically relevant coronary artery disease. Patients were evaluated at rest, during arm ergometric exercise and during temporal preload reduction by right-heart catheterization and real-time continuous LV PVL. HFpEF was defined as either elevated LV filling pressures at rest or during exercise or without elevated filling pressures but with prolonged relaxation or increased LV stiffness. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with confirmed HFpEF. Secondary endpoints included differences in the H 2 FPEF and HFA-PEFF scores in HFpEF vs non-HFpEF patients. We recruited 30 patients, and 28 patients (mean age 64.4 ± 9.7 years, 57% female) were included in the final analysis. Of those patients, 26 (93%) had HFpEF with either elevated (n = 11) or without elevated filling pressures (n = 15). Noninvasive diagnostic scores had excellent specificity but lacked sensitivity for HFpEF. Conclusions Half of the patients with HFpEF had normal right-heart catheter hemodynamics, but they fulfilled HFpEF diagnostic criteria by showing impaired relaxation or LV chamber stiffness. Further research might focus on understanding the clinical relevance of this group and on improving its detection and treatment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Geßner et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: