Key result
Medical, interventional, and surgical therapies promote LV reverse remodeling and improve heart failure outcomes.
Why the study?
Increased left ventricular dilation and reduced systolic function are associated with poor prognosis, highlighting the need to evaluate mechanisms and therapies promoting reverse remodeling and myocardial recovery.
This review highlights the pathophysiological mechanisms, imaging modalities, and therapeutic strategies available to promote left ventricular reverse remodeling and myocardial recovery in heart failure.
LV dilation with systolic dysfunction signals poor prognosis; leaves open optimal reversal strategies across remodeling phenotypes.
Increased left ventricular dilation and reduced systolic function are consistently associated with a poor prognosis and worse clinical outcomes. In this review, we discuss the pathophysiological mechanisms, use of cardiac imaging, and clinical implications of adverse cardiac remodeling. Unique situations with evidence of spontaneous recovery and their underlying mechanisms are evaluated. A comprehensive appreciation of current evidence surrounding the array of therapeutic tools available to promote reverse remodeling and improve clinical outcomes, including medical management, revascularization, cardiac synchronization therapy, mitral valve repair or replacement, and surgical procedures, such as left ventricular assist device implantation and ventricular reconstruction, are provided. There is an ongoing need for further research identifying potential mechanistic pathways and optimal patient selection criteria for therapeutic approaches promoting reverse remodeling and myocardial recovery.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Boulet et al. (2021) conducted a review in Heart Failure. Various therapeutic tools, including medical management, revascularization, and surgical procedures, are available to promote left ventricular reverse remodeling and improve outcomes in heart failure.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: