Key result
Varying diastolic dysfunction definitions yield highly variable prevalence rates and conflicting demographic risk associations.
Why the study?
How does the prevalence and predictor profile of diastolic dysfunction vary according to different classification criteria in an epidemiologic cohort?
Cross-Sectional (n=3,474)
How does the prevalence and predictor profile of diastolic dysfunction vary according to different classification criteria in an epidemiologic cohort?
The prevalence and predictors of diastolic dysfunction vary markedly depending on the echocardiographic definition applied, highlighting the need for a uniform definition in epidemiologic studies.
Variability in diastolic dysfunction definitions warrants caution interpreting prevalence and predictors; leaves open need for standardized criteria in epidemiologic research.
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction is often preceded by diastolic dysfunction (DD). Of several published DD criteria, it is unclear which, if any, are applicable to data obtained in epidemiologic cohorts. We evaluated the prevalence of DD using previously published definitions in a population-based study, the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (CARDIA) Study, using data gathered in 2010-2011. Echocardiography was performed on 3,474 individuals (mean age = 50.2 years) at the CARDIA year 25 examination. Four published definitions of DD were studied. We calculated DD prevalence for each definition and determined the overlap between definitions. We used logistic regression to assess the strength of associations between demographic and clinical factors and the definitions of DD. Prevalence of DD ranged from 2% to 32% across the 4 definitions, with a minority of cases identified by more than 1 definition. Two definitions classified 38%-39% of the study sample as indeterminate for DD. Associations of risk factors with DD varied considerably, with male sex being associated positively with DD for one definition (odds ratio = 1.4, 95% confidence interval: 1.2, 1.6) and inversely for another (odds ratio = 0.7, 95% confidence interval: 0.6, 0.8). Prevalence of DD varies markedly in CARDIA by the definition applied. A uniform, reliable, and accurate definition of DD for epidemiologic studies is needed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rasmussen‐Torvik et al. (2017) conducted a cross-sectional in Diastolic dysfunction (n=3,474). Four published definitions of diastolic dysfunction was evaluated on Prevalence of diastolic dysfunction. The prevalence of diastolic dysfunction varied markedly from 2% to 32% across four definitions, with male sex showing conflicting associations (OR 1.4 vs OR 0.7) depending on the criteria used.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: