Why the study?
While HF was traditionally conceptualized as primary hemodynamic pump failure, modern translational science reveals it to be a systemic multi-organ syndrome driven by interconnected maladaptive pathways requiring systematic quantification across remodeling, immunometabolism, fibrosis, and interorgan crosstalk.
Do systemic inflammatory, fibrotic, and metabolic biomarkers differ between HFpEF, HFrEF, and non-HF controls in clinical cohorts and preclinical models?
Meta-Analysis (n=42,680)
Do systemic inflammatory, fibrotic, and metabolic biomarkers differ between HFpEF, HFrEF, and non-HF controls in clinical cohorts and preclinical models?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates that while HFrEF is characterized by higher NT-proBNP levels due to wall stretch, HFpEF exhibits equal or higher systemic inflammatory and fibrotic biomarker elevations (such as hs-CRP, IL-6, and Galectin-3), underscoring distinct multisystem biological drivers.
Heart failure (HF) has traditionally been conceptualized as a primary hemodynamic pump failure characterized by reduced cardiac output and compensatory fluid retention. Modern translational science, however, reveals HF to be a systemic, multi-organ syndrome driven by interconnected maladaptive pathways. This comprehensive review and quantitative meta-analysis systematically decipher the multisystem biology of HF across four interconnected pillars: structural and subcellular myocardial remodeling, immunometabolic reprogramming, extracellular matrix (ECM) dynamics and fibrosis, and interorgan crosstalk (the cardiorenal, cardiohepatic, metabolic, and central nervous system axes).Through a systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science (2015–2026), we extracted quantitative metrics across 84 clinical cohorts and preclinical models (N = 42,680). Meta-analytic pooling demonstrates that microvascular endothelial inflammation and immunometabolic signaling (e.g., NLRP3 inflammasome activation, IL-1β/IL-6 signaling, and metabolic substrate switching from mitochondrial fatty acid oxidation to inefficient glycolysis) directly correlate with phenotypic progression in both HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Furthermore, we quantify the impact of key systemic interventions—including SGLT2 inhibitors, GLP-1 receptor agonists, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and targeted anti-inflammatory agents—on reversing adverse cardiac remodeling and dampening systemic interorgan decay.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Camilo Fernández Bravo (2026) conducted a meta-analysis in Heart Failure (HFpEF and HFrEF) (n=42,680). Heart Failure (HFpEF vs Control) vs. Non-HF Controls was evaluated on High-sensitivity C-Reactive Protein (hs-CRP, mg/L) in HFpEF vs Control (MD +2.41 mg/L, 95% CI 1.88-2.94, p=<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: