Left atrial reservoir strain was severely impaired and independently associated with HFpEF in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy patients (β 0.90; 95% CI 0.85-0.96) compared to non-HF patients.
Observational (n=154)
Does impaired left atrial phasic function associate with HFpEF in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy?
Left atrial phasic function assessed by cardiac MRI feature tracking is severely impaired and independently associated with HFpEF in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, whereas left ventricular function is not further impaired compared to non-HF patients.
Effect estimate: β 0.90 (95% CI 0.85-0.96)
Absolute Event Rate: 18.15% vs 27.4%
Background The majority of heart failure (HF) in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) manifests as a phenotype with preserved left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction; however, the exact contribution of left atrial (LA) phasic function to HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) in HCM remains unresolved. Purpose To define the association between LA function and HFpEF in HCM patients using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) feature tracking. Study Type Retrospective. Population One hundred and fifty‐four HCM patients (HFpEF vs. non‐HF: 55 34 females vs. 99 43 females). Field Strength/Sequence 3. 0 T /balanced steady‐state free precession. Assessment LA reservoir function (reservoir strain ε s , total ejection fraction EF), conduit function (conduit strain ε e , passive EF), booster‐pump function (booster strain ε a and active EF), LA volume index, and LV global longitudinal strain (LV GLS) were evaluated in HCM patients. Statistical Tests Chi‐square test, Student's t ‐test, Mann–Whitney U test, multivariate linear regression, logistic regression, and net reclassification analysis were used. Two‐sided P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results No significant difference was found in LV GLS between the non‐HF and HFpEF group (−10.67 ± 3.14% vs. −10.14 ± 4.01%, P = 0.397), whereas the HFpEF group had more severely impaired LA phasic strain ( ε s : 27.40 22.60, 35.80 vs. 18.15 11.98, 25.90; ε e : 13.80 9.20, 18.90 vs. 7.95 4.30, 14.35; ε a : 13.50 9.90, 17.10 vs. 7.90 5.40, 14.15). LA total EF (37.91 29.54, 47.94 vs. 47.49 39.18, 55.01), passive EF (14.70 7.41, 21.49 vs. 18.07 9.32, 24.78), and active EF (27.19 17.79, 36.60 vs. 36.64 26.63, 42.71) were all significantly decreased in HFpEF patients compared with non‐HF patients. LA reservoir ( β = 0.90 0.85, 0.96), conduit ( β = 0.93 0.87, 0.99), and booster ( β = 0.86 0.78, 0.95) strain were independently associated with HFpEF in HCM patients. The model including reservoir strain (Net Reclassification Index NRI: 0.260) or booster strain (NRI: 0.325) improved the reclassification of HFpEF based on LV GLS and minimum left atrial volume index (LAVI min ). Data Conclusion LA phasic function was severely impaired in HCM patients with HFpEF, whereas LV function was not further impaired compared with non‐HF patients. Level of Evidence 4 Technical Efficacy Stage 3
Shi et al. (Fri,) conducted a observational in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy (n=154). Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) vs. Non-HF was evaluated on Left atrial reservoir strain (β 0.90, 95% CI 0.85-0.96). Left atrial reservoir strain was severely impaired and independently associated with HFpEF in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy patients (β 0.90; 95% CI 0.85-0.96) compared to non-HF patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: