Literature DB >> 11099679

Systolic versus diastolic heart failure in community practice: clinical features, outcomes, and the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors.

E F Philbin1, T A Rocco, N W Lindenmuth, K Ulrich, P L Jenkins.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Among patients with heart failure, there is controversy about whether there are clinical features and laboratory tests that can differentiate patients who have low ejection fractions from those with normal ejection fractions. The usefulness of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors among heart failure patients who have normal left ventricular ejection fractions is also not known.
METHODS: From a registry of 2,906 unselected consecutive patients with heart failure who were admitted to 10 acute-care community hospitals during 1995 and 1997, we identified 1291 who had a quantitative measurement of their left ventricular ejection fraction. Patients were separated into three groups based on ejection fraction: < or =0.39 (n = 741, 57%), 0.40 to 0.49 (n = 238, 18%), and > or =0.50 (n = 312, 24%). In-hospital mortality, prescription of ACE inhibitors at discharge, subsequent rehospitalization, quality of life, and survival were measured; survivors were observed for at least 6 months after hospitalization.
RESULTS: The mean (+/- SD) age of the sample was 75+/-11 years; the majority (55%) of patients were women. In multivariate models, age >75 years, female sex, weight >72.7 kg, and a valvular etiology for heart failure were associated with an increased probability of having an ejection fraction > or =0.50; a prior history of heart failure, an ischemic or idiopathic cause of heart failure, and radiographic cardiomegaly were associated with a lower probability of having an ejection fraction > or =0.50. Total mortality was lower in patients with an ejection fraction > or =0.50 than in those with an ejection fraction < or =0.39 (odds ratio [OR] = 0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI 0.49 to 0.98, P = 0.04). Among hospital survivors with an ejection fraction of 0.40 to 0.49, the 65% who were prescribed ACE inhibitors at discharge had better mean adjusted quality-of-life scores (7.0 versus 6.2, P = 0.02), and lower adjusted mortality (OR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.17 to 0.70, P = 0.01) during follow-up than those who were not prescribed ACE inhibitors. Among hospital survivors with an ejection fraction > or =0.50, the 45% who were prescribed ACE inhibitors at discharge had better (lower) adjusted New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class (2.1 versus 2.4, P = 0.04) although there was no significant improvement in survival.
CONCLUSIONS: Among patients treated for heart failure in community hospitals, 42% of those whose ejection fraction was measured had a relatively normal systolic function (ejection fraction > or 0.40). The clinical characteristics and mortality of these patients differed from those in patients with low ejection fractions. Among the patients with ejection fractions > or =0.40, the prescription of ACE inhibitors at discharge was associated favorable effects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11099679     DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9343(00)00601-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Med        ISSN: 0002-9343            Impact factor:   4.965


  44 in total

1.  A systematic assessment of causes of death after heart failure onset in the community: impact of age at death, time period, and left ventricular systolic dysfunction.

Authors:  Douglas S Lee; Philimon Gona; Irene Albano; Martin G Larson; Emelia J Benjamin; Daniel Levy; William B Kannel; Ramachandran S Vasan
Journal:  Circ Heart Fail       Date:  2010-11-11       Impact factor: 8.790

Review 2.  The contribution of observational studies to the knowledge of drug effectiveness in heart failure.

Authors:  Daniela Dobre; Dirk J van Veldhuisen; Mike J L DeJongste; Eric van Sonderen; Olaf H Klungel; Robbert Sanderman; Adelita V Ranchor; Flora M Haaijer-Ruskamp
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2007-08-31       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 3.  Towards Precision in HF Pharmacotherapy.

Authors:  Nicholas B Norgard; Carolyn Hempel
Journal:  Curr Heart Fail Rep       Date:  2017-02

Review 4.  Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in the elderly: scope of the problem.

Authors:  Ken Kaila; Mark J Haykowsky; Richard B Thompson; D Ian Paterson
Journal:  Heart Fail Rev       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 4.214

5.  Heart failure and the aging population: an increasing burden in the 21st century?

Authors:  S Stewart; K MacIntyre; S Capewell; J J V McMurray
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 5.994

Review 6.  Cardiorenal syndrome in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction-an under-recognized clinical entity.

Authors:  Akanksha Agrawal; Mario Naranjo; Napatt Kanjanahattakij; Janani Rangaswami; Shuchita Gupta
Journal:  Heart Fail Rev       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 4.214

7.  Diastolic heart function in RA patients.

Authors:  M Wislowska; B Jaszczyk; M Kochmański; S Sypuła; M Sztechman
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  2007-10-24       Impact factor: 2.631

8.  Clinical variables affecting survival in patients with decompensated diastolic versus systolic heart failure.

Authors:  Oleg Gorelik; Dorit Almoznino-Sarafian; Miriam Shteinshnaider; Irena Alon; Irma Tzur; Ilya Sokolsky; Shai Efrati; Zoanna Babakin; David Modai; Natan Cohen
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2009-02-13       Impact factor: 5.460

9.  Exercise Training for Heart Failure Patients with and without Systolic Dysfunction: An Evidence-Based Analysis of How Patients Benefit.

Authors:  Neil Smart
Journal:  Cardiol Res Pract       Date:  2010-09-30       Impact factor: 1.866

Review 10.  You can do more to slow the progression of heart failure.

Authors:  Randy Wexler; Terry Elton; Adam Pleister; David Feldman
Journal:  J Fam Pract       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 0.493

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.