OBJECTIVES: To quantify the prognostic impact of coronary artery disease (CAD) on patients with acute heart failure (HF). DESIGN: Prospective cohort study of 217 consecutive patients presenting with acute HF to the emergency department. Treatment, hospitalisation, the use of revascularisation procedures, and survival were observed during follow up of up to three years. RESULTS: CAD was present in 153 patients (71%). Patients with and without CAD were similar with respect to age and sex. Although adequate HF treatment was initiated more rapidly among patients with CAD, their initial outcomes including hospitalisation rate, time to discharge, and total treatment cost were significantly worse. Moreover, despite higher use of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and beta blockers during follow up, patients with CAD had a significantly lower survival rate. Cumulative survival at 720 days was 48.7% of patients with CAD as compared with 76.4% of patients without CAD (p = 0.0004). In Cox regression analysis the presence of CAD increased the risk of death by more than 250% (hazard ratio 2.57, 95% confidence interval 1.50 to 4.39, p = 0.001). This strong association persisted after multivariate adjustments. The use of coronary angiography and coronary revascularisation procedures was low, both at initial presentation and during follow up. CONCLUSION: CAD is a strong and independent predictor of mortality among patients with acute HF. Whether, for example, less restrictive use of revascularisation procedures in this elderly HF population can improve the outcome for patients with CAD warrants further study.
OBJECTIVES: To quantify the prognostic impact of coronary artery disease (CAD) on patients with acute heart failure (HF). DESIGN: Prospective cohort study of 217 consecutive patients presenting with acute HF to the emergency department. Treatment, hospitalisation, the use of revascularisation procedures, and survival were observed during follow up of up to three years. RESULTS: CAD was present in 153 patients (71%). Patients with and without CAD were similar with respect to age and sex. Although adequate HF treatment was initiated more rapidly among patients with CAD, their initial outcomes including hospitalisation rate, time to discharge, and total treatment cost were significantly worse. Moreover, despite higher use of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and beta blockers during follow up, patients with CAD had a significantly lower survival rate. Cumulative survival at 720 days was 48.7% of patients with CAD as compared with 76.4% of patients without CAD (p = 0.0004). In Cox regression analysis the presence of CAD increased the risk of death by more than 250% (hazard ratio 2.57, 95% confidence interval 1.50 to 4.39, p = 0.001). This strong association persisted after multivariate adjustments. The use of coronary angiography and coronary revascularisation procedures was low, both at initial presentation and during follow up. CONCLUSION: CAD is a strong and independent predictor of mortality among patients with acute HF. Whether, for example, less restrictive use of revascularisation procedures in this elderly HF population can improve the outcome for patients with CAD warrants further study.
Authors: C P Cannon; W S Weintraub; L A Demopoulos; R Vicari; M J Frey; N Lakkis; F J Neumann; D H Robertson; P T DeLucca; P M DiBattiste; C M Gibson; E Braunwald Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2001-06-21 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: K F Fox; M R Cowie; D A Wood; A J Coats; J S Gibbs; S R Underwood; R M Turner; P A Poole-Wilson; S W Davies; G C Sutton Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2001-02 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Matthias Pfisterer; Peter Buser; Stefan Osswald; Urs Allemann; Wolfgang Amann; Walter Angehrn; Eric Eeckhout; Paul Erne; Werner Estlinbaum; Gabriela Kuster; Tiziano Moccetti; Barbara Naegeli; Peter Rickenbacher Journal: JAMA Date: 2003-03-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: K F Adams; S H Dunlap; C A Sueta; S W Clarke; J H Patterson; M B Blauwet; L R Jensen; L Tomasko; G Koch Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 1996-12 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: S A Hunt; D W Baker; M H Chin; M P Cinquegrani; A M Feldman; G S Francis; T G Ganiats; S Goldstein; G Gregoratos; M L Jessup; R J Noble; M Packer; M A Silver; L W Stevenson; R J Gibbons; E M Antman; J S Alpert; D P Faxon; V Fuster; G Gregoratos; A K Jacobs; L F Hiratzka; R O Russell; S C Smith Journal: Circulation Date: 2001-12-11 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: G M Felker; R E Thompson; J M Hare; R H Hruban; D E Clemetson; D L Howard; K L Baughman; E K Kasper Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2000-04-13 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: J G F Cleland; K Swedberg; F Follath; M Komajda; A Cohen-Solal; J C Aguilar; R Dietz; A Gavazzi; R Hobbs; J Korewicki; H C Madeira; V S Moiseyev; I Preda; W H van Gilst; J Widimsky; N Freemantle; Joanne Eastaugh; J Mason Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Robert J Mentz; Bradley D Allen; Mary J Kwasny; Marvin A Konstam; James E Udelson; Andrew P Ambrosy; Angela J Fought; Muthiah Vaduganathan; Christopher M O'Connor; Faiez Zannad; Aldo P Maggioni; Karl Swedberg; Robert O Bonow; Mihai Gheorghiade Journal: Eur J Heart Fail Date: 2012-09-11 Impact factor: 15.534
Authors: Hussam AlFaleh; Abdelfatah A Elasfar; Anhar Ullah; Khalid F AlHabib; Ahmad Hersi; Layth Mimish; Ali Almasood; Saleh Al Ghamdi; Abdullah Ghabashi; Asif Malik; Gamal A Hussein; Mushabab Al-Murayeh; Ahmed Abuosa; Waleed Al Habeeb; Tarek S Kashour Journal: BMC Cardiovasc Disord Date: 2016-05-20 Impact factor: 2.298