Ali Ahmed1. 1. Geriatric Heart Failure Clinic, and Division of Gerontology and Geriatric Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 35294, USA. aahmed@uab.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Studies of patients with heart failure and preserved systolic function report variable outcomes compared with those of patients with impaired systolic function. OBJECTIVE: To study outcomes of diastolic (vs systolic) heart failure in older adults with chronic heart failure. METHODS: Patients were ambulatory chronic heart failure patients 65 years and older (N = 3984) who participated in the Digitalis Investigation Group trial. Of these, 3405 had systolic heart failure (ejection fraction < or =45%) and 579 had diastolic heart failure (ejection fraction >45%). By using a 1:1 match by age, sex, and race, 571 diastolic heart failure patients were matched with 571 systolic heart failure patients. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses and multivariable Cox proportional hazard analyses were used to estimate the risk of various outcomes between the groups. RESULTS: During the 1044 mean days of follow up, compared with 41% of systolic heart failure patients, 27% of diastolic heart failure patients died (p <.001). Presence of diastolic heart failure was independently associated with a 27% decreased risk of all-cause death (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58-0.91) and a 32% reduction in risk of hospitalization due to heart failure (adjusted HR = 0.68; 95% CI, 0.52-0.88). There was no difference in overall hospitalization between the groups. However, compared with systolic heart failure patients, diastolic heart failure patients were more likely to be hospitalized due to noncardiovascular causes (adjusted HR = 1.38; 95% CI, 1.02-1.88). CONCLUSIONS: Older adults with diastolic heart failure had lower risk of all-cause mortality and heart failure-related hospitalizations, but higher risk of noncardiovascular hospitalization.
BACKGROUND: Studies of patients with heart failure and preserved systolic function report variable outcomes compared with those of patients with impaired systolic function. OBJECTIVE: To study outcomes of diastolic (vs systolic) heart failure in older adults with chronic heart failure. METHODS:Patients were ambulatory chronic heart failurepatients 65 years and older (N = 3984) who participated in the Digitalis Investigation Group trial. Of these, 3405 had systolic heart failure (ejection fraction < or =45%) and 579 had diastolic heart failure (ejection fraction >45%). By using a 1:1 match by age, sex, and race, 571 diastolic heart failurepatients were matched with 571 systolic heart failurepatients. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses and multivariable Cox proportional hazard analyses were used to estimate the risk of various outcomes between the groups. RESULTS: During the 1044 mean days of follow up, compared with 41% of systolic heart failurepatients, 27% of diastolic heart failurepatients died (p <.001). Presence of diastolic heart failure was independently associated with a 27% decreased risk of all-cause death (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58-0.91) and a 32% reduction in risk of hospitalization due to heart failure (adjusted HR = 0.68; 95% CI, 0.52-0.88). There was no difference in overall hospitalization between the groups. However, compared with systolic heart failurepatients, diastolic heart failurepatients were more likely to be hospitalized due to noncardiovascular causes (adjusted HR = 1.38; 95% CI, 1.02-1.88). CONCLUSIONS: Older adults with diastolic heart failure had lower risk of all-cause mortality and heart failure-related hospitalizations, but higher risk of noncardiovascular hospitalization.
Authors: A Cortina; J Reguero; E Segovia; J L Rodríguez Lambert; R Cortina; J C Arias; J Vara; F Torre Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2001-06-15 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: John S Gottdiener; Robyn L McClelland; Robert Marshall; Lynn Shemanski; Curt D Furberg; Dalane W Kitzman; Mary Cushman; Joseph Polak; Julius M Gardin; Bernard J Gersh; Gerard P Aurigemma; Teri A Manolio Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2002-10-15 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: James T Thomas; Russell F Kelly; Smitha J Thomas; Thomas D Stamos; Khaled Albasha; Joseph E Parrillo; James E Calvin Journal: Am J Med Date: 2002-04-15 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Frederick A Masoudi; Edward P Havranek; Grace Smith; Ronald H Fish; John F Steiner; Diana L Ordin; Harlan M Krumholz Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2003-01-15 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: A Varela-Roman; J R Gonzalez-Juanatey; P Basante; R Trillo; J Garcia-Seara; J L Martinez-Sande; F Gude Journal: Heart Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 5.994
Authors: Robert M Blanton; Eiki Takimoto; Mark Aronovitz; Robrecht Thoonen; David A Kass; Richard H Karas; Michael E Mendelsohn Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2013-05-08 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Mary E Tinetti; Gail McAvay; Sandy S Chang; Yuming Ning; Anne B Newman; Annette Fitzpatrick; Terri R Fried; Tamara B Harris; Michael C Nevitt; Suzanne Satterfield; Kristine Yaffe; Peter Peduzzi Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2011-08-24 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Zhuo Zhao; Hao Wang; Jewell A Jessup; Sarah H Lindsey; Mark C Chappell; Leanne Groban Journal: Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol Date: 2014-01-10 Impact factor: 4.733
Authors: Ali Ahmed; Michael R Zile; Michael W Rich; Jerome L Fleg; Kirkwood F Adams; Thomas E Love; James B Young; Wilbert S Aronow; Dalane W Kitzman; Mihai Gheorghiade; Louis J Dell'Italia Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2006-12-21 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Ali Ahmed; Michael W Rich; Jerome L Fleg; Michael R Zile; James B Young; Dalane W Kitzman; Thomas E Love; Wilbert S Aronow; Kirkwood F Adams; Mihai Gheorghiade Journal: Circulation Date: 2006-07-24 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Ali Ahmed; Michael W Rich; Michael Zile; Paul W Sanders; Kanan Patel; Yan Zhang; Inmaculada B Aban; Thomas E Love; Gregg C Fonarow; Wilbert S Aronow; Richard M Allman Journal: Am J Med Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 4.965