BACKGROUND: There is still ambiguity about the prognostic relevance of regression of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) (as revealed by echocardiography) in a large population of subjects with hypertension, with and without evidence of LVH in their electrocardiograms (ECGs). This holds true even after adjusting for various confounders including in treatment ambulatory blood pressure (BP). The most suitable time point for a follow-up echocardiography also remains a matter for debate. In this study, we investigated the prognostic relevance of regression of LVH after 2 years of therapy, in a large population of subjects with hypertension, and possessing the aforesaid characteristics. METHODS: The occurrence of adverse cardiovascular events was evaluated in 387 patients with LVH shown by echocardiography at baseline, and these patients were studied again after 2 years of therapy. At the second examination, 245 subjects showed regression of LVH, whereas 142 did not. RESULTS: During the time period before the subsequent follow up (6.2 +/- 3 years, range 1.9-12.9 years), 59 first adverse events (26 cardiac and 33 cerebrovascular) had occurred among these subjects. The event rates per 100 patient-years in patients with and without LVH regression were 1.06 and 4.4, respectively. After adjusting for several covariates at the 2-year visit, including in treatment ambulatory BP, Cox regression analysis showed that cardiovascular risk was significantly lower in patients with LVH regression than in those without (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.19-0.68, P = 0.002). When left ventricular (LV) mass index reduction was analyzed instead of LVH status, it was found to be significantly associated with reduced risk (RR 0.62 per 1-s.d. decrease, 95% CI 0.44-0.88, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Regression of LVH, as revealed by echocardiography after 2 years of therapy, is associated with reduced cardiovascular risk in patients with hypertension, whether or not LVH was revealed in their ECGs. This holds true even after adjusting for various confounders including in treatment ambulatory BP.
BACKGROUND: There is still ambiguity about the prognostic relevance of regression of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) (as revealed by echocardiography) in a large population of subjects with hypertension, with and without evidence of LVH in their electrocardiograms (ECGs). This holds true even after adjusting for various confounders including in treatment ambulatory blood pressure (BP). The most suitable time point for a follow-up echocardiography also remains a matter for debate. In this study, we investigated the prognostic relevance of regression of LVH after 2 years of therapy, in a large population of subjects with hypertension, and possessing the aforesaid characteristics. METHODS: The occurrence of adverse cardiovascular events was evaluated in 387 patients with LVH shown by echocardiography at baseline, and these patients were studied again after 2 years of therapy. At the second examination, 245 subjects showed regression of LVH, whereas 142 did not. RESULTS: During the time period before the subsequent follow up (6.2 +/- 3 years, range 1.9-12.9 years), 59 first adverse events (26 cardiac and 33 cerebrovascular) had occurred among these subjects. The event rates per 100 patient-years in patients with and without LVH regression were 1.06 and 4.4, respectively. After adjusting for several covariates at the 2-year visit, including in treatment ambulatory BP, Cox regression analysis showed that cardiovascular risk was significantly lower in patients with LVH regression than in those without (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.19-0.68, P = 0.002). When left ventricular (LV) mass index reduction was analyzed instead of LVH status, it was found to be significantly associated with reduced risk (RR 0.62 per 1-s.d. decrease, 95% CI 0.44-0.88, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Regression of LVH, as revealed by echocardiography after 2 years of therapy, is associated with reduced cardiovascular risk in patients with hypertension, whether or not LVH was revealed in their ECGs. This holds true even after adjusting for various confounders including in treatment ambulatory BP.
Authors: Sante D Pierdomenico; Mariantonietta Mancini; Chiara Cuccurullo; Maria D Guglielmi; Anna M Pierdomenico; Marta Di Nicola; Silvio Di Carlo; Domenico Lapenna; Franco Cuccurullo Journal: Heart Vessels Date: 2012-03-17 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Ruth F Dubin; Rajat Deo; Nisha Bansal; Amanda H Anderson; Peter Yang; Alan S Go; Martin Keane; Ray Townsend; Anna Porter; Matthew Budoff; Shaista Malik; Jiang He; Mahboob Rahman; Jackson Wright; Thomas Cappola; Radhakrishna Kallem; Jason Roy; Daohang Sha; Michael G Shlipak Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2016-11-10 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Juan C Kupferman; Lisa Aronson Friedman; Christopher Cox; Joseph Flynn; Susan Furth; Bradley Warady; Mark Mitsnefes Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2013-09-26 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Silvio Henrique Barberato; Minna Moreira Dias Romano; Adenalva Lima de Souza Beck; Ana Clara Tude Rodrigues; André Luiz Cerqueira de Almeida; Bruna Morhy Borges Leal Assunção; Eliza de Almeida Gripp; Fabio Villaça Guimarães Filho; Henry Abensur; José Maria Del Castillo; Marcelo Haertel Miglioranza; Marcelo Luiz Campos Vieira; Márcio Vinicius Lins de Barros; Maria do Carmo Pereira Nunes; Maria Estefania Bosco Otto; Renato de Aguiar Hortegal; Rodrigo Bellio de Mattos Barretto; Thais Harada Campos; Vicente Nicoliello de Siqueira; Samira Saady Morhy Journal: Arq Bras Cardiol Date: 2019-08-08 Impact factor: 2.000
Authors: Omar Asghar; Ahmed Al-Sunni; Kaivan Khavandi; Ali Khavandi; Sarah Withers; Adam Greenstein; Anthony M Heagerty; Rayaz A Malik Journal: Clin Sci (Lond) Date: 2009-05 Impact factor: 6.124