AIMS: The aim of this study was to assess the association between resting heart rate (HR), chronotropic index (CI), and clinical outcomes in optimally treated chronic heart failure (HF) patients on β-blocker therapy. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a sub-study in 1118 patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction (EF < 35%) included in the HF-ACTION trial. Patients in sinus rhythm who received a β-blocker and who performed with maximal effort on the exercise test were included. Chronotropic index was calculated as an index of HR reserve achieved, by using the equation (220-age) for estimating maximum HR. A sensitivity analysis using an equation developed for HF patients on β-blockers was also performed. Cox proportional hazards models were fit to assess the association between CI and clinical outcomes. Median (25th, 75th percentiles) follow-up was 32 (21, 44) months. In a multivariable model including resting HR and CI as continuous variables, neither was associated with the primary outcome of all-cause mortality or hospitalization. However, each 0.1 unit decrease in CI <0.6 was associated with 17% increased risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 1.17, 95% confidence interval 1.01-1.36; P = 0.036), and 13% increased risk of cardiovascular mortality or HF hospitalization (hazard ratio 1.13, 1.02-1.26; P = 0.025). Overall, 666 of 1118 (60%) patients had a CI <0.6. Chronotropic index did not retain statistical significance when dichotomized at a value of ≤ 0.62. CONCLUSION: In HF patients receiving optimal medical therapy, a decrease in CI <0.6 was associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Obtaining an optimal HR response to exercise, even in patients receiving optimal β-blocker therapy, may be a therapeutic target in the HF population.
RCT Entities:
AIMS: The aim of this study was to assess the association between resting heart rate (HR), chronotropic index (CI), and clinical outcomes in optimally treated chronic heart failure (HF) patients on β-blocker therapy. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a sub-study in 1118 patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction (EF < 35%) included in the HF-ACTION trial. Patients in sinus rhythm who received a β-blocker and who performed with maximal effort on the exercise test were included. Chronotropic index was calculated as an index of HR reserve achieved, by using the equation (220-age) for estimating maximum HR. A sensitivity analysis using an equation developed for HF patients on β-blockers was also performed. Cox proportional hazards models were fit to assess the association between CI and clinical outcomes. Median (25th, 75th percentiles) follow-up was 32 (21, 44) months. In a multivariable model including resting HR and CI as continuous variables, neither was associated with the primary outcome of all-cause mortality or hospitalization. However, each 0.1 unit decrease in CI <0.6 was associated with 17% increased risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 1.17, 95% confidence interval 1.01-1.36; P = 0.036), and 13% increased risk of cardiovascular mortality or HF hospitalization (hazard ratio 1.13, 1.02-1.26; P = 0.025). Overall, 666 of 1118 (60%) patients had a CI <0.6. Chronotropic index did not retain statistical significance when dichotomized at a value of ≤ 0.62. CONCLUSION: In HF patients receiving optimal medical therapy, a decrease in CI <0.6 was associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Obtaining an optimal HR response to exercise, even in patients receiving optimal β-blocker therapy, may be a therapeutic target in the HF population.
Authors: Babak Azarbal; Sean W Hayes; Howard C Lewin; Rory Hachamovitch; Ishac Cohen; Daniel S Berman Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2004-07-21 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: P Lechat; J S Hulot; S Escolano; A Mallet; A Leizorovicz; M Werhlen-Grandjean; G Pochmalicki; H Dargie Journal: Circulation Date: 2001-03-13 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: C Maack; T Elter; G Nickenig; K LaRosee; M Crivaro; A Stäblein; H Wuttke; M Böhm Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2001-10 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: W S Colucci; J P Ribeiro; M B Rocco; R J Quigg; M A Creager; J D Marsh; D F Gauthier; L H Hartley Journal: Circulation Date: 1989-08 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Prashanthan Sanders; Peter M Kistler; Joseph B Morton; Steven J Spence; Jonathan M Kalman Journal: Circulation Date: 2004-08-09 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Abdou Elhendy; Douglas W Mahoney; Bijoy K Khandheria; Kelli Burger; Patricia A Pellikka Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2003-09-03 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Bishnu P Dhakal; Rajeev Malhotra; Ryan M Murphy; Paul P Pappagianopoulos; Aaron L Baggish; Rory B Weiner; Nicholas E Houstis; Aaron S Eisman; Stacyann S Hough; Gregory D Lewis Journal: Circ Heart Fail Date: 2014-10-24 Impact factor: 8.790
Authors: Lena L Law; Stephanie A Schultz; Elizabeth A Boots; Jean A Einerson; Ryan J Dougherty; Jennifer M Oh; Claudia E Korcarz; Dorothy F Edwards; Rebecca L Koscik; N Maritza Dowling; Catherine L Gallagher; Barbara B Bendlin; Cynthia M Carlsson; Sanjay Asthana; Bruce P Hermann; Mark A Sager; Sterling C Johnson; Dane B Cook; James H Stein; Ozioma C Okonkwo Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2017 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Rupert K Hung; Mouaz H Al-Mallah; Seamus P Whelton; Erin D Michos; Roger S Blumenthal; Jonathan K Ehrman; Clinton A Brawner; Steven J Keteyian; Michael J Blaha Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2016-08-31 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Wilson Nadruz; Erin West; Morten Sengeløv; Gabriela L Grove; Mário Santos; John D Groarke; Daniel E Forman; Brian Claggett; Hicham Skali; Anju Nohria; Amil M Shah Journal: Heart Date: 2018-05-15 Impact factor: 5.994
Authors: Renata R T Castro; Luka Lechnewski; Alan Homero; Denilson Campos de Albuquerque; Luis Eduardo Rohde; Dirceu Almeida; João David; Salvador Rassi; Fernando Bacal; Edimar Bocchi; Lidia Moura Journal: Arq Bras Cardiol Date: 2021-01 Impact factor: 2.000