Comparison of characteristics and outcomes of patients with heart failure preserved ejection fraction versus reduced left ventricular ejection fraction in an urban cohort.

Despite significant advances in therapies for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), there are no evidence-based therapies for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), also known as diastolic heart failure (HF). Differences in pathophysiologic mechanisms are touted as to why patients with HFpEF purportedly do not derive similar therapeutic benefits compared with HFrEF. Similarly, the relative frequencies of HFpEF and HFrEF may differ between hospitalized and ambulatory settings. There are limited data on the prevalence, characteristics, treatment, and short-term outcomes of patients hospitalized with HFpEF. We sought to investigate these in patients hospitalized with HFpEF in an urban, hospitalized setting using the Get With The Guidelines registry. We retrospectively reviewed all consecutive discharges (n = 1,701) with a diagnosis of acute decompensated HF from December 1, 2006 to September 30, 2008. Patients with HFpEF (n = 499) were older, overweight, predominantly women, and had underlying hypertension and dyslipidemia. Presenting blood pressure and levels of creatinine were higher, with lower brain natriuretic peptide levels compared with patients with HFrEF (n = 598). Length of stay and 30-day mortality were comparable between patients with HFpEF and HFrEF. Thirty-day readmission was initially lower in patients with HFpEF. However 30-day mortality from any cause after the index HF hospitalization and survival curve at 1-year was no different between patients with HFpEF and HFrEF. In conclusion, lower 30-day readmissions do not translate into improved long-term outcome in patients with HFpEF.