Michael R Zile1, Tom D Bennett2, Stephanie El Hajj2, Fred J Kueffer2, Catalin F Baicu2, William T Abraham2, Robert C Bourge2, Lynne Warner Stevenson2. 1. From the RHJ Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston (M.R.Z., S.E.H., C.F.B.); Medtronic, Inc, Minneapolis, MN (T.D.B., F.J.K.); The Ohio State University, Columbus (W.T.A.), University of Alabama at Birmingham (R.C.B.); and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA (L.S.). zilem@musc.edu. 2. From the RHJ Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston (M.R.Z., S.E.H., C.F.B.); Medtronic, Inc, Minneapolis, MN (T.D.B., F.J.K.); The Ohio State University, Columbus (W.T.A.), University of Alabama at Birmingham (R.C.B.); and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA (L.S.).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this analysis was to examine whether implantable hemodynamic monitor-derived baseline estimated pulmonary artery diastolic pressure (ePAD) and change from baseline ePAD were independent predictors of all-cause mortality in patients with chronic heart failure. METHODS AND RESULTS: Retrospective analysis used data from 3 studies (n=790 patients; 216 deaths). Baseline ePAD was related to mortality using a multivariable model including baseline and demographic data. Changes in ePAD defined as change from baseline to 6 months and from baseline to 14 days before death or exit from study were related to subsequent mortality, and analysis was adjusted for baseline ePAD. Area under the pressure versus time curve during 180 days before death or exit from study was related to mortality. Baseline ePAD, independent of other covariates, was a significant predictor of mortality (hazard ratio=1.07; 95% confidence interval=1.05-1.09; P<0.0001). Change in ePAD was an independent predictor of mortality (hazard ratio=1.07; 95% confidence interval=1.05-1.100; P=0.0008). Increased ePAD of 3, 4, or 5 mm Hg from baseline to 6 months was associated with increased mortality risk of 23.8%, 32.9%, or 42.8%. Change in ePAD from baseline to 14 days before death or exit from study was higher in patients who died (3.0±8 versus 1.7±10 mm Hg; P=0.003). Area under the pressure versus time curve in the final 180 days before death or exit from study was higher in patients who died versus those alive at end of study (185±668 versus 17±482 mm Hg.days; P=0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Implantable hemodynamic monitor-derived baseline ePAD and change from baseline ePAD were independent predictors of mortality in chronic heart failure patients.
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this analysis was to examine whether implantable hemodynamic monitor-derived baseline estimated pulmonary artery diastolic pressure (ePAD) and change from baseline ePAD were independent predictors of all-cause mortality in patients with chronic heart failure. METHODS AND RESULTS: Retrospective analysis used data from 3 studies (n=790 patients; 216 deaths). Baseline ePAD was related to mortality using a multivariable model including baseline and demographic data. Changes in ePAD defined as change from baseline to 6 months and from baseline to 14 days before death or exit from study were related to subsequent mortality, and analysis was adjusted for baseline ePAD. Area under the pressure versus time curve during 180 days before death or exit from study was related to mortality. Baseline ePAD, independent of other covariates, was a significant predictor of mortality (hazard ratio=1.07; 95% confidence interval=1.05-1.09; P<0.0001). Change in ePAD was an independent predictor of mortality (hazard ratio=1.07; 95% confidence interval=1.05-1.100; P=0.0008). Increased ePAD of 3, 4, or 5 mm Hg from baseline to 6 months was associated with increased mortality risk of 23.8%, 32.9%, or 42.8%. Change in ePAD from baseline to 14 days before death or exit from study was higher in patients who died (3.0±8 versus 1.7±10 mm Hg; P=0.003). Area under the pressure versus time curve in the final 180 days before death or exit from study was higher in patients who died versus those alive at end of study (185±668 versus 17±482 mm Hg.days; P=0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Implantable hemodynamic monitor-derived baseline ePAD and change from baseline ePAD were independent predictors of mortality in chronic heart failurepatients.
Authors: Yogesh N V Reddy; Thomas P Olson; Masaru Obokata; Vojtech Melenovsky; Barry A Borlaug Journal: JACC Heart Fail Date: 2018-05-23 Impact factor: 12.035
Authors: Masaru Obokata; Garvan C Kane; Yogesh N V Reddy; Vojtech Melenovsky; Thomas P Olson; Petr Jarolim; Barry A Borlaug Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2019-12-01 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Jacob Abraham; Rupinder Bharmi; Orvar Jonsson; Guilherme H Oliveira; Andre Artis; Ali Valika; Robert Capodilupo; Philip B Adamson; Gregory Roberts; Nirav Dalal; Akshay S Desai; Raymond L Benza Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2019-06-01 Impact factor: 14.676
Authors: Christiane E Angermann; Birgit Assmus; Stefan D Anker; Johannes Brachmann; Georg Ertl; Friedrich Köhler; Stephan Rosenkranz; Carsten Tschöpe; Philip B Adamson; Michael Böhm Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2018-05-19 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Omer T Inan; Maziyar Baran Pouyan; Abdul Q Javaid; Sean Dowling; Mozziyar Etemadi; Alexis Dorier; J Alex Heller; A Ozan Bicen; Shuvo Roy; Teresa De Marco; Liviu Klein Journal: Circ Heart Fail Date: 2018-01 Impact factor: 8.790
Authors: Sanjiv J Shah; Ted Feldman; Mark J Ricciardi; Rami Kahwash; Scott Lilly; Sheldon Litwin; Chris D Nielsen; Pim van der Harst; Elke Hoendermis; Martin Penicka; Jozef Bartunek; Peter S Fail; David M Kaye; Anthony Walton; Mark C Petrie; Niki Walker; Anupam Basuray; Steven Yakubov; Scott L Hummel; Stanley Chetcuti; Rhondalyn Forde-McLean; Howard C Herrmann; Daniel Burkhoff; Joseph M Massaro; John G F Cleland; Laura Mauri Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2018-10-01 Impact factor: 14.676