| Literature DB >> 28674618 |
Shivani R Aggarwal1, David M Herrington1, Catherine J Vladutiu2, Jill C Newman1, Katrina Swett1, Franklyn Gonzalez2, Jorge R Kizer3, Michelle A Kominiarek4, Karen M Tabb5, Linda C Gallo6, Gregory A Talavera6, Barry E Hurwitz7, Carlos J Rodriguez1.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Female sex is a risk factor for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Previous literature suggests that some diastolic dysfunction (DD) develops during pregnancy and may persist postdelivery. Our objective was to examine the relationship between parity and cardiac structure and function in a population-based cohort.Entities:
Keywords: diastolic Dysfunction by echo; heart failure with preserved ejection fraction; hispanic; parity
Year: 2017 PMID: 28674618 PMCID: PMC5471863 DOI: 10.1136/openhrt-2016-000530
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Open Heart ISSN: 2053-3624
Figure 1Method of assessment of grade of diastolic dysfunction in ECHO-SOL.30 ECHO-SOL, Echocardiographic Study of Latinos; LAVI, left atrial volume index.
Baseline characteristics (frequency or mean (SE)) of female participants in the Echocardiographic Study of Latinos (n=1172)
| Overall | 0 Births | 1 Birth | 2 Births | 3 Births | 4 Births | 5+ Births | p Value* | |
| Age | 56.1 (0.5) | 56.1 (1.2) | 54.0 (0.7) | 55.4 (0.8) | 56.2 (1.4) | 56.2 (1.0) | 60.7 (1.1) | <0.01 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 31.0 (0.3) | 30.3 (0.9) | 29.9 (0.5) | 30.4 (0.4) | 31.4 (1.0) | 32.1 (0.5) | 32.2 (0.7) | 0.01 |
| Education | <0.01 | |||||||
| Less than HS | 33.9 | 23.3 | 21.9 | 20.7 | 36.5 | 54.5 | 62.3 | |
| HS or equivalent | 20.8 | 30.1 | 21.4 | 20.4 | 23.0 | 16.1 | 18.1 | |
| Greater than HS | 45.3 | 46.6 | 56.7 | 58.9 | 40.5 | 29.4 | 19.6 | |
| Income | 0.01 | |||||||
| <$20,000 | 57.9 | 52.2 | 58.5 | 59.8 | 49.5 | 53.5 | 80.8 | |
| $20 000 to $40 000 | 30.9 | 29.1 | 32.4 | 26.8 | 37.4 | 37.5 | 17.3 | |
| >$40 000 | 11.2 | 18.3 | 9.1 | 13.5 | 13.1 | 9.0 | 1.9 | |
| Current smoker | 13.9 | 17.3 | 21.2 | 12.7 | 8.5 | 22.7 | 9.0 | <0.01 |
| SBP | 134.3 (0.9) | 130.2 (2.5) | 130.5 (1.9) | 132.8 (1.2) | 135.6 (2.5) | 136.4 (2.5) | 140.2 (2.0) | <0.01 |
| Diabetes mellitus | 0.01 | |||||||
| No diabetes | 32.0 | 32.5 | 38.5 | 38.4 | 25.1 | 32.9 | 19.6 | |
| Prediabetes | 40.0 | 51.2 | 37.5 | 37.3 | 45.5 | 39.8 | 33.3 | |
| Diabetes | 28.0 | 16.3 | 24.1 | 24.3 | 29.4 | 27.3 | 47.1 | |
| Anti-HTN meds | 27.6 | 20.2 | 20.9 | 23.1 | 27.8 | 33.8 | 44.7 | 0.05 |
| Total cholesterol (mg/dL) | 214.2 (1.7) | 223.0 (7.8) | 216.3 (3.9) | 214.0 (3.1) | 216.1 (3.0) | 215.3 (3.7) | 202.1 (6.1) | 0.30 |
| HDL cholesterol (mg/dL) | 53.5 (0.5) | 54.7 (1.7) | 52.8 (1.1) | 53.3 (1.1) | 54.1 (0.8) | 54.1 (0.9) | 51.9 (1.5) | 0.76 |
*p Value from survey linear regression models for continuous measures and χ2 tests for categorical measures.
BMI, body mass index; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; HS, high school; HTN, hypertension; SBP, systolic blood pressure.
Multilevel multivariable linear regression models of association between parity and cardiac volumes and mass
| Parity | |||||||||||
| ≥5 vs 0 | 4 vs 0 | 3 vs 0 | 2 vs 0 | 1 vs 0 | |||||||
| β Estimate (SE)* | p Value | β Estimate (SE)* | p Value | β Estimate (SE)* | p Value | β Estimate (SE)* | p Value | β Estimate (SE)* | p Value | ||
|
| Model 1 | 8.83 (3.2) |
| 8.42 (3.1) |
| 8.45 (3.4) |
| 7.57 (2.7) |
| 2.08 (2.8) | 0.45 |
| Model 2 | 7.00 (2.6) |
| 6.31 (2.5) |
| 7.17 (2.4) |
| 7.11 (2.2) |
| 2.47 (2.4) | 0.30 | |
| Model 3 | 7.11 (2.6) |
| 6.02 (2.4) |
| 7.34 (2.3) |
| 7.24 (2.2) |
| 2.37 (2.3) | 0.30 | |
| Model 4 | 8.27 (2.9) |
| 6.29 (2.5) |
| 7.28 (2.3) |
| 8.17 (2.7) |
| 2.06 (2.5) | 0.41 | |
|
| Model 1 | 4.30 (1.4) |
| 3.46 (1.2) |
| 3.27 (1.3) |
| 3.28 (1.3) |
| 1.86 (1.2) | 0.11 |
| Model 2 | 3.12 (1.3) |
| 2.27 (1.1) |
| 2.41 (1.0) |
| 2.78 (1.2) |
| 1.75 (1.1) | 0.11 | |
| Model 3 | 3.12 (1.3) |
| 2.09 (1.0) |
| 2.52 (1.0) |
| 2.84 (1.2) |
| 1.66 (1.1) | 0.12 | |
| Model 4 | 3.12 (1.4) |
| 1.94 (1.1) | 0.07 | 2.34 (1.0) |
| 2.96 (1.3) |
| 1.36 (1.2) | 0.25 | |
|
| Model 1 | 3.19 (1.3) |
| 3.50 (1.3) |
| 2.00 (1.2) | 0.09 | 1.58 (1.2) | 0.17 | 1.28 (1.3) | 0.32 |
| Model 2 | 2.68 (1.3) |
| 3.26 (1.3) |
| 1.75 (1.2) | 0.15 | 1.45 (1.2) | 0.22 | 1.31 (1.3) | 0.31 | |
| Model 3 | 2.70 (1.3) |
| 3.21 (1.3) |
| 1.81 (1.2) | 0.13 | 1.51 (1.2) | 0.20 | 1.32 (1.3) | 0.31 | |
| Model 4 | 2.69 (1.4) | 0.06 | 3.10 (1.4) |
| 1.81 (1.2) | 0.14 | 1.78 (1.2) | 0.15 | 1.09 (1.3) | 0.41 | |
|
| Model 1 | 24.85 (7.9) |
| 26.68 (6.0) |
| 7.53 (4.8) | 0.11 | 11.30 (4.5) |
| 9.54 (5.3) | 0.07 |
| Model 2 | 17.04 (6.5) |
| 19.60 (4.9) |
| 2.63 (5.5) | 0.63 | 9.74 (3.8) |
| 9.54 (4.4) |
| |
| Model 3 | 16.64 (6.6) |
| 19.38 (5.1) |
| 2.75 (5.6) | 0.62 | 9.46 (3.8) |
| 9.26 (4.5) |
| |
| Model 4 | 15.20 (6.7) |
| 20.01 (5.4) |
| 2.50 (5.5) | 0.65 | 9.64 (4.0) |
| 9.16 (4.6) |
| |
|
| Model 1 | −2.04 (1.1) | 0.07 | −0.92 (1.0) | 0.37 | −0.58 (1.0) | 0.55 | −1.03 (1.0) | 0.30 | −1.67 (1.0) | 0.09 |
| Model 2 | −1.37 (1.1) | 0.22 | −0.40 (1.0) | 0.68 | −0.12 (0.9) | 0.90 | −0.56 (1.0) | 0.55 | −1.29 (1.0) | 0.18 | |
| Model 3 | −1.32 (1.1) | 0.24 | −0.35 (1.0) | 0.73 | −0.16 (0.9) | 0.87 | −0.57 (1.0) | 0.55 | −1.23 (1.0) | 0.21 | |
| Model 4 | −0.76 (1.1) | 0.52 | −0.16 (1.0) | 0.88 | −0.19 (0.9) | 0.85 | −0.41 (1.0) | 0.69 | −1.20 (1.0) | 0.25 | |
*β Estimate is the estimated change in outcome variable per unit change in predictor if all other variables remain constant.
EDV, end-diastolic volume; ESV, end-systolic volume; LAVI, left atrial volume index; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; LVM, left ventricular mass.
Model 1: Age
Model 2: Age, BMI, SBP, diabetes or pre-diabetes and anti-hypertension medication use
Model 3: Smoking status, total and HDL cholesterol in addition to variables in model 2
Model 4: Education and household income in addition to variables in model 3
Figure 2Least square means for changes in echocardiographic variables with parity. Least square means for various echocardiographic parameters and their association with increasing levels of parity in fully adjusted models for age, body mass index, diabetes or prediabetes, systolic blood pressure, antihypertensive medications, smoking, total cholesterol and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, education and income. EDV, end-diastolic volume; ESV, end-systolic volume; LAVI, left atrial volume index; LVM, left ventricular mass.
Figure 3Prevalence of any-grade diastolic dysfunction by levels of parity.
Figure 4ORs for logistic regression models of association between parity and any-grade diastolic dysfunction Model 1: Adjusted for age; Model 2: Adjusted for age, body mass index, systolic blood pressure, diabetes or prediabetes and antihypertension medication use; Model 3: Adjusted for smoking status, total cholesterol and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol in addition to variables in model 2; Model 4: Adjusted for education and household income in addition to variables in model 3.