Erik B Schelbert1,2,3, Yaron Fridman1,2, Timothy C Wong1,2,3, Hussein Abu Daya1,2, Kayla M Piehler1,2,3, Ajay Kadakkal1,2, Christopher A Miller4, Martin Ugander5, Maren Maanja5, Peter Kellman6, Dipan J Shah7, Kaleab Z Abebe8, Marc A Simon1,3, Giovanni Quarta9, Michele Senni9, Javed Butler10, Javier Diez11,12, Margaret M Redfield13, Mihai Gheorghiade14. 1. Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 2. UPMC Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Center, Heart and Vascular Institute, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 3. Clinical and Translational Science Institute, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 4. Centre for Imaging Sciences and Biomedical Imaging Institute, University of Manchester, Manchester, England. 5. Department of Clinical Physiology, Karolinska Institutet and Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. 6. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Bethesda, Maryland. 7. Houston Methodist DeBakey Heart and Vascular Center, Houston, Texas. 8. Center for Clinical Trials and Data Coordination, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 9. Department of Cardiology, Azienda Ospedaliera Papa Giovanni XXIII, Bergamo, Italy. 10. Cardiology Division, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York. 11. Program of Cardiovascular Diseases, Center for Applied Medical Research, Department of Cardiology and Cardiac Surgery, University Clinic, University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain. 12. CIBERCV, Carlos III Institute of Health, Madrid, Spain. 13. Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. 14. Center for Cardiovascular Innovation, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
Abstract
Importance: Among myriad changes occurring during the evolution of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), cardiomyocyte-extracellular matrix interactions from excess collagen may affect microvascular, mechanical, and electrical function. Objective: To investigate whether myocardial fibrosis (MF) is similarly prevalent both in those with HFpEF and those at risk for HFpEF, similarly associating with disease severity and outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: Observational cohort study from June 1, 2010, to September 17, 2015, with follow-up until December 14, 2015, at a cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) center serving an integrated health system. Consecutive patients with preserved systolic function referred for CMR were eligible. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance was used to exclude patients with cardiac amyloidosis (n = 19). Exposures: Myocardial fibrosis quantified by extracellular volume (ECV) CMR measures. Main Outcome and Measures: Baseline BNP; subsequent hospitalization for heart failure or death. Results: Of 1174 patients identified (537 [46%] female; median [interquartile range {IQR}] age, 56 [44-66] years), 250 were "at risk" for HFpEF given elevated brain-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) level; 160 had HFpEF by documented clinical diagnosis, and 745 did not have HFpEF. Patients either at risk for HFpEF or with HFpEF demonstrated similarly higher prevalence/extent of MF and worse prognosis compared with patients with no HFpEF. Among those at risk for HFpEF or with HFpEF, the actual diagnosis of HFpEF was not associated with significant differences in MF (median ECV, 28.2%; IQR, 26.2%-30.7% vs 28.3%; IQR, 25.5%-31.4%; P = .60) or prognosis (log-rank 0.8; P = .38). Over a median of 1.9 years, 61 patients at risk for HFpEF or with HFpEF experienced adverse events (19 hospitalization for heart failure, 48 deaths, 6 with both). In those with HFpEF, ECV was associated with baseline log BNP (disease severity surrogate) in multivariable linear regression models, and was associated with outcomes in multivariable Cox regression models (eg, hazard ratio 1.75 per 5% increase in ECV, 95% CI, 1.25-2.45; P = .001 in stepwise model) whether grouped with patients at risk for HFpEF or not. Conclusions and Relevance: Among myriad changes occurring during the apparent evolution of HFpEF where elevated BNP is prevalent, MF was similarly prevalent in those with or at risk for HFpEF. Conceivably, MF might precede clinical HFpEF diagnosis. Regardless, MF was associated with disease severity (ie, BNP) and outcomes. Whether cells and secretomes mediating MF represent therapeutic targets in HFpEF warrants further evaluation.
Importance: Among myriad changes occurring during the evolution of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), cardiomyocyte-extracellular matrix interactions from excess collagen may affect microvascular, mechanical, and electrical function. Objective: To investigate whether myocardial fibrosis (MF) is similarly prevalent both in those with HFpEF and those at risk for HFpEF, similarly associating with disease severity and outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: Observational cohort study from June 1, 2010, to September 17, 2015, with follow-up until December 14, 2015, at a cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) center serving an integrated health system. Consecutive patients with preserved systolic function referred for CMR were eligible. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance was used to exclude patients with cardiac amyloidosis (n = 19). Exposures: Myocardial fibrosis quantified by extracellular volume (ECV) CMR measures. Main Outcome and Measures: Baseline BNP; subsequent hospitalization for heart failure or death. Results: Of 1174 patients identified (537 [46%] female; median [interquartile range {IQR}] age, 56 [44-66] years), 250 were "at risk" for HFpEF given elevated brain-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) level; 160 had HFpEF by documented clinical diagnosis, and 745 did not have HFpEF. Patients either at risk for HFpEF or with HFpEF demonstrated similarly higher prevalence/extent of MF and worse prognosis compared with patients with no HFpEF. Among those at risk for HFpEF or with HFpEF, the actual diagnosis of HFpEF was not associated with significant differences in MF (median ECV, 28.2%; IQR, 26.2%-30.7% vs 28.3%; IQR, 25.5%-31.4%; P = .60) or prognosis (log-rank 0.8; P = .38). Over a median of 1.9 years, 61 patients at risk for HFpEF or with HFpEF experienced adverse events (19 hospitalization for heart failure, 48 deaths, 6 with both). In those with HFpEF, ECV was associated with baseline log BNP (disease severity surrogate) in multivariable linear regression models, and was associated with outcomes in multivariable Cox regression models (eg, hazard ratio 1.75 per 5% increase in ECV, 95% CI, 1.25-2.45; P = .001 in stepwise model) whether grouped with patients at risk for HFpEF or not. Conclusions and Relevance: Among myriad changes occurring during the apparent evolution of HFpEF where elevated BNP is prevalent, MF was similarly prevalent in those with or at risk for HFpEF. Conceivably, MF might precede clinical HFpEF diagnosis. Regardless, MF was associated with disease severity (ie, BNP) and outcomes. Whether cells and secretomes mediating MF represent therapeutic targets in HFpEF warrants further evaluation.
Authors: Karl-Philipp Rommel; Maximilian von Roeder; Konrad Latuscynski; Christian Oberueck; Stephan Blazek; Karl Fengler; Christian Besler; Marcus Sandri; Christian Lücke; Matthias Gutberlet; Axel Linke; Gerhard Schuler; Philipp Lurz Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2016-04-19 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Sanjay M Banypersad; Marianna Fontana; Viviana Maestrini; Daniel M Sado; Gabriella Captur; Aviva Petrie; Stefan K Piechnik; Carol J Whelan; Anna S Herrey; Julian D Gillmore; Helen J Lachmann; Ashutosh D Wechalekar; Philip N Hawkins; James C Moon Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2014-11-16 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Timothy C Wong; Kayla Piehler; Kathy S Puntil; Diego Moguillansky; Christopher G Meier; Joan M Lacomis; Peter Kellman; Stephen C Cook; David S Schwartzman; Marc A Simon; Suresh R Mulukutla; Erik B Schelbert Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2013-01-16 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Marianna Fontana; Silvia Pica; Patricia Reant; Amna Abdel-Gadir; Thomas A Treibel; Sanjay M Banypersad; Viviana Maestrini; William Barcella; Stefania Rosmini; Heerajnarain Bulluck; Rabya H Sayed; Ketna Patel; Shameem Mamhood; Chiara Bucciarelli-Ducci; Carol J Whelan; Anna S Herrey; Helen J Lachmann; Ashutosh D Wechalekar; Charlotte H Manisty; Eric B Schelbert; Peter Kellman; Julian D Gillmore; Philip N Hawkins; James C Moon Journal: Circulation Date: 2015-09-11 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: James E Udelson; Gregory D Lewis; Sanjiv J Shah; Michael R Zile; Margaret M Redfield; John Burnett; John Parker; Jelena P Seferovic; Phebe Wilson; Robert S Mittleman; Albert T Profy; Marvin A Konstam Journal: JAMA Date: 2020-10-20 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Adrián I Löffler; Jonathan A Pan; Pelbreton C Balfour; Peter W Shaw; Yang Yang; Moiz Nasir; Daniel A Auger; Frederick H Epstein; Christopher M Kramer; Li-Ming Gan; Michael Salerno Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2019-08-22 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Pankaj Garg; Hosamadin Assadi; Rachel Jones; Wei Bin Chan; Peter Metherall; Richard Thomas; Rob van der Geest; Andrew J Swift; Abdallah Al-Mohammad Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-01-12 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Ilaria Russo; Michele Cavalera; Shuaibo Huang; Ya Su; Anis Hanna; Bijun Chen; Arti V Shinde; Simon J Conway; Jonathan Graff; Nikolaos G Frangogiannis Journal: Circ Res Date: 2019-04-12 Impact factor: 17.367
Authors: Javed Butler; Andreas P Kalogeropoulos; Kevin J Anstrom; Priscilla Y Hsue; Raymond J Kim; Rebecca Scherzer; Sanjiv J Shah; Svati H Shah; Eric J Velazquez; Adrian F Hernandez; Patrice Desvigne-Nickens; Eugene Braunwald Journal: J Card Fail Date: 2018-03-02 Impact factor: 5.712