PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review explores key features and potential management controversies in two emerging populations in heart failure: heart failure with recovered ejection fraction (HF-recovered EF) and heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction (HFmrEF). RECENT FINDINGS: While HF-recovered EF patients have better outcomes than heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), they continue to have symptoms, persistent biomarker elevations, and abnormal outcomes suggesting a continued disease process. HFmrEF patients appear to have features of HFrEF and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), but have a high prevalence of ischemic heart disease and may represent a transitory phase between the HFrEF and HFpEF. Management strategies have insufficient data to warrant standardization at this time. HF-recovered EF and HFmrEF represent new populations with unmet needs and expose the pitfalls of an EF basis for heart failure classification.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review explores key features and potential management controversies in two emerging populations in heart failure: heart failure with recovered ejection fraction (HF-recovered EF) and heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction (HFmrEF). RECENT FINDINGS: While HF-recovered EF patients have better outcomes than heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), they continue to have symptoms, persistent biomarker elevations, and abnormal outcomes suggesting a continued disease process. HFmrEF patients appear to have features of HFrEF and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), but have a high prevalence of ischemic heart disease and may represent a transitory phase between the HFrEF and HFpEF. Management strategies have insufficient data to warrant standardization at this time. HF-recovered EF and HFmrEF represent new populations with unmet needs and expose the pitfalls of an EF basis for heart failure classification.
Authors: Stavros G Drakos; Abdallah G Kfoury; Josef Stehlik; Craig H Selzman; Bruce B Reid; John V Terrovitis; John N Nanas; Dean Y Li Journal: Circulation Date: 2012-07-10 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Jasper Tromp; Mohsin A F Khan; Robert J Mentz; Christopher M O'Connor; Marco Metra; Howard C Dittrich; Piotr Ponikowski; John R Teerlink; Gad Cotter; Beth Davison; John G F Cleland; Michael M Givertz; Daniel M Bloomfield; Dirk J Van Veldhuisen; Hans L Hillege; Adriaan A Voors; Peter van der Meer Journal: JACC Heart Fail Date: 2017-06-14 Impact factor: 12.035
Authors: James K Kirklin; Francis D Pagani; Robert L Kormos; Lynne W Stevenson; Elizabeth D Blume; Susan L Myers; Marissa A Miller; J Timothy Baldwin; James B Young; David C Naftel Journal: J Heart Lung Transplant Date: 2017-07-15 Impact factor: 10.247
Authors: Anupam Basuray; Benjamin French; Bonnie Ky; Esther Vorovich; Caroline Olt; Nancy K Sweitzer; Thomas P Cappola; James C Fang Journal: Circulation Date: 2014-05-05 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Tariq Ahmad; Teresa Wang; Emily C O'Brien; Marc D Samsky; John A Pura; Yuliya Lokhnygina; Joseph G Rogers; Adrian F Hernandez; Damian Craig; Dawn E Bowles; Carmelo A Milano; Svati H Shah; James L Januzzi; G Michael Felker; Chetan B Patel Journal: JACC Heart Fail Date: 2014-11-12 Impact factor: 12.035
Authors: John G F Cleland; Karina V Bunting; Marcus D Flather; Douglas G Altman; Jane Holmes; Andrew J S Coats; Luis Manzano; John J V McMurray; Frank Ruschitzka; Dirk J van Veldhuisen; Thomas G von Lueder; Michael Böhm; Bert Andersson; John Kjekshus; Milton Packer; Alan S Rigby; Giuseppe Rosano; Hans Wedel; Åke Hjalmarson; John Wikstrand; Dipak Kotecha Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2018-01-01 Impact factor: 29.983