Lamia Al Saikhan1,2, Alun D Hughes3,4, Wing-See Chung5, Maryam Alsharqi1, Petros Nihoyannopoulos1. 1. Imperial College London (National Heart and Lung Institute), Hammersmith Hospital, Du Cane Road, London, UK. 2. Department of Cardiac Technology, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, 2835 King Faisal Street, Dammam, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. 3. Department of Population Science & Experimental Medicine, Institute of Cardiovascular Science, University College London, Gower street, London, UK. 4. MRC Unit for Lifelong Health and Ageing, University College London, London, UK. 5. Cardiology Department, Hammersmith Hospital, Du Cane Road, London, UK.
Abstract
AIMS: Heart failure (HF) with mid-range ejection fraction (HFmrEF) shares similar diagnostic criteria to HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Whether left atrial (LA) function differs between HFmrEF and HFpEF is unknown. We, therefore, used 2D-speckle-tracking echocardiography (2D-STE) to assess LA phasic function in patients with HFpEF and HFmrEF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive outpatients diagnosed with HF according to current European recommendations were prospectively enrolled. There were 110 HFpEF and 61 HFmrEF patients with sinus rhythm, and 37 controls matched by age. LA phasic function was analysed using 2D-STE. Peak-atrial longitudinal strain (PALS), peak-atrial contraction strain (PACS), and PALS-PACS were measured reflecting LA reservoir, pump, and conduit function, respectively. Among HF groups, most of left ventricular (LV) diastolic function measures, and LA volume were similar. Both HF groups had abnormal LA phasic function compared with controls. HFmrEF patients had worse LA phasic function than HFpEF patients even among patients with LA enlargement. Among patients with normal LA size, LA reservoir, and pump function remained worse in HFmrEF. Differences in LA phasic function between HF groups remained significant after adjustment for confounders. Global PALS and PACS were inversely correlated with brain natriuretic peptide, LA volume, E/A, E/e', pulmonary artery systolic pressure, and diastolic dysfunction grade in both HF groups. CONCLUSION: LA phasic function was worse in HFmrEF patients compared with those with HFpEF regardless of LA size, and independent of potential confounders. These differences could be attributed to intrinsic LA myocardial dysfunction perhaps in relation to altered LV function. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
AIMS: Heart failure (HF) with mid-range ejection fraction (HFmrEF) shares similar diagnostic criteria to HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Whether left atrial (LA) function differs between HFmrEF and HFpEF is unknown. We, therefore, used 2D-speckle-tracking echocardiography (2D-STE) to assess LA phasic function in patients with HFpEF and HFmrEF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive outpatients diagnosed with HF according to current European recommendations were prospectively enrolled. There were 110 HFpEF and 61 HFmrEF patients with sinus rhythm, and 37 controls matched by age. LA phasic function was analysed using 2D-STE. Peak-atrial longitudinal strain (PALS), peak-atrial contraction strain (PACS), and PALS-PACS were measured reflecting LA reservoir, pump, and conduit function, respectively. Among HF groups, most of left ventricular (LV) diastolic function measures, and LA volume were similar. Both HF groups had abnormal LA phasic function compared with controls. HFmrEF patients had worse LA phasic function than HFpEF patients even among patients with LA enlargement. Among patients with normal LA size, LA reservoir, and pump function remained worse in HFmrEF. Differences in LA phasic function between HF groups remained significant after adjustment for confounders. Global PALS and PACS were inversely correlated with brain natriuretic peptide, LA volume, E/A, E/e', pulmonary artery systolic pressure, and diastolic dysfunction grade in both HF groups. CONCLUSION: LA phasic function was worse in HFmrEF patients compared with those with HFpEF regardless of LA size, and independent of potential confounders. These differences could be attributed to intrinsic LA myocardial dysfunction perhaps in relation to altered LV function. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
Authors: Mustafa Kurt; Ibrahim Halil Tanboga; Enbiya Aksakal; Ahmet Kaya; Turgay Isik; Mehmet Ekinci; Emine Bilen Journal: Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2011-12-13 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Clyde W Yancy; Mariell Jessup; Biykem Bozkurt; Javed Butler; Donald E Casey; Mark H Drazner; Gregg C Fonarow; Stephen A Geraci; Tamara Horwich; James L Januzzi; Maryl R Johnson; Edward K Kasper; Wayne C Levy; Frederick A Masoudi; Patrick E McBride; John J V McMurray; Judith E Mitchell; Pamela N Peterson; Barbara Riegel; Flora Sam; Lynne W Stevenson; W H Wilson Tang; Emily J Tsai; Bruce L Wilkoff Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-06-05 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Angela B S Santos; Gabriela Querejeta Roca; Brian Claggett; Nancy K Sweitzer; Sanjiv J Shah; Inder S Anand; James C Fang; Michael R Zile; Bertram Pitt; Scott D Solomon; Amil M Shah Journal: Circ Heart Fail Date: 2016-04 Impact factor: 8.790
Authors: Gustavo G Blume; Christopher J Mcleod; Marion E Barnes; James B Seward; Patricia A Pellikka; Paul M Bastiansen; Teresa S M Tsang Journal: Eur J Echocardiogr Date: 2011-05-12
Authors: Roberto M Lang; Luigi P Badano; Victor Mor-Avi; Jonathan Afilalo; Anderson Armstrong; Laura Ernande; Frank A Flachskampf; Elyse Foster; Steven A Goldstein; Tatiana Kuznetsova; Patrizio Lancellotti; Denisa Muraru; Michael H Picard; Ernst R Rietzschel; Lawrence Rudski; Kirk T Spencer; Wendy Tsang; Jens-Uwe Voigt Journal: Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2015-03 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Piotr Ponikowski; Adriaan A Voors; Stefan D Anker; Héctor Bueno; John G F Cleland; Andrew J S Coats; Volkmar Falk; José Ramón González-Juanatey; Veli-Pekka Harjola; Ewa A Jankowska; Mariell Jessup; Cecilia Linde; Petros Nihoyannopoulos; John T Parissis; Burkert Pieske; Jillian P Riley; Giuseppe M C Rosano; Luis M Ruilope; Frank Ruschitzka; Frans H Rutten; Peter van der Meer Journal: Eur J Heart Fail Date: 2016-05-20 Impact factor: 15.534
Authors: Angela B S Santos; Elisabeth Kraigher-Krainer; Deepak K Gupta; Brian Claggett; Michael R Zile; Burkert Pieske; Adriaan A Voors; Marty Lefkowitz; Toni Bransford; Victor Shi; Milton Packer; John J V McMurray; Amil M Shah; Scott D Solomon Journal: Eur J Heart Fail Date: 2014-08-19 Impact factor: 15.534
Authors: Daniel Tiller; Martin Russ; Karin Halina Greiser; Sebastian Nuding; Henning Ebelt; Alexander Kluttig; Jan A Kors; Joachim Thiery; Mathias Bruegel; Johannes Haerting; Karl Werdan Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-03-15 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Sjoerd Bouwmeester; Jonna A van der Stam; Saskia L M van Loon; Natal A W van Riel; Arjen-Kars Boer; Lukas R Dekker; Volkher Scharnhorst; Patrick Houthuizen Journal: BMC Cardiovasc Disord Date: 2022-03-14 Impact factor: 2.298
Authors: Sauyeh K Zamani; Thomas Jake Samuel; Janet Wei; Louise E J Thomson; Balaji Tamarappoo; Behzad Sharif; C Noel Bairey Merz; Michael D Nelson Journal: Clin Cardiol Date: 2020-05-27 Impact factor: 3.287
Authors: Aseel Alfuhied; Benjamin A Marrow; Sara Elfawal; Gaurav S Gulsin; Mathew P Graham-Brown; Christopher D Steadman; Prathap Kanagala; Gerry P McCann; Anvesha Singh Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2020-10-30 Impact factor: 5.315