| Literature DB >> 32743042 |
Riad Taher1, Jaskanwal D Sara2, Takumi Toya2,3, Barry A Borlaug2, Lilach O Lerman4, Amir Lerman2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: ACC/AHA guidelines recognize the progressive nature of heart failure (HF). Patients with risk factors (Stage A) are at risk for developing asymptomatic cardiac dysfunction (Stage B), which may then lead to symptomatic HF (Stage C). As such, therapies targeting abnormalities in stages A and B may protect against development of symptomatic HF. peripheral endothelial dysfunction (PED) is an independent predictor of adverse outcomes in patients with stage C HF. The aim of the current study was to evaluate whether PED might be associated with Stage B HF, where therapeutic interventions to prevent progression might be more efficacious.Entities:
Keywords: BMI, body mass index; CAD, coronary artery disease; CV, cardiovascular; EF, ejection fraction; HF, heart failure; Heart Failure; LV, left ventricular; Novel risk factor; Peripheral endothelial dysfunction; RH-PAT, reactive hyperemia-peripheral arterial tonometry; Systolic dysfunction
Year: 2020 PMID: 32743042 PMCID: PMC7385446 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcha.2020.100584
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc ISSN: 2352-9067
Patient characteristics.
| Characteristic | Without PED (N = 195) | With PED (N = 160) | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age - mean ± SD (yr) | 50.9 ± 14.5 | 52.2 ± 14.7 | 0.403 |
| Male sex - no./total no. (%) | 59/195 (30.3) | 65/160 (40.6) | |
| Body mass index - mean ± SD | 27.4 ± 5.8 | 29.3 ± 6.4 | |
| CAD status - no./total no. (%) | |||
| No known CAD | 136/195 (69.7) | 85/160 (53.1) | |
| Non obstructive | 19/195 (9.7) | 20/160 (12.5) | 0.409 |
| Obstructive CAD | 40/195 (20.5) | 55/160 (34.4) | |
| Framingham score‡<10 | |||
| All the individuals - no./total no. (%) | 121/162 (74.7) | 93/138 (67.4) | 0.163 |
| Men - no./total no. (%) | 23/47 (48.9) | 22/54 (40.7) | 0.409 |
| Women - no./total no. (%) | 98/115 (85.2) | 71/84 (84.5) | 0.893 |
| Smoking (past or current) - no./total no. (%) | 67/195 (34.4) | 61/160 (38.1) | 0.462 |
| Obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) - no./total no. (%) | 54/195 (27.7) | 71/160 (44.4) | |
| Dyslipidemia - no./total no. (%) | 126/195 (64.6) | 120/160 (75.0) | |
| Type 2 diabetes - no./total no. (%) | 13/195 (6.7) | 20/160 (12.5) | 0.06 |
| Hypertension - no./total no. (%) | 90/195 (46.2) | 78/160 (48.8) | 0.626 |
| Echocardiography findings | |||
| LVEF (%), median (IQR) | 64.0 (60.0–66.00) | 61.5 (58.8–65.0) | |
| LVEF range | 40–75 | 35–75 | |
| LVEF < 55% - no./total no. (%) | 5/195 (2.6) | 23/160 (14.4) | |
| Diastolic dysfunction - no./total no. ∫ (%) | 40/189 (21.2) | 42/152 (27.6) | 0.212 |
| RVSP - no./total no. (%), mean ± SD | 27.0 ± 5.1 | 27.4 ± 6.2 | 0.576 |
| Medications - no./total no. (%) | |||
| Aspirin | 88/195 (45.1) | 89/160 (55.6) | |
| Statins | 75/195 (38.5) | 74/160 (46.3) | 0.139 |
| Metformin | 9/195 (4.6) | 15/160 (9.4) | 0.076 |
| Sulfonylurea | 2/195 (1.0) | 4/160 (2.5) | 0.284 |
| Insulin | 4/195 (2.1) | 3/160 (1.9) | 0.905 |
| DPP4 inhibitors | 1/195 (0.5) | 1/160 (0.6) | 0.885 |
| Pioglitazone | 1/195 (0.5) | 3/160 (1.9) | 0.226 |
| ACE inhibitors/ARB's | 49/195 (25.1) | 49/160 (30.6) | 0.249 |
| Beta blockers | 68/195 (34.9) | 70/160 (43.8) | 0.088 |
| CCB | 37/195 (19.0) | 44/160 (27.5) | 0.057 |
| Any diuretics | 32/195 (16.4) | 35/160 (21.9) | 0.198 |
| Lab data- no./total no. (%), mean ± SD | |||
| NT-Pro BNP (pg/mL) | 33 /195 (16.9), 70.0 (30.2–163.3) | 45/160 (26.6), 81.5 (43.0–151.5) | 0.246 |
| FPG (mg/dL) | 180/195 (92.3), 99.4 ± 22.0 | 143/160 (89.4), 101.0 ± 19.3 | 0.474 |
| HBA1C (%) | 52/195 (26.7), 5.7 ± 0.9 | 66/160 (41.3), 5.7 ± 0.8 | 0.928 |
| Total cholesterol (mg/dL) | 169/195 (86.7), 191.3 ± 51.4 | 146/160 (91.3), 186.0 ± 45.8 | 0.338 |
| LDL cholesterol (mg/dL) | 166/195 (85.1), 107.6 ± 43.5 | 144/160 (90.0), 104.5 ± 38.6 | 0.5 |
| HDL cholesterol (mg/dL) | 169/195 (86.7), 58.2 ± 18.2 | 147/160 (91.9), 54.5 ± 18.0 | 0.069 |
| Non HDL cholesterol (mg/dL) | 169/195 (86.7), 133.1 ± 51.2 | 146/160 (91.3), 131.6 ± 45.9 | 0.783 |
| Triglycerides (mg/dL) | 169/195 (86.7), 102 (75–150) | 147/160 (91.9), 114 (75–182) | 0.130 |
| Creatinine (mg/dL) in women | 125/195 (64.1), 0.85 ± 0.19 | 89/160 (55.6), 0.84 ± 0.17 | 0.692 |
| Creatinine (mg/dL) in men | 55/195 (28.2), 1.02 ± 0.18 | 59/160 (36.9), 1.08 ± 0.28 | 0.171 |
| eGFR (mL/min/1.73 m2) | 181/195 (92.8), 76.4 ± 18.1 | 147/160 (91.9), 78.4 ± 20.3 | 0.349 |
‡ Framingham score was calculated in individuals with all the required lab data (total cholesterol and high density lipoprotein cholesterol levels) and who were in the acceptable age range (19–74 years).
∫ Total number of patients in whom diastolic function was evaluated.
Abbr eviations: PED - peripheral endothelial dysfunction, SD - Standard deviation, CAD - Coronary artery disease, DLP - Dyslipidemia, DPP4- Dipeptidyl peptidase4, ACE- Angiotensin converting enzyme, ARB- Angiotensin receptor agonist, CCB - Calcium channel blockers, NT-Pro BNP - N-terminal pro brain natriuretic peptide, FPG - Fasting plasma glucose HBA1C- glycated hemoglobin, LDL- low density lipoprotein, HDL - High density lipoprotein eGFR- estimated glomerular filtration rate (based on MDRD equation [21]).
Fig. 1Area under the receiver operator curve for the relationship between peripheral endothelial dysfunction and stage B heart failure at baseline. Area under the receiver operator curve for the relationship between peripheral endothelial dysfunction defined as an Reactive-Hyperemia Peripheral Arterial Tonometry index ≤ 2.0 and stage B heart failure at baseline in all patients (A), in men (B), and in women (C).
Fig. 2Area under the receiver operator curve for the relationship between peripheral endothelial dysfunction and clinically overt stage C heart failure at follow-up in all patients. Area under the receiver operator curve for the relationship between peripheral endothelial dysfunction defined as an Reactive-Hyperemia Peripheral Arterial Tonometry index ≤ 2.0 and clinically overt stage C heart failure at follow-up in all patients (A), in men (B), and in women (C).
Fig. 3Kaplan-Meier curve showing survival without overt stage C heart failure in all patients with versus without peripheral endothelial dysfunction. Patients with RH-PAT index ≤ 2.0 showed significantly decreased survival without overt stage C heart failure compared to patients with RH-PAT index > 2.0 (log-rank P = 0.014).