OBJECTIVE: The study aims to determine the clinical and echocardiographic parameters of patients with recovered heart failure (HFrecEF). METHODOLOGY: Sixty-seven patients (cases) were identified as heart failure with recovered ejection fraction (HFrecEF), defined as improvement in EF ≥ 10%. Sixty-nine patients (controls) were randomly selected by convenience sampling with no or <10% improvement in EF (HFrEF non-recovered). RESULTS: The mean interval between baseline and follow-up echocardiography was 10.5 months in cases and 11.2 months in the control group. HFrecEF showed a 22.7% improvement in mean ejection fraction, and HFrEF non-recovered group also showed a minor increment of 5.5%. HFrecEF patients were significantly younger (49.51 vs 57.54 years, P .001) with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (86.6% vs 52.2%). Patients with HFrecEF had significantly less left ventricular end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes (LVEDV: 162.51 mL vs 208.54 mL, P < .001; LVESV: 119.81 mL vs 157.13 mL, P < .001) and index left atrial volume (37.66 mL vs 47.09 mL, P < .001) than patients with non-recovered EF. The right ventricle (RV) and inferior vena cava were significantly dilated with higher mean tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) among patients with HFrecEF than HFrEF non-recovered. CONCLUSION: Based on univariate analysis, younger age, non-ischemic etiology, LVEDV, LVESV, deceleration time, better TAPSE, dilated right ventricle, dilated IVC, and smaller left atrial volumes were found significant, but on multivariate logistic regression model only left ventricle end-diastolic volume, left atrial volume, and TAPSE were linked to the recovery of ejection fraction.
OBJECTIVE: The study aims to determine the clinical and echocardiographic parameters of patients with recovered heart failure (HFrecEF). METHODOLOGY: Sixty-seven patients (cases) were identified as heart failure with recovered ejection fraction (HFrecEF), defined as improvement in EF ≥ 10%. Sixty-nine patients (controls) were randomly selected by convenience sampling with no or <10% improvement in EF (HFrEF non-recovered). RESULTS: The mean interval between baseline and follow-up echocardiography was 10.5 months in cases and 11.2 months in the control group. HFrecEF showed a 22.7% improvement in mean ejection fraction, and HFrEF non-recovered group also showed a minor increment of 5.5%. HFrecEF patients were significantly younger (49.51 vs 57.54 years, P .001) with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (86.6% vs 52.2%). Patients with HFrecEF had significantly less left ventricular end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes (LVEDV: 162.51 mL vs 208.54 mL, P < .001; LVESV: 119.81 mL vs 157.13 mL, P < .001) and index left atrial volume (37.66 mL vs 47.09 mL, P < .001) than patients with non-recovered EF. The right ventricle (RV) and inferior vena cava were significantly dilated with higher mean tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) among patients with HFrecEF than HFrEF non-recovered. CONCLUSION: Based on univariate analysis, younger age, non-ischemic etiology, LVEDV, LVESV, deceleration time, better TAPSE, dilated right ventricle, dilated IVC, and smaller left atrial volumes were found significant, but on multivariate logistic regression model only left ventricle end-diastolic volume, left atrial volume, and TAPSE were linked to the recovery of ejection fraction.