The prognostic significance of heart failure with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction: a literature-based meta-analysis.
ABSTRACT Heart failure (HF) with normal or preserved left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (HFPEF) has been reported to be associated with similar outcome as HF with reduced EF (HFREF) in registry-based and epidemiological analyses, but many of these studies excluded patients who did not have EF measurements. Conversely, prior prospective studies have reported better outcome for patients with HFPEF. We performed a meta-analysis of prospective observational studies comparing all-cause mortality in patients with HFREF and HFPEF.
We searched several online databases for studies comparing outcome in HFREF and HFPEF, published before 2007. Inclusion criteria: prospective, clinical HF, near complete EF data, and mortality outcome. Review Manager version 4.2.3 software was used for the analysis. Overall, 24 501 patients [9299 deaths (38%)] from 17 studies are included. Average follow-up was 47 months; the HFPEF group was older (69 vs. 66 years) and more likely to be female (44% vs. 26%). Of the 7688 patients with HFPEF 2468 died (32.1%), compared with 6831 of the 16 813 patients with HFREF (40.6%): odds ratio 0.51 (95% CI: 0.48, 0.55).
This literature-based meta-analysis demonstrates that mortality among patients with HFPEF was half that observed in those with HFREF, in contrast to previous reports suggesting that mortality may be similar between both groups.
SourceAvailable from: PubMed Central[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To update the Cochrane systematic review of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) for heart failure. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials was undertaken. MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were searched up to January 2013. Trials with 6 or more months of follow-up were included if they assessed the effects of exercise interventions alone or as a component of comprehensive CR programme compared with no exercise control. 33 trials were included with 4740 participants predominantly with a reduced ejection fraction (<40%) and New York Heart Association class II and III. Compared with controls, while there was no difference in pooled all-cause mortality between exercise CR with follow-up to 1 year (risk ratio (RR) 0.93; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.27, p=0.67), there was a trend towards a reduction in trials with follow-up beyond 1 year (RR 0.88; 0.75 to 1.02, 0.09). Exercise CR reduced the risk of overall (RR 0.75; 0.62 to 0.92, 0.005) and heart failure-specific hospitalisation (RR 0.61; 0.46 to 0.80, 0.0004) and resulted in a clinically important improvement in the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire (mean difference: -5.8 points, -9.2 to -2.4, 0.0007). Univariate meta-regression analysis showed that these benefits were independent of the type and dose of exercise CR, and trial duration of follow- up, quality or publication date. This updated Cochrane review shows that improvements in hospitalisation and health-related quality of life with exercise-based CR appear to be consistent across patients regardless of CR programme characteristics and may reduce mortality in the longer term. An individual participant data meta-analysis is needed to provide confirmatory evidence of the importance of patient subgroup and programme level characteristics (eg, exercise dose) on outcome.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) has recently emerged as a major cause of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Contrary to initial beliefs, HFpEF is now known to be as common as heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and carries an unacceptably high mortality rate. With a prevalence that has been steadily rising over the past two decades, it is very likely that HFpEF will represent the dominant heart failure phenotype over the coming few years. The scarcity of trials in this semi-discrete form of heart failure and lack of unified enrolment criteria in the studies conducted to date might have contributed to the current absence of specific therapies. Understanding the epidemiological, pathophysiological and molecular differences (and similarities) between these two forms of heart failure is cornerstone to the development of targeted therapies. Carefully designed studies that adhere to unified diagnostic criteria with the recruitment of appropriate controls and adoption of practical end-points are urgently needed to help identify effective treatment strategies.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The prevalence of heart failure (HF) and its subtype, HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), is on the rise due to aging of the population. HFpEF is convergence of several pathophysiological processes, which are not yet clearly identified. HFpEF is usually seen in association with systemic diseases, such as diabetes, hypertension, atrial fibrillation, sleep apnea, renal and pulmonary disease. The proportion of HF patients with HFpEF varies by patient demographics, study settings (cohort vs. clinical trial, outpatient clinics vs. hospitalised patients) and cut points used to define preserved function. There is an expanding body of literature about prevalence and prognostic significance of both cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular comorbidities in HFpEF patients. Current therapeutic approaches are targeted towards alleviating the symptoms, treating the associated comorbid conditions, and reducing recurrent hospital admissions. There is lack of evidence-based therapies that show a reduction in the mortality amongst HFpEF patients; however, an improvement in exercise tolerance and quality of life is seen with few interventions. In this review, we highlight the epidemiology and current treatment options for HFpEF.Current Heart Failure Reports 09/2014; DOI:10.1007/s11897-014-0223-7