A comparison of echocardiographic measures of diastolic function for predicting all-cause mortality in a predominantly male population

Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
American heart journal (Impact Factor: 4.46). 03/2011; 161(3):530-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2010.12.010
Source: PubMed


Prior studies demonstrating the prognostic value of echocardiographic measures of diastolic function have been limited by sample size, have included only select clinical populations, and have not incorporated newer measures of diastolic function nor determined their independent prognostic value. The objective of this study is to determine the independent prognostic value of established and new echocardiographic parameters of diastolic function.
We included 3,604 consecutive patients referred to 1 of 3 echocardiography laboratories over a 2-year period. We obtained measurements of mitral inflow velocities, pulmonary vein filling pattern, mitral annulus motion (e'), and propagation velocity (V(p)). The primary end point was 1-year all-cause mortality.
The mean age of the patients was 68 years, and 95% were male. There were 277 deaths during a mean follow-up of 248 ± 221 days. For patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), all measured parameters except for e' were associated with mortality (P < .05) on univariate analysis. For patients with preserved LVEF, the E-wave velocity was significantly associated with mortality (P < .05) on univariate analysis. The deceleration time/E-wave velocity ratio, V(p), and pulmonary vein filling pattern were borderline significant (P < .10). With multivariate analysis, only V(p) was associated with survival for both reduced (P = .02) and preserved LVEF groups (P = .01).
In a large, clinically diverse population, most measures of diastolic function were predictive of all-cause mortality without adjustment for patient characteristics. On multivariate analysis, only V(p) was independently associated with total mortality. This association with mortality may be related to factors other than diastolic function and warrants further investigation.

10 Reads
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Aim: Assessment of the occurrence, severity and progress of the diastolic dysfunction in patients with clinically manifest heart failure with preserved systolic function, by analyzing the ultrasound parameters that define the diastolic ventricular function, recorded dynamically. Material and Method: The study involved 200 patients suffering from clinically manifest heart failure, admitted in Cardiology Department of Medical no 1, Cluj-Napoca; an echocardiographic study of the systolic and diastolic function was performed, by the same person, for each of them. The echocardiographic study was carried out dynamically, at first within 3 days of the first examination, then, after 9 months. In the present study we selected patients with an ejection fraction> = 50% and diastolic dysfunction. Results: Of the 200 patients initially evaluated, 43 patients were selected based on the inclusion criteria for diastolic dysfunction. The E '/ A' ratios in the lateral regions of the mitral annulus showed a statistically significant improvement when dynamically assessed (0.71 versus 0, 6, p = 0.016). Also, E / E' ratio in the lateral portion of the mitral annulus significantly improved (6.15 vs. 5.44, p = 0.016) and MPI dynamical assessment shows a statistically significant improvement in this parameter (0.52 vs. 0.46 p = 0.014). Conclusions: Diastolic function assessment should be an integral part of the cardiac function assessment due to the increased prevalence of the patients with HF and preserved systolic function. Our study showed that the most reliable parameters used to assess the diastolic dysfunction in patients with preserved systolic function are the following: the E '/ A' ratio at the level of the septum, the E / E' ratio at the level of the lateral wall, as well as the MPI estimate.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Nearly half of all heart failure (HF) patients have diastolic HF (DHF) or clinical HF with normal or near-normal left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Although the terminology has not been clearly defined, it is increasingly being referred to as HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFPEF). The prevalence of HFPEF increases with age, especially among older women. Identifying HFPEF is important because the etiology, pathogenesis, prognosis, and optimal management may differ from that for systolic HF (SHF) or HF with reduced ejection fraction. The clinical presentation of HF is similar for both SHF and HFPEF. As in SHF, HFPEF is a clinical diagnosis. Once a clinical diagnosis of HF has been made, the presence of HFPEF can be established by confirming a normal or near-normal LVEF, often by an echocardiogram. HFPEF is often associated with a history of hypertension, concentric left ventricular hypertrophy, vascular stiffness, and left ventricular diastolic dysfunction. As in SHF, HFPEF is also associated with poor outcomes. While therapies with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and beta-blockers improve outcomes in SHF, there is currently no such evidence of their benefits in older HFPEF patients. In this review recent advances in the diagnosis and management of HFPEF in older adults are discussed.
    Annals of Medicine 03/2012; 45(1). DOI:10.3109/07853890.2012.660493 · 3.89 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Previous studies have found a similarly impaired prognosis in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) as in patients with systolic heart failure (HFrEF). This study examines the prognosis of HFpEF patients with only mild symptoms and compares two different methods of diagnosing HFpEF. Of 670 consecutive patients presenting in our outpatient clinic (57.6 ± 16 years, 50.1 % male), 165 revealed a typical clinical presentation with heart failure NYHA class II-III. The following echocardiographic parameters were assessed: ejection fraction (EF), left atrial size (LA), early and late antegrade mitral flow (E and A), early mitral annular movement (E'). Criteria for HFrEF were typical symptoms (NYHA II-III) and an EF < 50 %, HFpEF was diagnosed in patients with typical presentation, NYHA ≥ 2 and EF ≥ 50 % using 2 different definitions: similarly to the criteria of the I-Preserve study or as recommended by the german association of cardiology (DGK) that imply prove of diastolic dysfunction. Patients were followed-up for up to 2.5 years (mean 1.7±0.7) and the following events were registered: death, hospitalisation (myocardial infarction/coronary intervention/cardiac decompensation), cardiac transplantation (HTX). The majority (93.3 %) of the 165 heart failure patients had mild symptoms NYHA II. Of the 165 patients with typical symptoms, systolic heart failure could be found in 51 (30.9 %) and HFpEF according to I-Preserve criteria in 114 (69.1 %) patients. 56 (33.9 %) patients fulfilled the DGK criteria for HFpEF. Patients with HFpEF were significantly older, more often obese, female and hypertensive. The event rate was higher in patients with systolic heart failure (32 events, 62.7 %) than in patients with HFpEF (I-PRESERVE criteria: 28 events, 24.6 %; DGK criteria: 16 events, 28.6 %; both p < 0,001, log-rank), whereby this difference was mainly caused by increased hospitalisations (43.1 vs. 14.9 and 21,4 %, p < 0.001 and p < 0.016). Significantly more patients with HFrEF reached the combined end point death/HTX (p = 0.019 [I-Preserve] and p = 0.022 [DGK]). Both HFpEF groups showed no significant difference in any of the event types. Patients with HFpEF and mild symptoms have a more benign prognosis than those with systolic heart failure. Whether additional echocardiographic measurements are valuable for the diagnosis of HFpEF has to be proved in larger studies.
    DMW - Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift 04/2012; 137(14):706-10. DOI:10.1055/s-0031-1299011 · 0.54 Impact Factor
Show more


10 Reads
Available from