Dataset Information

Left atrium decompression devices across the spectrum of ejection fraction in heart failure: an updated systematic review and meta-regression analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In patients affected by heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), pharmacological treatments have been proven to alleviate symptoms and improve prognosis, while no treatment other than sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors have demonstrated significant effects in HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Left atrium decompression devices (LADd) have been recently investigated as a new interventional approach in patients with HFpEF.

Objectives

To assess the efficacy of LADd on soft endpoints in HF patients across the spectrum of ejection fraction.

Methods

PubMed and Web of Science were searched without restrictions from inception to 28 May 2022 to identify valuable articles. The studies that met the inclusion criteria were analyzed. The prespecified main outcomes were the change from baseline in 6-min walking distance (6MWD), NYHA class and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Secondary outcomes were reduction in HF hospitalizations, echocardiographic, and hemodynamic parameters.

Results

Eleven studies, with a total of 547 patients, were included. LADd significantly improved 6MWD by 43.95 m (95% CI 29.64-58.26 m), decreased NYHA class by 0.93 (95% CI 1.20-0.67), and improved HRQoL questionnaire by 20.45 points (95% CI 13.77-27.14) with better results for all outcomes in patients with lower EFs.

Conclusion

The present meta-analysis suggests that LADd are favorable in improving 6MWD, NYHA class, and HRQoL in HF across a wide spectrum of ejection fraction, with better outcomes in patients with lower EFs.

Trial registration

CRD42022336077, URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=336077 .

SUBMITTER: Basile C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10403397 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Left atrium decompression devices across the spectrum of ejection fraction in heart failure: an updated systematic review and meta-regression analysis.

Basile Christian C Paolillo Stefania S Gargiulo Paola P Marzano Federica F Dellegrottaglie Santo S Abbate Vincenza V Ambrosio Antonio A Carbone Francesca F Dell'Aversana Simona S Esposito Immacolata I Fierro Maria Francesca MF Perrone-Filardi Pasquale P

Heart failure reviews 20230510 5

<h4>Background</h4>In patients affected by heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), pharmacological treatments have been proven to alleviate symptoms and improve prognosis, while no treatment other than sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors have demonstrated significant effects in HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Left atrium decompression devices (LADd) have been recently investigated as a new interventional approach in patients with HFpEF.<h4>Objectives</h4>To ...[more]

PMID: 37162633

Similar Datasets

Project description:Aims: Evidence-based guidelines for heart failure management depend mainly on current left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). However, fewer studies have examined the impact of prior LVEF. Patients may enter the heart failure with midrange ejection fraction (HFmrEF) category when heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) deteriorates or heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) improves. In this study, we examined the association between change in LVEF and adverse outcomes. Methods: HFmrEF patients with at least two or more echocardiograms 3 months apart at the First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University between September 1, 2015 and November 30, 2019 were identified. According to the prior LVEF, the subjects were divided into improved group (prior LVEF < 40%), stable group (prior LVEF between 40 and 50%), and deteriorated group (prior LVEF ≥ 50%). The primary outcomes were cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, hospitalization for worsening heart failure, and composite event of all-cause mortality or all-cause hospitalization. Results: A total of 1,168 HFmrEF patients (67.04% male, mean age 63.60 ± 12.18 years) were included. The percentages of improved, stable, and deteriorated group were 310 (26.54%), 334 (28.60%), and 524 (44.86%), respectively. After a period of follow-up, 208 patients (17.81%) died and 500 patients met the composite endpoint. The rates of all-cause mortality were 35 (11.29%), 55 (16.47%), and 118 (22.52%), and the composite outcome was 102 (32.90%), 145 (43.41%), and 253 (48.28%) for the improved, stable, and deteriorated groups, respectively. Cox regression analysis showed that the deterioration group had higher risk of cardiovascular death (HR: 1.707, 95% CI: 1.064-2.739, P = 0.027), all-cause death (HR 1.948, 95% CI 1.335-2.840, P = 0.001), and composite outcome (HR 1.379, 95% CI 1.096-1.736, P = 0.006) compared to the improvement group. The association still remained significant after fully adjusted for both all-cause mortality (HR = 1.899, 95% CI 1.247-2.893, P = 0.003) and composite outcome (HR: 1.324, 95% CI: 1.020-1.718, P = 0.035). Conclusion: HFmrEF patients are heterogeneous with three different subsets identified, each with different outcomes. Strategies for managing HFmrEF should include previously measured LVEF to allow stratification based on direction changes in LVEF to better optimize treatment.

Project description:AimsNo therapy has shown to reduce the risk of hospitalization for heart failure across the entire range of ejection fractions seen in clinical practice. We assessed the influence of ejection fraction on the effect of the sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor empagliflozin on heart failure outcomes.Methods and resultsA pooled analysis was performed on both the EMPEROR-Reduced and EMPEROR-Preserved trials (9718 patients; 4860 empagliflozin and 4858 placebo), and patients were grouped based on ejection fraction: <25% (n = 999), 25-34% (n = 2230), 35-44% (n = 1272), 45-54% (n = 2260), 55-64% (n = 2092), and ≥65% (n = 865). Outcomes assessed included (i) time to first hospitalization for heart failure or cardiovascular mortality, (ii) time to first heart failure hospitalization, (iii) total (first and recurrent) hospitalizations for heart failure, and (iv) health status assessed by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ). The risk of cardiovascular death and hospitalization for heart failure declined progressively as ejection fraction increased from <25% to ≥65%. Empagliflozin reduced the risk of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization, mainly by reducing heart failure hospitalizations. Empagliflozin reduced the risk of heart failure hospitalization by ≈30% in all ejection fraction subgroups, with an attenuated effect in patients with an ejection fraction ≥65%. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals were: ejection fraction <25%: 0.73 (0.55-0.96); ejection fraction 25-34%: 0.63 (0.50-0.78); ejection fraction 35-44%: 0.72 (0.52-0.98); ejection fraction 45-54%: 0.66 (0.50-0.86); ejection fraction 55-64%: 0.70 (0.53-0.92); and ejection fraction ≥65%: 1.05 (0.70-1.58). Other heart failure outcomes and measures, including KCCQ, showed a similar response pattern. Sex did not influence the responses to empagliflozin.ConclusionThe magnitude of the effect of empagliflozin on heart failure outcomes was clinically meaningful and similar in patients with ejection fractions <25% to <65%, but was attenuated in patients with an ejection fraction ≥65%.Key questionHow does ejection fraction influence the effects of empagliflozin in patients with heart failure and either a reduced or a preserved ejection fraction?Key findingThe magnitude of the effect of empagliflozin on heart failure outcomes and health status was similar in patients with ejection fractions <25% to <65%, but it was attenuated in patients with an ejection fraction ≥65%.Take home messageThe consistency of the response in patients with ejection fractions of <25% to <65% distinguishes the effects of empagliflozin from other drugs that have been evaluated across the full spectrum of ejection fractions in patients with heart failure.

Project description:Heart Failure (HF) significantly impacts approximately 26 million people worldwide, causing disruptions in the normal functioning of their hearts. The estimation of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) plays a crucial role in the diagnosis, risk stratification, treatment selection, and monitoring of heart failure. However, achieving a definitive assessment is challenging, necessitating the use of echocardiography. Electrocardiogram (ECG) is a relatively simple, quick to obtain, provides continuous monitoring of patient's cardiac rhythm, and cost-effective procedure compared to echocardiography. In this study, we compare several regression models (support vector machine (SVM), extreme gradient boosting (XGBOOST), gaussian process regression (GPR) and decision tree) for the estimation of LVEF for three groups of HF patients at hourly intervals using 24-hour ECG recordings. Data from 303 HF patients with preserved, mid-range, or reduced LVEF were obtained from a multicentre cohort (American and Greek). ECG extracted features were used to train the different regression models in one-hour intervals. To enhance the best possible LVEF level estimations, hyperparameters tuning in nested loop approach was implemented (the outer loop divides the data into training and testing sets, while the inner loop further divides the training set into smaller sets for cross-validation). LVEF levels were best estimated using rational quadratic GPR and fine decision tree regression models with an average root mean square error (RMSE) of 3.83% and 3.42%, and correlation coefficients of 0.92 (p<0.01) and 0.91 (p<0.01), respectively. Furthermore, according to the experimental findings, the time periods of midnight-1 am, 8-9 am, and 10-11 pm demonstrated to be the lowest RMSE values between the actual and predicted LVEF levels. The findings could potentially lead to the development of an automated screening system for patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) by using the best measurement timings during their circadian cycles.

Project description:ImportancePatients categorized as having heart failure (HF) with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in the midrange between 40% and 50% (HFmrEF) are known to be at increased risk of future events. Although patients can transition into the midrange through either improvement or deterioration in their LVEF, there is limited information available assessing the association of directional change in LVEF with future events. Understanding the association between change in LVEF and the clinical course of patients with HFmrEF would be of value in guiding management strategies.ObjectiveTo determine whether risk of clinical events experienced by patients with HFmrEF varies according to whether LVEF improved or deteriorated into the range of 40% to 50% from previous measurements.Design, setting, and participantsIn this retrospective cohort study, patients were identified from the electronic health records at the UC San Diego Health System who had an LVEF measured between 40% and 50% on transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) performed during the calendar year of 2015 and who also had at least 1 prior TTE for comparison. The clinical course of these patients was then followed from the time of the index TTE through December 2018. Data were analyzed from January to March 2019.Main outcomes and measuresThe composite of all-cause mortality and all-cause hospitalization, the composite of cardiovascular mortality and HF hospitalization, and each of the individual components.ResultsOf the 448 patients who were identified with HFmrEF, 278 (62.1%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 67.4 (9.7) years. Left ventricular ejection fraction improved from less than 40% in 157 patients (35.0%), deteriorated from greater than 50% in 224 patients (50.0%), and remained between 40% and 50% over time in 67 patients (15.0%). Compared with patients whose LVEF improved from less than 40% to midrange levels, patients whose LVEF deteriorated from greater than 50% had higher risk of all-cause mortality and hospitalization (hazard ratio, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.10-1.82; P = .03) and of cardiovascular mortality and HF hospitalization (hazard ratio, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.08-2.50; P = .02), and these differences persisted after multivariable analysis. Outcomes did not differ significantly between patients whose LVEF improved and those in whom it remained stable.Conclusion and relevanceIn a cohort of patients with HFmrEF from a large academic medical center, the clinical course was strongly influenced by the directional change in LVEF from prior study. Patients whose LVEF deteriorated into midrange levels experienced a significantly higher risk of adverse clinical events than patients whose LVEF had improved. These results suggest that directional change in LVEF from prior measurements should be considered when devising management strategies for patients with HFmrEF.

Dataset Information

Left atrium decompression devices across the spectrum of ejection fraction in heart failure: an updated systematic review and meta-regression analysis.

Background

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Trial registration

Publications

Left atrium decompression devices across the spectrum of ejection fraction in heart failure: an updated systematic review and meta-regression analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets