Atrial fibrillation and risk of progressive heart failure in patients with preserved ejection fraction heart failure.

AIMS: Understanding of the pathophysiology of progressive heart failure (HF) in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is incomplete. We sought to identify factors differentially associated with risk of progressive HF death and hospitalization in patients with HFpEF compared with patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). METHODS AND RESULTS: Prospective cohort study of patients newly referred to secondary care with suspicion of HF, based on symptoms and signs of HF and elevated natriuretic peptides (NP), followed up for a minimum of 6 years. HFpEF and HFrEF were diagnosed according to the 2016 European Society of Cardiology guidelines. Of 960 patients referred, 467 had HFpEF (49%), 311 had HFrEF (32%), and 182 (19%) had neither. Atrial fibrillation (AF) was found in 37% of patients with HFpEF and 34% with HFrEF. During 6 years follow-up, 19% of HFrEF and 14% of HFpEF patients were hospitalized or died due to progressive HF, hazard ratio (HR) 0.67 (95% CI: 0.47-0.96; P = 0.028). AF was the only marker that was differentially associated with progressive HF death or hospitalization in patients with HFpEF HR 2.58 (95% CI: 1.59-4.21; P < 0.001) versus HFrEF HR 1.11 (95% CI: 0.65-1.89; P = 0.7). CONCLUSIONS: De novo patients diagnosed with HFrEF have greater risk of death or hospitalization due to progressive HF than patients with HFpEF. AF is associated with increased risk of progressive HF death or hospitalization in HFpEF but not HFrEF, raising the intriguing possibility that this may be a novel therapeutic target in this growing population.

Patients with long-term permanent pacemakers have a high prevalence of left ventricular dysfunction.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with right ventricular pacemakers are at increased risk of left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD). We aimed to establish the prevalence, degree and associations of LVSD in patients with long-term right ventricular pacemakers listed for pulse generator replacement (PGR). METHODS: All patients listed for PGR at Leeds General Infirmary were invited to attend for an assessment during which we recorded medical history, symptomatic status, medical therapy, date and indication of first implantation, the percentage of right ventricular pacing (% RVP) and an echocardiogram. RESULTS: We collected data on 491 patients. A left ventricular ejection fraction less than 50% was observed in 40% of our cohort, however, this was much higher (59%) in those with more than 80% RVP than in those with less than 80% RVP (22%) (P < 0.0001). Multivariable analysis revealed % RVP, (but not complete heart block at baseline), serum creatinine and previous myocardial infarction to be independently related to the presence of LVSD. A model combining % RVP and previous myocardial infarction has a c-statistic of 0.74 for predicting LVSD. After a mean follow-up time of 668 days, 56 patients (12%) were dead or had been hospitalized for heart failure. In multivariable analysis, previous myocardial infarction and high % RVP were independently associated with a worse survival. CONCLUSION: Patients with right ventricular pacemakers have a high prevalence of LVSD, and this is greater in those exposed to more RVP. Those with LVSD and high amounts of RVP are at higher risk of hospitalization or death. Simple variables can identify those patients who might benefit from a more comprehensive review.