Tsao Connie W, Lyass Asya, Larson Martin G, Cheng Susan, Lam Carolyn S P, Aragam Jayashri R, Benjamin Emelia J, Vasan Ramachandran S
Department of Medicine, Cardiovascular Division, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Boston University's and National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's Framingham Heart Study, Framingham, Massachusetts.
Boston University's and National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's Framingham Heart Study, Framingham, Massachusetts; Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts.
JACC Heart Fail. 2016 Jun;4(6):502-10. doi: 10.1016/j.jchf.2016.03.003.
This study sought to examine the association of a borderline left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 50% to 55% with cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in a community-based cohort.
Guidelines stipulate a LVEF >55% as normal, but the optimal threshold, if any, remains uncertain. The prognosis of a "borderline" LVEF, 50% to 55%, is unknown.
This study evaluated Framingham Heart Study participants who underwent echocardiography between 1979 and 2008 (n = 10,270 person-observations, mean age 60 years, 57% women). Using pooled data with up to 12 years of follow-up and multivariable Cox regression, we evaluated the associations of borderline LVEF and continuous LVEF with the risk of developing a composite outcome (heart failure [HF] or death; primary outcome) and incident HF (secondary outcome).
During follow-up (median 7.9 years), HF developed in 355 participants, and 1,070 died. Among participants with an LVEF of 50% to 55% (prevalence 3.5%), rates of the composite outcome and HF were 0.24 and 0.13 per 10 years of follow-up, respectively, versus 0.16 and 0.05 in participants having a normal LVEF. In multivariable-adjusted analyses, LVEF of 50% to 55% was associated with increased risk of the composite outcome (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.37; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05 to 1.80) and HF (HR: 2.15; 95% CI: 1.41 to 3.28). There was a linear inverse relationship of continuous LVEF with the composite outcome (HR per 5 LVEF% decrement: 1.12; 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.16) and HF (HR per 5 LVEF% decrement: 1.23; 95% CI: 1.15 to 1.32).
Persons with an LVEF of 50% to 55% in the community have greater risk for morbidity and mortality relative to persons with an LVEF >55%. Additional studies are warranted to elucidate the optimal management of these individuals.
本研究旨在探讨社区队列中左心室射血分数(LVEF)处于临界值50%至55%与心血管疾病发病率和死亡率之间的关联。
指南规定LVEF>55%为正常,但最佳阈值(若存在)仍不确定。LVEF处于“临界”值50%至55%的患者的预后尚不清楚。
本研究评估了1979年至2008年间接受超声心动图检查的弗雷明汉心脏研究参与者(n = 10270人-观察对象,平均年龄60岁,57%为女性)。使用长达12年随访的汇总数据和多变量Cox回归分析,我们评估了临界LVEF和连续性LVEF与复合结局(心力衰竭[HF]或死亡;主要结局)以及新发HF(次要结局)发生风险之间的关联。
在随访期间(中位时间7.9年),355名参与者发生了HF,1,070人死亡。在LVEF为50%至55%的参与者中(患病率3.5%),复合结局和HF的发生率分别为每10年随访0.24和0.13,而LVEF正常的参与者中这两个发生率分别为0.16和0.05。在多变量校正分析中,LVEF为50%至55%与复合结局风险增加相关(风险比[HR]:1.37;95%置信区间[CI]:1.05至1.80)以及与HF风险增加相关(HR:2.15;95%CI:1.41至3.28)。连续性LVEF与复合结局(每降低5%LVEF的HR:1.12;95%CI:1.07至1.16)以及HF(每降低5%LVEF的HR:1.23;95%CI:1.15至1.32)呈线性负相关。
社区中LVEF为50%至55%的人群相对于LVEF>55%的人群具有更高的发病和死亡风险。有必要进行更多研究以阐明对这些个体的最佳管理方法。