Department of Cardiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands; National Heart Centre Singapore, Duke-National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Department of Cardiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
JACC Heart Fail. 2017 Feb;5(2):92-98. doi: 10.1016/j.jchf.2016.10.005. Epub 2016 Dec 21.
This study sought to study the association of atrial fibrillation (AF) with exercise capacity, left ventricular filling pressure, natriuretic peptides, and left atrial size in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).
The diagnosis of HFpEF in patients with AF remains a challenge because both contribute to impaired exercise capacity, and increased natriuretic peptides and left atrial volume.
We studied 94 patients with symptomatic heart failure and left ventricular ejection fractions ≥45% using treadmill cardiopulmonary exercise testing and right- and/or left-sided cardiac catheterization with simultaneous echocardiography.
During catheterization, 62 patients were in sinus rhythm, and 32 patients had AF. There were no significant differences in age, sex, body size, comorbidities, or medications between groups; however, patients with AF had lower peak oxygen consumption (VO) compared with those with sinus rhythm (10.8 ± 3.1 ml/min/kg vs. 13.5 ± 3.8 ml/min/kg; p = 0.002). Median (25th to 75th percentile) N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) was higher in AF versus sinus rhythm (1,689; 851 to 2,637 pg/ml vs. 490; 272 to 1,019 pg/ml; p < 0.0001). Left atrial volume index (LAVI) was higher in AF than sinus rhythm (57.8 ± 17.0 ml/m vs. 42.5 ± 15.1 ml/m; p = 0.001). Invasive hemodynamics showed higher mean pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) (19.9 ± 3.7 vs. 15.2 ± 6.8) in AF versus sinus rhythm (all p < 0.001), with a trend toward higher left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (17.7 ± 3.0 mm Hg vs. 15.7 ± 6.9 mm Hg; p = 0.06). After adjusting for clinical covariates and mean PCWP, AF remained associated with reduced peak VO increased log NT-proBNP, and enlarged LAVI (all p ≤0.005).
AF is independently associated with greater exertional intolerance, natriuretic peptide elevation, and left atrial remodeling in HFpEF. These data support the application of different thresholds of NT-proBNP and LAVI for the diagnosis of HFpEF in the presence of AF versus the absence of AF.
本研究旨在探讨心房颤动(AF)与射血分数保留的心力衰竭(HFpEF)患者运动能力、左心室充盈压、利钠肽和左心房大小的关系。
AF 患者 HFpEF 的诊断仍然具有挑战性,因为两者都导致运动能力受损,并增加利钠肽和左心房容积。
我们使用跑步机心肺运动试验和右心及/或左心导管检查,同时进行超声心动图检查,研究了 94 例有症状的左心室射血分数≥45%的心力衰竭患者。
在导管检查过程中,62 例患者处于窦性心律,32 例患者患有 AF。两组间年龄、性别、体型、合并症或药物治疗无显著差异;然而,与窦性心律患者相比,AF 患者的峰值摄氧量(VO)较低(10.8±3.1ml/min/kg 比 13.5±3.8ml/min/kg;p=0.002)。中位(25 至 75 百分位数)N 末端脑利钠肽前体(NT-proBNP)在 AF 中高于窦性心律(1689;851 至 2637pg/ml 比 490;272 至 1019pg/ml;p<0.0001)。AF 患者的左心房容积指数(LAVI)高于窦性心律(57.8±17.0ml/m 比 42.5±15.1ml/m;p=0.001)。在侵入性血流动力学方面,AF 患者的平均肺动脉楔压(PCWP)高于窦性心律(19.9±3.7 比 15.2±6.8)(均 p<0.001),左心室舒张末期压(17.7±3.0mmHg 比 15.7±6.9mmHg)也有升高趋势(p=0.06)。在调整了临床协变量和平均 PCWP 后,AF 仍然与峰值 VO 降低、log NT-proBNP 升高和左心房扩大相关(均 p≤0.005)。
AF 与 HFpEF 患者的运动耐量降低、利钠肽升高和左心房重构独立相关。这些数据支持在存在 AF 与不存在 AF 时,应用不同的 NT-proBNP 和 LAVI 阈值来诊断 HFpEF。