National Heart Centre Singapore, Singapore.
Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore.
Eur J Heart Fail. 2017 Dec;19(12):1624-1634. doi: 10.1002/ejhf.945. Epub 2017 Sep 25.
AIMS: Clinical features and outcomes in the novel phenotype heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction [HFmrEF, ejection fraction (EF) 40-49%] were compared with heart failure with reduced EF (HFrEF, EF <40%) and preserved EF (HFpEF, EF ≥50%). METHODS AND RESULTS: In the Swedish Heart Failure Registry, we assessed the association between baseline characteristics and EF group using multivariable logistic regressions, and the association between EF group and all-cause mortality using multivariable Cox regressions. Of 42 061 patients, 56% had HFrEF, 21% had HFmrEF, and 23% had HFpEF. Characteristics were continuous for age (72 ± 12 vs. 74 ± 12 vs. 77 ± 11 years), proportion of women (29% vs. 39% vs. 55%), and 13 other characteristics. Coronary artery disease (CAD) was distinctly more common in HFrEF (54%) and HFmrEF (53%) vs. HFpEF (42%); adjusted odds ratio for CAD in HFmrEF vs. HFpEF was 1.52 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.41-1.63]. For six additional characteristics HFmrEF resembled HFrEF, for seven characteristics HFmrEF resembled HFpEF, and for 10 characteristics there was no pattern. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for mortality in HFrEF vs. HFpEF was 1.35 (95% CI 1.14-1.60) at 30 days, 1.26 (95% CI 1.17-1.35) at 1 year, and 1.20 (95% CI 1.14-1.26) at 3 years. In contrast, HFmrEF and HFpEF had a similar prognosis (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.86-1.30 at 30 days; HR 1.08, 95% CI 1.00-1.18 at 1 year; and HR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00-1.12 at 3 years). Three-year mortality was higher in HFmrEF than in HFpEF in the presence of CAD (HR 1.11, 95% CI 1.02-1.21), but not in the absence of CAD (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.94-1.12; P for interaction <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: HFmrEF was an intermediate phenotype, except that CAD was more common in HFmrEF and HFrEF vs. HFpEF, crude all-cause mortality was lower in HFmrEF and HFrEF, adjusted all-cause mortality was lower in HFmrEF and HFpEF, and CAD portended a higher adjusted risk of death in HFmrEF and HFrEF.
目的:比较新型中间射血分数心力衰竭(HFmrEF,射血分数[EF]为 40%-49%)与射血分数降低性心力衰竭(HFrEF,EF<40%)和射血分数保留性心力衰竭(HFpEF,EF≥50%)的临床特征和结局。
方法和结果:在瑞典心力衰竭注册研究中,我们使用多变量逻辑回归评估基线特征与 EF 组之间的相关性,并使用多变量 Cox 回归评估 EF 组与全因死亡率之间的相关性。在 42061 例患者中,56%为 HFrEF,21%为 HFmrEF,23%为 HFpEF。年龄(72±12 岁比 74±12 岁比 77±11 岁)、女性比例(29%比 39%比 55%)和 13 个其他特征呈连续分布。冠心病(CAD)在 HFrEF(54%)和 HFmrEF(53%)中明显比 HFpEF(42%)更常见;HFmrEF 与 HFpEF 相比,CAD 的调整比值比为 1.52(95%置信区间[CI]为 1.41-1.63)。HFmrEF 与 HFrEF 相似的特征有 6 个,与 HFpEF 相似的特征有 7 个,而与其他特征无相似性的有 10 个。HFrEF 与 HFpEF 相比,30 天的死亡调整风险比(HR)为 1.35(95%CI 1.14-1.60),1 年时为 1.26(95%CI 1.17-1.35),3 年时为 1.20(95%CI 1.14-1.26)。相比之下,HFmrEF 和 HFpEF 的预后相似(30 天时的 HR 为 1.06[95%CI 0.86-1.30];1 年时的 HR 为 1.08[95%CI 1.00-1.18];3 年时的 HR 为 1.06[95%CI 1.00-1.12])。CAD 存在时,HFmrEF 3 年死亡率高于 HFpEF(HR 1.11,95%CI 1.02-1.21),但 CAD 不存在时,HFmrEF 3 年死亡率与 HFpEF 无差异(HR 1.02,95%CI 0.94-1.12;P 值<0.001)。
结论:HFmrEF 是一种中间表型,除 CAD 在 HFmrEF 和 HFrEF 中比 HFpEF 更常见外,HFmrEF 和 HFrEF 的全因死亡率较高,HFmrEF 和 HFpEF 的全因死亡率较低,CAD 预示着 HFmrEF 和 HFrEF 的死亡风险调整后更高。
Eur J Heart Fail. 2017-9-25
JACC Heart Fail. 2019-3-6
JACC Heart Fail. 2017-7-12
Diagnostics (Basel). 2025-8-20