Clinical characteristics, treatment and prognosis of patients with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy: a tertiary center experience.

BACKGROUND

Contemporary heart failure medications have led to considerable improvement in the survival of patients with heart failure. However, limited evidence is available regarding the effect of those medications in patients with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy (IDCM), particularly in China. We sought to analyze the trends in clinical characteristics and the prescription rate of recommended therapies and its prognostic impact in patients with IDCM.

METHODS

From 2009 to 2016, 1441 consecutive patients (age: 55±14 years, 68% men, LVEF: 33% ± 12%) fulfilling World Health Organization criteria for IDCM were enrolled in the current retrospective cohort study. Temporal trends of baseline clinical characteristics, treatment and prognosis were analyzed, and potential influential factors were explored.

RESULTS

Rates of patients receiving angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin II receptors blockers, β-blockers, aldosterone receptor antagonists and diuretics increased from 55%, 45%, 58%, 51% in 2009 to 67%, 69%, 71%, 64% in 2016, respectively ( < 0.05); whereas, the proportion of patients receiving digoxin decreased from 39% in 2009 to 28% in 2016 ( < 0.05). The overall proportion of patients with optimal guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) was 44.6%; however, that rate increased from 33% in 2009 to 41%, 49% and 56% in 2012, 2014 and 2016 respectively ( < 0.05). Patients with optimal GDMT had a better outcome than those without, but there was no temporal trend toward improvement in the overall long-term prognosis of IDCM patients with the years. There was a trend towards admission of patients with milder disease and toward increased admission to a cardiology ward with the years.

CONCLUSIONS

An improvement in prescription rates of guideline-recommended medications in IDCM patients was observed. However, it remains suboptimal, and there is still some room for improvement. The prognosis of patients with optimal GDMT was better than those without. Moreover, the following patient category also had an improved prognosis: patients with LVEF ≥ 40%, with device therapy, and those admitted to a cardiology ward.