Institute of Life Sciences, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pisa, Italy.
Cardiology Division, Fondazione Toscana Gabriele Monasterio, Piazza Martiri della Libertà 33, Pisa, 56124, Italy.
ESC Heart Fail. 2021 Aug;8(4):3014-3025. doi: 10.1002/ehf2.13396. Epub 2021 May 18.
Reverse remodelling (RR) is the recovery from left ventricular (LV) dilatation and dysfunction. Many arbitrary criteria for RR have been proposed. We searched the criteria with the strongest prognostic yield for the hard endpoint of cardiovascular death.
We performed a systematic literature search of diagnostic criteria for RR. We evaluated their prognostic significance in a cohort of 927 patients with LV ejection fraction (LVEF) < 50% undergoing two echocardiograms within 12 ± 2 months. These patients were followed for a median of 2.8 years (interquartile interval 1.3-4.9) after the second echocardiogram, recording 123 cardiovascular deaths. Two prognostic models were defined. Model 1 included age, LVEF, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, ischaemic aetiology, cardiac resynchronization therapy, estimated glomerular filtration rate, New York Heart Association, and LV end-systolic volume (LVESV) index, and Model 2 the validated Cardiac and Comorbid Conditions Heart Failure score. We identified 25 criteria for RR, the most used being LVESV reduction ≥15% (12 studies out of 42). In the whole cohort, two criteria proved particularly effective in risk reclassification over Model 1 and Model 2. These criteria were (i) LVEF increase >10 U and (ii) LVEF increase ≥1 category [severe (LVEF ≤ 30%), moderate (LVEF 31-40%), mild LV dysfunction (LVEF 41-55%), and normal LV function (LVEF ≥ 56%)]. The same two criteria yielded independent prognostic significance and improved risk reclassification even in patients with more severe systolic dysfunction, namely, those with LVEF < 40% or LVEF ≤ 35%. Furthermore, LVEF increase >10 U and LVEF increase ≥1 category displayed a greater prognostic value than LVESV reduction ≥15%, both in the whole cohort and in the subgroups with LVEF < 40% or LVEF ≤ 35%. For example, LVEF increase >10 U independently predicted cardiovascular death over Model 1 and LVESV reduction ≥15% (hazard ratio 0.40, 95% confidence interval 0.18-0.90, P = 0.026), while LVESV reduction ≥15% did not independently predict cardiovascular death (P = 0.112).
Left ventricular ejection fraction increase >10 U and LVEF increase ≥1 category are stronger predictors of cardiovascular death than the most commonly used criterion for RR, namely, LVESV reduction ≥15%.
逆重构(RR)是指左心室(LV)扩张和功能障碍的恢复。已经提出了许多用于 RR 的任意标准。我们搜索了具有最强预后效果的标准,以确定心血管死亡这一硬终点。
我们对 RR 的诊断标准进行了系统的文献检索。我们在一个 927 例 LV 射血分数(LVEF)<50%的患者队列中评估了这些标准的预后意义,这些患者在 12±2 个月内进行了两次超声心动图检查。在第二次超声心动图检查后,这些患者中位随访 2.8 年(四分位间距 1.3-4.9),记录了 123 例心血管死亡事件。定义了两个预测模型。模型 1 包括年龄、LVEF、N 末端脑利钠肽前体、缺血病因、心脏再同步治疗、估计肾小球滤过率、纽约心脏协会和 LV 收缩末期容积(LVESV)指数,模型 2 则包括经过验证的心脏合并症心力衰竭评分。我们确定了 25 项 RR 标准,最常用的是 LVESV 减少≥15%(42 项研究中有 12 项)。在整个队列中,有两项标准在风险重新分类方面比模型 1 和模型 2 更有效。这两项标准是(i)LVEF 增加>10 U 和(ii)LVEF 增加≥1 个类别[严重(LVEF≤30%)、中度(LVEF 31-40%)、轻度 LV 功能障碍(LVEF 41-55%)和正常 LV 功能(LVEF≥56%)]。即使在收缩功能障碍更严重的患者中,即 LVEF<40%或 LVEF≤35%的患者中,这两项标准仍然具有独立的预后意义,并改善了风险重新分类。此外,LVEF 增加>10 U 和 LVEF 增加≥1 个类别比 LVESV 减少≥15%具有更大的预后价值,无论是在整个队列中还是在 LVEF<40%或 LVEF≤35%的亚组中。例如,LVEF 增加>10 U 可独立预测心血管死亡,优于模型 1 和 LVESV 减少≥15%(风险比 0.40,95%置信区间 0.18-0.90,P=0.026),而 LVESV 减少≥15%不能独立预测心血管死亡(P=0.112)。
LVEF 增加>10 U 和 LVEF 增加≥1 个类别是预测心血管死亡的更强指标,优于最常用的 RR 标准,即 LVESV 减少≥15%。