Department of Cardiology, Campus Kerckhoff of the Justus-Liebig-University Giessen, Kerckhoff-Clinic, Bad Nauheim, Germany; German Center for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK), Partner Site Rhine-Main, Bad Nauheim, Germany.
University Medical Center Göttingen, Department of Cardiology and Pneumology, Georg-August University, Göttingen, Germany; German Center for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK), Partner Site Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Int J Cardiol. 2024 Jun 1;404:131949. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2024.131949. Epub 2024 Mar 11.
With emerging therapies, early diagnosis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) comes to the fore. Whilst the reference standard of exercise-stress right heart catheterisation is well established, the clinical routine struggles between feasibility of exercise-stress and diagnostic accuracy of available tests.
The HFpEF Stress Trial (DZHK-17) prospectively enrolled 75 patients with exertional dyspnoea and echocardiographic signs of diastolic dysfunction (E/e' > 8) who underwent simultaneous rest and exercise-stress echocardiography and right heart catheterisation (RHC). HFpEF was defined according to pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (HFpEF: PCWP rest: ≥15 mmHg stress: ≥25 mmHg). Patients were classified as non-cardiac dyspnoea (NCD) in the absence of HFpEF and cardiovascular disease. LA compliance was defined as reservoir strain (Es)/(E/e'). Follow-up was conducted after 4 years to evaluate cardiovascular hospitalisation (CVH).
The final study population included 68 patients (HFpEF n = 34 and NCD n = 34) of which 23 reached the clinical endpoint, 1 patient was lost to follow-up. Patients with HFpEF according to the HFA-PEFF score (≥5 points) had significantly lower LA compliance at rest (p < 0.001) compared to patients with a score ≤ 4. LA compliance at rest outperformed E/e' (AUC 0.78 vs 0.87, p = 0.024) and showed a statistical trend to outperform Es (AUC 0.79 vs 0.87, p = 0.090) for the diagnosis of HFpEF. LA compliance at rest predicted CVH (HR 2.83, 95% CI 1.70-4.74, p < 0.001) irrespective of concomitant atrial fibrillation.
LA compliance at rest can be obtained from clinical routine imaging and bears strong diagnostic and prognostic accuracy. Addition of LA compliance can improve the role of echocardiography as the primary test and gatekeeper.
随着新兴疗法的出现,早期诊断射血分数保留型心力衰竭(HFpEF)变得尤为重要。虽然运动应激右心导管检查作为参考标准已经得到很好的确立,但在运动应激的可行性和现有检查的诊断准确性之间,临床常规仍存在着困难。
HFpEF 应激试验(DZHK-17)前瞻性纳入了 75 例因劳力性呼吸困难和超声心动图表现为舒张功能障碍(E/e'>8)而就诊的患者,这些患者同时接受了静息和运动应激超声心动图以及右心导管检查(RHC)。HFpEF 根据肺毛细血管楔压(HFpEF:静息时 PCWP≥15mmHg,应激时 PCWP≥25mmHg)来定义。如果没有 HFpEF 和心血管疾病,则将患者归类为非心源性呼吸困难(NCD)。左心房顺应性定义为储备应变(Es)/(E/e')。在 4 年后进行随访,以评估心血管住院治疗(CVH)。
最终的研究人群包括 68 例患者(HFpEF 组 n=34,NCD 组 n=34),其中 23 例达到了临床终点,1 例失访。根据 HFA-PEFF 评分(≥5 分),HFpEF 患者的左心房顺应性在静息时显著降低(p<0.001),而评分≤4 分的患者则没有这种差异。左心房顺应性在静息时的诊断性能优于 E/e'(AUC 为 0.78 对 0.87,p=0.024),且有统计学趋势优于 Es(AUC 为 0.79 对 0.87,p=0.090)。左心房顺应性在静息时预测 CVH(HR 为 2.83,95%CI 为 1.70-4.74,p<0.001),与是否合并心房颤动无关。
静息时的左心房顺应性可从临床常规影像学中获得,具有很强的诊断和预后准确性。增加左心房顺应性可以提高超声心动图作为主要检查和门控检查的作用。