Li Guangling, Zhang Jing, Xu Zheng, Ning Yaogui, Zhang Li, Yang Jing, Chen Gang, Li Fan, Jiang Jiangang
Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Hubei Key Laboratory of Genetics and Molecular Mechanisms of Cardiological Disorders, Wuhan 430030, China.
Division of Cardiology, Fuwai Central China Cardiovascular Hospital, Zhengzhou 451460, China.
Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc. 2025 Jun 30;59:101738. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcha.2025.101738. eCollection 2025 Aug.
There is a gap regarding comparisons of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) changes between fulminant myocarditis (FM) and non-FM (NFM) patients at different follow-up intervals.
This multicenter retrospective study included 324 patients (163 FM and 161 NFM) with confirmed acute myocarditis through endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) or cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. We used multi-model adjustment approach and a mixed-effects model to comprehensively evaluate changes in LVEF in FM relative to NFM, considering both dichotomous outcome (primary outcome) and repeated measurements outcome (secondary outcome). Sensitivity analysis was conducted for patients aged 15 years and older.
FM patients exhibited a higher risk of the primary outcome (LVEF < 55 % at the last two follow-up visits) compared to NFM patients, with an odds ratio (OR) of 8.517 (95 % CI, 4.666-16.552; P < 0.001). Following comprehensive adjustment for confounders, the OR for FM versus NFM was 7.438 (95 % CI, 3.967-14.763; P < 0.001). Analysis of repeated measurements (secondary outcome) revealed that LVEF in the NFM group surpassed that in the FM group at different follow-up time points. Consistent findings were observed in the sensitivity analysis population. Additionally, after adjusting for potential confounders, intra-aortic ballon pump (IABP) and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) demonstrated OR values of 0.030 (95 % CI: 0.002-0.197; P = 0.001) and 0.339 (95 % CI: 0.124-0.880; P = 0.030) in patients with FM, respectively.
FM patients face a lower LVEF compared to NFM patients across various follow-up intervals. Additionally, early application of IABP and ECMO can enhance long-term LVEF in patients with FM.
在不同随访间隔下,暴发性心肌炎(FM)和非暴发性心肌炎(NFM)患者左心室射血分数(LVEF)变化的比较存在差距。
这项多中心回顾性研究纳入了324例经心内膜心肌活检(EMB)或心脏磁共振成像确诊为急性心肌炎的患者(163例FM和161例NFM)。我们采用多模型调整方法和混合效应模型,综合评估FM患者相对于NFM患者LVEF的变化,同时考虑二分结局(主要结局)和重复测量结局(次要结局)。对15岁及以上患者进行了敏感性分析。
与NFM患者相比,FM患者出现主要结局(在最后两次随访时LVEF<55%)的风险更高,优势比(OR)为8.517(95%CI,4.666 - 16.552;P<0.001)。在对混杂因素进行全面调整后,FM与NFM的OR为7.438(95%CI,3.967 - 14.763;P<0.001)。重复测量分析(次要结局)显示,在不同随访时间点,NFM组的LVEF超过FM组。在敏感性分析人群中观察到了一致的结果。此外,在调整潜在混杂因素后,对于FM患者,主动脉内球囊泵(IABP)和体外膜肺氧合(ECMO)的OR值分别为0.030(95%CI:0.002 - 0.197;P = 0.001)和0.339(95%CI:0.124 - 0.880;P = 0.030)。
在各个随访间隔中,FM患者的LVEF低于NFM患者。此外,早期应用IABP和ECMO可提高FM患者的长期LVEF。