CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

充血性心力衰竭

Abstract

Recommended Article

Heart Failure With Improved Ejection Fraction-Is it Possible to Escape One’s Past? Association Between Functional Impairment and Medication Burden in Adults with Heart Failure Baseline Features of the VICTORIA (Vericiguat Global Study in Subjects With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction) Trial Association of Abnormal Left Ventricular Functional Reserve With Outcome in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction A trial to evaluate the effect of the sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor dapagliflozin on morbidity and mortality in patients with heart failure and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (DAPA-HF) The Role of the Pericardium in Heart Failure: Implications for Pathophysiology and Treatment Universal Definition and Classification of Heart Failure: A Report of the Heart Failure Society of America, Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology, Japanese Heart Failure Society and Writing Committee of the Universal Definition of Heart Failure Permanent pacemaker use among patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction: Findings from the Acute Decompensated Heart Failure National Registry (ADHERE) National Registry

Review Article19 December 2020

JOURNAL:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/e Article Link

Is Acute heart failure a distinctive disorder? An analysis from BIOSTAT-CHF

BA Davison, S Senger, IE Sama et al. Keywords: acute heart failure; HF outpatients; diagnosis; treatment;

ABSTRACT

AIMS -This retrospective analysis sought to identify markers that might distinguish between acute heart failure (HF) and worsening HF in chronic outpatients.


METHODS AND RESULTS -The BIOSTAT‐CHF index cohort included 2516 patients with new or worsening HF symptoms: 1694 enrolled as inpatients (acute HF) and 822 as outpatients (worsening HF in chronic outpatients). A validation cohort included 935 inpatients and 803 outpatients. Multivariable models were developed in the index cohort using clinical characteristics, routine laboratory values, and proteomics data to examine which factors predict adverse outcomes in both conditions and to determine which factors differ between acute HF and worsening HF in chronic outpatients, validated in the validation cohort.

Patients with acute HF had substantially higher morbidity and mortality (6 months mortality was 12..3% for acute HF and 4..7% for worsening HF in chronic outpatients). Multivariable models predicting 180‐day mortality and 180‐day HF re‐admission differed substantially between acute HF and worsening HF in chronic outpatients. CA‐125 was the strongest single biomarker to distinguish acute HF from worsening HF in chronic outpatients, but only yielded a C‐index of 0..71. A model including multiple biomarkers and clinical variables achieved a high degree of discrimination with a C‐index of 0..913 in the index cohort and 0..901 in the validation cohort.


CONCLUSION - The study identifies different characteristics and predictors of outcome in acute HF patients as compared to outpatients with chronic HF developing worsening HF. The markers identified may be useful in better diagnosing acute HF and may become targets for treatment development.