CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

血管内超声指导

Abstract

Recommended Article

Relation between baseline plaque features and subsequent coronary artery remodeling determined by optical coherence tomography and intravascular ultrasound Intravascular ultrasound guidance improves clinical outcomes during implantation of both first- and second-generation drug-eluting stents: a meta-analysis Utility of intravascular ultrasound guidance in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for type C lesions The effect of complete percutaneous revascularisation with and without intravascular ultrasound guidance in the drugeluting stent era Clinical Outcomes Following Intravascular Imaging-Guided Versus Coronary Angiography-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Stent Implantation: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis of 31 Studies and 17,882 Patients A volumetric intravascular ultrasound comparison of early drug-eluting stent thrombosis versus restenosis Coronary plaque redistribution after stent implantation is determined by lipid composition: A NIRS-IVUS analysis Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Vulnerable Coronary Atherosclerotic Plaque
|<<... 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ...>>|

Original Research2017 Nov 14;70(20):2476-2486.

JOURNAL：J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Heart Failure With Preserved, Borderline, and Reduced Ejection Fraction: 5-Year Outcomes

Shah KS, Xu H, Fonarow GC et al. Keywords: ejection fraction; heart failure; outcomes; survival

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - Patients with heart failure (HF) have a poor prognosis and are categorized by ejection fraction (EF).


OBJECTIVES - This study sought to characterize differences in outcomes in patients hospitalized with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) (EF ≥50%), heart failure with borderline ejection fraction (HFbEF) (EF 41% to 49%), and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) (EF ≤40%).


METHODS - Data from GWTG-HF (Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure) were linked to Medicare data for longitudinal follow-up. Multivariable models were constructed to examine 5-year outcomes and to compare survival to median survival of the U.S. population.


RESULTS - A total of 39,982 patients from 254 hospitals who were admitted for HF between 2005 and 2009 were included: 18,299 (46%) had HFpEF, 3,285 (8.2%) had HFbEF, and 18,398 (46%) had HFrEF. Overall, median survival was 2.1 years. In risk-adjusted survival analysis, all 3 groups had similar 5-year mortality (HFrEF 75.3% vs. HFpEF 75.7%; hazard ratio: 0.99 [95% confidence interval: 0.958 to 1.022]; HFbEF 75.7% vs. HFpEF 75.7%; hazard ratio: 0.99 [95% confidence interval: 0.947 to 1.046]). In risk-adjusted analyses, the composite of mortality and rehospitalization was similar for all subgroups. Cardiovascular and HF readmission rates were higher in those with HFrEF and HFbEF compared with those with HFpEF. When compared with the U.S. population, HF patients across all age and EF groups had markedly lower median survival.


CONCLUSIONS - Among patients hospitalized with HF, patients across the EF spectrum have a similarly poor 5-year survival with an elevated risk for cardiovascular and HF admission. These findings underscore the need to improve treatment of patients with HF.

Copyright © 2017 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.



>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 REGISTRATION

> CBS 2019 PROGRAM

> CBS 2019 CALL FOR SCIENCE

> CBS 2019 SPOTLIGHTS

 CBSMD

> CBSMD WEBSITE REGISTRATION

> EDUCATION CENTER

> RECOMMANDED PAPER

> TOP 10 RESEARCH PAPER

> PRE-READING

CBS 2019 CBS 2019 FACULTY Education Resource CBSMD Scientific Library
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top