Clinical characteristics and prognosis of hospitalised inpatients with heart failure and preserved or reduced left ventricular ejection fraction

Pre-discharge, but not admission, levels of NT-proBNP predict adverse prognosis following acute LVF

BACKGROUND

Circulating natriuretic peptide levels provide prognostic information following acute coronary syndromes and in chronic heart failure. Little evidence exists of their utility following hospitalisation with acute left ventricular failure (LVF).

AIMS

To examine the relative prognostic value of admission and pre-discharge plasma N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) following hospitalisation with acute heart failure.

METHODS

NT-proBNP was measured at admission in 96 patients hospitalised with acute LVF. In a subset of 34 patients, NT-proBNP was also measured prior to discharge. Multivariate analysis was performed of the clinical and serological predictors of a combined primary endpoint of death or heart failure (hospitalisation or as an outpatient).

RESULTS

During follow up (median 350 days, range 2-762), 37 (38.5%) patients died (n=16, 16.7%), or experienced at least 1 heart failure event (n=21, 21.9%). For the entire cohort of 96 patients, only a prior history of heart failure was associated with the primary endpoint (OR 3.5 [1.10-11.08], P=0.034). Admission plasma NT-proBNP was not predictive (OR 1.84 [0.75-4.51], P=0.185). In the 34 patients for whom both admission and pre-discharge NT-proBNP was available, 19 (55.9%) died (n=8, 23.5%) or experienced heart failure (n=11, 32.4%). Only pre-discharge plasma NT-proBNP (OR 15.30 [95% CI: 1.4-168.9], P=0.026) was independently predictive of the composite endpoint. The area under the receiver-operator-characteristic (AUC ROC) curve for pre-discharge NT-proBNP was superior to that for admission NT-proBNP for prediction of death or heart failure (AUC ROC 0.87 cf 0.70), for death (0.79 cf 0.66), LVF hospitalisation (0.78 cf 0.70) or heart failure as an outpatient (0.71 cf 0.61).

CONCLUSIONS

Plasma NT-proBNP measured pre-discharge provides useful prognostic information following hospitalisation with acute LVF.

Características clínicas y pronóstico a medio plazo de la insuficiencia cardíaca con función sistólica conservada. ¿Es diferente de la insuficiencia cardíaca sistólica?

OBJECTIVES

To assess the prevalence, clinical profile and medium-term prognosis in patients with heart failure and preserved systolic ventricular function compared to those with systolic dysfunction.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

153 patients were included, 62 with preserved systolic ventricular function (left ventricular ejection fraction > or = 45%) and 91 with impaired systolic ventricular function (left ventricular ejection fraction < 45%). The mean follow-up period was 25 10 months.

RESULTS

Mean age was similar (66 10 vs. 65 10; p = 0.54). There was a higher proportion of women among patients with preserved systolic function (53% vs. 28%; p < 0.01). Ischemic and idiopathic cardiomyopathy were the most common causes of heart failure in patients with systolic dysfunction, whereas valvular disease and hypertensive cardiopathy were the most common in patients with preserved systolic function. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and beta-blockers were more often prescribed in patients with impaired systolic ventricular function (86% vs. 52%; p < 0.01 and 33% vs. 11%; p < 0.01, respectively). There were no differences between the groups in terms of mortality rate (37% vs. 29%), readmission rate for other causes (29% vs. 23%), readmission rate for heart failure (45% vs. 45%), cumulative survival (51% vs. 62%) and the likelihood of not being readmitted for heart failure (50% vs. 52%). In the multivariate analysis, left ventricular ejection fraction was not a predictor of death or readmission because of heart failure.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large proportion of patients with heart failure, systolic ventricular function is preserved. Despite the clinical differences between patients with preserved and impaired systolic ventricular function, the medium-term prognosis was similar in both groups.