Predictors and outcome of sustained improvement in left ventricular function in dilated cardiomyopathy

Late gadolinium enhancement for re-worsening left ventricular ejection fraction in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy

Aims

This study aimed to evaluate the clinical parameters including late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) of cardiovascular magnetic resonance to predict re‐worsening of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM).

Methods and results

We included 138 patients with recent‐onset DCM who had an LVEF <45% and underwent LGE of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging at diagnosis and echocardiography at the yearly follow‐up [median 6 (4–8.3) years]. Initial LVEF recovery was defined as LVEF increase >10% from baseline, resulting in LVEF ≧45% after treatment. The patients were divided into three groups: (i) improved (n = 83, 60%), defined as those with sustained LVEF ≧45%; (ii) re‐worsening (n = 39, 28%), those with >5% decrease and LVEF <45% after the initial LVEF recovery; and (iii) not‐improved (n = 16, 12%), those without initial LVEF recovery. The primary endpoint was a composite of hospitalization for heart failure or sudden cardiac death. In baseline, LGE was observed in 70 patients. The LGE area was significantly larger in the re‐worsening and not‐improved groups than that in the improved group (P < 0.001). Loess curves of long‐term LVEF trajectories showed that LVEF in the re‐worsening group increased in the first 2 years and slowly declined thereafter. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that LGE area [odds ratio (OR) 1.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03–1.16, P = 0.004], B‐type natriuretic peptide (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.05–2.21, P = 0.030) level at the initial recovery, and LVEF (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.86–0.97, P = 0.004) at the initial LVEF recovery were independent predictors of re‐worsening of LVEF. During a median follow‐up of 2273 (interquartile range: 1634–3191) days, the primary endpoint was observed in 31 (22%) patients. Univariate Cox proportional hazards analysis demonstrated that the risk of experiencing the primary event in the re‐worsening group was significantly higher (hazard ratio: 4.30, 95% CI 1.63–11.31, P = 0.003) than that in the improved group and was lower than that in the not‐improved group (hazard ratio: 0.33, 95% CI 0.15–0.72, P = 0.006).

Conclusions

Re‐worsening of LVEF was observed in 28% of patients with recent‐onset DCM who showed an initial improvement in LVEF. High LGE burden, higher B‐type natriuretic peptide level, and lower LVEF at the initial LVEF recovery were independent predictors of re‐worsening of LVEF in patients with DCM. Careful observation is recommended for patients with a high risk for re‐worsening of LVEF, even in those with an initial LVEF recovery.

Dilated cardiomyopathy: from epidemiologic to genetic phenotypes: A translational review of current literature

Dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) is characterized by left ventricular dilatation and, consecutively, contractile dysfunction. The causes of DCM are heterogeneous. DCM often results from myocarditis, exposure to alcohol, drugs or other toxins and metabolic or endocrine disturbances. In about 35% of patients, genetic mutations can be identified that usually involve genes responsible for cytoskeletal, sarcomere and nuclear envelope proteins. Due to its heterogeneity, a detailed diagnostic work-up is necessary to identify the specific underlying cause and exclude other conditions with phenotype overlap. Patients with DCM show typical systolic heart failure symptoms, but, with progress of the disease, diastolic dysfunction is present as well. Depending on the underlying pathology, DCM patients also become apparent through arrhythmias, thromboembolic events or cardiogenic shock. Disease progression and prognosis are mostly driven by disease severity and reverse remodelling within the heart. The worst prognosis is seen in patients with lowest ejection fractions or severe diastolic dysfunction, leading to terminal heart failure with subsequent need for left ventricular assist device implantation or heart transplantation. Guideline-based heart failure medication and device therapy reduces the frequency of heart failure hospitalizations and improves survival.

Dilated cardiomyopathy with re-worsening left ventricular ejection fraction

Re-worsening left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is observed in some patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) despite initial improvements in LVEF. We analyzed cardiac outcomes and clinical variables associated with this re-worsening LVEF. A total of 180 newly diagnosed DCM patients who received only pharmacotherapy were enrolled. Echocardiography was performed after 6, 12, 24, and 36 months after initiation of pharmacotherapy. Patients were divided into three groups: (1) Improved: (n = 113, 63%), defined as those > 10% increase in LVEF after 12 months and no decrease (> 10%) between 12 and 36 months; (2) Re-worse: (n = 12, 7%), those with > 10% increase in LVEF after 12 months but with decrease (> 10%) between 12 and 36 months; and (3) Not-improved: (n = 55: 30%), those with no increase in LVEF (> 10%) after 12 months. Patients with re-worse group were older (P = 0.04) and had higher brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels after 12 months (P = 0.002) than those in the Improved group. Major cardiac events (sudden death, implantation of a ventricular assist device, and death due to heart failure,) were observed in 13 (7%) patients after 36 months of pharmacotherapy. Multivariate analysis revealed that the Re-worse group had a higher risk for cardiac events (hazard ratio 11.7, 95% confidence interval 1.9-90.7, P = 0.01) than the Improved group, but had a similar risk compared with the Not-improved group. Re-worsening LVEF was associated with poor cardiac outcomes in newly diagnosed DCM patients. Age and persistently high-BNP levels after improvement in LVEF were significantly associated with re-worsening LVEF.

Prognostic Impact and Predictors of Ejection Fraction Recovery in Patients With Alcoholic Cardiomyopathy

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Recovery of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) has been described in alcoholic cardiomyopathy (ACM) after a period of alcohol withdrawal. Nevertheless, the prognostic impact of LVEF recovery in ACM and its determinants have not been studied. We sought to define the role of LVEF improvement in the long-term outcome of ACM and to identify predictors of LVEF recovery in these patients.

METHODS

We evaluated 101 ACM patients during a median follow-up period of 82 months [interquartile range 36-134].

RESULTS

At latest follow-up, 42 patients (42%) showed substantial LVEF recovery defined as an absolute increase in LVEF ≥ 10% to a final value of ≥ 40%. Patients who recovered LVEF had better outcomes than patients who did not (heart transplant or cardiovascular death 1% vs 30%; P <.001). A QRS with <120ms (OR, 6.68; 95%CI, 2.30-19.41), beta-blocker therapy (OR, 3.01; 95%CI, 1.09-8.28), and the absence of diuretics (OR, 3.35; 95%CI, 1.08-10.42) predicted LVEF recovery in multivariate analysis. Although alcohol cessation did not predict LVEF recovery, none of the patients (n=6) who persisted with heavy alcohol consumption recovered LVEF. The rate of patients who recovered LVEF did not differ between abstainers and moderate drinkers (44% vs 45%; P=.9).

CONCLUSIONS

The LVEF recovery is associated with an excellent prognosis in ACM. Beta-blocker treatment, QRS <120ms and absence of diuretics are independent predictors of LVEF recovery. LVEF recovery is similar in moderate drinkers and abstainers.

Fibrosis and Fibrotic Gene Expression in Pediatric and Adult Patients With Idiopathic Dilated Cardiomyopathy

BACKGROUND

Although fibrosis seems to be prognostic for adverse outcomes in adults with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy (IDC), little is known about the prevalence and development of fibrosis in pediatric IDC hearts. We hypothesized that there is less activation of fibrosis at a molecular level in pediatric IDC hearts than in failing adult hearts.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Pediatric hearts were analyzed histologically to determine the prevalence of fibrosis. Left ventricular tissue from adult and pediatric IDC hearts and adult and pediatric nonfailing (NF) hearts were subjected to quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction to study the expression of important mRNAs that affect fibrosis. We found age-specific differences between IDC and NF hearts in the regulation of noncoding galectin-3, Corin, matrix metalloproteinase (MMP) 2, MMP-9, tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase (TIMP) 2, and TIMP-3. We also found markers that were similarly altered in both adult and pediatric IDC hearts (interleukin-1 receptor-like 1 receptor, TIMP-1, and TIMP-4). Finally, microRNAs 29a-c were significantly decreased in the pediatric IDC patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric IDC patients demonstrate age-specific differences in the molecular pathways implicated in fibrosis in the adult heart. At the ultrastructural level the unique gene expression pattern appears to limit fibrosis in the failing pediatric heart.

Comparison of Baseline versus Posttreatment Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction in Patients with Acute Decompensated Heart Failure for Predicting Cardiovascular Outcome: Implications from Single-Center Systolic Heart Failure Cohort

Aims

The prognostic values of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) during heart failure (HF) with acute decompensation or after optimal treatment have not been extensively studied. We hypothesized that posttreatment LVEF has superior predictive value for long-term prognosis than LVEF at admission does.

Methods and Results

In Protocol 1, 428 acute decompensated HF (ADHF) patients with LVEF ≤35% in a tertiary medical center were enrolled and followed for a mean period of 34.7 ± 10.8 months. The primary and secondary end points were all-cause mortality and HF readmission, respectively. In total, 86 deaths and 240 HF readmissions were recorded. The predictive values of baseline LVEF at admission and LVEF 6 months posttreatment were analyzed and compared. The posttreatment LVEFs were predictive for future events (P = 0.01 for all-cause mortality, P < 0.001 for HF readmission), but the baseline LVEFs were not. In Protocol 2, the outcomes of patients with improved LVEF (change of LVEF: ≥+10%), unchanged LVEF (change of LVEF: –10% to +10%), and reduced LVEF (change of LVEF: ≤–10%) were analyzed and compared. Improved LVEF occurred in 171 patients and was associated with a superior long-term prognosis among all groups (P = 0.02 for all-cause mortality, P < 0.001 for HF readmission). In Protocol 3, independent predictors of improved LVEF were analyzed, and baseline LV end-diastolic dimension (LVEDD) was identified as a powerful predictor in ADHF patients (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

In patients with ADHF, posttreatment LVEF but not baseline LVEF had prognostic power. Improved LVEF was associated with superior long-term prognosis, and baseline LVEDD identified patients who were more likely to have improved LVEF. Therefore, baseline LVEF should not be considered a relevant prognosis factor in clinical practice for patients with ADHF.