1
|
Tomoaia R, Harrison P, Bevis L, Wahab A, Thompson P, Saunderson CED, Levelt E, Dall’Armellina E, Garg P, Greenwood JP, Plein S, Swoboda PP. CMR characterization of patients with heart failure and left bundle branch block. EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL. IMAGING METHODS AND PRACTICE 2024; 2:qyae047. [PMID: 38845796 PMCID: PMC11151275 DOI: 10.1093/ehjimp/qyae047] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/29/2024] [Accepted: 05/07/2024] [Indexed: 06/09/2024]
Abstract
Aims We aimed to identify the distinctive cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) features of patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) of presumed non-ischaemic aetiology. The secondary aim was to determine whether these individuals exhibit characteristics that could potentially serve as predictors of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) recovery as compared with patients without LBBB. Methods and results We prospectively recruited patients with HFrEF (LVEF ≤ 40%) on echocardiography who were referred for early CMR examination. Patients with an established diagnosis of coronary artery disease and known structural or congenital heart disease were excluded. LV recovery was defined as achieving ≥10% absolute improvement to ≥40% in LVEF between baseline evaluation to CMR. A total of 391 patients were recruited including 115 (29.4%) with LBBB. Compared with HF patients without LBBB, those with LBBB exhibited larger left ventricles and smaller right ventricles, but no differences were observed with respect to LVEF (35.8 ± 12 vs. 38 ± 12%, P = 0.105). The overall rate of LV recovery from baseline echocardiogram to CMR (70 [42-128] days) was not significantly different between LBBB and non-LBBB patients (27.8% vs. 31.5%, P = 0.47). Reduced LVEF remained an independent predictor of LV non-recovery only in patients with LBBB. Conclusion Patients presenting with HFrEF and LBBB had larger LV cavities and smaller RV cavities than those without LBBB but no difference in prevalence of scar or ischaemia. The rates of LV recovery were similar between both groups, which supports current guidelines to defer device therapy until 3-6 months of guideline-directed medical therapy, rather than early CMR and device implantation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Raluca Tomoaia
- Biomedical Imaging Sciences Department, Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Woodhouse, Leeds, West Yorkshire LS2 9JT, UK
- Cardiology Department, Iuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| | - Peter Harrison
- Biomedical Imaging Sciences Department, Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Woodhouse, Leeds, West Yorkshire LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Lydia Bevis
- Biomedical Imaging Sciences Department, Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Woodhouse, Leeds, West Yorkshire LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Ali Wahab
- Biomedical Imaging Sciences Department, Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Woodhouse, Leeds, West Yorkshire LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Patrick Thompson
- Biomedical Imaging Sciences Department, Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Woodhouse, Leeds, West Yorkshire LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Christopher E D Saunderson
- Biomedical Imaging Sciences Department, Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Woodhouse, Leeds, West Yorkshire LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Eylem Levelt
- Biomedical Imaging Sciences Department, Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Woodhouse, Leeds, West Yorkshire LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Erica Dall’Armellina
- Biomedical Imaging Sciences Department, Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Woodhouse, Leeds, West Yorkshire LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Pankaj Garg
- Department of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Health, Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norfolk, UK
| | - John P Greenwood
- Biomedical Imaging Sciences Department, Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Woodhouse, Leeds, West Yorkshire LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Sven Plein
- Biomedical Imaging Sciences Department, Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Woodhouse, Leeds, West Yorkshire LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Peter P Swoboda
- Biomedical Imaging Sciences Department, Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Woodhouse, Leeds, West Yorkshire LS2 9JT, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Pensa AV, Khan SS, Shah RV, Wilcox JE. Heart failure with improved ejection fraction: Beyond diagnosis to trajectory analysis. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 2024; 82:102-112. [PMID: 38244827 DOI: 10.1016/j.pcad.2024.01.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/14/2024] [Accepted: 01/14/2024] [Indexed: 01/22/2024]
Abstract
Left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction represents a highly treatable cause of heart failure (HF). A substantial proportion of patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (EF;HFrEF) demonstrate improvement in LV systolic function (termed HF with improved EF [HFimpEF]), either spontaneously or when treated with guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT). Although it is a relatively new HF classification, HFimpEF has emerged in recent years as an important and distinct clinical entity. Improvement in LVEF leads to decreased rates of mortality and adverse HF-related outcomes compared to patients with sustained LV systolic dysfunction (HFrEF). While numerous clinical and imaging factors have been associated with HFimpEF, identification of which patients do and do not improve requires further investigation. In addition, patients improve at different rates, and what determines the trajectory of HFimpEF patients after improvement is incompletely characterized. A proportion of patients maintain improvement in LV systolic function, while others experience a recrudescence of systolic dysfunction, especially with GDMT discontinuation. In this review we discuss the contemporary guideline-recommended classification definition of HFimpEF, the epidemiology of improvement in LV systolic function, and the clinical course of this unique patient population. We also offer evidence-based recommendations for the clinical management of HFimpEF and provide a roadmap for future directions in understanding and improving outcomes in the care of patients with HFimpEF.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anthony V Pensa
- Department of Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States of America
| | - Sadiya S Khan
- Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States of America
| | - Ravi V Shah
- Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, United States of America
| | - Jane E Wilcox
- Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States of America.
| |
Collapse
|