H2FPEF Score for the Prediction of Exercise Intolerance and Abnormal Hemodynamics in Japanese - Evaluation by Exercise Stress Echocardiography Combined With Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing

Heart failure with mildly reduced and preserved ejection fraction: A review of disease burden and remaining unmet medical needs within a new treatment landscape

This review provides a comprehensive overview of heart failure with mildly reduced and preserved ejection fraction (HFmrEF/HFpEF), including its definition, diagnosis, and epidemiology; clinical, humanistic, and economic burdens; current pharmacologic landscape in key pharmaceutical markets; and unmet needs to identify key knowledge gaps. We conducted a targeted literature review in electronic databases and prioritized articles with valuable insights into HFmrEF/HFpEF. Overall, 27 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 66 real-world evidence studies, 18 clinical practice guidelines, and 25 additional publications were included. Although recent heart failure (HF) guidelines set left ventricular ejection fraction thresholds to differentiate categories, characterization and diagnosis criteria vary because of the incomplete disease understanding. Recent epidemiological data are limited and diverse. Approximately 50% of symptomatic HF patients have HFpEF, more common than HFmrEF. Prevalence varies with country because of differing definitions and study characteristics, making prevalence interpretation challenging. HFmrEF/HFpEF has considerable mortality risk, and the mortality rate varies with study and patient characteristics and treatments. HFmrEF/HFpEF is associated with considerable morbidity, poor patient outcomes, and common comorbidities. Patients require frequent hospitalizations; therefore, early intervention is crucial to prevent disease burden. Recent RCTs show promising results like risk reduction of composite cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization. Costs data are scarce, but the economic burden is increasing. Despite new drugs, unmet medical needs requiring new treatments remain. Thus, HFmrEF/HFpEF is a growing global healthcare concern. With improving yet incomplete understanding of this disease and its promising treatments, further research is required for better patient outcomes.

Exercise-Induced Pulmonary Hypertension: A Valid Entity or Another Factor of Confusion?

Exercise-induced pulmonary hypertension EIPH has been defined as an increase in mean pulmonary arterial pressure (mPAP) during exercise in otherwise normal values at rest. EIPH reflects heart and/or lung dysfunction and may precede the development of manifest pulmonary hypertension (PH) in a proportion of patients. It is also associated with decreased life expectancy in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) or left ventricle (LV) valvular diseases. Diastolic dysfunction exacerbated during exercise relates to increased LV filling pressure and left atrial pressure (LAP). In this context backward, transmitted pressure alone or accompanied with backward blood flow promotes EIPH. The gold standard of EIPH assessment remains the right heart catheterization during exercise, which is an accurate but invasive method. Alternatively, non-invasive diagnostic modalities include exercise stress echocardiography (ESE) and cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET). Both diagnostic tests are performed under gradually increasing physical stress using treadmill and ergo-cycling protocols. Escalating workload during the exercise is analogous to the physiological response to real exercise. The results of the latter techniques show good correlation with invasive measurements, but they suffer from lack of validation and cut-off value determination. Although it is not officially recommended, there are accumulated data supporting the importance of EIPH diagnosis in the assessment of other mild/subclinical or probably fatal diseases in patients with latent PH or heart failure or LV valvular disease, respectively. Nevertheless, larger, prospective studies are required to ensure its role in clinical practice.

The H2FPEF and HFA-PEFF algorithms for predicting exercise intolerance and abnormal hemodynamics in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Exercise intolerance is a primary manifestation in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and is associated with abnormal hemodynamics and a poor quality of life. Two multiparametric scoring systems have been proposed to diagnose HFpEF. This study sought to determine the performance of the H₂FPEF and HFA-PEFF scores for predicting exercise capacity and echocardiographic findings of intracardiac pressures during exercise in subjects with dyspnea on exertion referred for bicycle stress echocardiography. In a subset, simultaneous expired gas analysis was performed to measure the peak oxygen consumption (VO₂). Patients with HFpEF (n = 83) and controls without HF (n = 104) were enrolled. The H₂FPEF score was obtainable for all patients while the HFA-PEFF score could not be calculated for 23 patients (feasibility 88%). Both H₂FPEF and HFA-PEFF scores correlated with a higher E/e' ratio (r = 0.49 and r = 0.46), lower systolic tricuspid annular velocity (r =  - 0.44 and =  - 0.24), and lower cardiac output (r =  - 0.28 and r =  - 0.24) during peak exercise. Peak VO₂ and exercise duration decreased with an increase in H₂FPEF scores (r =  - 0.40 and r =  - 0.32). The H₂FPEF score predicted a reduced aerobic capacity (AUC 0.71, p = 0.0005), but the HFA-PEFF score did not (p = 0.07). These data provide insights into the role of the H₂FPEF and HFA-PEFF scores for predicting exercise intolerance and abnormal hemodynamics in patients presenting with exertional dyspnea.

Factors Influencing Cardiac Sympathetic Nervous Function in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis: Assessment by 123I-Metaiodobenzylguanidine Myocardial Scintigraphy

BACKGROUND

Numerous studies have shown that 123I-metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) scintigraphy, an index of cardiac sympathetic nervous (CSN) activity, is useful for predicting prognosis in patients with heart failure. However, the factors influencing the CSN activity of patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) remain unclear.

METHODS

We enrolled 91 patients with severe AS who underwent 123I-MIBG scintigraphy, coronary computed tomography (CCT), and transthoracic echocardiography. When CCT angiography (CCTA) showed an obstructive epicardial artery, invasive coronary angiography was performed within 1 week of CCTA.

RESULTS

There were 21 male and 70 female patients with a mean age of 84±5 years. Eighty-five (85) patients (93%) had hypertension and 13 patients (14%) had diabetes. Two (2) patients (2%) had previous myocardial infarction and eight (9%) had a previous coronary intervention. All patients had severe AS: aortic valve area was 0.63±0.18 cm² and the mean pressure gradient was 56±19 mmHg. Regarding 123I-MIBG parameters, early heart-to-mediastinum (H/M) ratio was 3.1±0.5, delayed H/M ratio was 2.8±0.6, and the washout rate (WR) was 35%±13%. Multivariable linear regression analysis showed that coronary artery disease (β=-0.30, p=0.002) was an independent predictor of delayed H/M ratio, and that aortic valve area (β=-0.20, p=0.048) was an independent predictor of WR.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that coronary artery disease is an independent predictor of delayed H/M ratio, and aortic valve area is an independent predictor of WR in patients with severe AS.

Diagnostic and prognostic implications of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction scoring systems

Aims

We sought to compare the generalizability and prognostic implications of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) scores (HFA‐PEFF and H₂FPEF score) in Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure with an Aldosterone Antagonist (TOPCAT) and Phosphodiesterase‐5 Inhibition to Improve Clinical Status and Exercise Capacity in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction (RELAX) trial participants and matched controls from the Atherosclerosis Risk in Community (ARIC) study.

Methods and results

Based on the respective scores, the study participants from the TOPCAT (N = 356), RELAX (N = 216), and ARIC (N = 379) studies were categorized as having a low, intermediate, or high likelihood of HFpEF. Age, sex, and race matched controls free of cardiovascular disease who had unexplained dyspnoea were used to evaluate the diagnostic performance. The prognostic value of scores was assessed using multivariable‐adjusted Cox regression analyses. The median HFA‐PEFF scores in the TOPCAT, RELAX, and ARIC studies were 5.0 [interquartile range (IQR): 5.0–6.0], 4.0 (IQR: 2.0–4.0), and 3.0 (IQR: 2.0–4.0), respectively. The median H₂FPEF scores in the three studies were 5.5 (IQR: 4.0–7.0), 6.0 (IQR: 4.0–7.0), and 3.0 (IQR: 2.0–5.0), respectively. A low HFA‐PEFF and H₂FPEF score can rule out HFpEF with high sensitivity (99.5% and 99.6%, respectively) and negative predictive value (95.7% and 98.3%, respectively). A high HFA‐PEFF and H₂FPEF score can rule‐in HFpEF with good specificity (82.8% and 95.6%, respectively) and positive predictive value (79.9% and 90.4%, respectively). Among TOPCAT participants, the hazard for adverse cardiovascular events per point increase in HFA‐PEFF and H₂FPEF score was 1.26 (95% confidence interval: 0.98–1.63) and 1.01 (95% confidence interval: 0.88–1.15), respectively. A higher H₂FPEF score was associated with lower peak oxygen intake in RELAX trial participants (adjusted P = 0.01).

Conclusions

The HFA‐PEFF and the H₂FPEF scores are reliable diagnostic tools for HFpEF. The prognostic utility of HFpEF scores requires further validation in larger rigorously phenotyped populations.

Impact of Updated 2016 ASE/EACVI VIS-À-VIS 2009 ASE Recommendation on the Prevalence of Diastolic Dysfunction and LV Filling Pressures in Patients with Preserved Ejection Fraction

BACKGROUND

Assessment of diastolic dysfunction (DD) and left ventricular filling pressures (LVFP) by echocardiography is complex in patients with preserved ejection fraction (EF). The American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (ASE/EACVI) jointly published recommendations in 2016 to simplify the diagnosis and classification of DD and the assessment of LVFP. We aimed to study the impact of the updated 2016 ASE/EACVI guidelines vis-à-vis the 2009 ASE recommendations on prevalence of DD and LVFP in patients with preserved EF.

METHODS

Five hundred patients referred to the echocardiography laboratory from March 2020 to May 2020 were analyzed. Patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 50% were excluded. All patients underwent comprehensive transthoracic echocardiography. DD and LVFP were assessed by the 2016 ASE/EACVI and 2009 ASE recommendations. The concordance between the guidelines was analyzed by kappa coefficient and overall proportion of agreement.

RESULTS

Mean age was 53 ± 13 years and 63.4% were men. Prevalence of DD and abnormal LVFP were significantly lower with the 2016 recommendations than with the 2009 recommendations (9.4% vs. 16.8%, p < 0.001 and 8.4% vs. 12.8%, p < 0.05). Patients with Grade 1 DD (100%) and Grade 2 DD (46.4%) were reclassified by the 2016 recommendations. Indeterminate diastolic function (9.8%) was strikingly high according to the 2016 recommendations. The concordance between the two recommendations was moderate (kappa = 0.569). The overall proportion of agreement was 85.4%.

CONCLUSIONS

Prevalence of DD and abnormal LV filling pressures were lower with application of the 2016 ASE/EACVI recommendations in patients with preserved EF. There was moderate agreement between the 2009 and 2016 recommendations.

Impact of Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement on Changes in Cardiac Sympathetic Nervous Function

The impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) on changes in cardiac sympathetic nervous (CSN) function remains unclear. Using 123I-metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) myocardial scintigraphy, we investigated the impact of PPM after TAVR on CSN activity.We enrolled 44 of 117 patients with severe aortic stenosis who underwent TAVR for analysis in the present study. We conducted 123I-MIBG scintigraphy at baseline and at about 9 months after TAVR. Differences between baseline and post-TAVR 123I-MIBG parameters were compared between cases with and without PPM.There were 17 and 27 patients with and without PPM, respectively. Those without PPM exhibited significantly decreased left ventricular mass index (122 ± 36 g/m² versus 108 ± 30 g/m², P < 0.001) following TAVR, whereas those with PPM did not (117 ± 21 g/m² versus 110 ± 17 g/m², P = 0.09). Significant improvements in delayed heart-to-mediastinum (H/M) ratio (2.8 ± 0.4 versus 3.0 ± 0.4, P = 0.004) and washout rate (WR) (33% ± 10% versus 24% ± 12%, P < 0.001) were observed after TAVR in patients without PPM but not in those with PPM. Multivariable linear regression analysis revealed PPM to be a negative predictor of improvements in delayed H/M ratio and WR.Delayed H/M ratio and WR improve significantly after TAVR in the absence of PPM, whereas these improvements are not observed in patients with PPM. Hence, the presence of PPM is a negative predictor of improvements in delayed H/M ratio and WR in patients undergoing TAVR.

Diagnosis and Management of Patients with Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF): Current Perspectives and Recommendations

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a major global public health problem. Diagnosis of HFpEF is still challenging and built based on the comprehensive echocardiographic analysis. Currently, there are no universally accepted therapies that alter the clinical course of HFpEF. This review attempts to summarize the current advances in the diagnosis of HFpEF and provide future directions of the patients´ management with this very widespread, heterogeneous clinical syndrome.