First-Phase Ejection Fraction Predicts Response to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy and Adverse Outcomes |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. British Heart Foundation Centre, King’s College London, London, United Kingdom;2. Cardiology Department, Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom;3. Imaging Sciences and Biomedical Engineering, King’s College London, London, United Kingdom;4. Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway;5. Barts Heart Centre, St. Bartholomew’s Hospital, London, United Kingdom |
| |
Abstract: | ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to examine the value of first-phase ejection fraction (EF1), to predict response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and clinical outcomes after CRT.BackgroundCRT is an important treatment for patients with chronic heart failure. However, even in carefully selected cases, up to 40% of patients fail to respond. EF1, the ejection fraction up to the time of maximal ventricular contraction, is a novel sensitive echocardiographic measure of early systolic function and might relate to response to CRT.MethodsAn initial retrospective study was performed in 197 patients who underwent CRT between 2009 and 2018 and were followed to determine clinical outcomes at King’s Health Partners in London. A validation study (n = 100) was performed in patients undergoing CRT at Barts Heart Centre in London.ResultsVolumetric response rate (reduction in end-systolic volume ≥15%) was 92.3% and 12.1% for those with EF1 in the highest and lowest tertiles (P < 0.001). A cutoff value of 11.9% for EF1 had >85% sensitivity and specificity for prediction of response to CRT; on multivariate binary logistic regression analysis incorporating previously defined predictors, EF1 was the strongest predictor of response (odds ratio [OR]: 1.56 per 1% change in EF1; 95% CI: 1.37-1.78; P < 0.001). EF1 was also the strongest predictor of improvement in clinical composite score (OR: 1.11; 95% CI: 1.04-1.19; P = 0.001). Improvement in EF1 at 6 months after CRT implantation (6.5% ± 5.8% vs 1.8% ± 4.3% in responders vs nonresponders; P < 0.001) was the best predictor of heart failure rehospitalization and death after median follow-up period of 20.3 months (HR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.73-0.90; P < 0.001). In the validation cohort, EF1 was a similarly 1strong predictor of response (OR: 1.45; 95% CI: 1.23-1.70; P < 0.001) as in the original cohort.ConclusionsEF1 is a promising marker to identify patients likely to respond to CRT. |
| |
Keywords: | cardiac resynchronization therapy first-phase ejection fraction myocardial function 3D" },{" #name" :" keyword" ," $" :{" id" :" kwrd0030" }," $$" :[{" #name" :" text" ," _" :" 3-dimensional ApRock" },{" #name" :" keyword" ," $" :{" id" :" kwrd0040" }," $$" :[{" #name" :" text" ," _" :" apical rocking CRT" },{" #name" :" keyword" ," $" :{" id" :" kwrd0050" }," $$" :[{" #name" :" text" ," _" :" cardiac resynchronization therapy EDV" },{" #name" :" keyword" ," $" :{" id" :" kwrd0060" }," $$" :[{" #name" :" text" ," _" :" end-diastolic volume EF" },{" #name" :" keyword" ," $" :{" id" :" kwrd0070" }," $$" :[{" #name" :" text" ," _" :" ejection fraction EF1" },{" #name" :" keyword" ," $" :{" id" :" kwrd0080" }," $$" :[{" #name" :" text" ," _" :" first-phase ejection fraction ESV" },{" #name" :" keyword" ," $" :{" id" :" kwrd0090" }," $$" :[{" #name" :" text" ," _" :" end-systolic volume LV" },{" #name" :" keyword" ," $" :{" id" :" kwrd0100" }," $$" :[{" #name" :" text" ," _" :" left ventricular OR" },{" #name" :" keyword" ," $" :{" id" :" kwrd0110" }," $$" :[{" #name" :" text" ," _" :" odds ratio SF" },{" #name" :" keyword" ," $" :{" id" :" kwrd0120" }," $$" :[{" #name" :" text" ," _" :" septal flash TPAVF" },{" #name" :" keyword" ," $" :{" id" :" kwrd0130" }," $$" :[{" #name" :" text" ," _" :" time of peak aortic valve flow velocity |
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录! |
|