Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ European Journal of ...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
European Journal of Heart Failure
Article . 2017 . Peer-reviewed
License: OUP Standard Publication Reuse
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

A Comprehensive Population-Based Characterization of Heart Failure with Mid-Range Ejection Fraction

Authors: Angela S, Koh; Wan Ting, Tay; Tiew Hwa Katherine, Teng; Ola, Vedin; Lina, Benson; Ulf, Dahlstrom; Gianluigi, Savarese; +2 Authors

A Comprehensive Population-Based Characterization of Heart Failure with Mid-Range Ejection Fraction

Abstract

Abstract Aims Clinical features and outcomes in the novel phenotype heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction [HFmrEF, ejection fraction (EF) 40–49%] were compared with heart failure with reduced EF (HFrEF, EF <40%) and preserved EF (HFpEF, EF ≥50%). Methods and results In the Swedish Heart Failure Registry, we assessed the association between baseline characteristics and EF group using multivariable logistic regressions, and the association between EF group and all-cause mortality using multivariable Cox regressions. Of 42 061 patients, 56% had HFrEF, 21% had HFmrEF, and 23% had HFpEF. Characteristics were continuous for age (72 ± 12 vs. 74 ± 12 vs. 77 ± 11 years), proportion of women (29% vs. 39% vs. 55%), and 13 other characteristics. Coronary artery disease (CAD) was distinctly more common in HFrEF (54%) and HFmrEF (53%) vs. HFpEF (42%); adjusted odds ratio for CAD in HFmrEF vs. HFpEF was 1.52 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.41–1.63]. For six additional characteristics HFmrEF resembled HFrEF, for seven characteristics HFmrEF resembled HFpEF, and for 10 characteristics there was no pattern. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for mortality in HFrEF vs. HFpEF was 1.35 (95% CI 1.14–1.60) at 30 days, 1.26 (95% CI 1.17–1.35) at 1 year, and 1.20 (95% CI 1.14–1.26) at 3 years. In contrast, HFmrEF and HFpEF had a similar prognosis (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.86–1.30 at 30 days; HR 1.08, 95% CI 1.00–1.18 at 1 year; and HR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00–1.12 at 3 years). Three-year mortality was higher in HFmrEF than in HFpEF in the presence of CAD (HR 1.11, 95% CI 1.02–1.21), but not in the absence of CAD (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.94–1.12; P for interaction <0.001). Conclusions HFmrEF was an intermediate phenotype, except that CAD was more common in HFmrEF and HFrEF vs. HFpEF, crude all-cause mortality was lower in HFmrEF and HFrEF, adjusted all-cause mortality was lower in HFmrEF and HFpEF, and CAD portended a higher adjusted risk of death in HFmrEF and HFrEF.

Keywords

Heart Failure, Male, Sweden, Time Factors, Stroke Volume, Prognosis, Hospitalization, Survival Rate, Risk Factors, Cause of Death, Disease Progression, Humans, Female, Registries, Aged, Follow-Up Studies, Retrospective Studies

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    280
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 0.1%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 1%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 1%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
280
Top 0.1%
Top 1%
Top 1%
bronze