| 1. |
- Bang, Casper N., et al.
(författare)
-
Four-Group Classification of Left Ventricular Hypertrophy Based on Ventricular Concentricity and Dilatation Identifies a Low-Risk Subset of Eccentric Hypertrophy in Hypertensive Patients
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Circulation Cardiovascular Imaging. - 1941-9651 .- 1942-0080. ; 7:3, s. 422-429
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background-Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH; high LV mass [LVM]) is traditionally classified as concentric or eccentric based on LV relative wall thickness. We evaluated the prediction of subsequent adverse events in a new 4-group LVH classification based on LV dilatation (high LV end-diastolic volume [EDV] index) and concentricity (mass/end-diastolic volume [M/EDV](2/3)) in hypertensive patients. Methods and Results-In the Losartan Intervention for Endpoint Reduction (LIFE) echocardiography substudy, 939 hypertensive patients with measurable LVM at baseline were randomized to a mean of 4.8 years of losartan- or atenolol-based treatment. Patients with LVH (LVM/body surface area >= 116 and >= 96 g/m(2) in men and woman, respectively) were divided into 4 groups-concentric nondilated (increased M/EDV, normal EDV), eccentric dilated (increased EDV, normal M/EDV), concentric dilated (increased M/EDV and EDV), and eccentric nondilated (normal M/EDV and EDV)-and compared with patients with normal LVM. Time-varying LVH classes were tested for association with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality and a composite end point of myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, and cardiovascular death in multivariable Cox analyses. At baseline, the LVs were categorized as eccentric nondilated in 12%, eccentric dilated in 20%, concentric nondilated in 29%, concentric dilated in 14%, and normal LVM in 25%. Treatment changed the prevalence of 4 LVH groups to 23%, 4%, 5%, and 7%; 62% had normal LVM after 4 years. In time-varying Cox analyses, compared with normal LVM, those with eccentric dilated and both concentric nondilated and dilated LVH had increased risks of all-cause or cardiovascular mortality or the composite end point, whereas the eccentric nondilated group did not. Conclusions-Hypertensive patients with relatively mild LVH without either increased LV volume or concentricity have similar risk of all-cause mortality or cardiovascular events because hypertensive patients with normal LVM seem to be a low-risk group.
|
|
| 2. |
- Devereux, Richard B., et al.
(författare)
-
Left Ventricular Wall Stress-Mass-Heart Rate Product and Cardiovascular Events in Treated Hypertensive Patients LIFE Study
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Hypertension. - 0194-911X .- 1524-4563. ; 66:5, s. 945-953
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In the Losartan Intervention for End Point Reduction in Hypertension (LIFE) study, 4.8 years' losartan- versus atenolol-based antihypertensive treatment reduced left ventricular hypertrophy and cardiovascular end points, including cardiovascular death and stroke. However, there was no difference in myocardial infarction (MI), possibly related to greater reduction in myocardial oxygen demand by atenolol-based treatment. Myocardial oxygen demand was assessed indirectly by the left ventricular massxwall stressxheart rate (triple product) in 905 LIFE participants. The triple product was included as time-varying covariate in Cox models assessing predictors of the LIFE primary composite end point (cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke), its individual components, and all-cause mortality. At baseline, the triple product in both treatment groups was, compared with normal adults, elevated in 70% of patients. During randomized treatment, the triple product was reduced more by atenolol, with prevalences of elevated triple product of 39% versus 51% on losartan (both P0.001). In Cox regression analyses adjusting for age, smoking, diabetes mellitus, and prior stroke, MI, and heart failure, 1 SD lower triple product was associated with 23% (95% confidence interval 13%-32%) fewer composite end points, 31% (18%-41%) less cardiovascular mortality, 30% (15%-41%) lower MI, and 22% (11%-33%) lower all-cause mortality (all P0.001), without association with stroke (P=0.34). Although losartan-based therapy reduced ventricular mass more, greater heart rate reduction with atenolol resulted in larger reduction of the triple product. Lower triple product during antihypertensive treatment was strongly, independently associated with lower rates of the LIFE primary composite end point, cardiovascular death, and MI, but not stroke.
|
|
| 3. |
- Greve, Anders M., et al.
(författare)
-
Contrasting Hemodynamic Mechanisms of Losartan- vs. Atenolol-Based Antihypertensive Treatment : A LIFE Study
- 2012
-
Ingår i: American Journal of Hypertension. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0895-7061 .- 1941-7225. ; 25:9, s. 1017-1023
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND Pharmaceutical differences in central hemodynamics might influence cardiac response to antihypertensive treatment despite similar lowering of brachial blood pressure (BP). METHODS Data from all patients with at least two echocardiographic examinations in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint Reduction in Hypertension (LIFE) echocardiographic substudy (n = 801); high-risk patients on losartan- vs. atenolol-based antihypertensive therapy. Echocardiography was performed annually for 4 years to measure stroke index (SI), heart rate, cardiac index (CI), conduit artery stiffness assessed as pulse pressure/stroke index (PP/SI) and total peripheral resistance index (TPRI). RESULTS Atenolol- and losartan-based therapy reduced BP similarly (cumulative difference in mean brachial blood pressure 0.3 mm Hg, P = 0.65). After 4 years the cumulative means of SI and heart rate were 1.8 ml/m(2) higher and 5.7 beats/min lower on atenolol-based treatment, respectively (both P < 0.001). This kept CI below baseline in atenolol-treated patients, whereas in the losartan group CI was unchanged from baseline throughout the study. TPRI was decreased more and remained lower in the losartan group (cumulative difference in mean TPRI 287 dynes/sec(-5)/cm/m(2), P < 0.001). These findings partly explained univariate differences in systolic- and diastolic function indices between the two treatments; fully adjusted losartan was only associated with a smaller left atrial diameter (cumulative mean difference 0.07 cm; 95% confidence intervals, -0.13 to -0.01, P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS Contrasting hemodynamics impacted cardiac response to similar reductions in brachial BP on losartan- vs. atenolol-based therapy. The similar reduction of PP/SI suggests that the antihypertensive regimens used in the LIFE study had comparable effects on arterial stiffness (LIFE study; NCT00338260)
|
|
