| 1. |
- Bonapace, Stefano, et al.
(författare)
-
Brachial pulse pressure in acute heart failure. Results of the Heart Failure Registry
- 2019
-
Ingår i: ESC Heart Failure. - : WILEY PERIODICALS, INC. - 2055-5822. ; 6:6, s. 1167-1177
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims To investigate the still uncertain independent prognostic impact of pulse pressure (PP) in acute heart failure (HF), in particular across the left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) phenotypes, and the potential contribution of PP in outlining the individual phenotypes. Methods and results We prospectively evaluated 1-year death and rehospitalization in 4314 patients admitted for acute HF grouped by EF and stratified by their PP level on admission. In HF with reduced (amp;lt; 40%) EF (HFrEF), the highest quartiles of PP had the lowest unadjusted [hazard ratio (HR) 0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-0.98] and adjusted (HR 0.64 0.50-0.82) risk of 1 year all cause death compared to the lowest quartile. Its prognostic impact was partially mediated by systolic blood pressure (SBP). In HF with preserved (amp;gt;= 50%) EF (HFpEF), the intermediate quartile of PP showed the lowest 1 year all cause mortality in unadjusted (HR 0.598, CI 0.416-0.858) and adjusted (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.388-0.801) models with no relationship with SBP. In a receiver operating characteristic analysis, a combination of PP amp;gt; 60 mmHg and SBP amp;gt; 140 mmHg was associated to a preserved EF with a high performance value. No prognostic significance of PP was found in the HF with mid-range EF subgroup. Conclusions In acute HFrEF, there is an almost linear inverse relation between mortality and PP, partly mediated by SBP. In HFpEF, a J-shaped relationship between mortality and PP was present with a better prognosis at the nadir. A combination of PP amp;gt; 60 mmHg with SBP amp;gt; 140 mmHg may be clinically helpful as marker of a preserved left ventricular EF.
|
|
| 2. |
- Temporelli, Pier Luigi, et al.
(författare)
-
Atrial fibrillation ablation in heart failure : Findings from the ESC-EHRA EORP Atrial Fibrillation Ablation long-term (AFA LT) registry
- 2022
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Cardiology. - : Elsevier. - 0167-5273 .- 1874-1754. ; 346, s. 19-26
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: The current practice of atrial fibrillation ablation (AFA) as a treatment option for atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with heart failure (HF) across Europe, their clinical profiles and outcomes is still undefined.Methods: The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) led a prospective observational registry of consecutive patients undergoing AFA, in 27 member countries. The subgroup of patients with HF, followed-up for 1 year, was analyzed and the results are reported.Results: Of the 3582 AF patients in the Registry, 537 (14.9%) had HF. Diabetes, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥ 2, structural heart disease and persistent AF were more common in HF than non-HF patients (all p < 0.001). However the in-hospital complications were less frequent in HF patients (5.0% vs. 8.2% p = 0.01). Both in-hospital and 1-year outcomes, including 1-year AF recurrence (15.4%) and repeat ablations (9.5%), were similar in both groups. We subdivided HF patients according to their left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) at baseline into reduced (HFrEF, <40%), mid-range (HFmEF, 40-49%), or preserved EF (HFpEF, ≥ 50%). Most patients were HFpEF (n 375, 77%), 72 (15%) were HFmEF and 8% HFrEF. The most frequent underlying conditions in HFpEF were hypertension and ischemic heart disease, while those most common in HFmEF and HFrEF were valvular and dilated cardiomyopathy.Conclusion: In routine care in Europe, HF patients represent a minority of patients undergoing AFA, and most belong to the HFpEF phenotype. The limited clinical research on AFA HFpEF patients is reflected by the uncertainty expressed in the current AF Guidelines and Expert statements.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Tilz, Roland Richard, et al.
(författare)
-
Which patients with atrial fibrillation undergo an ablation procedure today in Europe? : A report from the ESC-EHRA-EORP Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Long-Term and Atrial Fibrillation General Pilot Registries
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Europace. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1099-5129 .- 1532-2092. ; 22:2, s. 250-258
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- AimsRhythm control management in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) may be unequal across Europe. The aim of this study was to investigate how selective the patient cohort referred for AF ablation is, as compared to the general AF population in Europe, and to describe the governing mechanisms for such selection.Methods and resultsDescriptive comparative statistical analyses of the baseline characteristics were performed between the cohorts of Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Long-Term (ESC EORP AFA-LT) registry, designed to provide a picture of contemporary real-world AF ablation, and the AF population from the AF-General (ESC EORP AF-Gen) pilot registry. Data collection was performed using a web-based system. In the AFA and in the Atrial Fibrillation General (AFG) pilot registries, 3593 and 3049 patients were enrolled, respectively. Patients who underwent AF ablation were younger, more commonly male, and had significantly less comorbidities. Atrial Fibrillation Ablation patients often presented without comorbidities, resulting in a lower risk of stroke (CHA2DS2-VASc ≥5: 2.9% vs. 24.5%, all P < 0.001) and bleeding (HAS-BLED ≥2: 8.5% vs. 40.5%, P < 0.001) but with European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) scores >1 and more prevalent AF-related symptoms such as palpitations, fatigue, and weakness (all P < 0.001) as compared to the general AF patients. Atrial Fibrillation Ablation patients were significantly more often male, had higher left ventricular ejection fraction (59.5% vs. 52.4%) and smaller left atrial size on echocardiogram (P < 0.001 each).ConclusionThe comparison of the patient cohorts in the AFA and AFG registries showed that AF ablation in European clinical practice is mostly performed in relatively young, symptomatic and relatively healthy patients.
|
|
