Search

Abstract: Background and objective: Doppler echocardiographic assessment of diastolic filling provides a non-invasive estimate of left ventricular (LV) filling pressure and the most advanced diastolic filling grade, the restrictive filling pattern (RFP), has been linked to prognosis in patients post acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and with heart failure (HF). There remains some uncertainty about the prognostic role of RFP in patients with varied levels of systolic function. The objective of this collaboration is to determine whether the presence of RFP offers additional prognostic information over LV systolic function, symptoms or other clinical factors in patients post AMI or with HF. Methods: The Meta-analysis Research Group in Echocardiography (MeRGE) has been established in order to test this through two individual patient meta-analyses. Prospective studies that enrolled patients with either established HF or post AMI and included Doppler-echocardiography and outcome data will be merged into two large datasets (3739 AMI patients and 3540 HF patients) in order to evaluate the independent effects of RFP upon total and cardiovascular mortality using Kaplan–Meier survival analysis methods and Cox proportional Hazards model for multi-variate analysis. Survival will be examined within different bands of LV systolic function based upon ejection fraction (EF). Implications: This unique dataset will provide a very large cohort of patients, which will be adequately powered to provide new and prognostically important information to further aid risk stratification in these two high-risk patient groups. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Background: Several studies have reported that the presence of a restrictive filling pattern (RFP) is associated with poor outcome in patients with heart failure (HF). These studies, of variable sample size, have involved different HF patient groups with variable associated mortality rates and follow-up times, and while powered for effects on combined end-points such as death or hospital admission, many were underpowered to reliably determine the overall effect of the RFP on total mortality. Consequently, we performed a meta-analysis to determine the mortality associated with RFP in patients with HF. Methods: We searched several online medical databases for prospective studies of patients with HF. All authors were requested to confirm their data. All-cause mortality was compared between RFP and non-restrictive filling patterns (Non-RFP). Review Manager version 4.2.7 software was used for the analysis. Results: 3024 patients in 27 studies were identified (379 idiopathic cardiomyopathy, 2645 mixed aetiology HF). Average follow-up was between 3 months and 5 years. 1284 (42%) patients had RFP at baseline. 688 deaths occurred and the overall odds ratio for death was 4.36 (CI 3.60, 5.04); idiopathic group: 6.65 (CI 3.86, 11.47); mixed aetiology group: 4.10 (CI 3.34, 5.04). The overall odds ratio for death/transplantation was 4.87 (CI 4.04, 5.86); idiopathic group: 7.62 (CI 4.50, 12.92); mixed aetiology group: 4.56 (CI 3.74, 5.56). Conclusions: Restrictive filling pattern is associated with a four-fold increase in mortality in patients with HF and thus should be an important part of the echocardiographic assessment of such patients. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is considered for severe aortic valve disease at high and now intermediate risk for surgical aortic valve replacement. Risk stratification plays a critical role decision-making for intervention and modality. We compared the prognostic utility of surgical risk scores for TAVI in this meta-analysis. Methods MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane and Web of Science databases from 1 January 1980 to 31 December 2015 were searched. Studies were systematically reviewed for inclusion, and data extracted for pooled analyses. Results Amongst 1688 articles searched, 47 full-text articles were screened and 24 studies (12,346 TAVI cases) included for analyses. Pooled c-statistics (95% confidence interval) for operative mortality were EuroSCORE 0.62 (0.57–0.67), EuroSCORE II 0.62 (0.59–0.66), STS Score 0.62 (0.59–0.65). Pooled calibration odds ratios (95%CI) were EuroSCORE 0.31 (0.25–0.38), EuroSCORE II 1.26 (1.06–1.51), STS 0.95 (0.72–1.27). C-statistics (95%CI) for 1-year mortality were EuroSCORE 0.62 (0.57–0.67), EuroSCORE II 0.66 (0.61–0.71) and STS Score 0.58 (0.53–0.64). Conclusion Surgical risk scores at most modestly discriminated operative and 1-year mortality. The EuroSCORE grossly over-estimated operative mortality while the EuroSCORE II and STS Scores fitted better to TAVI outcomes with their own limitations. There is a need for the development and validation of TAVI-specific risk models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Meta-analyses are increasingly used to summarise observational data however a literature meta-analysis (LMA) may give different results to the corresponding individual patient meta-analysis (IPMA). This study compares the published results of equivalent LMAs and IPMAs, highlighting factors that can affect the results and therefore impact on clinical interpretation of meta-analyses. Method: Univariate results from published meta-analyses of prospective observational outcome data were compared, as were the number of studies, patients and length of follow-up. The absolute difference in survival was calculated. The association between severe diastolic dysfunction (RFP) and death post acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and in chronic heart failure (HF) were used as clinical examples. Results: The IPMA hazard ratio was lower that the LMA odds ratio: AMI hazard ratio 2.67 (95% confidence interval 2.23 to 3.20), odds ratio 4.10 (3.38 to 4.99); HF hazard ratio 2.42 (2.06 to 2.83), odds ratio 4.36 (3.60 to 5.04). The IPMAs contained most of the studies from the LMAs as well as additional unpublished data, and a longer length of follow-up was available in the IPMAs (AMI 3.7 vs 2.6 yr, HF 4.0 vs 1.5yr). Restricting analysis to the same studies in both the LMA and IPMA resulted in a similar difference in effect sizes between methods to those found in the published analyses. Conclusions: The result of a meta-analysis is affected by whether study level or individual patient data have been used, and the variant of analysis that is required. Awareness and consideration of these factors is important for clinical interpretation of meta-analyses. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: BNP and echocardiographic E/Ea are variables helpful in the management of patients with heart failure (HF). The response of E/Ea to treatment for acute decompensated HF remains uncertain. This pilot study aimed to explore this relationship. 24 patients (17 male, mean age 69 years, median ejection fraction 26%) hospitalized with HF were enrolled in this study. Paired clinical examination, BNP-32 level, and echocardiogram were performed at admission and discharge. By discharge patient symptoms and BNP-32 had significantly improved, however E/Ea did not change. Our data suggests that BNP-32 and E/Ea may not be interchangeable indices and may respond differently during treatment of acute decompensated HF. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]