Back to Search Start Over

Prevalence and Prognostic Significance of Microvascular Dysfunction in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction

Authors :
J. Ranjit Arnold
Prathap Kanagala
Charley A. Budgeon
Michael Jerosch-Herold
Gaurav S. Gulsin
Anvesha Singh
Jamal N. Khan
Daniel C.S. Chan
Iain B. Squire
Leong L. Ng
Gerry P. McCann
Source :
JACC. Cardiovascular imaging. 15(6)
Publication Year :
2021

Abstract

The pathophysiological and clinical significance of microvascular dysfunction (MVD) in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains uncertain.The aim of this study was to use cardiovascular magnetic resonance to: 1) quantify coronary microvascular function; 2) examine the relationship between perfusion and fibrosis; and 3) evaluate the impact of MVD and fibrosis on long-term clinical outcomes.In a prospective, observational study, patients with HFpEF and control subjects underwent multiparametric cardiovascular magnetic resonance (comprising assessment of left ventricular volumetry, perfusion, and fibrosis [focal by late gadolinium enhancement and diffuse by extracellular volume]). The primary endpoint was the composite of death or hospitalization with heart failure.One hundred and one patients with HFpEF (mean age 73 ± 9 years, mean ejection fraction 56% ± 5%) and 43 control subjects (mean age 73 ± 5 years, mean ejection fraction 58% ± 5%) were studied. Myocardial perfusion reserve (MPR) was lower in patients with HFpEF versus control subjects (1.74 ± 0.76 vs 2.22 ± 0.76; P = 0.001). MVD (defined as MPR 2.0) was present in 70% of patients with HFpEF (vs 48% of control subjects; P = 0.014). There was no significant linear correlation between MPR and diffuse fibrosis (r = -0.10; P = 0.473) and no difference in MPR between those with and without focal fibrosis (mean difference -0.03; 95% CI: -0.37 to 0.30). In the HFpEF group, during median follow-up of 3.1 years, there were 45 composite events. MPR was independently predictive of clinical outcome following adjustment for clinical, blood, and imaging parameters (1 SD increase: HR: 0.673 [95% CI: 0.463 to 0.978; P = 0.038]; HR: 0.694 [95% CI: 0.491 to 0.982; P = 0.039]; and HR: 0.690 [95% CI: 0.489 to 0.973; P = 0.034], respectively).MVD is highly prevalent among patients with HFpEF and is an independent predictor of prognosis. The lack of correlation between MVD and fibrosis may challenge the assertion of a direct causal link between these entities. (Developing Imaging and Plasma Biomarkers in Describing Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction [DIAMONDHFpEF]; NCT03050593).

Details

ISSN :
18767591
Volume :
15
Issue :
6
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
JACC. Cardiovascular imaging
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....883973af00e3ed3ca06970bf37ce5751