open access

Vol 3, No 4 (2018)
Original article
Published online: 2018-12-18
Get Citation

Clinical presentations and hemodynamic parameters in patients hospitalized due to acute heart failure stratified by the left-ventricular ejection fraction

Agata Anna Galas1, Paweł Krzesiński1, Grzegorz Gielerak1, Beata Uziębło-Życzkowska1, Małagorzata Banak1
·
Medical Research Journal 2018;3(4):195-203.
Affiliations
  1. Klinika Kardiologii i Chorób Wewnętrznych, Wojskowy Instytut Medyczny

open access

Vol 3, No 4 (2018)
ORIGINAL ARTICLES
Published online: 2018-12-18

Abstract

Background: Currently, one of the most common causes of hospitalization, especially in the elderly,
is heart failure (HF) exacerbation. In nearly 95% of patients, this is caused by fluid overload. There
have been studies comparing the rates of comorbidities and biochemical disturbances in HF patients;
however, their hemodynamic parameters have not yet been assessed. Thus, the aim of this study
was to compare the clinical presentations and hemodynamic parameters assessed via impedance
cardiography (ICG) in patients hospitalized due to acute HF, stratified by the left-ventricular ejection
fraction (LVEF).


Methods: This study enrolled 102 patients, aged > 18 years, hospitalized due to decompensated HF.
Ninety-seven patients (74 men, 23 women) underwent echocardiographic examination. Biochemical
and hemodynamic parameters were assessed on the day of admission and, subsequently, every
other day during hospitalization. Based on echocardiographic findings and the ESC guidelines the
study group was divided into the following subgroups: HFrEF (EF < 40%), HFpEF (EF > 50%), and
HFmrEF (EF 40–49%).


Results: The HFrEF group, which constituted 60.8% of patients (n = 58), was predominantly male (P =
0.0005); and most had elevated N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide levels (P = 0.0008). The HFpEF and
HFmrEF subgroups, jointly (n = 38), were characterized by higher systolic blood pressure (P = 0.0001),
and lower hemoglobin levels (P = 0.003). The hemodynamic assessment showed that HFrEF patients
had higher total fluid content (P = 0.005) and lower systolic time ratio (P = 0.0002).

Conclusions: Despite similar clinical presentation, patients with HF exhibited different values of hemodynamic
and biochemical parameters depending on their LVEF; this indicates non-homogeneity of pathomechanisms
and causes of HF decompensation.

Abstract

Background: Currently, one of the most common causes of hospitalization, especially in the elderly,
is heart failure (HF) exacerbation. In nearly 95% of patients, this is caused by fluid overload. There
have been studies comparing the rates of comorbidities and biochemical disturbances in HF patients;
however, their hemodynamic parameters have not yet been assessed. Thus, the aim of this study
was to compare the clinical presentations and hemodynamic parameters assessed via impedance
cardiography (ICG) in patients hospitalized due to acute HF, stratified by the left-ventricular ejection
fraction (LVEF).


Methods: This study enrolled 102 patients, aged > 18 years, hospitalized due to decompensated HF.
Ninety-seven patients (74 men, 23 women) underwent echocardiographic examination. Biochemical
and hemodynamic parameters were assessed on the day of admission and, subsequently, every
other day during hospitalization. Based on echocardiographic findings and the ESC guidelines the
study group was divided into the following subgroups: HFrEF (EF < 40%), HFpEF (EF > 50%), and
HFmrEF (EF 40–49%).


Results: The HFrEF group, which constituted 60.8% of patients (n = 58), was predominantly male (P =
0.0005); and most had elevated N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide levels (P = 0.0008). The HFpEF and
HFmrEF subgroups, jointly (n = 38), were characterized by higher systolic blood pressure (P = 0.0001),
and lower hemoglobin levels (P = 0.003). The hemodynamic assessment showed that HFrEF patients
had higher total fluid content (P = 0.005) and lower systolic time ratio (P = 0.0002).

Conclusions: Despite similar clinical presentation, patients with HF exhibited different values of hemodynamic
and biochemical parameters depending on their LVEF; this indicates non-homogeneity of pathomechanisms
and causes of HF decompensation.

Get Citation

Keywords

heart failure, acute heart failure, hemodynamic parameters, impedance cardiography, left-ventricular ejection fraction

About this article
Title

Clinical presentations and hemodynamic parameters in patients hospitalized due to acute heart failure stratified by the left-ventricular ejection fraction

Journal

Medical Research Journal

Issue

Vol 3, No 4 (2018)

Article type

Original article

Pages

195-203

Published online

2018-12-18

Page views

1000

Article views/downloads

982

DOI

10.5603/MRJ.a2018.0032

Bibliographic record

Medical Research Journal 2018;3(4):195-203.

Keywords

heart failure
acute heart failure
hemodynamic parameters
impedance cardiography
left-ventricular ejection fraction

Authors

Agata Anna Galas
Paweł Krzesiński
Grzegorz Gielerak
Beata Uziębło-Życzkowska
Małagorzata Banak

References (50)
  1. Ponikowski P, Voors AA, Anker SD, et al. Authors/Task Force Members, Document Reviewers. 2016 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure: The Task Force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Developed with the special contribution of the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC. Eur J Heart Fail. 2016; 18(8): 891–975.
  2. Abraham WT, Adams KF, Fonarow GC, et al. ADHERE Scientific Advisory Committee and Investigators, ADHERE Study Group. In-hospital mortality in patients with acute decompensated heart failure requiring intravenous vasoactive medications: an analysis from the Acute Decompensated Heart Failure National Registry (ADHERE). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005; 46(1): 57–64.
  3. Moleerergpoom W, Hengrussamee K, Piyayotai D, et al. Predictors of in-hospital mortality in acute decompensated heart failure (Thai ADHERE). J Med Assoc Thai. 2013; 96(2): 157–164.
  4. Chan MMY, Lam CSP. How do patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction die? Eur J Heart Fail. 2013; 15(6): 604–613.
  5. Rich JD, Burns J, Freed BH, et al. Beta-Blockers in Heart Failure Collaborative Group, Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure (MAGGIC), Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure MAGGIC, Beta-Blockers in Heart Failure Collaborative Group, Meta-analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure (MAGGIC), Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure, Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure, MAGGIC Investigators, Meta-analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure (MAGGIC) Investigators, Meta-Analysis Global Group In Chronic Heart Failure (MAGGIC), Meta-analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure (MAGGIC). The survival of patients with heart failure with preserved or reduced left ventricular ejection fraction: an individual patient data meta-analysis. Eur Heart J. 2012; 33(14): 1750–1757.
  6. Fonarow GC, Stough WG, Abraham WT, et al. OPTIMIZE-HF Investigators and Hospitals. Characteristics, treatments, and outcomes of patients with preserved systolic function hospitalized for heart failure: a report from the OPTIMIZE-HF Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007; 50(8): 768–777.
  7. Maisel AS, Peacock WF, McMullin N, et al. Timing of immunoreactive B-type natriuretic peptide levels and treatment delay in acute decompensated heart failure: an ADHERE (Acute Decompensated Heart Failure National Registry) analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008; 52(7): 534–540.
  8. Hunter BR, Martindale J, Abdel-Hafez O, et al. Approach to Acute Heart Failure in the Emergency Department. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2017; 60(2): 178–186.
  9. Peacock WF, Cannon CM, Singer AJ, et al. Considerations for initial therapy in the treatment of acute heart failure. Crit Care. 2015; 19: 399.
  10. Sanchez CE, Richards DR. Contemporary in-hospital management strategies for acute decompensated heart failure. Cardiol Rev. 2011; 19(3): 122–129.
  11. Vernon C, Phillips CR. Pulmonary artery catheters in acute heart failure: end of an era? Crit Care. 2009; 13(6): 1003.
  12. Maurer MS. Heart failure with a normal ejection fraction (HFNEF): embracing complexity. J Card Fail. 2009; 15(7): 561–564.
  13. Aurigemma GP, Gaasch WH. Clinical practice. Diastolic heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2004; 351(11): 1097–1105.
  14. Burkhoff D, Maurer MS, Packer M. Heart failure with a normal ejection fraction: is it really a disorder of diastolic function? Circulation. 2003; 107(5): 656–658.
  15. Bursi F, Weston SA, Redfield MM, et al. Systolic and diastolic heart failure in the community. JAMA. 2006; 296(18): 2209–2216.
  16. Steinberg BA, Zhao X, Heidenreich PA, et al. Get With the Guidelines Scientific Advisory Committee and Investigators. Trends in patients hospitalized with heart failure and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction: prevalence, therapies, and outcomes. Circulation. 2012; 126(1): 65–75.
  17. Owan TE, Hodge DO, Herges RM, et al. Trends in prevalence and outcome of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. N Engl J Med. 2006; 355(3): 251–259.
  18. Bhatia RS, Tu JV, Lee DS, et al. Outcome of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in a population-based study. N Engl J Med. 2006; 355(3): 260–269.
  19. Krzesiński P, Gielerak G, Kowal J. [Impedance cardiography - a modern tool for monitoring therapy of cardiovascular diseases]. Kardiol Pol. 2009; 67(1): 65–71.
  20. Smilde TDJ, van Veldhuisen DJ, Navis G, et al. Drawbacks and prognostic value of formulas estimating renal function in patients with chronic heart failure and systolic dysfunction. Circulation. 2006; 114(15): 1572–1580.
  21. Quiroz R, Doros G, Shaw P, et al. Comparison of characteristics and outcomes of patients with heart failure preserved ejection fraction versus reduced left ventricular ejection fraction in an urban cohort. Am J Cardiol. 2014; 113(4): 691–696.
  22. Hsich EM, Grau-Sepulveda MV, Hernandez AF, et al. Sex differences in in-hospital mortality in acute decompensated heart failure with reduced and preserved ejection fraction. Am Heart J. 2012; 163(3): 430–7, 437.e1.
  23. Villacorta H, Saenz-Tello BF, Santos EB, et al. Renal dysfunction and anemia in patients with heart failure with reduced versus normal ejection fraction. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2010; 94(3): 357–63, 378.
  24. de Denus S, Lavoie J, Ducharme A, et al. Differences in biomarkers in patients with heart failure with a reduced vs a preserved left ventricular ejection fraction. Can J Cardiol. 2012; 28(1): 62–68.
  25. Cheng RK, Cox M, Neely ML, et al. Outcomes in patients with heart failure with preserved, borderline, and reduced ejection fraction in the Medicare population. Am Heart J. 2014; 168(5): 721–730.
  26. Mentz RJ, Kelly JP, von Lueder TG, et al. Noncardiac comorbidities in heart failure with reduced versus preserved ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014; 64(21): 2281–2293.
  27. Bishu K, Deswal A, Chen HH, et al. Biomarkers in acutely decompensated heart failure with preserved or reduced ejection fraction. Am Heart J. 2012; 164(5): 763–770.e3.
  28. Guisado-Espartero ME, Salamanca-Bautista P, Aramburu-Bodas Ó, et al. RICA investigators group. Heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction in patients admitted to internal medicine departments: Findings from the RICA Registry. Int J Cardiol. 2018; 255: 124–128.
  29. Steinberg BA, Zhao X, Heidenreich PA, et al. Get With the Guidelines Scientific Advisory Committee and Investigators. Trends in patients hospitalized with heart failure and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction: prevalence, therapies, and outcomes. Circulation. 2012; 126(1): 65–75.
  30. Brouwers FP, de Boer RA, van der Harst P, et al. Incidence and epidemiology of new onset heart failure with preserved vs. reduced ejection fraction in a community-based cohort: 11-year follow-up of PREVEND. Eur Heart J. 2013; 34(19): 1424–1431.
  31. van Deursen VM, Urso R, Laroche C, et al. Co-morbidities in patients with heart failure: an analysis of the European Heart Failure Pilot Survey. Eur J Heart Fail. 2014; 16(1): 103–111.
  32. Arimoto T, Takeishi Y, Niizeki T, et al. Cystatin C, a novel measure of renal function, is an independent predictor of cardiac events in patients with heart failure. J Card Fail. 2005; 11(8): 595–601.
  33. Carrasco-Sánchez FJ, Galisteo-Almeda L, Páez-Rubio I, et al. Prognostic value of cystatin C on admission in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. J Card Fail. 2011; 17(1): 31–38.
  34. Dharnidharka VR, Kwon C, Stevens G. Serum cystatin C is superior to serum creatinine as a marker of kidney function: a meta-analysis. Am J Kidney Dis. 2002; 40(2): 221–226.
  35. Finney H, Newman DJ, Price CP. Adult reference ranges for serum cystatin C, creatinine and predicted creatinine clearance. Ann Clin Biochem. 2000; 37 ( Pt 1): 49–59.
  36. Laterza OF, Price CP, Scott MG. Cystatin C: an improved estimator of glomerular filtration rate? Clin Chem. 2002; 48(5): 699–707.
  37. Sweitzer NK, Lopatin M, Yancy CW, et al. Comparison of clinical features and outcomes of patients hospitalized with heart failure and normal ejection fraction (> or =55%) versus those with mildly reduced (40% to 55%) and moderately to severely reduced (<40%) fractions. Am J Cardiol. 2008; 101(8): 1151–1156.
  38. Benedict CR, Weiner DH, Johnstone DE, et al. Comparative neurohormonal responses in patients with preserved and impaired left ventricular ejection fraction: results of the Studies of Left Ventricular Dysfunction (SOLVD) Registry. The SOLVD Investigators. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993; 22(4 Suppl A): 146A–153A.
  39. Kitzman DW, Little WC, Brubaker PH, et al. Pathophysiological characterization of isolated diastolic heart failure in comparison to systolic heart failure. JAMA. 2002; 288(17): 2144–2150.
  40. Maisel A, Hollander JE, Guss D, et al. Rapid Emergency Department Heart Failure Outpatient Trial investigators. Primary results of the Rapid Emergency Department Heart Failure Outpatient Trial (REDHOT). A multicenter study of B-type natriuretic peptide levels, emergency department decision making, and outcomes in patients presenting with shortness of breath. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004; 44(6): 1328–1333.
  41. Wang TJ, Larson MG, Levy D, et al. Impact of age and sex on plasma natriuretic peptide levels in healthy adults. Am J Cardiol. 2002; 90(3): 254–258.
  42. Lam CSP, Cheng S, Choong K, et al. Influence of sex and hormone status on circulating natriuretic peptides. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011; 58(6): 618–626.
  43. Kaszuba E, Scheel S, Odeberg H, et al. Comparing impedance cardiography and echocardiography in the assessment of reduced left ventricular systolic function. BMC Res Notes. 2013; 6: 114.
  44. Krzesiński P, Gielerak G, Stańczyk A, et al. What does impedance cardiography add more to the assessment of left ventricular diastolic function in essential hypertension? Pol Merkur Lekarski. 2015; 39(234): 352–358.
  45. Krzesiński P, Gielerak G, Kowal J, et al. Usefulness of impedance cardiography in optimisation of antihypertensive treatment in patients with metabolic syndrome: a randomised prospective clinical trial. Kardiol Pol. 2012; 70(6): 599–607.
  46. Facchini C, Malfatto G, Giglio A, et al. Lung ultrasound and transthoracic impedance for noninvasive evaluation of pulmonary congestion in heart failure. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2016; 17(7): 510–517.
  47. Di Somma S, Lalle I, Magrini L, et al. Additive diagnostic and prognostic value of bioelectrical impedance vector analysis (BIVA) to brain natriuretic peptide 'grey-zone' in patients with acute heart failure in the emergency department. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. 2014; 3(2): 167–175.
  48. Sandesara PB, O'Neal WT, Kelli HM, et al. The Prognostic Significance of Diabetes and Microvascular Complications in Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction. Diabetes Care. 2018; 41(1): 150–155.
  49. Taler SJ. Individualizing antihypertensive combination therapies: clinical and hemodynamic considerations. Curr Hypertens Rep. 2014; 16(7): 451.
  50. Krzesiński P, Gielerak GG, Kowal JJ. A "patient-tailored" treatment of hypertension with use of impedance cardiography: a randomized, prospective and controlled trial. Med Sci Monit. 2013; 19: 242–250.

Regulations

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

By VM Media Group sp. z o.o., ul. Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk, Poland
tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, fax:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail: viamedica@viamedica.pl