Rosada, Javier

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Aims. Combined cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) and exercise stress echocardiography (ESE) provides a non-invasive tool to study cardiopulmonary pathophysiology. We analyzed how cardiac functional reserve during exercise relates to peak oxygen consumption (VO2). Methods and Results. We performed a symptom-limited graded ramp bicycle CPET-ESE in 30 healthy controls and 357 patients: 113 at risk of developing heart failure (American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association HF Stages A-B) and 244 in HF Stage C with preserved (HFpEF, n = 101) or reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF, n = 143). Peak VO2 significantly decreased from controls to Stage A-B and Stage C (Table 1). A multivariable regression model to predict peak VO2 revealed peak left ventricular systolic annulus tissue velocity (S"), peak TAPSE/PAPs (tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion/systolic pulmonary artery pressure) and low-load left atrial reservoir strain/E/e’ were independent predictors, in addition to peak heart rate, stroke volume and workload (adjusted R²=0.76, p < 0.0001). The model was successfully tested in subjects with atrial fibrillation (n = 49), and with (n = 224) and without (n = 163) beta-blockers (all p < 0.01). Peak S’ showed the highest accuracy in predicting peak VO2 < 10 mL/kg/min (cut-point ≤ 7.5 cm/s; AUC = 0.92, p < 0.0001) and peak VO2 > 20 mL/kg/min (cut-point > 12.5 cm/s; AUC = 0.84, p < 0.0001) in comparison to the other cardiac variables of the model (p < 0.05). Conclusions. A model incorporating different measures of cardiac mechanics is strongly related to peak aerobic capacity and may help in identifying different causes of effort intolerance from HF Stage A to C. Table 1 Variable Overall population (n = 387) Controls (n = 30) Stage A-B (n = 113) Stage C-HFpEF (n = 101) Stage c-HFrEF (n = 143) p-value Age, years 68.9 ± 11.1 67.1 ± 10.6 67.7 ± 10.4 70.5 ± 10.1 68.5 ± 11 0.1 Male, n (%) 247 (64) 18 (60) 70 (62) 57 (56) 102 (71) 0.1 VO2 @peak, mL/min/kg 15.7 (12.1-19.6) 23 (21.7- 29.7) 18 (15.4- 20.7)* 13.6 (11.8- 16.8)*† 14.2 (10.7- 17.5)*† <0.0001 Workload @peak, W 90 (65-120) 130 (115-195) 110 (84-130)* 70 (55-100)*† 80 (60-110)*† <0.0001 Heart rate @peak, bpm 123 ± 22 142 ± 12 130 ± 20* 115 ± 17*† 119 ± 23*† <0.0001 Stroke volume @peak, mL 83 (71-99) 98 (85-114) 86 (76-107) 83 (74-97)* 75 (63-95)*† <0.0001 Average S" @peak, cm/s 11.2 ± 3.8 17.1 ± 3.9 13.3 ± 2.9* 10.6 ± 2.5*† 8.7 ± 2.7*†‡ <0.0001 TAPSE/PAPs @peak, mm/mmHg 0.75 (0.46-0.97) 1.05 (0.93- 1.16) 0.81 (0.52- 0.91)* 0.52 (0.38- 0.83)*† 0.58 (0.41- 0.89)*† <0.0001 Left atrial reservoir strain/E/e" @low-load, % 2.25 (1.17-5.04) 6.23 (4.45-6.77) 4.34 (3.89- 5.58)* 2.23 (1.31- 2.86)*† 1.91 (1.07-2.44)*†‡ <0.0001 * p < 0.01 vs Controls; † p < 0.01 vs Stage A-B; ‡ p < 0.01 vs Stage C-HFpEF. PAPs systolic pulmonary artery pressure; TAPSE: tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion; VO2: oxygen consumption. Abstract Figure 1

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Aims. We tested the prognostic role of a risk score including bio-humoral evaluation, cardiopulmonary-echocardiographic stress (CPET-ESE) and lung ultrasound, in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced and preserved ejection fraction (HFrEF and HFpEF), and subjects at risk of developing HF (American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Stages A and B). Methods and results. We evaluated 318 subjects: 94 in Stages A-B, 194 in Stage C (85 HFpEF and 109 HFrEF), and 30 age and sex-matched controls (Stage 0). During a median follow-up of 18.5 months, we reported 40 urgent HF visits, 31 HF hospitalisations and 10 cardiovascular deaths. Cox proportional-hazards regression for predicting adverse events identified five independent predictors and each was assigned a number of points proportional to its regression coefficient: Δstress-rest B-lines >10 (3 points), peak oxygen consumption <16 mL/kg/min (2 points), minute ventilation/carbon dioxide production slope ≥36 (2 points), peak systolic pulmonary artery pressure ≥50 mmHg (1 point) and resting N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) >900 pg/mL (1 point). We defined three risk categories: low-risk (<3 points), intermediate-risk (3-6 points), and high-risk (>6 points). The event-free survival probability for these three groups were 93%, 52% and 20%, respectively. Hazard Ratio was 4.55 for each risk category upgrade (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.44-5.93). The area-under-curve for the scoring system to predict events was 0.92 (95% CI 0.88-0.96). Conclusion. A multiparametric risk score including indices of exercise-induced pulmonary congestion, markers of cardiopulmonary dysfunction and NT-proBNP identifies patients at increased risk for HF events across the HF spectrum. Table 1 Variable EPYC score EPYC score <3 (low risk) n = 217 EPYC score 3-6 (intermediate risk) n = 70 EPYC score >6 (high risk) n = 31 p-value (between risk categories) Event-free (n = 244) 0 (0 - 2) 210 (97) 32 (46) 2 (6) <0.0001 With events (n = 74) 6 (4 - 9) 7 (3) 38 (54) 29 (94) <0.0001 p-value (event-free vs with events) <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 Stage 0-Controls (n = 30) 0 (0 - 1) 30 0 0 <0.0001 Stages A-B (n = 94) 1 (0 - 2) 85 (45) 6 (9) 3 (10) <0.0001 Stage C-HFpEF (n = 85) 3 (1 - 6)*† 46 (25) 29 (41) 10 (32) <0.0001 Stage C-HFrEF (n = 109) 4 (2 - 7)*† 56 (30) 35 (50) 18 (58) <0.0001 p-value (between HF Stages) <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 Values are mean ± standard deviation, n (%), or median [25th quartile, 75th quartile]. * p < 0.01 vs Stage 0-Controls; † p < 0.01 vs Stages A-B. Abstract Figure 1

Abstract Aims Risk stratification of heart failure (HF) patients with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) can promote a more personalized treatment. We tested the prognostic value of a multi-parametric evaluation, including biomarkers, cardiopulmonary exercise testing-exercise stress echocardiography (CPET-ESE), and lung ultrasound, in HFpEF patients and subjects at risk of developing HF (HF Stages A and B). Background Risk stratification of heart failure (HF) patients with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) can promote a more personalized treatment. Design We tested the prognostic value of a multi-parametric evaluation, including biomarkers, cardiopulmonary exercise testing-exercise stress echocardiography (CPET-ESE), and lung ultrasound, in HFpEF patients and subjects at risk of developing HF (HF Stages A and B). Methods and results We performed a resting clinical/bio-humoural evaluation and a symptom-limited CPET-ESE in 274 patients (45 Stage A, 68 Stage B, and 161 Stage C-HFpEF) and 30 age- and sex-matched healthy controls. During a median follow-up of 18.5 months, we reported 71 HF hospitalizations and 10 cardiovascular deaths. Cox proportional-hazards regression identified five independent predictors and each was assigned a number of points proportional to its regression coefficient: stress-rest ΔB-lines >10 (3 points), peak oxygen consumption <16 mL/kg/min (2 points), minute ventilation/carbon dioxide production slope ≥36 (2 points), peak systolic pulmonary artery pressure ≥50 mmHg (1 point) and resting N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) >900 pg/mL (1 point). The event-free survival probability for low risk (<3 points), intermediate risk (3–6 points), and high risk (>6 points) were 93%, 52%, and 20%, respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) for the scoring system to predict events was 0.92 (95% CI 0.88–0.96), with an accuracy significantly higher than the individual components of the score (all P < 0.01 vs. individual AUCs). Conclusion A weighted risk score including NT-proBNP, markers of cardiopulmonary dysfunction and indices of exercise-induced pulmonary congestion identifies HFpEF patients at increased risk for adverse events and Stage A and B subjects more likely to progress towards more advanced HF stages.