Tada, Atsushi

BACKGROUND: Plasma NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide) is commonly used to diagnose heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), but its diagnostic performance in the ambulatory/outpatient setting is unknown because previous studies lacked objective reference standards. METHODS: Among patients with chronic dyspnea, diagnosis of HFpEF or noncardiac dyspnea was determined conclusively by exercise catheterization in a derivation cohort (n=414), multicenter validation cohort 1 (n=560), validation cohort 2 (n=207), and a nonobese Japanese validation cohort 3 (n=77). Optimal NT-proBNP cut points for HFpEF rule out (optimizing sensitivity) and rule in (optimizing specificity) were derived and tested, stratified by obesity and atrial fibrillation. Derived cut points were tested in 3 additional validation cohorts (cohorts 4–6) in whom HFpEF was diagnosed by resting catheterization only (n=260), previous hospitalization for heart failure (n=447), or exercise echocardiography (n=517), respectively. RESULTS: Current recommended rule-out NT-proBNP threshold <125 pg/mL had 82% sensitivity (95% CI, 77%–88%) with a body mass index (BMI) <35 kg/m 2 , decreasing to 67% (95% CI, 58%–77%) with a BMI ≥35 kg/m 2 . A lower rule-out NT-proBNP threshold <50 pg/mL displayed good sensitivity with a BMI <35 kg/m 2 (97% [95% CI, 95%–99%]), with a modest decline in sensitivity with a BMI ≥35 kg/m 2 (86% [95% CI, 79%–93%]); diagnostic thresholds were confirmed in validation cohorts 1 and 2 (91% [95% CI, 88%–95%] and 86% [95% CI, 80%–93%] with a BMI <35 kg/m 2 ; 80% [95% CI, 74%–87%] and 84% [95% CI, 74%–93%] with a BMI ≥35 kg/m 2 ). Current consensus age- and BMI-stratified rule-in thresholds demonstrated only 65% specificity (95% CI, 57%–72%). Rule-in NT-proBNP threshold ≥500 pg/mL had 85% specificity (95% CI, 78%–91%) with a BMI <35 kg/m 2 (87% [95% CI, 80%–94%] and 90% [95% CI, 81%–99%] in validation cohorts), with 100% specificity at a BMI ≥35 kg/m 2 (93% [95% CI, 81%–100%] and 100% in validation cohorts). With a BMI ≥35 kg/m 2 , lower rule-in thresholds (≥220 pg/mL) provided good specificity (88% [95% CI, 73%–100%]; 93% [95% CI, 81%–100%] and 100% in validation cohorts). Findings were consistent in validation cohorts 3 through 6 (sensitivity of <50 pg/mL, 93%–98%; specificity of ≥500 pg/mL, 82%–89%). NT-proBNP provided no incremental discrimination among patients with history of AF; ≥98% of patients with AF and dyspnea were found to have HFpEF in our cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with chronic unexplained dyspnea, current rule-in and rule-out NT-proBNP diagnostic thresholds lead to unacceptably high error rates, with important interactions by obesity and AF status. In our study, NT-proBNP provided little value in those with AF and dyspnea because the presence of AF is by itself a robust biomarker of HFpEF. Use of separate rule-in and rule-out diagnostic thresholds stratified by BMI reduces miscategorization and can guide more appropriate use of exercise testing for possible HFpEF.

Background: Pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) is commonly considered to reflect opposition to lung blood flow caused by the arteries (PVRa), but downstream venous resistance (PVRv) may also contribute to pulmonary hypertension (PH) associated with left heart diseases (PH-LHD). In patients referred for right heart catheterization, we investigated PVR distribution and its pathophysiologic implications in PH-LHD and other forms of PH. Methods: Patients with PH-LHD (n=292), pulmonary veno-occlusive disease (PVOD, n=10), chronic thromboembolic PH (CTEPH, n=36) and controls without PH (Ctrl, n=28) were included. Pulmonary capillary pressure (Pc) was calculated using the pulmonary artery occlusion technique. PVR was partitioned into PVRa ((mPAP-Pc)/CO) and PVRv ((Pc-PAWP)/CO) with each expressed as % of PVR. PH-LHD was divided into isolated post-capillary PH (IpcPH) and combined post- and pre-capillary PH (CpcPH). Further, PH-LHD was categorized as heart failure with preserved (HFpEF, EF≥50%) or reduced (HFrEF, EF<50%) ejection fraction or left valvular heart disease (L-VHD). In subsets, functional tests (n=71-81) and histological pulmonary venous (PV) remodeling (autopsy, n=15) were performed to investigate correlations with PVR distribution. Results: PVR distribution showed an arterial predominance in Ctrl and CTEPH, and increasing venous contribution in PH-LHD (both IpcPH and CpcPH) and PVOD (Figure A-F). In PH-LHD, patients with HFpEF had proportionately greater venous contribution to PVR than HFrEF and L-VHD (Figure G-I), though not to the extent observed in PVOD. In subsets, PVRv was more strongly correlated with E/e’, extravascular lung water estimated by sonographic B-lines, arterial PO 2 , pulmonary dead space fraction (VD/VT), DLCO, and, among the autopsy series, PV intimal thickness as compared to PVRa (Figure J-O). Conclusions: Pulmonary venous contributions to PVR are amplified in patients with PH-LHD, which is correlated with greater lung congestion, ventilatory and gas exchange abnormalities, and histological venous remodeling. Further study is required to determine the molecular mechanism and novel therapeutics of pulmonary venous disease in PH-LHD.

BACKGROUND: Systemic arterial compliance and venous capacitance are typically impaired in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), contributing to hemodynamic congestion with stress. Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors reduce hemodynamic congestion and improve clinical outcomes in patients with HFpEF, but the mechanisms remain unclear. This study tested the hypothesis that Dapagliflozin would improve systemic arterial compliance and venous capacitance during exercise in patients with HFpEF. METHODS: In this secondary analysis from the CAMEO-DAPA trial (Cardiac and Metabolic Effects of Dapagliflozin in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction Trial), 37 patients with HFpEF (mean age 68 ± 9 years, women 65%) underwent invasive hemodynamic exercise testing with simultaneous echocardiography at baseline and following treatment for 24 weeks with Dapagliflozin or placebo. Radial artery pressure (BP) was measured continuously using a fluid-filled catheter with transformation to aortic pressure, central hemodynamics were measured using high-fidelity micromanometers, and stressed blood volume was estimated from hemodynamic indices fit to a comprehensive cardiovascular model. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant effect of Dapagliflozin on resting BP, but Dapagliflozin reduced systolic BP during peak exercise (estimated treatment difference [ETD], −18.8 mm Hg [95% CI, −33.9 to −3.7] P =0.016). Reduction in BP was related to improved exertional total arterial compliance (ETD, 0.06 mL/mm Hg/m 2 [95% CI, 0.003–0.11] P =0.039) and aortic root characteristic impedance (ETD, −2.6 mm Hg/mL*sec [95% CI: −5.1 to −0.03] P =0.048), with no significant effect on systemic vascular resistance. Dapagliflozin reduced estimated stressed blood volume at rest and during peak exercise (ETD, −292 mm Hg [95% CI, −530 to −53] P =0.018), and improved venous capacitance evidenced by a decline in ratio of estimated stressed blood volume to total blood volume (ETD, −7.3% [95% CI, −13.3 to −1.3] P =0.020). Each of these effects of Dapagliflozin at peak exercise were also observed during matched 20W exercise intensity. Improvements in total arterial compliance and estimated stressed blood volume were correlated with decreases in body weight, and reduction in systolic BP with treatment was correlated with the change in estimated stressed blood volume during exercise (r=0.40, P =0.019). Decreases in BP were correlated with reduction in pulmonary capillary wedge pressure during exercise (r=0.56, P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with HFpEF, treatment with Dapagliflozin improved systemic arterial compliance and venous capacitance during exercise, while reducing aortic characteristic impedance, suggesting a reduction in arterial wall stiffness. These vascular effects may partially explain the clinical benefits with sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors in HFpEF. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT04730947.

Abstract Understanding of the pathophysiology of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) has advanced rapidly over the past two decades. Currently, HFpEF is recognized as a heterogeneous syndrome, and there is a growing movement towards developing personalized treatments based on phenotype-guided strategies. Left ventricular dysfunction is a fundamental pathophysiological abnormality in HFpEF; however, recent evidence also highlights significant roles for the atria, right ventricle, pericardium, and extracardiac contributors. Imaging plays a central role in characterizing these complex and highly integrated domains of pathophysiology. This review focuses on established evidence, recent insights, and the challenges that need to be addressed concerning the pathophysiology of HFpEF, with a focus on imaging-based evaluations and opportunities for further research.

Abstract Aims This study aimed to evaluate the clinical significance of secondary mitral regurgitation (MR) in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Methods and results We conducted a prospective study enrolling consecutively evaluated patients with HFpEF undergoing invasive haemodynamic exercise testing with simultaneous echocardiography. Compared to HFpEF without MR (n = 145, 79.7%), those with mild or moderate MR (n = 37, 20.3%) were older, more likely to be women, had more left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction, and more likely to have left atrial (LA) myopathy reflected by greater burden of atrial fibrillation, more LA dilatation, and poorer LA function. Pulmonary artery (PA) wedge pressure was higher at rest in HFpEF with MR (17 ± 5 mmHg vs. 20 ± 5 mmHg, p = 0.005), but there was no difference with exercise. At rest, only 2 (1.1%) patients had moderate MR, and none developed severe MR. Pulmonary vascular resistance was higher, and right ventricular (RV)-PA coupling was more impaired in patients with HFpEF and MR at rest and exercise. LV and LA myocardial dysfunction remained more severe in patients with MR during stress compared to those without MR, characterized by greater LA dilatation during all stages of exertion, lower LA emptying fraction and compliance, steeper and rightward-shifted LA pressure–volume relationships, and reduced LV longitudinal contractile function. Conclusions Patients with HFpEF and mild or moderate MR have more severe LV systolic dysfunction, LA myopathy, RV-PA uncoupling, and more severe pulmonary vascular disease. Mitral valve incompetence in this setting is a phenotypic marker of more advanced disease but is not a causal factor in development of HFpEF.

Abstract Aims We aimed to clarify the extent to which cardiac and peripheral impairments to oxygen delivery and utilization contribute to exercise intolerance and risk for adverse events, and how this relates to diversity and multiplicity in pathophysiologic traits. Methods and results Individuals with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and non-cardiac dyspnoea (controls) underwent invasive cardiopulmonary exercise testing and clinical follow-up. Haemodynamics and oxygen transport responses were compared. HFpEF patients were then categorized a priori into previously-proposed, non-exclusive descriptive clinical trait phenogroups, including cardiometabolic, pulmonary vascular disease, left atrial myopathy, and vascular stiffening phenogroups based on clinical and haemodynamic profiles to contrast pathophysiology and clinical risk. Overall, patients with HFpEF (n = 643) had impaired cardiac output reserve with exercise (2.3 vs. 2.8 L/min, p = 0.025) and greater reliance on peripheral oxygen extraction augmentation (4.5 vs. 3.8 ml/dl, p &lt; 0.001) compared to dyspnoeic controls (n = 219). Most (94%) patients with HFpEF met criteria for at least one clinical phenogroup, and 67% fulfilled criteria for multiple overlapping phenogroups. There was greater impairment in peripheral limitations in the cardiometabolic group and greater cardiac output limitations and higher pulmonary vascular resistance during exertion in the other phenogroups. Increasing trait multiplicity within a given patient was associated with worse exercise haemodynamics, poorer exercise capacity, lower cardiac output reserve, and greater risk for heart failure hospitalization or death (hazard ratio 1.74, 95% confidence interval 1.08–2.79 for 0–1 vs. ≥2 phenogroup traits present). Conclusions Though cardiac output response to exercise is limited in patients with HFpEF compared to those with non-cardiac dyspnoea, the relative contributions of cardiac and peripheral limitations vary with differing numbers and types of clinical phenotypic traits present. Patients fulfilling criteria for greater multiplicity and diversity of HFpEF phenogroup traits have poorer exercise capacity, worsening haemodynamic perturbations, and greater risk for adverse outcome.