Shourav, Md Manjurul Islam

Background Studies suggest that hypoperfusion from heart failure (HF) may contribute to cognitive decline. However, the relationship between the HF subtypes and cognition remains poorly described in real‐world populations. Methods We conducted a cross‐sectional study of patients aged ≥18 years seen at the Mayo Clinic in 2022 who underwent echocardiogram and cognitive assessment within 1 year. HF was classified per the 2022 American Heart Association as no HF, HF with preserved ejection fraction (EF), HF with mildly reduced EF, and HF with reduced EF. Cognitive impairment was categorized using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment score as normal (≥26), mild (18–25), and moderate to severe (<18). Linear regression assessed EF–Montreal Cognitive Assessment correlation and logistic regression the association between HF subtypes and cognitive dysfunction, adjusting for age, sex, race, and vascular risk factors. Results A total of 1592 patients met inclusion criteria (mean age, 75.7±13.8 years; 48.5% women). Lower EF was associated with worse cognitive performance (postadjustment β=0.033, P =0.013). Patients with HF with reduced EF and patients with HF with preserved EF had significantly lower Montreal Cognitive Assessment scores than those without HF (17.6±6.2 and 18.9±5.8 versus 19.9±6.0, P <0.001). The prevalence of moderate to severe cognitive impairment was highest in HF with reduced EF (43.3%), followed by HF with preserved EF (34.4%), no heart failure (28.6%), and HF with mildly reduced EF (23.4%) (adjusted trend P =0.032). Conclusions HF, independent of ejection fraction alone, is associated with cognitive impairment. Further studies should confirm these findings and evaluate the impact of interventions targeting EF and HF subtypes on cognitive outcomes.

Background: The management of asymptomatic high-grade carotid stenosis remains challenging, particularly in identifying individuals at highest risk for hypoperfusion-related stroke. Impaired cerebrovascular reactivity (CVR) has emerged as a potential predictor of future cerebrovascular events. Objective: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to quantify the association between impaired CVR and the risk of ipsilateral ischemic stroke or TIA in patients with asymptomatic high-grade carotid stenosis/occlusion. Methods: A systematic literature search of PubMed, Embase and Scopus was conducted from inception till July 2025. Eligible studies included asymptomatic patients with ≥70% carotid stenosis or occlusion who underwent CVR assessment and reported ipsilateral ischemic stroke or TIA outcomes. Pooled relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Forest plots were generated, and heterogeneity was assessed using the chi-square test and the I 2 statistic. Results: Six prospective observational studies including a total of 361 patients with asymptomatic high-grade carotid stenosis/occlusion (mean age 70.4 years; 73.6% male; 71.2% with hypertension; 28.6% with diabetes; 29.6% current or former smokers) were included in the analysis. Of these, 120 patients had impaired CVR and 241 had preserved CVR. Transcranial Doppler (TCD) was the most frequently used modality to assess CVR, with acetazolamide or CO 2 as the vasodilatory stimulus. Following CVR assessment, patients were monitored for a weighted mean follow-up of 26.2 months (range: 21.5 to 42.5 months). The incidence of ipsilateral ischemic stroke or TIA was 14.2% in patients with impaired CVR versus 2.1% in those with preserved CVR (RR 3.98; 95% CI 1.62–9.76; P = 0.003; Figure 1). When limited to ipsilateral ischemic stroke alone, the incidence was 21.4% in the impaired CVR group compared to 4.3% in the preserved CVR group (RR 3.35; 95% CI 1.54–7.25; P = 0.002; Figure 2). Conclusions: Impaired CVR is associated with a 3- to 4-fold increased risk of ipsilateral ischemic stroke or TIA in patients with high-grade carotid stenosis/occlusion. CVR assessment may help stratify risk and guide individualized management in this population.

Introduction: Studies suggest that stroke and hypoperfusion from heart failure (HF) may contribute to cognitive decline. However, the relationship between the HF subtypes and cognition remains poorly described in real-world populations. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that HF subtypes are differentially associated with cognitive impairment and that lower left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) correlates with poorer cognitive performance. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of patients aged ≥18 years seen at a Heath System in 2022 who underwent both echocardiogram and cognitive assessment within one year. HF was classified into four groups based on 2022 American Heart Association HF guideline: No heart failure, HFpEF (HF with preserved LVEF), HFmrEF (HF with mid-range LVEF), and HFrEF (HF with reduced LVEF). Cognitive impairment was categorized using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA) as normal (≥26), mild (18–25), moderate (10–17), and severe (<10). Multivariable linear regression assessed the correlation between EF and MoCA, and logistic regression evaluated the association between HF subtypes and severity of cognitive loss, adjusting for age, sex, race, hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia, chronic kidney disease, stroke. Results: A total of 1,695 patients were included in the study (mean age, 75.3±14 years; 48.3% female). 82.0% had HFpEF; 7.1%, HFmrEF; 7.9%, HFrEF, and 3.0% no HF. LVEF was positively associated with MoCA score (β=0.028, p=0.032). Patients with LVEF ≤40% had lower MoCA scores (17.7 ± 6.2 vs. 19.1 ± 5.9, p=0.008) and higher adjusted odds of moderate/severe cognitive impairment (aOR 2.49, 95%CI 1.20-5.15, p=0.014), compared to those with LVEF >40%. Adjusted odds of moderate to severe cognitive impairment were 1.14 for HFpEF, 0.99 for HFmrEF, and 2.81 for HFrEF compared to patients with no heart failure (trend-P=0.031, Table). Conclusions: Lower LVEF was independently associated with worse cognitive performance. Patients with HFrEF had a 2.5-fold higher risk of moderate to severe cognitive impairment. This association was not observed in patients with HFpEF or HFmrEF, suggesting differential cognitive effects across HF subtypes. Further studies are warranted to confirm these findings and evaluate the impact of interventions targeting EF and HF subtypes on cognitive outcomes.