Right Heart Dysfunction and Failure in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction: Mechanisms and Management. Position Statement on Behalf of the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology
Abstract There is an unmet need for effective treatment strategies to reduce morbidity and mortality in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Until recently, attention in patients with HFpEF was almost exclusively focused on the left side. However, it is now increasingly recognized that right heart dysfunction is common and contributes importantly to poor prognosis in HFpEF. More insights into the development of right heart dysfunction in HFpEF may aid to our knowledge about this complex disease and may eventually lead to better treatments to improve outcomes in these patients. In this position paper from the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology, the Committee on Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction reviews the prevalence, diagnosis, and pathophysiology of right heart dysfunction and failure in patients with HFpEF. Finally, potential treatment strategies, important knowledge gaps and future directions regarding the right side in HFpEF are discussed.
Variability of Phase Shift Between Blood Pressure and Heart Rate Fluctuations
Background— We postulated that the variability of the phase shift between blood pressure and heart rate fluctuation near the frequency of 0.10 Hz might be useful in assessing autonomic circulatory control. Methods and Results— We tested this hypothesis in 4 groups of subjects: 28 young, healthy individuals; 13 elderly healthy individuals; 25 patients with coronary heart disease; and 19 patients with a planned or implanted cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD recipients). Data from 5 minutes of free breathing and at 2 different, controlled breathing frequencies (0.10 and 0.33 Hz) were used. Clear differences ( P <0.001) in variability of phase were evident between the ICD recipients and all other groups. Furthermore, at a breathing frequency of 0.10 Hz, differences in baroreflex sensitivity ( P <0.01) also became evident, even though these differences were not apparent at the 0.33-Hz breathing frequency. Conclusions— The frequency of 0.10 Hz represents a useful and potentially important one for controlled breathing, at which differences in blood pressure–RR interactions become evident. These interactions, whether computed as a variability of phase to define stability of the blood pressure–heart rate interaction or defined as the baroreflex sensitivity to define the gain in heart rate response to blood pressure changes, are significantly different in patients at risk for sudden arrhythmic death. In young versus older healthy individuals, only baroreflex gain is different, with the variability of phase being similar in both groups. These measurements of short-term circulatory control might help in risk stratification for sudden cardiac death.