Obokata, Masaru

Background: Diagnosis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is challenging in euvolemic patients with dyspnea, and no evidence-based criteria are available. We sought to develop and then validate noninvasive diagnostic criteria that could be used to estimate the likelihood that HFpEF is present among patients with unexplained dyspnea to guide further testing. Methods: Consecutive patients with unexplained dyspnea referred for invasive hemodynamic exercise testing were retrospectively evaluated. Diagnosis of HFpEF (case) or noncardiac dyspnea (control) was ascertained by invasive hemodynamic exercise testing. Logistic regression was performed to evaluate the ability of clinical findings to discriminate cases from controls. A scoring system was developed and then validated in a separate test cohort. Results: The derivation cohort included 414 consecutive patients (267 cases with HFpEF and 147 controls; HFpEF prevalence, 64%). The test cohort included 100 consecutive patients (61 with HFpEF; prevalence, 61%). Obesity, atrial fibrillation, age >60 years, treatment with ≥2 antihypertensives, echocardiographic E/e’ ratio >9, and echocardiographic pulmonary artery systolic pressure >35 mm Hg were selected as the final set of predictive variables. A weighted score based on these 6 variables was used to create a composite score (H 2 FPEF score) ranging from 0 to 9. The odds of HFpEF doubled for each 1-unit score increase (odds ratio, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.74–2.30; P <0.0001), with an area under the curve of 0.841 ( P <0.0001). The H 2 FPEF score was superior to a currently used algorithm based on expert consensus (increase in area under the curve of 0.169; 95% CI, 0.120–0.217; P <0.0001). Performance in the independent test cohort was maintained (area under the curve, 0.886; P <0.0001). Conclusions: The H 2 FPEF score, which relies on simple clinical characteristics and echocardiography, enables discrimination of HFpEF from noncardiac causes of dyspnea and can assist in determination of the need for further diagnostic testing in the evaluation of patients with unexplained exertional dyspnea.

Abstract Aims Increases in left ventricular filling pressure are a fundamental haemodynamic abnormality in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). However, very little is known regarding how elevated filling pressures cause pulmonary abnormalities or symptoms of dyspnoea. We sought to determine the relationships between simultaneously measured central haemodynamics, symptoms, and lung ventilatory and gas exchange abnormalities during exercise in HFpEF. Methods and results Subjects with invasively-proven HFpEF (n = 50) and non-cardiac causes of dyspnoea (controls, n = 24) underwent cardiac catheterization at rest and during exercise with simultaneous expired gas analysis. During submaximal (20 W) exercise, subjects with HFpEF displayed higher pulmonary capillary wedge pressures (PCWP) and pulmonary artery pressures, higher Borg perceived dyspnoea scores, and increased ventilatory drive and respiratory rate. At peak exercise, ventilation reserve was reduced in HFpEF compared with controls, with greater dead space ventilation (higher VD/VT). Increasing exercise PCWP was directly correlated with higher perceived dyspnoea scores, lower peak exercise capacity, greater ventilatory drive, worse New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class, and impaired pulmonary ventilation reserve. Conclusion This study provides the first evidence linking altered exercise haemodynamics to pulmonary abnormalities and symptoms of dyspnoea in patients with HFpEF. Further study is required to identify the mechanisms by which haemodynamic derangements affect lung function and symptoms and to test novel therapies targeting exercise haemodynamics in HFpEF.

Background: Heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a heterogeneous syndrome. Phenotyping patients into pathophysiologically homogeneous groups may enable better targeting of treatment. Obesity is common in HFpEF and has many cardiovascular effects, suggesting that it may be a viable candidate for phenotyping. We compared cardiovascular structure, function, and reserve capacity in subjects with obese HFpEF, those with nonobese HFpEF, and control subjects. Methods: Subjects with obese HFpEF (body mass index ≥35 kg/m 2 ; n=99), nonobese HFpEF (body mass index <30 kg/m 2 ; n=96), and nonobese control subjects free of HF (n=71) underwent detailed clinical assessment, echocardiography, and invasive hemodynamic exercise testing. Results: Compared with both subjects with nonobese HFpEF and control subjects, subjects with obese HFpEF displayed increased plasma volume (3907 mL [3563–4333 mL] versus 2772 mL [2555–3133 mL], and 2680 mL [2380–3006 mL]; P <0.0001), more concentric left ventricular remodeling, greater right ventricular dilatation (base, 34±7 versus 31±6 and 30±6 mm, P =0.0005; length, 66±7 versus 61±7 and 61±7 mm, P <0.0001), more right ventricular dysfunction, increased epicardial fat thickness (10±2 versus 7±2 and 6±2 mm; P <0.0001), and greater total epicardial heart volume (945 mL [831–1105 mL] versus 797 mL [643–979 mL] and 632 mL [517–768 mL]; P <0.0001), despite lower N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels. Pulmonary capillary wedge pressure was correlated with body mass and plasma volume in obese HFpEF ( r =0.22 and 0.27, both P <0.05) but not in nonobese HFpEF ( P ≥0.3). The increase in heart volumes in obese HFpEF was associated with greater pericardial restraint and heightened ventricular interdependence, reflected by increased ratio of right- to left-sided heart filling pressures (0.64±0.17 versus 0.56±0.19 and 0.53±0.20; P =0.0004), higher pulmonary venous pressure relative to left ventricular transmural pressure, and greater left ventricular eccentricity index (1.10±0.19 versus 0.99±0.06 and 0.97±0.12; P <0.0001). Interdependence was enhanced as pulmonary artery pressure load increased ( P for interaction <0.05). Compared with those with nonobese HFpEF and control subjects, obese patients with HFpEF displayed worse exercise capacity (peak oxygen consumption, 7.7±2.3 versus 10.0±3.4 and12.9±4.0 mL/min·kg; P <0.0001), higher biventricular filling pressures with exercise, and depressed pulmonary artery vasodilator reserve. Conclusions: Obesity-related HFpEF is a genuine form of cardiac failure and a clinically relevant phenotype that may require specific treatments.