首页> 外文期刊>ESC Heart Failure >Characteristics and long‐term prognosis of patients with heart failure and mid‐range ejection fraction compared with reduced and preserved ejection fraction: a systematic review and meta‐analysis
【24h】

Characteristics and long‐term prognosis of patients with heart failure and mid‐range ejection fraction compared with reduced and preserved ejection fraction: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

机译:与减少和保留射血分数相比,心力衰竭和中射血分数的患者的特征和长期预后:系统评价和荟萃分析

获取原文
           

摘要

Aims This study aimed to assess by a meta‐analysis the clinical characteristics, all‐cause and cardiovascular mortality, and hospitalization of patients with heart failure (HF) with mid‐range ejection fraction (HFmrEF) compared with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Methods and results Data from 12 eligible observational studies including 109?257 patients were pooled. HFmrEF patients were significantly different and occupied a mid‐position between HFrEF and HFpEF: mean age 73.6?±?9.8 vs. 72.6?±?9.8 and 77.6?±?7.2 years, male gender 59% vs. 68.5% and 40%, ischaemic heart disease 49% vs. 52.6% and 39.4%, hypertension 67.3% vs. 61.5% and 76.5%, atrial fibrillation 45.2% vs. 39.6% and 46%, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease 26.4% vs. 24.9% and 30.5%, estimated glomerular filtration rate 62?±?30 vs. 63.3?±?23 and 59?±?22.5, use of renin–angiotensin system inhibitors 79.6% vs. 90.1% and 68.7%, beta‐blockers 82% vs. 89% and 73.5%, and aldosterone antagonists 20.3 vs. 31.5% and 26%, P ‐values??0.05. After a mean follow‐up of 31?±?5?months, all‐cause mortality was significantly lower in HFmrEF than in HFrEF and HFpEF (26.8% vs. 29.5% and 31%): risk ratio (RR) 0.95 [0.93–0.98; 95% confidence interval (CI)], P ??0.001, and 0.97 (0.94–0.99; 95% CI), P ?=?0.014, respectively. Cardiovascular mortality was lowest in HFmrEF (9.7% vs. 13% and 12.8%): RR?=?0.81 (0.73–0.91), P ??0.001, and 1.10 (0.97–1.24; 95% CI), P ?=?0.13, respectively. HF hospitalization in HFmrEF compared to that in HFrEF and HFpEF was 23.9% vs. 27.6% and 23.3% with RR?=?0.89 (0.85–0.93), P ??0.001, and RR?=?1.12 (1.07–1.17), P ??0.001, respectively. Conclusions The results of this study support that HFmrEF is a distinct category characterized by a mid‐position between HFrEF and HFpEF and with the lowest all‐cause and cardiovascular mortality.
机译:目的本研究旨在通过荟萃分析评估患有中程射血分数(HFmrEF)的心力衰竭(HF)与射血分数降低(HFrEF)的心力衰竭(HF)患者的临床特征,全因和心血管疾病死亡率以及住院情况)和射血分数保留的HF(HFpEF)。方法和结果收集了包括109?257例患者在内的12项符合条件的观察性研究的数据。 HFmrEF患者差异显着,处于HFrEF和HFpEF之间的中间位置:平均年龄为73.6?±?9.8 vs. 72.6?±?9.8和77.6?±?7.2岁,男性为59%,分别为68.5%和40%,缺血性心脏病49%比52.6%和39.4%,高血压67.3%比61.5%和76.5%,房颤45.2%比39.6%和46%,慢性阻塞性肺疾病26.4%比24.9%和30.5%,估计肾小球滤过率分别为62±±30和63.3±23和59±22.5,使用肾素-血管紧张素系统抑制剂79.6%,90.1%和68.7%,β受体阻滞剂82%和89%,以及73.5%,醛固酮拮抗剂20.3比31.5%和26%,P值<0.05。在平均随访31?±?5?月之后,HFmrEF的全因死亡率显着低于HFrEF和HFpEF(26.8%,29.5%和31%):风险比(RR)0.95 [0.93– 0.98; 95%置信区间(CI)],P 0.001和0.97(0.94-0.99; 95%CI),P <= 0.014。 HFmrEF组的心血管死亡率最低(9.7%对13%和12.8%):RR <= 0.81(0.73-0.91),P 0.001,和1.10(0.97-1.24; 95%CI),P <=分别为0.13。与HFrEF和HFpEF相比,HFmrEF的HF住院率分别为23.9%,27.6%和23.3%,RR≤0.89(0.85-0.93),P≤0.001,RR≤1.12(1.07-1.17) ,P≤0.001。结论本研究结果支持HFmrEF是一个独特的类别,其特征是HFrEF和HFpEF之间处于中间位置,并且全因和心血管死亡率最低。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号