Objectives. Soluble suppression of tumorigenecity 2 (sST2) is prognostic in acute and chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) but less studied in HF with preserved EF (HFpEF). We evaluated sST2 concentrations, correlations with biomarkers and echocardiographic measures of diastolic and systolic function, and associations with outcomes in HFpEF and HFrEF. Design and results. A total of 193 subjects from three different cohorts were included. Eighty-six HFpEF patients were obtained from the Karolinska Rennes (KaRen) study, 86 patients with HFrEF were recruited from referrals to Karolinska University Hospital for advanced assessment of HF, and 21 controls were included (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier for KaRen: NCT01091467). HFrEF and controls cohorts did not have ClinicalTrials.gov registrations. sST2 was lower in HFpEF, median (interquartile range); 23 (17-31) compared to HFrEF; 35 (23-52) mg/L, p < .001. In both HFpEF and HFrEF, sST2 correlated positively with NT-proBNP (HFpEF r s ¼0.392, p < .001 and HFrEF r s ¼0.466, p < .001). In HFpEF, sST2 correlated to left atrial volume index (r s ¼0.276, p ¼ .019) but not to E/E, nor to left ventricular mass index. sST2 was in HFpEF associated with the composite endpoint of death or HF hospitalization, adjusted hazard ratio (HR) per log increase in sST2 6.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04-42.28, p ¼ .046, and in HFrEF death, heart transplant or left ventricular assist systems; 3.51, 95% CI 1.05-11.69, p ¼ .041. Conclusions. In patients with HFpEF compared to HFrEF, crude levels of sST2 were lower but potentially more strongly associated with outcomes. The lower levels of sST2 in HFpEF than in HFrEF may reflect lower degrees of fibrosis, but the potentially stronger association with outcomes may reflect a greater prognostic importance of progressive fibrosis and as such a greater potential for intervention. In conclusion; this study adds to the evidence of sST2 as prognostic marker in both HFpEF and HFrEF. ARTICLE HISTORY
AimsLevosimendan improves haemodynamics in acute decompensated heart failure (HF). However, it is increasingly used for repetitive or intermittent infusions in advanced but stable chronic HF, without clear indication, selection criteria, or effect. We tested the hypotheses that (1) levosimendan improves haemodynamics in stable chronic HF and (2) that the response is dependent on baseline clinical and haemodynamic factors.Methods and resultsTwenty‐three patients [median age 56 (49–64) years, four (17%) women] with stable New York Heart Association (NYHA) III and IV HF received a single 24 h levosimendan infusion. Non‐invasive haemodynamics (inert gas re‐breathing technique), estimated glomerular filtration rate, and N‐terminal pro‐brain natriuretic peptide were assessed before and after infusion. Levosimendan had the following effects (median change): a significant increase in cardiac output (+9.8 ± 21.6%; P = 0.026) and decrease in N‐terminal pro‐brain natriuretic peptide (−28.1 ± 16.3%, P < 0.001), estimated total peripheral resistance (−16.9 ± 18.3%, P = 0.005), and mean arterial pressure (−5.9 ± 8.2%, P = 0.007), but no change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (+0.89 ± 14.0%, P = 0.955). There were no significant associations between baseline clinical and/or haemodynamic factors and the levosimendan effect on cardiac output.ConclusionsLevosimendan was associated with improved haemodynamics in patients with stable chronic HF, but we could not identify any predictors of the magnitude of haemodynamic response.
Aims Ramp testing in the postoperative period can be used to optimize left ventricular assist device (LVAD) speed for optimal left ventricular (LV) unloading. We tested the hypothesis that a non-invasive echocardiographic ramp test post-HeartMate 3 implantation improves LV unloading immediately after and 1-3 months after as compared with before the test. We also tested a secondary hypothesis that speed adjustments during echocardiography-guided ramp testing do not worsen right ventricular (RV) function immediately after and 1-3 months after. Methods and resultsWe retrospectively reviewed data from patients who underwent an echocardiographic ramp test. A total of 14 out of 19 patients were clinically stable and were enrolled. Adequate LV unloading was defined as no more than mild mitral regurgitation, and intermittent aortic valve (AV) opening or closed AV, and reduction of left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD); and for the follow-up measurement, decreased NT-proBNP. Median (interquartile range) time from implantation to ramp test was 27 (16; 56) days, and median time from ramp test to follow-up echocardiography was 55 (47; 102) days. Median LVAD speed achieved during ramp testing was 5550 (5375; 6025) revolutions per minute (rpm), and median final LVAD speed was 5200 (5000; 5425) rpm. Ramp testing resulted in final LVAD speed increase in 11 (79%) patients and a median net change of 200 (200; 300) rpm. Speed adjustments after ramp testing resulted in improved LVAD unloading that was achieved in additional 3 (21%) patients who were not originally optimized. RV function did not worsen significantly during ramp testing or at final LVAD speed. Conclusions The echocardiographic ramp test allowed LVAD speed adjustment and optimization and improved LV unloading during ramp testing and at final speed with no evidence of worsening of RV function.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.