Background-In patients with systolic heart failure, high levels of circulating aldosterone are associated with an adverse prognosis, and mineralocorticoid receptor blockade improves survival. The prognostic significance of cortisol that may also bind and activate the mineralocorticoid receptor in chronic heart failure is unknown. Methods and Results-Serum levels of cortisol and aldosterone were quantified in a prospective cohort study of 294 consecutive patients with chronic heart failure [48% were in New York Heart Association functional class III or IV; 58% had systolic heart failure]. During a median follow-up of 803 days (interquartile range, 314 to 1098), 79 patients died (27.3% mortality rate). Cortisol and aldosterone were independent predictors of increased mortality risk in Cox regression analyses adjusted for age, sex, New York Heart Association functional class, C-reactive protein, N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide, sodium, and hypercholesterolemia. . Conclusions-In patients with chronic heart failure, higher serum levels of both cortisol and aldosterone were independent predictors of increased mortality risk that conferred complementary and incremental prognostic value. (Circulation.
BackgroundThe Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) defines COPD as a fixed post-bronchodilator ratio of forced expiratory volume in 1 second and forced vital capacity (FEV1/FVC) below 0.7. Age-dependent cut-off values below the lower fifth percentile (LLN) of this ratio derived from the general population have been proposed as an alternative. We wanted to assess the diagnostic accuracy and prognostic capability of the GOLD and LLN definition when compared to an expert-based diagnosis.MethodsIn a prospective cohort study, 405 patients aged ≥ 65 years with a general practitioner's diagnosis of COPD were recruited and followed up for 4.5 (median; quartiles 3.9; 5.1) years. Prevalence rates of COPD according to GOLD and three LLN definitions and diagnostic performance measurements were calculated. The reference standard was the diagnosis of COPD of an expert panel that used all available diagnostic information, including spirometry and bodyplethysmography.ResultsCompared to the expert panel diagnosis, 'GOLD-COPD' misclassified 69 (28%) patients, and the three LLNs misclassified 114 (46%), 96 (39%), and 98 (40%) patients, respectively. The GOLD classification led to more false positives, the LLNs to more false negative diagnoses. The main predictors beyond the FEV1/FVC ratio for an expert diagnosis of COPD were the FEV1 % predicted, and the residual volume/total lung capacity ratio (RV/TLC). Adding FEV1 and RV/TLC to GOLD or LLN improved the diagnostic accuracy, resulting in a significant reduction of up to 50% of the number of misdiagnoses. The expert diagnosis of COPD better predicts exacerbations, hospitalizations and mortality than GOLD or LLN.ConclusionsGOLD criteria over-diagnose COPD, while LLN definitions under-diagnose COPD in elderly patients as compared to an expert panel diagnosis. Incorporating FEV1 and RV/TLC into the GOLD-COPD or LLN-based definition brings both definitions closer to expert panel diagnosis of COPD, and to daily clinical practice.
Coincidence of COPD and heart failure (HF) is challenging as both diseases interact on multiple levels with each other, and thus impact significantly on diagnosis, disease severity classification, and choice of medical therapy. The current overview aims to educate caregivers involved in the daily management of patients with HF and (possibly) concurrent COPD in how to deal with clinically relevant issues such as interpreting spirometry, the potential role of extensive pulmonary function testing, and finally, the potential beneficial, but also detrimental effects of medication used for HF and COPD on either disease.
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.