Left Ventricular Reverse Remodeling in Heart Failure: Remission to Recovery

Boulet, Jacinthe; Mehra, Mandeep R.

doi:10.1080/24748706.2021.1954275

Cited by 29 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 193 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Strain echocardiography is a newer echocardiographic technique and it offers a more comprehensive evaluation of myocardial contractility, being able to detect the subclinical disease as well. In addition, it is an excellent tool to assess the prognosis of patients with HF [ 22 , 107 ].…”

Section: Imaging Techniques Of Adverse Remodelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, LGE can identify microvascular obstruction after MI, by visualizing the no-reflow phenomenon [ 22 ]. Finally, CMR is extremely useful in evaluating the etiology of MINOCA, and novel CMR techniques will bring further insight into ventricular remodeling after MI [ 17 , 22 , 107 , 108 ].…”

Section: Imaging Techniques Of Adverse Remodelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The treatment in MI aims to prevent or attenuate left ventricular remodeling by reducing the size of the infarction and targeting the neurohormonal systems [ 12 , 13 ]. Reverse remodeling is the result of myocardial recovery in response to therapy, and it has been defined in previous studies as a decrease in LV end-systolic volume of 12% by CMR, while echocardiographic parameters include a reduction in end-systolic and end-diastolic volumes and an increase in LV EF of 12% to 15% [ 107 , 109 ]. It appears that in ischemic cardiomyopathy, there is no difference in the incidence of adverse remodeling between sexes.…”

Section: Therapeutic Implications In Adverse Cardiac Remodelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Left Ventricular Remodeling after Myocardial Infarction: From Physiopathology to Treatment

Leancă

Crișu

Petriş

et al. 2022

Life

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Myocardial infarction (MI) is the leading cause of death and morbidity worldwide, with an incidence relatively high in developed countries and rapidly growing in developing countries. The most common cause of MI is the rupture of an atherosclerotic plaque with subsequent thrombotic occlusion in the coronary circulation. This causes cardiomyocyte death and myocardial necrosis, with subsequent inflammation and fibrosis. Current therapies aim to restore coronary flow by thrombus dissolution with pharmaceutical treatment and/or intravascular stent implantation and to counteract neurohormonal activation. Despite these therapies, the injury caused by myocardial ischemia leads to left ventricular remodeling; this process involves changes in cardiac geometry, dimension and function and eventually progression to heart failure (HF). This review describes the pathophysiological mechanism that leads to cardiac remodeling and the therapeutic strategies with a role in slowing the progression of remodeling and improving cardiac structure and function.

show abstract

Section: Imaging Techniques Of Adverse Remodelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Imaging Techniques Of Adverse Remodelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Therapeutic Implications In Adverse Cardiac Remodelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Left Ventricular Remodeling after Myocardial Infarction: From Physiopathology to Treatment

Leancă

Crișu

Petriş

et al. 2022

Life

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Left ventricle reverse remodeling (LVRR) consists of complex dynamic mechanisms able to overcome the maladaptive process due to structural and functional heart disease to achieve the restoration of a more normal ventricular shape, reduction in LV volumes and mass, as well as improvements in systo-diastolic LV function. 14 LVRR after TEER with MitraClip device has been extensively reported and has proven to be an independent prognosticator. 15 After correction of MR, progressive restoration of almost normal LV volumes involves both EDV and ESV reduction, which implies not only a minimization of volume overload but also a positive effect on LV wall stress.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Predicting outcomes after trans-catheter edge-to-edge repair with MitraClip: a nearing milestone

Mazzola

Giannini

2022

Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Long‐term impact of angiotensin receptor‐neprilysin inhibitor based on short‐term treatment response in heart failure

Park,

Kim

et al. 2023

ESC Heart Failure

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AimsThe long‐term effect of angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) remains uncertain in patients who have experienced improvements in left ventricular (LV) systolic function or significant LV reverse remodelling following a certain period of treatment. It is also unclear how ARNI performs in patients who have not shown these improvements. This study aimed to assess the impact of prolonged ARNI use compared with angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in patients with and without significant treatment response after 1 year of heart failure (HF) treatment.Methods and resultsThe present study enrolled patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) who were treated with either ARNI or ACEIs/ARBs within 1 year of undergoing index echocardiography. After 1 year of treatment, patients were reclassified into the following groups: (i) patients with HF with improved ejection fraction and persistent HFrEF and (ii) patients with and without LV reverse remodelling based on the follow‐up echocardiography. The effect of ARNI versus that of ACEIs/ARBs in each group was assessed from the time of categorizing into new groups using the composite event of all‐cause mortality and HF hospitalization. A total of 671 patients with HFrEF (age, 66.4 ± 14.1 years; males, 66.8%) were included, and 133 (19.8%) composite events of death and rehospitalization for HF were observed during the follow‐up (median follow‐up, 44 [interquartile range, 34–51] months). ARNI had a significantly lower event rate than ACEIs/ARBs in patients with HF with improved ejection fraction (7.0% vs. 30.4%, P = 0.020) and those with persistent HFrEF (17.6% vs. 49.7%, P < 0.001). Irrespective of whether patients exhibited LV reverse remodelling (15.8% vs. 31.1%, P = 0.001) or not (15.0% vs. 54.9%, P < 0.001), ARNIs were associated with a significantly lower event rate than ACEIs/ARBs.ConclusionsRegardless of significant treatment response measured by either LVEF or LV reverse remodelling after 1 year of treatment, the extended utilization of ARNI demonstrated a more favourable prognosis than that of ACEIs/ARBs in patients with HFrEF.

show abstract

Left Ventricular Reverse Remodeling in Heart Failure: Remission to Recovery

Cited by 29 publications

References 193 publications

Left Ventricular Remodeling after Myocardial Infarction: From Physiopathology to Treatment

Left Ventricular Remodeling after Myocardial Infarction: From Physiopathology to Treatment

Predicting outcomes after trans-catheter edge-to-edge repair with MitraClip: a nearing milestone

Long‐term impact of angiotensin receptor‐neprilysin inhibitor based on short‐term treatment response in heart failure

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About