Chemoreflex and Baroreflex Sensitivity Hold a Strong Prognostic Value in Chronic Heart Failure.


Journal

JACC. Heart failure
ISSN: 2213-1787
Titre abrégé: JACC Heart Fail
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101598241

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
09 2022
Historique:
received: 22 11 2021
revised: 07 02 2022
accepted: 11 02 2022
entrez: 1 9 2022
pubmed: 2 9 2022
medline: 9 9 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Novel treatments targeting in baroreflex sensitivity (BRS) and chemoreflex sensitivity (CRS) heart failure (HF) are grounded on small prognostic studies, partly performed in the pre-beta-blockade era. This study assesses the clinical/prognostic significance of BRS and CRS in a large cohort of patients with chronic HF on modern treatments. Outpatients with chronic HF with either reduced (≤40%) or mildly reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (41% to 49%) underwent BRS (SD method) and CRS to hypoxia and hypercapnia (rebreathing technique) assessment and were followed up for a composite endpoint of cardiac death, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shock, or HF hospitalization. A total of 425 patients were enrolled (65 ± 12 years of age, LVEF 32% [IQR: 25%-38%], 94% on beta blockers). Patients with decreased BRS (n = 96 of 267, 36%) had lower exercise tolerance and heart rate variability (P < 0.05), whereas those with increased CRS to both hypoxia and hypercapnia (n = 74 of 369, 20%) had higher plasma norepinephrine and central apneas across the 24-hour period (P < 0.01). During a median 50-month follow-up (IQR: 24-94 months), the primary endpoint occurred more often in patients with decreased BRS (log-rank: 11.64; P = 0.001), mainly for increased cardiac deaths/implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks, and in those with increased CRS (log-rank: 34.81; P < 0.001), mainly for increased HF hospitalizations. Patients with both abnormal BRS and CRS showed the worst outcome. Reduced BRS (HR: 2.76 [95% CI: 1.36-5.63]; P = 0.005) and increased CRS (HR: 2.91 [95% CI: 1.34-6.31]; P = 0.007) were independently associated with the primary outcome and increased risk stratification when added to standard HF prognosticators (P < 0.05). In subjects with HF on modern treatment, abnormal BRS and CRS are frequently observed. BRS and CRS elicit autonomic imbalance, exercise limitation, unstable ventilation, and predict adverse outcomes.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Novel treatments targeting in baroreflex sensitivity (BRS) and chemoreflex sensitivity (CRS) heart failure (HF) are grounded on small prognostic studies, partly performed in the pre-beta-blockade era.
OBJECTIVES
This study assesses the clinical/prognostic significance of BRS and CRS in a large cohort of patients with chronic HF on modern treatments.
METHODS
Outpatients with chronic HF with either reduced (≤40%) or mildly reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (41% to 49%) underwent BRS (SD method) and CRS to hypoxia and hypercapnia (rebreathing technique) assessment and were followed up for a composite endpoint of cardiac death, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shock, or HF hospitalization.
RESULTS
A total of 425 patients were enrolled (65 ± 12 years of age, LVEF 32% [IQR: 25%-38%], 94% on beta blockers). Patients with decreased BRS (n = 96 of 267, 36%) had lower exercise tolerance and heart rate variability (P < 0.05), whereas those with increased CRS to both hypoxia and hypercapnia (n = 74 of 369, 20%) had higher plasma norepinephrine and central apneas across the 24-hour period (P < 0.01). During a median 50-month follow-up (IQR: 24-94 months), the primary endpoint occurred more often in patients with decreased BRS (log-rank: 11.64; P = 0.001), mainly for increased cardiac deaths/implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks, and in those with increased CRS (log-rank: 34.81; P < 0.001), mainly for increased HF hospitalizations. Patients with both abnormal BRS and CRS showed the worst outcome. Reduced BRS (HR: 2.76 [95% CI: 1.36-5.63]; P = 0.005) and increased CRS (HR: 2.91 [95% CI: 1.34-6.31]; P = 0.007) were independently associated with the primary outcome and increased risk stratification when added to standard HF prognosticators (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
In subjects with HF on modern treatment, abnormal BRS and CRS are frequently observed. BRS and CRS elicit autonomic imbalance, exercise limitation, unstable ventilation, and predict adverse outcomes.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36049816
pii: S2213-1779(22)00171-8
doi: 10.1016/j.jchf.2022.02.006
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

662-676

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2022 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Funding Support and Disclosures The authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.

Auteurs

Alberto Giannoni (A)

Institute of Life Sciences, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pisa, Italy; Fondazione Toscana G. Monasterio, CNR-Regione Toscana, Pisa, Italy. Electronic address: a.giannoni@santannapisa.it.

Francesco Gentile (F)

Fondazione Toscana G. Monasterio, CNR-Regione Toscana, Pisa, Italy; Pisa University Hospital, Pisa, Italy.

Francesco Buoncristiani (F)

Fondazione Toscana G. Monasterio, CNR-Regione Toscana, Pisa, Italy.

Chiara Borrelli (C)

Fondazione Toscana G. Monasterio, CNR-Regione Toscana, Pisa, Italy; Pisa University Hospital, Pisa, Italy.

Paolo Sciarrone (P)

Fondazione Toscana G. Monasterio, CNR-Regione Toscana, Pisa, Italy; Pisa University Hospital, Pisa, Italy.

Jens Spiesshoefer (J)

Institute of Life Sciences, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pisa, Italy; Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.

Francesca Bramanti (F)

Fondazione Toscana G. Monasterio, CNR-Regione Toscana, Pisa, Italy.

Giovanni Iudice (G)

Fondazione Toscana G. Monasterio, CNR-Regione Toscana, Pisa, Italy.

Shahrokh Javaheri (S)

Division of Pulmonary and Sleep Medicine, Bethesda North Hospital, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA; Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA; Division of Cardiology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.

Michele Emdin (M)

Institute of Life Sciences, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pisa, Italy; Fondazione Toscana G. Monasterio, CNR-Regione Toscana, Pisa, Italy.

Claudio Passino (C)

Institute of Life Sciences, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pisa, Italy; Fondazione Toscana G. Monasterio, CNR-Regione Toscana, Pisa, Italy.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH