We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Different prognostic significance of right and left ventricular diastolic dysfunction in heart failure.
Clinical Cardiology 1999 August
BACKGROUND: Left (LV) and right (RV) ventricular diastolic dysfunction is common in heart failure but the prognostic value of RV diastolic dysfunction is not known.
HYPOTHESIS: As a follow-up to a previously undertaken study, this study was carried out to investigate whether LV and RV diastolic dysfunction affect prognosis differently and, in addition, whether changes in diastolic filling patterns over time correlate with clinical outcome.
METHODS: We studied a cohort of 105 patients (mean age 62.7 +/- 1.3 years, 66% male) with heart failure (ejection fraction < 50%) by Doppler echocardiography in both RV and LV.
RESULTS: An LV restrictive filling pattern (RFP) was present in 48% of the patients and, when compared with non-RFP subgroups, it was associated with poorer systolic function, higher New York Heart Association functional class, and higher cardiac mortality at 1 year (all p < 0.001). The coexistence of an LV-RFP and poor LV systolic function (ejection fraction < 25%) markedly decreased the 1-year survival that was significant when compared with other subgroups (p = 0.001). In contrast, RV diastolic dysfunction that occurred in 21% of patients was not a prognostic factor for mortality either alone or in combination with LV diastolic dysfunction, but predicted nonfatal hospital admissions for heart failure or unstable angina (p = 0.016).
CONCLUSION: An LV restrictive filling pattern is a powerful predictor of a poor prognosis, especially when combined with low ejection fraction, but in this study RV diastolic dysfunction did not appear to be an independent predictor of subsequent mortality.
HYPOTHESIS: As a follow-up to a previously undertaken study, this study was carried out to investigate whether LV and RV diastolic dysfunction affect prognosis differently and, in addition, whether changes in diastolic filling patterns over time correlate with clinical outcome.
METHODS: We studied a cohort of 105 patients (mean age 62.7 +/- 1.3 years, 66% male) with heart failure (ejection fraction < 50%) by Doppler echocardiography in both RV and LV.
RESULTS: An LV restrictive filling pattern (RFP) was present in 48% of the patients and, when compared with non-RFP subgroups, it was associated with poorer systolic function, higher New York Heart Association functional class, and higher cardiac mortality at 1 year (all p < 0.001). The coexistence of an LV-RFP and poor LV systolic function (ejection fraction < 25%) markedly decreased the 1-year survival that was significant when compared with other subgroups (p = 0.001). In contrast, RV diastolic dysfunction that occurred in 21% of patients was not a prognostic factor for mortality either alone or in combination with LV diastolic dysfunction, but predicted nonfatal hospital admissions for heart failure or unstable angina (p = 0.016).
CONCLUSION: An LV restrictive filling pattern is a powerful predictor of a poor prognosis, especially when combined with low ejection fraction, but in this study RV diastolic dysfunction did not appear to be an independent predictor of subsequent mortality.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app