Miocardiopatia de etiologia isquémica versus não-isquémica: haverá diferenças no prognóstico? Experiência de um centro de insuficiência cardíaca avançada

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Lourenço, C
Data de Publicação: 2011
Outros Autores: Saraiva, F, Martins, H, Baptista, R, Costa, S, Coelho, L, Vieira, H, Monteiro, P, Franco, F, Gonçalves, L, Providência, LA
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10400.4/1250
Resumo: INTRODUCTION: Previous studies have associated heart failure (HF) of ischemic etiology with worse prognosis compared to HF from non-ischemic cardiomyopathy. HF treatment has evolved significantly in recent years. Has this evolution had an impact on this prognostic gap? OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to compare patients with advanced HF--nonischemic versus ischemic etiology--in terms of baseline characteristics, treatment, and in-hospital and long-term prognosis (including death, heart transplantation and hospital readmission). METHODS: We performed a retrospective study including 286 consecutive patients with systolic HF admitted to an HF unit between January 2003 and June 2006. We compared two groups according to HF etiology: Group A--ischemic cardiomyopathy (n = 109); Group B--non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (n = 177). Mean follow-up was 41 months. RESULTS: Group A were older (62.2 +/- 10.4 vs. 55.9 +/- 15.2 years, p < 0.001), with a higher proportion of males (80.7 vs. 67.8%, p = 0.017), diabetes, anemia, dyslipidemia and smokers; they required more prolonged treatment with inotropic drugs and more frequent treatment with statins, antiplatelet agents and nitrates. On admission, Group B patients presented with lower serum sodium and higher aminotransferase levels. There were no differences in the occurrence of cardiogenic shock or dysrhythmias, baseline ECG rhythm, frequency of left bundle branch block, renal function, BNP, left ventricular ejection fraction, heart rate or implantation of intracardiac devices. Group A had higher in-hospital mortality (11.0 vs. 4.0%, p = 0.020). Multivariate analysis showed that the only predictor of in-hospital mortality was serum sodium < 133 mmol/l and also showed that HF etiology was not a predictor of this endpoint; previous medication with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors was a protective factor. On Kaplan-Meier analysis, it was observed that, in the long-term, there were no significant differences in either survival rates (70.0 vs. 76.8%, p = 0.258), or the combined endpoints of survival free of death or heart transplantation (55.7 vs. 54.5%, p = 0.899) and survival free of death, heart transplantation or hospital readmission (38.0 vs. 32.8%, p = 0.386). CONCLUSIONS: Although in-hospital mortality was higher in ischemic cardiomyopathy, this variable was not an independent predictor of mortality and the difference appears to fade in the long-term, in contrast to what had been reported in older studies, but in agreement with more recent data
id RCAP_cc670d63cdd5cd51bfc287667b083e90
oai_identifier_str oai:rihuc.huc.min-saude.pt:10400.4/1250
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Miocardiopatia de etiologia isquémica versus não-isquémica: haverá diferenças no prognóstico? Experiência de um centro de insuficiência cardíaca avançadaIschemic versus non-ischemic cardiomyopathy--are there differences in prognosis? Experience of an advanced heart failure centerInsuficiência CardíacaIsquemia do MiocárdioINTRODUCTION: Previous studies have associated heart failure (HF) of ischemic etiology with worse prognosis compared to HF from non-ischemic cardiomyopathy. HF treatment has evolved significantly in recent years. Has this evolution had an impact on this prognostic gap? OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to compare patients with advanced HF--nonischemic versus ischemic etiology--in terms of baseline characteristics, treatment, and in-hospital and long-term prognosis (including death, heart transplantation and hospital readmission). METHODS: We performed a retrospective study including 286 consecutive patients with systolic HF admitted to an HF unit between January 2003 and June 2006. We compared two groups according to HF etiology: Group A--ischemic cardiomyopathy (n = 109); Group B--non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (n = 177). Mean follow-up was 41 months. RESULTS: Group A were older (62.2 +/- 10.4 vs. 55.9 +/- 15.2 years, p < 0.001), with a higher proportion of males (80.7 vs. 67.8%, p = 0.017), diabetes, anemia, dyslipidemia and smokers; they required more prolonged treatment with inotropic drugs and more frequent treatment with statins, antiplatelet agents and nitrates. On admission, Group B patients presented with lower serum sodium and higher aminotransferase levels. There were no differences in the occurrence of cardiogenic shock or dysrhythmias, baseline ECG rhythm, frequency of left bundle branch block, renal function, BNP, left ventricular ejection fraction, heart rate or implantation of intracardiac devices. Group A had higher in-hospital mortality (11.0 vs. 4.0%, p = 0.020). Multivariate analysis showed that the only predictor of in-hospital mortality was serum sodium < 133 mmol/l and also showed that HF etiology was not a predictor of this endpoint; previous medication with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors was a protective factor. On Kaplan-Meier analysis, it was observed that, in the long-term, there were no significant differences in either survival rates (70.0 vs. 76.8%, p = 0.258), or the combined endpoints of survival free of death or heart transplantation (55.7 vs. 54.5%, p = 0.899) and survival free of death, heart transplantation or hospital readmission (38.0 vs. 32.8%, p = 0.386). CONCLUSIONS: Although in-hospital mortality was higher in ischemic cardiomyopathy, this variable was not an independent predictor of mortality and the difference appears to fade in the long-term, in contrast to what had been reported in older studies, but in agreement with more recent dataSociedade Portuguesa de CardiologiaRIHUCLourenço, CSaraiva, FMartins, HBaptista, RCosta, SCoelho, LVieira, HMonteiro, PFranco, FGonçalves, LProvidência, LA2012-01-12T12:55:55Z20112011-01-01T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10400.4/1250porRev Port Cardiol. 2011;30(2):181-97.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2023-07-11T14:22:31Zoai:rihuc.huc.min-saude.pt:10400.4/1250Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T18:03:47.569496Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Miocardiopatia de etiologia isquémica versus não-isquémica: haverá diferenças no prognóstico? Experiência de um centro de insuficiência cardíaca avançada
Ischemic versus non-ischemic cardiomyopathy--are there differences in prognosis? Experience of an advanced heart failure center
title Miocardiopatia de etiologia isquémica versus não-isquémica: haverá diferenças no prognóstico? Experiência de um centro de insuficiência cardíaca avançada
spellingShingle Miocardiopatia de etiologia isquémica versus não-isquémica: haverá diferenças no prognóstico? Experiência de um centro de insuficiência cardíaca avançada
Lourenço, C
Insuficiência Cardíaca
Isquemia do Miocárdio
title_short Miocardiopatia de etiologia isquémica versus não-isquémica: haverá diferenças no prognóstico? Experiência de um centro de insuficiência cardíaca avançada
title_full Miocardiopatia de etiologia isquémica versus não-isquémica: haverá diferenças no prognóstico? Experiência de um centro de insuficiência cardíaca avançada
title_fullStr Miocardiopatia de etiologia isquémica versus não-isquémica: haverá diferenças no prognóstico? Experiência de um centro de insuficiência cardíaca avançada
title_full_unstemmed Miocardiopatia de etiologia isquémica versus não-isquémica: haverá diferenças no prognóstico? Experiência de um centro de insuficiência cardíaca avançada
title_sort Miocardiopatia de etiologia isquémica versus não-isquémica: haverá diferenças no prognóstico? Experiência de um centro de insuficiência cardíaca avançada
author Lourenço, C
author_facet Lourenço, C
Saraiva, F
Martins, H
Baptista, R
Costa, S
Coelho, L
Vieira, H
Monteiro, P
Franco, F
Gonçalves, L
Providência, LA
author_role author
author2 Saraiva, F
Martins, H
Baptista, R
Costa, S
Coelho, L
Vieira, H
Monteiro, P
Franco, F
Gonçalves, L
Providência, LA
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv RIHUC
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Lourenço, C
Saraiva, F
Martins, H
Baptista, R
Costa, S
Coelho, L
Vieira, H
Monteiro, P
Franco, F
Gonçalves, L
Providência, LA
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Insuficiência Cardíaca
Isquemia do Miocárdio
topic Insuficiência Cardíaca
Isquemia do Miocárdio
description INTRODUCTION: Previous studies have associated heart failure (HF) of ischemic etiology with worse prognosis compared to HF from non-ischemic cardiomyopathy. HF treatment has evolved significantly in recent years. Has this evolution had an impact on this prognostic gap? OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to compare patients with advanced HF--nonischemic versus ischemic etiology--in terms of baseline characteristics, treatment, and in-hospital and long-term prognosis (including death, heart transplantation and hospital readmission). METHODS: We performed a retrospective study including 286 consecutive patients with systolic HF admitted to an HF unit between January 2003 and June 2006. We compared two groups according to HF etiology: Group A--ischemic cardiomyopathy (n = 109); Group B--non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (n = 177). Mean follow-up was 41 months. RESULTS: Group A were older (62.2 +/- 10.4 vs. 55.9 +/- 15.2 years, p < 0.001), with a higher proportion of males (80.7 vs. 67.8%, p = 0.017), diabetes, anemia, dyslipidemia and smokers; they required more prolonged treatment with inotropic drugs and more frequent treatment with statins, antiplatelet agents and nitrates. On admission, Group B patients presented with lower serum sodium and higher aminotransferase levels. There were no differences in the occurrence of cardiogenic shock or dysrhythmias, baseline ECG rhythm, frequency of left bundle branch block, renal function, BNP, left ventricular ejection fraction, heart rate or implantation of intracardiac devices. Group A had higher in-hospital mortality (11.0 vs. 4.0%, p = 0.020). Multivariate analysis showed that the only predictor of in-hospital mortality was serum sodium < 133 mmol/l and also showed that HF etiology was not a predictor of this endpoint; previous medication with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors was a protective factor. On Kaplan-Meier analysis, it was observed that, in the long-term, there were no significant differences in either survival rates (70.0 vs. 76.8%, p = 0.258), or the combined endpoints of survival free of death or heart transplantation (55.7 vs. 54.5%, p = 0.899) and survival free of death, heart transplantation or hospital readmission (38.0 vs. 32.8%, p = 0.386). CONCLUSIONS: Although in-hospital mortality was higher in ischemic cardiomyopathy, this variable was not an independent predictor of mortality and the difference appears to fade in the long-term, in contrast to what had been reported in older studies, but in agreement with more recent data
publishDate 2011
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2011
2011-01-01T00:00:00Z
2012-01-12T12:55:55Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10400.4/1250
url http://hdl.handle.net/10400.4/1250
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Rev Port Cardiol. 2011;30(2):181-97.
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Portuguesa de Cardiologia
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Portuguesa de Cardiologia
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799131700750450688