Hemodynamic profiles and survival in chronic advanced heart failure patients evaluated for heart replacement therapy
G Giovannelli,M Sabatino,A Minervini,A Piermartiri,S Laterza,C Marcelli,A Aloisio,M Masetti,P Brizzi,L Cocchiarella,M Silenzi,L Borgese,L Marcantonini,L Potena
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae666.817
IF: 39.3
2024-10-30
European Heart Journal
Abstract:Background Advanced heart failure (HF) is associated with dismal prognosis despite optimal medical therapy. Invasive assessment with right heart catheterization (RHC) is a valuable tool to assess transplant candidates and hemodynamic profiling is crucial to stratify prognosis and select patients for advanced therapies. Purpose This study aims to examine the relationship between hemodynamic profiles based on cardiac index (CI) and filling pressures and survival in ambulatory patients with advanced HF evaluated for heart replacement therapy (HRT) such as heart transplantation (HT) and left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implant. Methods We analyzed adult ambulatory advanced HF patients evaluated for HRT with an available baseline RHC from 2003 to 2022. Hemodynamic data were classified using a CI < 2.2 l/min/m2 as marker of reduced cardiac output ("cold" profile opposed to the "warm" profile) and increased filling pressure, defined as right atrial pressure ≥ 10 mmHg and/or pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) ≥ 15 mmHg as a marker for congestion ("wet" profile opposed to the "dry" profile). Study endpoint was death or urgent HT or LVAD implant at 5 years. Results Study population included 610 patients (mean age 53±10 years, 79% males). According to hemodynamic criteria, 332 patients (55%) exhibited a "wet cold" hemodynamic profile, 117 (19%) a "cold dry", 91 (15%) a "warm wet" and 66 (11%) a "warm dry" phenotype. The "wet" patients showed a significantly higher prevalence of pulmonary hypertension (96% wet cold, 94% wet warm vs 21% dry warm, 19% dry cold; p<0,001), a lower pulmonary artery pulsatility index (4,0 wet cold, 4,1 wet warm vs 7,4 dry warm, 6,9 dry cold; p<0,001). No differences were found in etiology of HF. Both reduced CI [OR 1,6 (1-2,4), p=0.003] and increased filling pressures [OR 1,9, (1,2-2,8) p=0.007] were associated with worse outcomes. Survival differed significantly among hemodynamic profiles, with a survival rate of 48% in the "cold wet" profile compared to 68% in the "cold dry" [OR 1,9 (1,2-3,1) p=0,007] and 65% in the "warm dry" [OR 2,2 (1,1-4,2), p=0.01]. The difference between "cold wet" and "warm wet" was borderline significant (p=0.07). Further stratification between right and left ventricular filling pressures showed that isolated right ventricular congestion was rare and associated with low event rate, while in patients with preserved CI, biventricular congestion was associated with borderline worse survival as compared to isolated left ventricular increased filling pressures (p=0.06). Conclusions Hemodynamic profiles assessed with RHC stratify prognosis in ambulatory patients with advanced HF referred for HRT. Evaluation of hemodynamic phenotype may help identify subgroups of patients at high risk and guide therapeutic decisions. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings and develop personalized management strategies to improve clinical outcomes in this population.Survival-hemodynamic phenotypeSurvival-filling pressures
cardiac & cardiovascular systems