This study aims to evaluate the incidence of coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) and its prognostic implication for the improvement of left ventricular function in patients who have been diagnosed with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) caused by non-ischemic etiology.
HF is a clinical syndrome characterized by dyspnea or exertional limitation due to impairment of ventricular filling or ejection of blood or both. HFrEF occurs when the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is 40% or less and is accompanied by progressive left ventricular dilatation and adverse cardiac remodeling. Among them, a substantial portion of patients had non-ischemic etiology.4 The CMD, defined by impaired coronary flow reserve (CFR), is commonly observed in patients with cardiomyopathies caused by non-ischemic etiology and is well-known to be associated with poor prognosis independently of the degree of left ventricular functional abnormality. However, the presence of CMD can be more specifically evaluated by invasive physiologic assessment using both CFR and the index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR) than by non-invasive methods (doppler echocardiography, positron emission tomography, or cardiac magnetic resonance imaging \[MRI\]) measuring CFR alone. Considering that CMD, defined by depressed CFR with elevated IMR, reflects the impaired myocardial flow and microvascular damages, there was a possibility that it may be a predictor of irreversible myocardial damages in HFrEF patients with non-ischemic etiology. Nevertheless, there has been limited data regarding the association between the improvement of LV function and CMD for patients with HFrEF caused by non-ischemic etiology after guideline-directed medical treatment (GDMT). Therefore, the investigators sought to evaluate the incidence of CMD and its prognostic implication for the improvement of left ventricular function after GDMT in patients who have been diagnosed with HFrEF caused by non-ischemic etiology.
Study Type
OBSERVATIONAL
Enrollment
200
Measured CFR and IMR
Samsung Medical Center
Seoul, South Korea
RECRUITINGProportion of HFiEF* at 12 months
HFiEF was defined as LVEF \>40% measured by echocardiography at 12 months.1
Time frame: 1-year follow-up
Correlation between CMD and left ventricular end diastolic pressure
Time frame: 1 year
Correlation between CMD and delta LVEF from baseline to 12 months
Time frame: 1 year
Correlation between CMD and E/e'
Time frame: 1 year
Correlation between CMD and delta LV systolic dimension from baseline to 12 months
Time frame: 1 year
Correlation between CMD and delta LV diastolic dimension from baseline to 12 months
Time frame: 1-year follow-up
Correlation between CMD and late gadolinium enhancement measured by cardiac MRI
Time frame: 1 year
Correlation between CMD and pulmonary artery wedge pressure
Time frame: 1 year
Correlation between CMD and mean pulmonary artery pressure
Time frame: 1 year
Correlation between CMD and pulmonary artery pulsatility index (PAPi)
Time frame: 1 year
Correlation between CMD and cardiac output/cardiac index
Time frame: 1 year
Correlation between CMD and delta NT-proBNP from baseline to 12 months follow-up
Time frame: 1-year follow-up
Proportion of CMD according to etiology
Time frame: 1 year
Rates of All-cause death
Time frame: 1-year follow-up
Rates of Cardiac death
Time frame: 1-year follow-up
Rates of Readmission due to HF
Time frame: 1-year follow-up
Rates of Readmission
Time frame: 1-year follow-up
Rates of Implantation of implantable cardioverter defibrillator
Time frame: 1-year follow-up
Rates of Cardiac replacement therapy (heart transplantation or LVAD)
Time frame: 1-year follow-up
Changes of quality of life for HF (Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire [KCCQ])
Time frame: 1-year follow-up
Total medical cost
Time frame: 1-year follow-up
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.