Mechanistic Basis for Differential Effects of Interatrial Shunt Treatment in HFrEF vs HFpEF: The RELIEVE-HF Trial.

IF 15.2 1区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Michael R Zile, William T Abraham, JoAnn Lindenfeld, Stefan D Anker, Josep Rodés-Cabau, Michael P Pfeiffer, John P Boehmer, Sheldon Litwin, Catalin F Baicu, Julio Núñez Villota, Elizabeth C Lee, Richard Holcomb, Patrick O'Keefe, Neal L Eigler, Gregg W Stone
{"title":"Mechanistic Basis for Differential Effects of Interatrial Shunt Treatment in HFrEF vs HFpEF: The RELIEVE-HF Trial.","authors":"Michael R Zile, William T Abraham, JoAnn Lindenfeld, Stefan D Anker, Josep Rodés-Cabau, Michael P Pfeiffer, John P Boehmer, Sheldon Litwin, Catalin F Baicu, Julio Núñez Villota, Elizabeth C Lee, Richard Holcomb, Patrick O'Keefe, Neal L Eigler, Gregg W Stone","doi":"10.1016/j.jcmg.2025.08.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The RELIEVE-HF (REducing Lung congestion symptoms using the v-wavE shunt in adVancEd Heart Failure) trial randomized 508 patients with heart failure (HF) to interatrial shunt treatment vs placebo procedure. Randomization was stratified into 2 patient groups: heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) (left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] ≤40%); and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) (LVEF >40%). HF event rates (all-cause death, transplantation or left ventricular (LV) assist device, HF hospitalization or outpatient worsening) after shunt treatment during 2-year follow-up were directionally opposite: decreased by 51% in HFrEF, increased by 69% in HFpEF.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aims to examine differences in cardiac structure and function before and after interatrial shunt placement in patients with HFrEF vs HFpEF that could underlie these discordant clinical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Serial changes from baseline to 12 months in 17 transthoracic echocardiographic parameters in shunt-treated vs control patients in HFrEF vs HFpEF were assessed and compared by ANCOVA (analysis of covariance).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In shunt-treated vs control patients with HFrEF, there were reductions in median LV end-diastolic volumes (-11.9 mL/m<sup>2</sup> [Q1-Q3: -21.3 to -2.5 mL/m<sup>2</sup>]; P = 0.01) and LV end-systolic volumes (-8.9 mL/m<sup>2</sup> [Q1-Q3: -17.2 to -20.7 mL/m<sup>2</sup>]; P = 0.01) indicative of reverse LV remodeling. There were no significant changes in right ventricular (RV), right atrial, or inferior vena cava sizes or pulmonary artery systolic pressure (PASP). In contrast, shunt-treated vs control patients with HFpEF did not have LV remodeling, but they had increased RV, right atrial, and inferior vena cava dimensions, and PASP also increased (4.7 mm Hg [Q1-Q3: 0.9-8.5 mm Hg]; P = 0.02). LV and RV diastolic compliance were decreased in HFpEF vs HFrEF at baseline and decreased further after shunt treatment in HFpEF.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Differential changes in left-sided and right-sided heart remodeling and PASP following interatrial shunt placement in patients with HFrEF vs HFpEF provide a mechanistic basis for the variable effects on clinical outcomes observed in RELIEVE-HF. (REducing Lung congestion symptoms using the v-wavE shunt in adVancEd Heart Failure [RELIEVE-HF]; NCT03499236).</p>","PeriodicalId":14767,"journal":{"name":"JACC. Cardiovascular imaging","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":15.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JACC. Cardiovascular imaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2025.08.005","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The RELIEVE-HF (REducing Lung congestion symptoms using the v-wavE shunt in adVancEd Heart Failure) trial randomized 508 patients with heart failure (HF) to interatrial shunt treatment vs placebo procedure. Randomization was stratified into 2 patient groups: heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) (left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] ≤40%); and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) (LVEF >40%). HF event rates (all-cause death, transplantation or left ventricular (LV) assist device, HF hospitalization or outpatient worsening) after shunt treatment during 2-year follow-up were directionally opposite: decreased by 51% in HFrEF, increased by 69% in HFpEF.

Objectives: This study aims to examine differences in cardiac structure and function before and after interatrial shunt placement in patients with HFrEF vs HFpEF that could underlie these discordant clinical outcomes.

Methods: Serial changes from baseline to 12 months in 17 transthoracic echocardiographic parameters in shunt-treated vs control patients in HFrEF vs HFpEF were assessed and compared by ANCOVA (analysis of covariance).

Results: In shunt-treated vs control patients with HFrEF, there were reductions in median LV end-diastolic volumes (-11.9 mL/m2 [Q1-Q3: -21.3 to -2.5 mL/m2]; P = 0.01) and LV end-systolic volumes (-8.9 mL/m2 [Q1-Q3: -17.2 to -20.7 mL/m2]; P = 0.01) indicative of reverse LV remodeling. There were no significant changes in right ventricular (RV), right atrial, or inferior vena cava sizes or pulmonary artery systolic pressure (PASP). In contrast, shunt-treated vs control patients with HFpEF did not have LV remodeling, but they had increased RV, right atrial, and inferior vena cava dimensions, and PASP also increased (4.7 mm Hg [Q1-Q3: 0.9-8.5 mm Hg]; P = 0.02). LV and RV diastolic compliance were decreased in HFpEF vs HFrEF at baseline and decreased further after shunt treatment in HFpEF.

Conclusions: Differential changes in left-sided and right-sided heart remodeling and PASP following interatrial shunt placement in patients with HFrEF vs HFpEF provide a mechanistic basis for the variable effects on clinical outcomes observed in RELIEVE-HF. (REducing Lung congestion symptoms using the v-wavE shunt in adVancEd Heart Failure [RELIEVE-HF]; NCT03499236).

心房分流治疗在HFrEF和HFpEF中不同效果的机制基础:relief - hf试验。
背景:relief -HF试验将508例心力衰竭(HF)患者随机分为房间分流治疗组和安慰剂组。随机分为射血分数降低的HF (HFrEF;LVEF≤40%)和保留EF的HF (HFpEF;LVEF bb≤40%)2组。在2年随访期间,分流治疗后HF事件发生率(全因死亡、移植/LVAD、HF住院/门诊恶化)方向相反:HFrEF组下降51%,HFpEF组增加69%。目的:研究HFrEF和HFpEF患者心房分流术放置前后心脏结构和功能的差异,这可能是导致这些不一致临床结果的原因。方法:通过ANCOVA评估和比较分流治疗的HFrEF和HFpEF患者与对照组患者17项经胸超声心动图参数从基线到12个月的连续变化。结果:分流治疗的HFrEF患者与对照组相比,左室舒张末期中位容积降低(-11.9[-21.3,-2.5]ml/m2,p=0.01),左室收缩末期中位容积降低(-8.9[-17.2,-20.7]ml/m2,p=0.01),表明左室重构逆转。右心室(RV)、右心房(RA)、下腔静脉(IVC)大小和肺动脉收缩压(PASP)均无明显变化。相比之下,分流治疗的HFpEF患者与对照组相比,未发生左室重构,但RV、RA和IVC尺寸增加,PASP增加(4.7[0.9,8.5]mmHg,p=0.02)。HFpEF组左室和右室舒张顺应性在基线时较HFrEF组降低,在分流治疗后进一步降低。结论:HFrEF与HFpEF患者放置心房分流器后左右心重构和PASP的差异变化为relive - hf临床结果的不同影响提供了机制基础。试验注册:Clinical Trial.gov标识符:NCT03499236。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JACC. Cardiovascular imaging
JACC. Cardiovascular imaging CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
CiteScore
24.90
自引率
5.70%
发文量
330
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging, part of the prestigious Journal of the American College of Cardiology (JACC) family, offers readers a comprehensive perspective on all aspects of cardiovascular imaging. This specialist journal covers original clinical research on both non-invasive and invasive imaging techniques, including echocardiography, CT, CMR, nuclear, optical imaging, and cine-angiography. JACC. Cardiovascular imaging highlights advances in basic science and molecular imaging that are expected to significantly impact clinical practice in the next decade. This influence encompasses improvements in diagnostic performance, enhanced understanding of the pathogenetic basis of diseases, and advancements in therapy. In addition to cutting-edge research,the content of JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging emphasizes practical aspects for the practicing cardiologist, including advocacy and practice management.The journal also features state-of-the-art reviews, ensuring a well-rounded and insightful resource for professionals in the field of cardiovascular imaging.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信