反复导管消融后窦性心律维持对保留射血分数的心力衰竭患者临床结局的影响。

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Yasuyuki Egami, Noriyuki Kobayashi, Ayako Sugino, Masaru Abe, Mizuki Ohsuga, Hiroaki Nohara, Shodai Kawanami, Kohei Ukita, Akito Kawamura, Koji Yasumoto, Naotaka Okamoto, Yasuharu Matsunaga-Lee, Masamichi Yano, Masami Nishino
{"title":"反复导管消融后窦性心律维持对保留射血分数的心力衰竭患者临床结局的影响。","authors":"Yasuyuki Egami, Noriyuki Kobayashi, Ayako Sugino, Masaru Abe, Mizuki Ohsuga, Hiroaki Nohara, Shodai Kawanami, Kohei Ukita, Akito Kawamura, Koji Yasumoto, Naotaka Okamoto, Yasuharu Matsunaga-Lee, Masamichi Yano, Masami Nishino","doi":"10.1016/j.jjcc.2025.05.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) frequently coexist and significantly contribute to morbidity and mortality. Catheter ablation (CA) for AF in HFpEF patients can improve clinical outcomes compared to medical therapy. However, the impact of repeat (Re) CA for AF recurrence (AFR) in HFpEF patients on adverse events remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of sinus rhythm maintenance (SRM) versus AFR after ReCA on clinical adverse outcomes and HFpEF improvement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included 79 patients with AFR and HFpEF who underwent ReCA. HFpEF was defined as an HFA-PEFF score of 5-6 and left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50 %. HFpEF improvement was defined as a reduction in the 12-month HFA-PEFF score to 0-4. Patients were divided into two groups based on rhythm status after ReCA: SRM (post-ReCA SRM, n = 54) and AFR (post-ReCA AFR, n = 25). The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality, HF hospitalizations, or stroke during a 3-year follow-up. Secondary endpoints included 12-month HFA-PEFF scores and the proportion of patients with HFpEF improvement (HFA-PEFF score 0-4).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The post-ReCA SRM group had a significantly lower incidence of the primary endpoint (7.4 % vs. 36 %, p = 0.002) and higher event-free survival (hazard ratio: 0.19, 95 % CI: 0.06-0.63, p = 0.006). The post-ReCA SRM group also showed lower 12-month HFA-PEFF scores [4 (3, 5) vs. 5 (4, 6), p = 0.045] and greater HFpEF improvement (48 % vs. 11 %, p = 0.005).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In HFpEF patients with AFR after initial CA, SRM after ReCA is significantly associated with fewer adverse events, including all-cause mortality, hospitalizations for worsening HF, and strokes, during a 3-year follow-up period, and improved HFpEF status during a 3-year follow-up.</p>","PeriodicalId":15223,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cardiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of sinus rhythm maintenance after repeat catheter ablation on clinical outcomes in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.\",\"authors\":\"Yasuyuki Egami, Noriyuki Kobayashi, Ayako Sugino, Masaru Abe, Mizuki Ohsuga, Hiroaki Nohara, Shodai Kawanami, Kohei Ukita, Akito Kawamura, Koji Yasumoto, Naotaka Okamoto, Yasuharu Matsunaga-Lee, Masamichi Yano, Masami Nishino\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jjcc.2025.05.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) frequently coexist and significantly contribute to morbidity and mortality. Catheter ablation (CA) for AF in HFpEF patients can improve clinical outcomes compared to medical therapy. However, the impact of repeat (Re) CA for AF recurrence (AFR) in HFpEF patients on adverse events remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of sinus rhythm maintenance (SRM) versus AFR after ReCA on clinical adverse outcomes and HFpEF improvement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included 79 patients with AFR and HFpEF who underwent ReCA. HFpEF was defined as an HFA-PEFF score of 5-6 and left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50 %. HFpEF improvement was defined as a reduction in the 12-month HFA-PEFF score to 0-4. Patients were divided into two groups based on rhythm status after ReCA: SRM (post-ReCA SRM, n = 54) and AFR (post-ReCA AFR, n = 25). The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality, HF hospitalizations, or stroke during a 3-year follow-up. Secondary endpoints included 12-month HFA-PEFF scores and the proportion of patients with HFpEF improvement (HFA-PEFF score 0-4).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The post-ReCA SRM group had a significantly lower incidence of the primary endpoint (7.4 % vs. 36 %, p = 0.002) and higher event-free survival (hazard ratio: 0.19, 95 % CI: 0.06-0.63, p = 0.006). The post-ReCA SRM group also showed lower 12-month HFA-PEFF scores [4 (3, 5) vs. 5 (4, 6), p = 0.045] and greater HFpEF improvement (48 % vs. 11 %, p = 0.005).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In HFpEF patients with AFR after initial CA, SRM after ReCA is significantly associated with fewer adverse events, including all-cause mortality, hospitalizations for worsening HF, and strokes, during a 3-year follow-up period, and improved HFpEF status during a 3-year follow-up.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15223,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of cardiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of cardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jjcc.2025.05.003\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jjcc.2025.05.003","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:伴有保留射血分数(HFpEF)的心房颤动(AF)和心力衰竭(HF)经常共存,并对发病率和死亡率有显著影响。与药物治疗相比,HFpEF患者房颤的导管消融(CA)可以改善临床结果。然而,重复(Re) CA治疗HFpEF患者AF复发(AFR)对不良事件的影响尚不清楚。本研究旨在评估ReCA术后窦性心律维持(SRM)与AFR对临床不良结局和HFpEF改善的影响。方法:回顾性研究79例AFR和HFpEF患者行ReCA。HFpEF定义为HFA-PEFF评分为5-6,左室射血分数≥50 %。HFpEF改善被定义为12个月HFA-PEFF评分降至0-4。根据患者ReCA后的心律状态分为两组:SRM组(ReCA后的SRM, n = 54)和AFR组(ReCA后的AFR, n = 25)。主要终点是3年随访期间的全因死亡率、心衰住院或卒中的综合指标。次要终点包括12个月HFA-PEFF评分和HFpEF改善的患者比例(HFA-PEFF评分0-4)。结果:reca后SRM组的主要终点发生率显著降低(7.4 %对36 %,p = 0.002),无事件生存率显著提高(风险比:0.19,95 % CI: 0.06-0.63, p = 0.006)。reca后SRM组也显示较低的12个月HFA-PEFF评分[4(3,5)对5 (4,6),p = 0.045]和较大的HFpEF改善(48 %对11 %,p = 0.005)。结论:在初始CA后伴有AFR的HFpEF患者中,在3年随访期间,rea后SRM与不良事件的减少显著相关,包括全因死亡率、因心衰恶化住院和卒中,以及在3年随访期间HFpEF状态的改善。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Impact of sinus rhythm maintenance after repeat catheter ablation on clinical outcomes in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) frequently coexist and significantly contribute to morbidity and mortality. Catheter ablation (CA) for AF in HFpEF patients can improve clinical outcomes compared to medical therapy. However, the impact of repeat (Re) CA for AF recurrence (AFR) in HFpEF patients on adverse events remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of sinus rhythm maintenance (SRM) versus AFR after ReCA on clinical adverse outcomes and HFpEF improvement.

Methods: This retrospective study included 79 patients with AFR and HFpEF who underwent ReCA. HFpEF was defined as an HFA-PEFF score of 5-6 and left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50 %. HFpEF improvement was defined as a reduction in the 12-month HFA-PEFF score to 0-4. Patients were divided into two groups based on rhythm status after ReCA: SRM (post-ReCA SRM, n = 54) and AFR (post-ReCA AFR, n = 25). The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality, HF hospitalizations, or stroke during a 3-year follow-up. Secondary endpoints included 12-month HFA-PEFF scores and the proportion of patients with HFpEF improvement (HFA-PEFF score 0-4).

Results: The post-ReCA SRM group had a significantly lower incidence of the primary endpoint (7.4 % vs. 36 %, p = 0.002) and higher event-free survival (hazard ratio: 0.19, 95 % CI: 0.06-0.63, p = 0.006). The post-ReCA SRM group also showed lower 12-month HFA-PEFF scores [4 (3, 5) vs. 5 (4, 6), p = 0.045] and greater HFpEF improvement (48 % vs. 11 %, p = 0.005).

Conclusions: In HFpEF patients with AFR after initial CA, SRM after ReCA is significantly associated with fewer adverse events, including all-cause mortality, hospitalizations for worsening HF, and strokes, during a 3-year follow-up period, and improved HFpEF status during a 3-year follow-up.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of cardiology
Journal of cardiology CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
8.00%
发文量
202
审稿时长
29 days
期刊介绍: The official journal of the Japanese College of Cardiology is an international, English language, peer-reviewed journal publishing the latest findings in cardiovascular medicine. Journal of Cardiology (JC) aims to publish the highest-quality material covering original basic and clinical research on all aspects of cardiovascular disease. Topics covered include ischemic heart disease, cardiomyopathy, valvular heart disease, vascular disease, hypertension, arrhythmia, congenital heart disease, pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment, new diagnostic techniques, and cardiovascular imaging. JC also publishes a selection of review articles, clinical trials, short communications, and important messages and letters to the editor.
×
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