Fernando Colares Barros, Jéssica Cristina de Cezaro, Pietro Donelli Costa, Giovanni Donelli Costa, Angela Barreto Santiago Santos, Eduardo Gatti Pianca, Willian Roberto Menegazzo, Fernando Luís Scolari, Anderson Donelli da Silveira
{"title":"当前临床评分在保留射血分数的心力衰竭中的预后应用:一项前瞻性队列研究。","authors":"Fernando Colares Barros, Jéssica Cristina de Cezaro, Pietro Donelli Costa, Giovanni Donelli Costa, Angela Barreto Santiago Santos, Eduardo Gatti Pianca, Willian Roberto Menegazzo, Fernando Luís Scolari, Anderson Donelli da Silveira","doi":"10.36660/abc.20240852","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The H2FPEF and HFA-PEFF scores were developed to support the diagnosis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and may also help predict cardiovascular outcomes.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the prognostic value of these scores in a cohort of individuals with HFpEF.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective study was conducted at a tertiary hospital in Brazil between March 2019 and December 2021. After clinical evaluation, echocardiography, and exercise testing, the H2FPEF and HFA-PEFF scores were calculated. Patients were classified into intermediate probability groups (H2FPEF: 2-5 points; HFA-PEFF: 2-4 points) and high probability groups (H2FPEF >5 points; HFA-PEFF >4 points). The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and hospitalizations due to HFpEF. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 103 patients were followed for an average of 888 days (±291). The mean age was 69 years (±8.3), and 61% were women. Twenty-seven patients (26.2%) experienced primary outcomes, totaling 32 events-11 deaths and 21 hospitalizations due to HFpEF. In the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, the H2FPEF score showed better predictive ability for the outcomes (area under the curve [AUC]: 0.637, 95% CI: 0.518-0.756, p=0.035) compared to the HFA-PEFF score (AUC: 0.572, 95% CI: 0.448-0.696, p=0.270). In the Kaplan-Meier analysis, high-probability classification by both scores was significantly associated with the occurrence of outcomes (log-rank p=0.034), compared to the intermediate score group or patients with differing classifications between the two scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The H2FPEF score showed better performance than the HFA-PEFF score in predicting outcomes in patients with HFpEF. Findings from this contemporary study conducted in Brazil contribute to risk stratification in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":93887,"journal":{"name":"Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia","volume":"122 6","pages":"e20240852"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12212386/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prognostic Applications of Current Clinical Scores in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Prospective Cohort Study.\",\"authors\":\"Fernando Colares Barros, Jéssica Cristina de Cezaro, Pietro Donelli Costa, Giovanni Donelli Costa, Angela Barreto Santiago Santos, Eduardo Gatti Pianca, Willian Roberto Menegazzo, Fernando Luís Scolari, Anderson Donelli da Silveira\",\"doi\":\"10.36660/abc.20240852\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The H2FPEF and HFA-PEFF scores were developed to support the diagnosis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and may also help predict cardiovascular outcomes.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the prognostic value of these scores in a cohort of individuals with HFpEF.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective study was conducted at a tertiary hospital in Brazil between March 2019 and December 2021. After clinical evaluation, echocardiography, and exercise testing, the H2FPEF and HFA-PEFF scores were calculated. Patients were classified into intermediate probability groups (H2FPEF: 2-5 points; HFA-PEFF: 2-4 points) and high probability groups (H2FPEF >5 points; HFA-PEFF >4 points). The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and hospitalizations due to HFpEF. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 103 patients were followed for an average of 888 days (±291). The mean age was 69 years (±8.3), and 61% were women. Twenty-seven patients (26.2%) experienced primary outcomes, totaling 32 events-11 deaths and 21 hospitalizations due to HFpEF. In the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, the H2FPEF score showed better predictive ability for the outcomes (area under the curve [AUC]: 0.637, 95% CI: 0.518-0.756, p=0.035) compared to the HFA-PEFF score (AUC: 0.572, 95% CI: 0.448-0.696, p=0.270). In the Kaplan-Meier analysis, high-probability classification by both scores was significantly associated with the occurrence of outcomes (log-rank p=0.034), compared to the intermediate score group or patients with differing classifications between the two scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The H2FPEF score showed better performance than the HFA-PEFF score in predicting outcomes in patients with HFpEF. Findings from this contemporary study conducted in Brazil contribute to risk stratification in clinical practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93887,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia\",\"volume\":\"122 6\",\"pages\":\"e20240852\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12212386/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36660/abc.20240852\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36660/abc.20240852","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Prognostic Applications of Current Clinical Scores in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Prospective Cohort Study.
Background: The H2FPEF and HFA-PEFF scores were developed to support the diagnosis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and may also help predict cardiovascular outcomes.
Objective: To assess the prognostic value of these scores in a cohort of individuals with HFpEF.
Methods: This prospective study was conducted at a tertiary hospital in Brazil between March 2019 and December 2021. After clinical evaluation, echocardiography, and exercise testing, the H2FPEF and HFA-PEFF scores were calculated. Patients were classified into intermediate probability groups (H2FPEF: 2-5 points; HFA-PEFF: 2-4 points) and high probability groups (H2FPEF >5 points; HFA-PEFF >4 points). The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and hospitalizations due to HFpEF. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05.
Results: A total of 103 patients were followed for an average of 888 days (±291). The mean age was 69 years (±8.3), and 61% were women. Twenty-seven patients (26.2%) experienced primary outcomes, totaling 32 events-11 deaths and 21 hospitalizations due to HFpEF. In the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, the H2FPEF score showed better predictive ability for the outcomes (area under the curve [AUC]: 0.637, 95% CI: 0.518-0.756, p=0.035) compared to the HFA-PEFF score (AUC: 0.572, 95% CI: 0.448-0.696, p=0.270). In the Kaplan-Meier analysis, high-probability classification by both scores was significantly associated with the occurrence of outcomes (log-rank p=0.034), compared to the intermediate score group or patients with differing classifications between the two scores.
Conclusions: The H2FPEF score showed better performance than the HFA-PEFF score in predicting outcomes in patients with HFpEF. Findings from this contemporary study conducted in Brazil contribute to risk stratification in clinical practice.