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。

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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:开发H2FPEF和HFA-PEFF评分是为了支持保留射血分数(HFpEF)心力衰竭的诊断,也可能有助于预测心血管结局。目的:评估这些评分在HFpEF患者队列中的预后价值。方法:这项前瞻性研究于2019年3月至2021年12月在巴西一家三级医院进行。经临床评估、超声心动图和运动试验后,计算H2FPEF和HFA-PEFF评分。将患者分为中概率组(H2FPEF: 2-5分;HFA-PEFF: 2-4分)和高概率组(H2FPEF >5分;HFA-PEFF b> 4分)。主要结局是由HFpEF引起的全因死亡率和住院率的综合结果。结果:共103例患者,平均随访888天(±291天)。平均年龄69岁(±8.3岁),61%为女性。27名患者(26.2%)经历了主要结局,共有32个事件——11例死亡和21例因HFpEF住院。在受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线分析中,H2FPEF评分对预后的预测能力(曲线下面积[AUC]: 0.637, 95% CI: 0.518-0.756, p=0.035)优于HFA-PEFF评分(AUC: 0.572, 95% CI: 0.448-0.696, p=0.270)。在Kaplan-Meier分析中,与中间评分组或两种评分之间不同分类的患者相比,两种评分的高概率分类与结果的发生显著相关(log-rank p=0.034)。结论:H2FPEF评分在预测HFpEF患者预后方面优于HFA-PEFF评分。这项在巴西进行的当代研究结果有助于临床实践中的风险分层。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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