4.7 Article

Exercise Capacity and Clinical Outcomes in Chronic Heart Failure Patients with Mild Tricuspid Regurgitation

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
Volume 12, Issue 23, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jcm12237459

Keywords

cardiopulmonary exercise testing; chronic heart failure; exercise intolerance; mild tricuspid regurgitation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aimed to investigate the impact of mild tricuspid regurgitation on patients with chronic heart failure. The results showed that patients with mild TR had worse symptoms, reduced exercise capacity, and poor clinical outcomes.
Aim: The present study aimed to investigate the impact of mild tricuspid regurgitation (TR) on the exercise capacity or clinical outcomes in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). Methods and Results: The study enrolled 511 patients with CHF who underwent cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) between 2013 and 2018. The primary outcome was a composite of heart failure hospitalization and death. Patients with mild TR (n = 324) or significant TR (moderate or greater; n = 60) displayed worse NHYA class and reduced exercise capacity on CPET than those with non-TR (n = 127), but these were more severely impaired in patients with significant TR. A total of 90 patients experienced events over a median follow-up period of 3.3 (interquartile range 0.8-5.5) years. Patients with significant TR displayed a higher risk of events, while patients with mild TR had a 3.0-fold higher risk of events than patients with non-TR (hazard ratio (HR) 3.01; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.50-6.07). Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that, compared with non-TR, mild TR was associated with increased adverse events, even after adjustment for co-variates (HR 2.97; 95% CI, 1.35-6.55). Conclusions: TR severity was associated with worse symptoms, reduced exercise capacity, and poor clinical outcomes. Even patients with mild TR had worse clinical characteristics than those with non-TR.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available