4.4 Article

Mortality and readmission of hospitalized patients with congestive heart failure and preserved versus depressed systolic function

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
Volume 88, Issue 5, Pages 530-533

Publisher

EXCERPTA MEDICA INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0002-9149(01)01732-5

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Patients with congestive heart failure (CHF) and preserved systolic function are very common. Despite the high prevalence of this syndrome, very little information is known regarding its mortality and morbidity (e.g., readmission), or the efficacy of drugs. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical characteristics and prognosis among consecutively hospitalized patients with CHF and preserved versus depressed left ventricular systolic function. Patients with severe aortic or mitral valve disease were excluded from the study. Patients were categorized based on the values of ejection fraction (EF) as having preserved (EF > 50%), intermediate (EF 40% to 50%), or depressed (EF < 40%) systolic function. Clinical characteristics as well as mortality and hospital readmission rates during 2.4 years of follow-up were recorded for each patient. Sixty-one patients (35%) had preserved systolic function, 73 (43%) had depressed function, and 38 (22%) had intermediate function. Patients with preserved systolic function were more often women and had a higher prevalence of left ventricular hypertrophy (all p <0.05). At follow-up, cumulative survival probabilities were similar between patients with preserved systolic function and those with systolic dysfunction (p = 0.84). Readmission rates were also comparable between preserved and depressed systolic function (36% vs 48%; p = NS). The prognosis of CHF patients with preserved systolic function was similar to those with systolic dysfunction. In light of these findings, effective therapeutic strategy for this subset of patients is needed. (C) 2001 by Excerpta Medica, Inc.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available