4.3 Article

Relation between serum sodium levels and prognosis in outpatients with chronic heart failure: neutral effect of treatment with beta-blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors: data from the Italian network on congestive heart failure (IN-CHF database)

期刊

JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR MEDICINE
卷 12, 期 10, 页码 723-731

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.2459/JCM.0b013e32834ae87e

关键词

angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors; beta-blockers; heart failure; hyponatremia; prognosis

资金

  1. Merck Sharp Dohme Italy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction The predictive role of hyponatremia has been tested in acute and chronic heart failure. Sodium level is inversely related with renin-angiotensin-aldersterone system (RAAS) and sympathetic nervous activity but important issues remain unresolved. Our aim was to define the level of hyponatremia able to predict 1-year outcomes and investigate the relation between sodium levels and mortality and the effect of beta-blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors on this relation. Methods We analyzed 4670 patients enrolled in the IN-CHF Italian Registry. We controlled the predictivity of hyponatremia, testing it either as a continuous variable and dividing the study sample into three severity groups: group 1 (>= 136 mEq/l; n=4207), group 2 (131-135 mEq/l; n=389) and group 3 (<= 130 mEq/l; n=74). The linearity of the relationship between sodium levels and mortality was also tested. Results Mild-to-moderate and severe hyponatremia (groups 2 and 3) independently predicted the 1-year mortality. The relation between sodium concentration and death was not linear and a decrease of 1 mEq/l of sodium increased death rate only for values of sodium 142.9 mEq/l or less. This relationship was not modified by beta-blocker and ACE inhibitor therapies. Conclusion Our data confirm the negative prognostic value of hyponatremia, even of moderate degree, independently of the use of recommended treatments for heart failure.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据