4.5 Article

Anaemia, iron status, and gender predict the outcome in patients with chronic heart failure

期刊

ESC HEART FAILURE
卷 7, 期 4, 页码 1880-1890

出版社

WILEY PERIODICALS, INC
DOI: 10.1002/ehf2.12755

关键词

Anaemia; Gender; Heart failure; Iron deficiency; Outcome

资金

  1. Christian Doppler Society

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims Anaemia and iron deficiency (ID) are frequently found in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) and associated with adverse outcome. However, it is unclear whether absolute [transferrin saturation (TSAT) <20%, ferritin <100 mu g/L] or inflammation-driven functional ID (TSAT <20%, ferritin >100 mu g/L) with and without anaemia had similar or different consequences for such patients. Methods and results Within this retrospective cohort study, 2223 patients (1601 men and 622 women) with CHF, referred to our department, between 2000 and 2018, were followed for a median time of 84 months. Anaemia was found in 393 patients and was an independent predictor for an adverse outcome [HR 2.164 (95% CI 1.865-2.512), P < 0.001]. In 674 patients with available parameters of iron metabolism, ID was present in 228 patients and was associated with an unfavourable outcome [HR 1.499 (95% CI 1.158-1.940), P = 0.002]. ID was best predicting an adverse outcome in men <= 59 years, with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, preserved kidney function, no inflammation, and a body mass index (BMI) >= 25.5 kg/m(2). Functional ID in women and absolute ID in men were associated with poor prognosis. Of note, TSAT <20% but not low ferritin levels were predictive for an adverse outcome. Anaemic patients with high ferritin levels, advanced inflammation, older age, low BMI, male gender, and reduced glomerular filtration rate had the worst prognosis. Conclusions Anaemia and low tissue iron availability as reflected by TSAT <20% are negative predictors of outcome in patients with CHF. Systemic inflammation, renal function, BMI, age, and gender are important contributors for the clinical course.

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

4.5
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