4.5 Article

Left cardiac sympathetic denervation for treatment of symptomatic systolic heart failure patients: a pilot study

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEART FAILURE
卷 14, 期 12, 页码 1366-1373

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1093/eurjhf/hfs132

关键词

Heart failure; Surgery; Autonomic denervation; Sympathectomy

资金

  1. Abbott
  2. Novartis
  3. Baldacci

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To evaluate the feasibility, safety, and potential beneficial effects of left cardiac sympathetic denervation (LCSD) in systolic heart failure (HF) patients. In this prospective, randomized pilot study, inclusion criteria were New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class II or III, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 40, sinus rhythm, and resting heart rate 65 b.p.m., despite optimal medical therapy (MT). Fifteen patients were randomly assigned either to MT alone or MT plus LCSD. The primary endpoint was safety, measured by mortality in the first month of follow-up and morbidity according to pre-specified criteria. Secondary endpoints were exercise capacity, quality of life, LVEF, muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA), brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels and 24 h Holter mean heart rate before and after 6 months. We studied clinical effects in long-term follow-up. Ten patients underwent LCSD. There were no adverse events attributable to surgery. In the LCSD group, LVEF improved from 25 6.6 to 33 5.2 (P 0.03); 6 min walking distance improved from 167 35 to 198 47 m (P 0.02). Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLWHFQ) score physical dimension changed from 21 5 to 15 7 (P 0.06). The remaining analysed variables were unchanged. During 848 549 days of follow-up, in the MT group, three patients either died or underwent cardiac transplantation (CT), while in the LCSD group six were alive without CT. LCSD was feasible and seemed to be safe in systolic HF patients. Its beneficial effects warrant the development of a larger randomized trial. Trail registration: NCT01224899.

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