TY - JOUR
T1 - Electrocardiographic predictors of heart failure with reduced versus preserved ejection fraction
T2 - The multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis
AU - O'Neal, Wesley T.
AU - Mazur, Matylda
AU - Bertoni, Alain G.
AU - Bluemke, David A.
AU - Al-Mallah, Mouaz H.
AU - Lima, Joao A.C.
AU - Kitzman, Dalane
AU - Soliman, Elsayed Z.
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors thank the other investigators, the staff, and the participants of MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) for their valuable contributions. A full list of participating MESA investigators and institutions can be found at http://www.mesanhlbi. org. This research was supported by contracts N01-HC-95159, N01-HC-95160, N01-HC-95161, N01-HC-95162, N01-HC-95163, N01-HC-95164, N01-HC-95165, N01-HC-95166, N01-HC-95167, N01-HC-95168 and N01-HC-95169 from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and by grants UL1-TR-000040 and UL1-TR-001079 from the National Center for Research Resources. Dr O'Neal is supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health under award no. F32-HL-134290. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 The Authors.
PY - 2017/6/1
Y1 - 2017/6/1
N2 - Background-Several markers detected on the routine 12-lead ECG are associated with future heart failure events. We examined whether these markers are able to separate the risk of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) from heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Methods and Results-We analyzed data of 6664 participants (53% female mean age 62±10 years) from MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) who were free of cardiovascular disease at baseline (2000-2002). A competing risks analysis was used to compare the association of several baseline ECG predictors with HFrEF and HFpEF detected during a median follow-up of 12.1 years. A total of 127 HFrEF and 117 HFpEF events were detected during follow-up. In a multivariable adjusted model, prolonged QRS duration, delayed intrinsicoid deflection, left-axis deviation, right-axis deviation, prolonged QT interval, abnormal QRS-T axis, left ventricular hypertrophy, ST/T-wave abnormalities, and left bundle-branch block were associated with HFrEF. In contrast, higher resting heart rate, abnormal P-wave axis, and abnormal QRS-T axis were associated with HFpEF. The risk of HFrEF versus HFpEF was significantly differently for delayed intrinsicoid deflection (hazard ratio: 4.90 [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.77- 8.68] versus 0.94 [95% CI, 0.29-2.97] comparison P=0.013), prolonged QT interval (hazard ratio: 2.39 [95% CI, 1.55-3.68] versus 0.52 [95% CI, 0.23-1.19] comparison P < 0.001), and ST/T-wave abnormalities (hazard ratio: 2.47 [95% CI, 1.69-3.62] versus 1.13 [95% CI, 0.72-1.77] comparison P=0.0093). Conclusions-Markers of ventricular repolarization and delayed ventricular activation are able to distinguish between the future risk of HFrEF and HFpEF. These findings suggest a role for ECG markers in the personalized risk assessment of heart failure subtypes.
AB - Background-Several markers detected on the routine 12-lead ECG are associated with future heart failure events. We examined whether these markers are able to separate the risk of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) from heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Methods and Results-We analyzed data of 6664 participants (53% female mean age 62±10 years) from MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) who were free of cardiovascular disease at baseline (2000-2002). A competing risks analysis was used to compare the association of several baseline ECG predictors with HFrEF and HFpEF detected during a median follow-up of 12.1 years. A total of 127 HFrEF and 117 HFpEF events were detected during follow-up. In a multivariable adjusted model, prolonged QRS duration, delayed intrinsicoid deflection, left-axis deviation, right-axis deviation, prolonged QT interval, abnormal QRS-T axis, left ventricular hypertrophy, ST/T-wave abnormalities, and left bundle-branch block were associated with HFrEF. In contrast, higher resting heart rate, abnormal P-wave axis, and abnormal QRS-T axis were associated with HFpEF. The risk of HFrEF versus HFpEF was significantly differently for delayed intrinsicoid deflection (hazard ratio: 4.90 [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.77- 8.68] versus 0.94 [95% CI, 0.29-2.97] comparison P=0.013), prolonged QT interval (hazard ratio: 2.39 [95% CI, 1.55-3.68] versus 0.52 [95% CI, 0.23-1.19] comparison P < 0.001), and ST/T-wave abnormalities (hazard ratio: 2.47 [95% CI, 1.69-3.62] versus 1.13 [95% CI, 0.72-1.77] comparison P=0.0093). Conclusions-Markers of ventricular repolarization and delayed ventricular activation are able to distinguish between the future risk of HFrEF and HFpEF. These findings suggest a role for ECG markers in the personalized risk assessment of heart failure subtypes.
KW - Electrocardiography
KW - Epidemiology
KW - Heart failure
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85020470762&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85020470762&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1161/JAHA.117.006023
DO - 10.1161/JAHA.117.006023
M3 - Article
C2 - 28546456
AN - SCOPUS:85020470762
SN - 2047-9980
VL - 6
JO - Journal of the American Heart Association
JF - Journal of the American Heart Association
IS - 6
M1 - e006023
ER -