Comparative Study Of Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF) Via Non-invasive Hemodynamic And Echocardiograph:one Year Follow-up

Objective:A comparative study of non-invasive hemodynamics examination and echocardiography in 139 cases of heart failure patients with preserved ejection fraction(HFpEF)at baseline and one year follow-up to explore the value of diagnosis,monitoring and prognosis in patients with HFpEFMethods:139 of in-hospital patients with HFpEF,enrolled in the(china PEACE 5P-HF)From Jun.2016 to May.2018,Retrospective analyze the baseline and one year follow-up data.The general data were collected.The participants were Between 18ys and 80ys,average age is(64±12.3)y,63.31%male(88/139)and 36.69%female(51/139).t-test way was used to analyze the baseline and one year follw-up data.The indexs including Blood pressure(BP),NT-proBNP and 6-munites walk test(6MWT).While,non-invasive hemodynamic indicators included stroke volume(SV),ejection fractions(EF),cardiac index(CI),index of contratility(IC),pulmonary artery wedge pressure(PCWP),maximum angiectatic velocity(AMPC),left ventricular ejection time(LVET),left ventricular isovolumetric relaxation time(LVLVIVRT),pre-ejection period/left ventricular ejection fractions(PEP/LVET),leftv ventricular end diastolic pressure(LVEDP)and left cardiac work index(LCWI),and hemodynamic indicators included left ventricular end diastolic dimension(LVEDd),left ventricular end systolic dimension(LVEDs),interventricular septal thickness at diastole(IVSD),left ventricular ejection fractions(LVEF),E/eResults:There were no significant difference between one year follow-up and baseline data in blood pressure,NT-proBNP and 6MWT(p>0.05):SBP:(146.2±25.4)vs.(138.6±30.8)mmHg,DBP:(81.5±19.4)vs.(85.3±17.2)mmHg,NT-proBNP:(2092.38±2833.78)vs.(1723..22±3017.81)pg/ml,and 6MWT:(401.3±140.8)vs.(439.8±132.2)mThe Hemodynamic indicators in baseline and one year follow up as follow,there were significantly increased in LVET and E/e' in one year follow-up than that in baseline:LVEF:(63.53±8.39)vs.(61.02±7.16)%;E/e'in one year follow-up is significantly decresed than that in the baseline,they were(14.32±6.61)vs.(12.89±5.86);There were no significantly difference in LVEDd,LVEDs and IVSD in one year follow-up than that in baseline,they were(52.75±11.96)vs.(48.52±12.64)mm,(29 15±7.39)vs.(27.99±8.49)mm and(12.83±5.53)vs.(12.78±4.61)mm;There were significantly increased in SV,EF,CI,IC in one year follow-up than that in baseline:(p<0.05)SV:(73.39±29.47)vs.(63.39±24.37)ml,EF:(64.87±9.16)%vs.(61.81±9.02),CI:(3.06±1.10)vs.(2.62±1.06)ml-1·min-1·m2,IC:(0.037±0.039)vs(0.028±0.015)L/s,while PCWP in one year follow-up was decreased than that in baseline,they were(9.21±3.34)vs.(9.87±3.13)mmHg,(P<0.05),However,the other indicators in one year follow-up and baseline,which were AMPC:(0.79±0.49)vs.(0.73±0.46)Q/s,LVET:(0.32±0.08)vs.(0.31±0.09)s,LVIVRT:(0.11±0.33)vs.(0.11±0.29)s,PEP/LVET:(0.32±0.17)vs.(0.32±0.16),LVEDP:(17.28±5.12)vs.(17.39±3.12)mmHg,LCWI:(165.51±30.34)vs.(172.67±24.92),there was no significant difference(p>0.05).Conclusions:Hemodynamic indicators:SV,EF,CI,IC and PCWP may be a predictor of early diagnosis,monitoring and prognosis on HFpEF;The combination of non-invasive hemodynamic and echocardiographic effectively reflect the myocardial remodeling and cardiac function in patients with HFpEF.