Circulation. Heart failure · 2012
Clinical and functional correlates of early microvascular dysfunction after heart transplantation.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Haddad François, Khazanie Prateeti, Deuse Tobias, Weisshaar Dana, Zhou Jessica, Nam Chang Wook, Vu Thu A, Gomari Fatemeh A, Skhiri Mehdi, Simos Ana, Schnittger Ingela, Vrotvec Bojan, Hunt Sharon A, Fearon William F
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Microvascular dysfunction is emerging as a strong predictor of outcome in heart transplant recipients. At this time, the determinants and consequences of early microvascular dysfunction are not well established. The objective of the study was to determine the risk factors and functional correlates associated with early microvascular dysfunction in heart transplant recipients.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Sixty-three heart transplant recipients who had coronary physiology assessment, right heart catheterization, and echocardiography performed at the time of their first annual evaluation were included in the study. Microvascular dysfunction was assessed using the recently described index of microcirculatory resistance. The presence of microvascular dysfunction, predefined by an index of microcirculatory resistance >20, was observed in 46% of patients at 1 year. A history of acute rejection and undersized donor hearts were associated with microvascular dysfunction at 1 year, with odds ratio of 4.0 (1.3-12.8) and 3.6 (1.2-11.1), respectively. Patients with microvascular dysfunction had lower cardiac index (3.1±0.7 versus 3.5±0.7 L/min per m(2); P=0.02) and mild graft dysfunction measured by echocardiography-derived left and right myocardial performance indices ([0.54±0.09 versus 0.43±0.09; P<0.01] and [0.47±0.14 versus 0.32±0.05; P<0.01], respectively). Microvascular dysfunction was also associated with a higher likelihood of death, graft failure, or allograft vasculopathy at 5 years after transplant (hazard ratio, 2.52 [95% CI, 1.04-5.91]).
CONCLUSIONS: A history of acute rejection during the first year and smaller donor hearts were identified as risk factors for early microvascular dysfunction. Microvascular dysfunction assessed using index of microcirculatory resistances at 1 year was also associated with worse graft function and possibly worse clinical outcomes.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Sixty-three heart transplant recipients who had coronary physiology assessment, right heart catheterization, and echocardiography performed at the time of their first annual evaluation were included in the study. Microvascular dysfunction was assessed using the recently described index of microcirculatory resistance. The presence of microvascular dysfunction, predefined by an index of microcirculatory resistance >20, was observed in 46% of patients at 1 year. A history of acute rejection and undersized donor hearts were associated with microvascular dysfunction at 1 year, with odds ratio of 4.0 (1.3-12.8) and 3.6 (1.2-11.1), respectively. Patients with microvascular dysfunction had lower cardiac index (3.1±0.7 versus 3.5±0.7 L/min per m(2); P=0.02) and mild graft dysfunction measured by echocardiography-derived left and right myocardial performance indices ([0.54±0.09 versus 0.43±0.09; P<0.01] and [0.47±0.14 versus 0.32±0.05; P<0.01], respectively). Microvascular dysfunction was also associated with a higher likelihood of death, graft failure, or allograft vasculopathy at 5 years after transplant (hazard ratio, 2.52 [95% CI, 1.04-5.91]).
CONCLUSIONS: A history of acute rejection during the first year and smaller donor hearts were identified as risk factors for early microvascular dysfunction. Microvascular dysfunction assessed using index of microcirculatory resistances at 1 year was also associated with worse graft function and possibly worse clinical outcomes.