Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction in Rheumatoid Disease An Unrecognized Burden?

ObjectivesThis study sought to ascertain whether left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) is more common among clinic patients with rheumatoid disease (RD) compared with the general population, and to assess the diagnostic utility of brain natriuretic peptide (BNP).BackgroundPatients with RD are at increased risk of ischemic heart disease. However, there are few large echocardiographic studies identifying cardiac dysfunction in RD. We hypothesized that LVSD would be more prevalent in RD patients than in the general population.MethodsA total of 226 hospital out-patients with RD (65% women) underwent clinical evaluation, electrocardiography (ECG), echocardiography, and plasma BNP assay (218 patients). Prevalence of LVSD was compared with local population estimates.ResultsDefinite LVSD (left ventricular ejection fraction <40%) occurred in 5.3% of the RD group: standardized prevalence ratio, 3.20; 95% confidence interval, 1.65 to 5.59. Median BNP values were higher in patients with LVSD compared with those without: 16.6 pmol/l versus 8.5 pmol/l, p < 0.005, although values between the two groups overlapped. One in nine patients with an abnormal ECG had definite LVSD.ConclusionsDefinite LVSD was three times more common in RD patients than in the general population. Given the prognostic benefits of treating LVSD, echocardiographic screening of RD patients with an abnormal ECG may be worthwhile

Evaluation of B-type Natriuretic Peptide for validation of a heart failure register in primary care

Abstract Background Diagnosing heart failure and left ventricular systolic dysfunction is difficult on clinical grounds alone. We sought to determine the accuracy of a heart failure register in a single primary care practice, and to examine the usefulness of b-type (or brain) natriuretic peptide (BNP) assay for this purpose. Methods A register validation audit in a single general practice in the UK was carried out. Of 217 patients on the heart failure register, 56 of 61 patients who had not been previously investigated underwent 12-lead electrocardiography and echocardiography within the practice site. Plasma was obtained for BNP assay from 45 subjects, and its performance in identifying echocardiographic abnormalities consistent with heart failure was assessed by analysing area under receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves. Results 30/217 were found to have no evidence to suggest heart failure on notes review and were probably incorrectly coded. 70/112 who were previously investigated were confirmed to have heart failure. Of those not previously investigated, 24/56 (42.9%) who attended for the study had echocardiographic left ventricular systolic dysfunction. A further 8 (14.3%) had normal systolic function, but had left ventricular hypertrophy or significant valve disease. Overall, echocardiographic features consistent with heart failure were found in only 102/203 (50.2%). BNP was poor at discriminating those with and without systolic dysfunction (area under ROC curve 0.612), and those with and without any significant echocardiographic abnormality (area under ROC curve 0.723). Conclusion In this practice, half of the registered patients did not have significant cardiac dysfunction. On-site echocardiography identifies patients who can be removed from the heart failure register. The use of BNP assay to determine which patients require echocardiography is not supported by these data.</p