Left atrial volume and left ventricular mass indices in heart failure with preserved and reduced ejection fraction

Aims: Two key echocardiographic parameters that are currently used to diagnose heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) are left atrial volume index (LAVi) and left ventricular mass index (LVMi). We investigated whether patients' characteristics, biomarkers, and co-morbidities are associated with these parameters and whether the relationships differ between patients with HFpEF or HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Methods: We consecutively enrolled 831 outpatients with typical signs and symptoms of HF and elevated N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels and categorized patients based upon left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF): LVEF < 40% (HFrEF), LVEF between 40% and 50% (HF with mid-range ejection fraction), and LVEF ≥ 50% (HFpEF). The study includes consecutively enrolled HF patients from an HF outpatient clinic at a tertiary medical centre in the Netherlands. All patients underwent baseline characterization, laboratory measurements, and echocardiography. Results: Four hundred sixty-nine patients had HFrEF, 189 HF with mid-range ejection fraction, and 173 HFpEF. The patients with HFrEF were rather male [HFrEF: 323 (69%); HFpEF: 80 (46%); P < 0.001], and the age was comparable (HFrEF 67 ± 13; HFpEF 70 ± 14; P = 0.069). In HFpEF, more patients had hypertension [190 (40.5%); 114 (65.9%); P < 0.001], higher body mass indices (27 ± 8; 30 ± 7; P < 0.001), and atrial fibrillation [194 (41.4); 86 (49.7); P = 0.029]. The correlation analyses showed that in HFrEF patients, LAVi was significantly associated with age (β 0.293; P < 0.001), male gender (β 0.104; P = 0.042), body mass index (β −0160; P = 0.002), diastolic blood pressure (β −0.136; P < 0.001), New York Heart Association (β 0.174; P = 0.001), atrial fibrillation (β 0.381; P < 0.001), galectin 3 (β 0.230; P < 0.001), NT-proBNP (β 0.183; P < 0.001), estimated glomerular filtration rate (β −0.205; P < 0.001), LVEF (β −0.173; P = 0.001), and LVMi (β 0.337; P < 0.001). In HFpEF patients, only age (β 0.326; P < 0.001), atrial fibrillation (β 0.386; P < 0.001), NT-proBNP (β 0.176; P = 0.036), and LVMi (β 0.213; P = 0.013) were associated with LAVi. Conclusions: Although LVMi and LAVi are hallmark parameters to diagnose HFpEF, they only correlate with a few characteristics of HF and mainly with atrial fibrillation. In contrast, in HFrEF patients, LAVi relates strongly to several other HF parameters. These findings underscore the complexity in visualizing the pathophysiology of HFpEF and question the relation between cardiac structural remodeling and the impact of co-morbidities

Pectins from various sources inhibit galectin-3-related cardiac fibrosis

Purpose of the study: A major challenge in cardiology remains in finding a therapy for cardiac fibrosis. Inhibition of galectin-3 with pectins attenuates fibrosis in animal models of heart failure. The purpose of this study is to identify pectins with the strongest galectin-3 inhibitory capacity. We evaluated the in vitro inhibitory capacity, identified potent pectins, and tested if this potency could be validated in a mouse model of myocardial fibrosis. Methods: Various pectin fractions were screened in vitro. Modified rhubarb pectin (EMRP) was identified as the most potent inhibitor of galectin-3 and compared to the well-known modified citrus pectin (MCP). Our findings were validated in a mouse model of myocardial fibrosis, which was induced by angiotensin II (Ang II) infusion. Results: Ang II infusion was associated with a 4–5-fold increase in fibrosis signal in the tissue of the left ventricle, compared to the control group (0•22±0•10 to 1•08±0•53%; P < 0•001). After treatment with rhubarb pectin, fibrosis was reduced by 57% vs. Ang II alone while this reduction was 30% with the well-known MCP (P = NS, P < 0•05). Treatment was associated with a reduced cardiac inflammatory response and preserved cardiac function. Conclusion: The galectin-3 inhibitor natural rhubarb pectin has a superior inhibitory capacity over established pectins, substantially attenuates cardiac fibrosis, and preserves cardiac function in vivo. Bioactive pectins are natural sources of galectin-3 inhibitors and may be helpful in the prevention of heart failure or other diseases characterized by fibrosis. Funding: Dr. Meijers is supported by the Mandema-Stipendium of the Junior Scientific Masterclass 2020-10, University Medical Center Groningen and by the Netherlands Heart Foundation (Dekkerbeurs 2021)Dr. de Boer is supported by the Netherlands Heart Foundation (CVON SHE-PREDICTS-HF, grant 2017-21; CVON RED-CVD, grant 2017-11; CVON PREDICT2, grant 2018-30; and CVON DOUBLE DOSE, grant 2020B005), by a grant from the leDucq Foundation (Cure PhosphoLambaN induced Cardiomyopathy (Cure-PLaN), and by a grant from the European Research Council (ERC CoG 818715, SECRETE-HF)

Galectin-3 in Heart Failure:An Update of the Last 3 Years

Galectin-3 plays a role in tissue inflammation, repair, and fibrosis. This article specifically focuses on heart failure (HF), in which galectin-3 has been shown to be a useful biomarker in prognosis and risk stratification, especially in HF with preserved ejection fraction. Experimental research has shown that galectin-3 directly induces pathologic remodeling of the heart, and is therefore considered a culprit protein in the development of cardiac fibrosis in HF, with potentially relevant clinical implications. In summary, galectin-3 is a biomarker and biotarget in cardiac remodeling and fibrosis and future research will target galectin-3-centered diseases

Left atrial volume and left ventricular mass indices in heart failure with preserved and reduced ejection fraction

Aims: Two key echocardiographic parameters that are currently used to diagnose heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) are left atrial volume index (LAVi) and left ventricular mass index (LVMi). We investigated whether patients' characteristics, biomarkers, and co-morbidities are associated with these parameters and whether the relationships differ between patients with HFpEF or HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Methods: We consecutively enrolled 831 outpatients with typical signs and symptoms of HF and elevated N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels and categorized patients based upon left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF): LVEF < 40% (HFrEF), LVEF between 40% and 50% (HF with mid-range ejection fraction), and LVEF ≥ 50% (HFpEF). The study includes consecutively enrolled HF patients from an HF outpatient clinic at a tertiary medical centre in the Netherlands. All patients underwent baseline characterization, laboratory measurements, and echocardiography. Results: Four hundred sixty-nine patients had HFrEF, 189 HF with mid-range ejection fraction, and 173 HFpEF. The patients with HFrEF were rather male [HFrEF: 323 (69%); HFpEF: 80 (46%); P < 0.001], and the age was comparable (HFrEF 67 ± 13; HFpEF 70 ± 14; P = 0.069). In HFpEF, more patients had hypertension [190 (40.5%); 114 (65.9%); P < 0.001], higher body mass indices (27 ± 8; 30 ± 7; P < 0.001), and atrial fibrillation [194 (41.4); 86 (49.7); P = 0.029]. The correlation analyses showed that in HFrEF patients, LAVi was significantly associated with age (β 0.293; P < 0.001), male gender (β 0.104; P = 0.042), body mass index (β −0160; P = 0.002), diastolic blood pressure (β −0.136; P < 0.001), New York Heart Association (β 0.174; P = 0.001), atrial fibrillation (β 0.381; P < 0.001), galectin 3 (β 0.230; P < 0.001), NT-proBNP (β 0.183; P < 0.001), estimated glomerular filtration rate (β −0.205; P < 0.001), LVEF (β −0.173; P = 0.001), and LVMi (β 0.337; P < 0.001). In HFpEF patients, only age (β 0.326; P < 0.001), atrial fibrillation (β 0.386; P < 0.001), NT-proBNP (β 0.176; P = 0.036), and LVMi (β 0.213; P = 0.013) were associated with LAVi. Conclusions: Although LVMi and LAVi are hallmark parameters to diagnose HFpEF, they only correlate with a few characteristics of HF and mainly with atrial fibrillation. In contrast, in HFrEF patients, LAVi relates strongly to several other HF parameters. These findings underscore the complexity in visualizing the pathophysiology of HFpEF and question the relation between cardiac structural remodeling and the impact of co-morbidities