III Diretriz Brasileira de Insuficiência Cardíaca Crônica

Universidade de São Paulo Faculdade de Medicina Hospital das ClínicasUniversidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul Hospital de Clínicas de Porto AlegreUniversidade de Pernambuco Faculdade de Ciências Médicas de PernambucoUniversidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) Escola Paulista de MedicinaUniversidade Federal de Minas Gerais Faculdade de MedicinaFaculdade de Medicina de São José do Rio PretoFundação Universitária de Cardiologia do Rio Grande do Sul Instituto de CardiologiaRede Labs D'OrUniversidade Federal FluminenseUniversidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro Faculdade de Ciencias MédicasInstituto Dante Pazzanese de CardiologiaSanta Casa de MisericórdiaUniversidade de Pernambuco Pronto Socorro Cardiológico de PernambucoHospital Pró CardíacoHospital de MessejanaPontifícia Universidade Católica do ParanáUniversidade Federal de Goiás Faculdade de MedicinaUniversidade de São Paulo Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão PretoReal e Benemerita Sociedade de Beneficência PortuguesaFaculdade de Ciências Médicas de Minas GeraisUNIFESP, EPMSciEL

Utilidade clínica da angiografia coronariana em pacientes com disfunção ventricular esquerda Clinical usefulness of coronary angiography in patients with left ventricular dysfunction

FUNDAMENTO: A realização da angiografia coronariana na insuficiência cardíaca sem etiologia definida é frequentemente justificada para avaliação diagnóstica de cardiopatia isquêmica. Porém, o benefício clínico dessa estratégia não é conhecido. OBJETIVO: Avaliar a prevalência de cardiopatia isquêmica mediante critérios angiográficos em pacientes com insuficiência cardíaca e fração de ejeção reduzida sem etiologia, assim como o seu impacto na decisão terapêutica. MÉTODOS: Foram avaliados pacientes ambulatoriais consecutivos com insuficiência cardíaca e disfunção sistólica, que tiveram a angiografia coronariana indicada para esclarecimento etiológico da cardiopatia, no período de 1º de janeiro de 2009 a 31 de dezembro de 2010. Os pacientes com diagnóstico de doença arterial coronariana, sorologia positiva para doença de Chagas, cardiopatia congênita, valvopatia grave ou pacientes submetidos a transplante cardíaco foram excluídos da análise. A amostra foi dividida em dois grupos conforme a indicação do cateterismo. Grupo-1: Sintomáticos em razão de angina ou insuficiência cardíaca refratária. Grupo-2: Presença de > 2 fatores de risco para doença arterial coronariana RESULTADOS: Cento e sete pacientes foram incluídos para análise, sendo 51 (47,7%) pacientes pertencentes ao Grupo-1 e 56 (52,3%), ao Grupo-2. A prevalência de cardiopatia isquêmica foi de 9,3% (10 pacientes), e todos pertenciam ao Grupo-1 (p = 0,0001). Durante o seguimento, apenas 4 (3,7%) tiveram indicação de revascularização miocárdica; 3 (2,8%) pacientes apresentaram complicações relacionadas ao procedimento. CONCLUSÃO: Em nosso trabalho, a realização da angiografia coronariana em pacientes com insuficiência cardíaca e disfunção sistólica sem etiologia, apesar de embasada pelas atuais diretrizes, não evidenciou benefício quando indicada apenas pela presença de fatores de risco para doença arterial coronariana.BACKGROUND: Performing a coronary angiography in patients with heart failure of unknown etiology is often justified by the diagnostic assessment of ischemic heart disease. However, the clinical benefit of this strategy is not known. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prevalence of ischemic heart disease by angiographic criteria in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction of unknown etiology, as well as its impact on therapy decisions. METHODS: Consecutive outpatients with heart failure and systolic dysfunction, who had an indication for coronary angiography to clarify the etiology of heart disease were assessed from 1 January 2009 to December 31, 2010. Patients diagnosed with coronary artery disease, positive serology for Chagas disease, congenital heart disease, valve disease or patients undergoing cardiac transplantation were excluded from the analysis. The sample was divided into two groups according to the indication for catheterization. Group-1: Symptomatic due to angina or heart failure. Group-2: Presence of > 2 risk factors for coronary artery disease RESULTS: One hundred and seven patients were included in the analysis, with 51 (47.7%) patients in Group 1 and 56 (52.3%) in Group 2. The prevalence of ischemic heart disease was 9.3% (10 patients), and all belonged to Group 1 (p = 0.0001). During follow-up, only 4 (3.7%) were referred for CABG; 3 (2.8%) patients had procedure-related complications. CONCLUSION: In our study, coronary angiography in patients with heart failure and systolic dysfunction of unknown etiology, although supported by current guidelines, did not show benefits when performed only due to the presence of risk factors for coronary artery disease

NHETS - Necropsy Heart Transplantation Study

Fundamento: Discordâncias entre diagnóstico pre e post-mortem são relatadas na literatura, podendo variar de 4,1 a 49,8% dentre os casos encaminhados para exame necroscópico, com importante repercussão no tratamento dos pacientes. Objetivo: Analisar pacientes com óbito após o transplante cardíaco e confrontar os diagnósticos pre e post-mortem. Métodos: Por meio da revisão de prontuários, foram analisados dados clínicos, presença de comorbidades, esquema de imunossupressão, exames laboratoriais, causa clínica do óbito e causa do óbito à necrópsia. Foram confrontadas, então, a causa clínica e a causa necroscópica do óbito de cada paciente. Resultados: Foram analisados 48 óbitos submetidos à necrópsia no período de 2000 a 2010; 29 (60,4%) tiveram diagnósticos clínico e necroscópico concordantes, 16 (33,3%) tiveram diagnósticos discordantes e três (6,3%) tiveram diagnóstico não esclarecido. Entre os discordantes, 15 (31,3%) apresentaram possível impacto na sobrevida e um (2,1%) não apresentou impacto na sobrevida. O principal diagnóstico clínico feito equivocadamente foi o de infecção, com cinco casos (26,7% dos discordantes), seguido por rejeição hiperaguda, com quatro casos (20% dos discordantes), e tromboembolismo pulmonar, com três casos (13,3% dos discordantes). Conclusão: Discordâncias entre o diagnóstico clínico e achados da necrópsia são comumente encontradas no transplante cardíaco. Novas estratégias no aperfeiçoamento do diagnóstico clínico devem ser introduzidas, considerando-se os resultados da necrópsia para melhoria do tratamento da insuficiência cardíaca por meio do transplante cardíaco

Clinical findings and prognosis of patients hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure: Analysis of the influence of Chagas etiology and ventricular function.

Explore the association between clinical findings and prognosis in patients with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) and analyze the influence of etiology on clinical presentation and prognosis.Prospective cohort of 500 patients admitted with ADHF from Aug/2013-Feb/2016; patients were predominantly male (61.8%), median age was 58 (IQ25-75% 47-66 years); etiology was dilated cardiomyopathy in 141 (28.2%), ischemic heart disease in 137 (27.4%), and Chagas heart disease in 113 (22.6%). Patients who died (154 [30.8%]) or underwent heart transplantation (53[10.6%]) were younger (56 years [IQ25-75% 45-64 vs 60 years, IQ25-75% 49-67], P = 0.032), more frequently admitted for cardiogenic shock (20.3% vs 6.8%, P<0.001), had longer duration of symptoms (14 days [IQ25-75% 4-32.8 vs 7.5 days, IQ25-75% 2-31], P = 0.004), had signs of congestion (90.8% vs 76.5%, P<0.001) and inadequate perfusion more frequently (45.9% vs 28%, P<0.001), and had lower blood pressure (90 [IQ25-75% 80-100 vs 100, IQ25-75% 90-120], P<0.001). In a logistic regression model analysis, systolic blood pressure (P<0.001, OR 0.97 [95%CI 0.96-0.98] per mmHg) and jugular distention (P = 0.004, OR 1.923 [95%CI 1.232-3.001]) were significant. Chagas patients were more frequently admitted for cardiogenic shock (15%) and syncope/arrhythmia (20.4%). Pulmonary congestion was rare among Chagas patients and blood pressure was lower. The rate of in-hospital death or heart transplant was higher among patients with Chagas (50.5%).A physical exam may identify patients at higher risk in a contemporaneous population. Our findings support specific therapies targeted at Chagas patients in the setting of ADHF

Clinical Use of Coronary Angiography and Magnetic Nuclear Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Ischemic Cardiomyopathy

ABSTRACTBackgroundThe diagnosis of ischemic cardiomyopathy is frequently difficult. Coronary angiography (CA) is limited because it is invasive and the evaluation is exclusively anatomic. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) measures patterns of myocardial fibrosis caused by ischemia. However, LGE does not detect ischemia that does not result in fibrosis. Thus, a thorough clinical evaluation by a cardiologist seems to be the most effective option for diagnosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate CA and LGE as complementary methods for the diagnosis of ischemic cardiomyopathy in patients with systolic heart failure of unknown etiology.MethodsPatients with systolic heart failure, left ventricle ejection fraction < 45% and unknown etiology after initial non-invasive evaluation were submitted to CA and MRI with LGE to define the etiology of the disease. Patient evaluation by two cardiologists was the gold standard for the diagnosis of ischemic cardiomyopathy.ResultsTwenty-four patients were included. The sensitivity to detect ischemic cardiomyopathy was 0.45 for CA vs. 0.81 for LGE. The specificity was 1.0 for CA vs. 0.84 for LGE. The positive predictive value was 1.0 vs. 0.81 and the negative predictive value was 0.68 vs. 0.84 for CA and LGE, respectively. LGE accuracy was superior to CA accuracy (0.83 vs. 0.75).ConclusionsLGE was more sensitive than CA to evaluate the etiology of ventricular dysfunction, whereas CA was more specific. The diagnosis of ischemic cardiomyopathy using each one of the methods separately presented limitations

Left cardiac sympathetic denervation for treatment of symptomatic systolic heart failure patients: a pilot study

To evaluate the feasibility, safety, and potential beneficial effects of left cardiac sympathetic denervation (LCSD) in systolic heart failure (HF) patients. In this prospective, randomized pilot study, inclusion criteria were New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class II or III, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 40, sinus rhythm, and resting heart rate 65 b.p.m., despite optimal medical therapy (MT). Fifteen patients were randomly assigned either to MT alone or MT plus LCSD. The primary endpoint was safety, measured by mortality in the first month of follow-up and morbidity according to pre-specified criteria. Secondary endpoints were exercise capacity, quality of life, LVEF, muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA), brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels and 24 h Holter mean heart rate before and after 6 months. We studied clinical effects in long-term follow-up. Ten patients underwent LCSD. There were no adverse events attributable to surgery. In the LCSD group, LVEF improved from 25 6.6 to 33 5.2 (P 0.03); 6 min walking distance improved from 167 35 to 198 47 m (P 0.02). Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLWHFQ) score physical dimension changed from 21 5 to 15 7 (P 0.06). The remaining analysed variables were unchanged. During 848 549 days of follow-up, in the MT group, three patients either died or underwent cardiac transplantation (CT), while in the LCSD group six were alive without CT. LCSD was feasible and seemed to be safe in systolic HF patients. Its beneficial effects warrant the development of a larger randomized trial. Trail registration: NCT01224899.AbbottAbbottNovartisNovartisBaldacciBaldacc

Clinical characteristics of patients according to cardiac function.

<p>Clinical characteristics of patients according to cardiac function.</p

In-hospital prognosis according to hemodynamic profile.

<p>Profile A: patients with no evidence of congestion or hypoperfusion (dry-warm); profile L: patients with hypoperfusion without congestion (dry-cold); profile B: patients with congestion with adequate perfusion (wet- warm); profile C: patients with congestion and hypoperfusion (wet-cold).</p