Farré, NúriaLupón, JosepRoig i Minguell, EulàliaGonzález-Costello, JoséVila, JoanPerez, SilviaAntonio, Marta deSolé González, EduardSánchez Enrique, CristinaMoliner, PedroRuiz, SoniaEnjuanes, CristinaMirabet, SoniaBayés Genís, AntoniComín Colet, Josep2018-09-032018-09-032017-12-01https://hdl.handle.net/2445/124226Objectives: The aim of this study was to analyse baseline characteristics and outcome of patients with heart failure and mid-range left ventricular ejection fraction (HFmrEF, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 40%-49%) and the effect of 1-year change in LVEF in this group. Setting: Multicentre prospective observational study of ambulatory patients with HF followed up at four university hospitals with dedicated HF units. Participants: Fourteen per cent (n=504) of the 3580 patients included had HFmrEF. Interventions: Baseline characteristics, 1-year LVEF and outcomes were collected. All-cause death, HF hospitalisation and the composite end-point were the primary outcomes. Results: Median follow-up was 3.66 (1.69-6.04) years. All-cause death, HF hospitalisation and the composite end-point were 47%, 35% and 59%, respectively. Outcomes were worse in HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) (LVEF>50%), without differences between HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) (LVEF<40%) and HFmrEF (all-cause mortality 52.6% vs 45.8% and 43.8%, respectively, P=0.001). After multivariable Cox regression analyses, no differences in all-cause death and the composite end-point were seen between the three groups. HF hospitalisation and cardiovascular death were not statistically different between patients with HFmrEF and HFrEF. At 1-year follow-up, 62% of patients with HFmrEF had LVEF measured: 24% had LVEF<40%, 43% maintained LVEF 40%-49% and 33% had LVEF>50%. While change in LVEF as continuous variable was not associated with better outcomes, those patients who evolved from HFmrEF to HFpEF did have a better outcome. Those who remained in the HFmrEF and HFrEF groups had higher all-cause mortality after adjustment for age, sex and baseline LVEF (HR 1.96 (95% CI 1.08 to 3.54, P=0.027) and HR 2.01 (95% CI 1.04 to 3.86, P=0.037), respectively). Conclusions: Patients with HFmrEF have a clinical profile in-between HFpEF and HFrEF, without differences in all-cause mortality and the composite end-point between the three groups. At 1 year, patients with HFmrEF exhibited the greatest variability in LVEF and this change was associated with survival.9 p.application/pdfengcc by-nc (c) Farré et al., 2017http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/es/Insuficiència cardíacaHeart failureinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article7025852018-07-24info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess29273666