Prediction of Clinical Outcomes Based on Phenotypic Grouping Using Left Ventricular and Left Atrial Strains in Patients with HFpEF

Clicks: 1
ID: 320172
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal

Ranked #83 of 96 articles by views in European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
AIMS: Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a heterogeneous syndrome with poor clinical outcomes similar to HF with reduced ejection fraction. We investigated whether phenotyping based on dual-chamber strain analysis (left ventricular global longitudinal strain [LVGLS] and left atrial reservoir strain [LARS]) provides incremental prognostic value in patients with HFpEF. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analyzed dual-chamber strains from all HFpEF patients in the multicenter STRATS-AHF registry. We categorized all patients into four groups according to cut-off values (LVGLS ≤-16%; LARS ≥18%). The primary outcome was 5-year all-cause mortality. We analyzed a total of 1,184 HFpEF patients (mean age: 73.4 years, 60.4% female) and categorized them into four groups: Group 1 (preserved dual-chamber strains, n = 340), Group 2 (impaired LVGLS/preserved LARS, n = 239), Group 3 (preserved LVGLS/impaired LARS, n = 186), and Group 4 (impaired dual-chamber strains, n = 419). Compared with Group 1, Group 4 exhibited the highest prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF, 62.8%), the highest E/e' ratio, and the most impaired right ventricular global longitudinal strain. In univariate analysis, mortality risk increased progressively from Group 2 to Group 4 (Group 2: HR = 1.341, P = 0.016; Group 3: 1.578, P < 0.001; Group 4: HR = 1.822, P < 0.001). In multivariate models, Group 2 (adjusted HR = 1.664, P = 0.011) and Group 4 (adjusted HR = 1.660, P = 0.026) remained independent predictors of death compared to Group 1. Group 3 demonstrated insignificant risk after adjusting for other variables, including age and AF (adjusted HR = 1.509, P = 0.171). CONCLUSIONS: Combined LV and LA strain assessment identified distinct HFpEF phenotypes and provided valuable prognostic information in HFpEF patients.
Reference Key
openalex_W7167593061 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors J H Lee, Jae-Hyeong Park, Jae-Hyeong Park, In‐Chang Hwang, Jin Joo Park, Jin Joo Park, Jun-Bean Park, Jun-Bean Park, Goo‐Yeong Cho
Journal European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/ehjci/jeag173
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjci/jeag173
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.