Background Age-specific and gender-specific reference values for left ventricular (LV) and right ventricle volumes are available. The prognostic implications of the ratio between these volumes in... Show moreBackground Age-specific and gender-specific reference values for left ventricular (LV) and right ventricle volumes are available. The prognostic implications of the ratio between these volumes in heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) have never been evaluated.Methods We examined all HFpEF outpatients undergoing a cardiac magnetic resonance from 2011 to 2021. The left-to-right ventricular volume ratio (LRVR) was defined as the ratio between the LV and right ventricle end-diastolic volume indexes (LVEDVi/RVEDVi).Results Among 159 patients [median age 58 years (interquartile range 49–69), 64% men, LV ejection fraction 60% (54–70%)] the median LRVR was 1.21 (1.07–1.40). Over 3.5 years (1.5–5.0), 23 patients (15%) experienced all-cause death or heart failure hospitalization, and 22 (14%) cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization. The risk of all-cause death or heart failure hospitalization increased with an LRVR less than 1.0 or at least 1.4. An LRVR less than 1.0 was associated with a higher risk of all-cause death or heart failure hospitalization [hazard ratio 5.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.67–21.28; P = 0.006] and cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization (hazard ratio 5.68, 95% CI 1.58–20.35; P = 0.008) as compared with LRVR 1.0–1.3. Furthermore, an LRVR at least 1.4 was associated with a higher risk of all-cause death or heart failure hospitalization (hazard ratio 4.10, 95% CI 1.58–10.61; P = 0.004) and cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization (hazard ratio 3.71, 95% CI 1.41–9.79; P = 0.008) as compared with LRVR 1.0–1.3. These results were confirmed in patients without dilation of either ventricle.Conclusion LRVR values less than 1.0 or at least 1.4 are associated with worse outcomes in HFpEF. LRVR may become a valuable tool for risk prediction in HFpEF. Show less
Compagne, K.C.J.; Kappelhof, M.; Hinsenveld, W.H.; Brouwer, J.; Goldhoorn, R.J.B.; Uyttenboogaart, M.; ... ; MR CLEAN Registry Investigators 2022
Background: We evaluated data from all patients in the Netherlands who underwent endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke in the past 3.5 years, to identify nationwide trends in time to... Show moreBackground: We evaluated data from all patients in the Netherlands who underwent endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke in the past 3.5 years, to identify nationwide trends in time to treatment and procedural success, and assess their effect on clinical outcomes. Methods: We included patients with proximal occlusions of the anterior circulation from the second and first cohorts of the MR CLEAN (Multicenter Randomized Clinical trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands) Registry (March 2014 to June 2016; June 2016 to November 2017, respectively). We compared workflow times and rates of successful reperfusion (defined as an extended Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction score of 2B-3) between cohorts and chronological quartiles (all included patients stratified in chronological quartiles of intervention dates to create equally sized groups over the study period). Multivariable ordinal logistic regression was used to assess differences in the primary outcome (ordinal modified Rankin Scale at 90 days). Results: Baseline characteristics were similar between cohorts (second cohort n=1692, first cohort n=1488) except for higher age, poorer collaterals, and less signs of early ischemia on computed tomography in the second cohort. Time from stroke onset to groin puncture and reperfusion were shorter in the second cohort (median 185 versus 210 minutes; PP<0.001, respectively). Successful reperfusion was achieved more often in the second than in the first cohort (72% versus 66%; P<0.001). Functional outcome significantly improved (adjusted common odds ratio 1.23 [95% CI, 1.07-1.40]). This effect was attenuated by adjustment for time from onset to reperfusion (adjusted common odds ratio, 1.12 [95% CI, 0.98-1.28]) and successful reperfusion (adjusted common odds ratio, 1.13 [95% CI, 0.99-1.30]). Outcomes were consistent in the analysis per chronological quartile. Conclusions: Clinical outcomes after endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke in routine clinical practice have improved over the past years, likely resulting from improved workflow times and higher successful reperfusion rates. Show less
