Prognosis value of Forrester's classification in advanced heart failure patients awaiting heart transplantation

Aims The value of Forrester's perfusion/congestion profiles assessed by invasive catheter evaluation in non‐inotrope advanced heart failure patients listed for heart transplant (HT) is unclear. We aimed to assess the value of haemodynamic evaluation according to Forrester's profiles to pre...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:ESC Heart Failure 2022-10, Vol.9 (5), p.3287-3297
Hauptverfasser: Baudry, Guillaume, Coutance, Guillaume, Dorent, Richard, Bauer, Fabrice, Blanchart, Katrien, Boignard, Aude, Chabanne, Céline, Delmas, Clément, D'Ostrevy, Nicolas, Epailly, Eric, Gariboldi, Vlad, Gaudard, Philippe, Goéminne, Céline, Grosjean, Sandrine, Guihaire, Julien, Guillemain, Romain, Mattei, Mathieu, Nubret, Karine, Pattier, Sabine, Pozzi, Matteo, Rossignol, Patrick, Vermes, Emmanuelle, Sebbag, Laurent, Girerd, Nicolas, Hugon‐Vallet, Elisabeth, Seronde, Marie‐France, Fournier, Pauline, Augier, Caroline
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Aims The value of Forrester's perfusion/congestion profiles assessed by invasive catheter evaluation in non‐inotrope advanced heart failure patients listed for heart transplant (HT) is unclear. We aimed to assess the value of haemodynamic evaluation according to Forrester's profiles to predict events on the HT waitlist. Methods and results All non‐inotrope patients (n = 837, 79% ambulatory at listing) registered on the French national HT waiting list between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2019 with right heart catheterization (RHC) were included. The primary outcome was a combined criteria of waitlist death, delisting for aggravation, urgent HT or left ventricular assist device implantation. Secondary outcome was waitlist death. The ‘warm‐dry’, ‘cold‐dry’, ‘warm‐wet’, and ‘cold‐wet’ profiles represented 27%, 18%, 27%, and 28% of patients, respectively. At 12 months, the respective rates of primary outcome were 15%, 17%, 25%, and 29% (P = 0.008). Taking the ‘warm‐dry’ category as reference, a significant increase in the risk of primary outcome was observed only in the ‘wet’ categories, irrespectively of ‘warm/cold’ status: hazard ratios, 1.50; 1.06–2.13; P = 0.024 in ‘warm‐wet’ and 1.77; 1. 25–2.49; P = 0.001 in ‘cold‐wet’. Conclusions Haemodynamic assessment of advanced HF patients using perfusion/congestion profiles predicts the risk of the combine endpoint of waitlist death, delisting for aggravation, urgent heart transplantation, or left ventricular assist device implantation. ‘Wet’ patients had the worst prognosis, independently of perfusion status, thus placing special emphasis on the cardinal prominence of persistent congestion in advanced HF.
ISSN:2055-5822
2055-5822
DOI:10.1002/ehf2.14037