This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 117/20/2591    most recent CIRCULATIONAHA.107.738625v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire PubMed PubMed Citation Related Collections Acute myocardial infarction Echocardiography Related Article

(Circulation. 2008;117:2591-2598.)
© 2008 American Heart Association, Inc.

Coronary Heart Disease

Independent Prognostic Importance of a Restrictive Left Ventricular Filling Pattern After Myocardial Infarction

An Individual Patient Meta-Analysis: Meta-Analysis Research Group in Echocardiography Acute Myocardial Infarction

Meta-Analysis Research Group in Echocardiography (MeRGE) AMI Collaborators^*

Correspondence to Dr Gillian Whalley, PhD, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92 019, Auckland, New Zealand. E-mail g.whalley{at}auckland.ac.nz

Received September 13, 2007; accepted February 11, 2008.

Background— Restrictive mitral filling pattern (RFP), the most severe form of diastolic dysfunction, is a predictor of outcome after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Low power has precluded a definite conclusion on the independent importance of RFP, especially when overall systolic function is preserved. We undertook an individual patient meta-analysis to determine whether RFP is predictive of mortality independently of LV ejection fraction (LVEF), end-systolic volume index, and Killip class in patients after AMI.

Methods and Results— Twelve prospective studies (3396 patients) assessing the relationship between prognosis and Doppler echocardiographic LV filling pattern in patients after AMI were included. Individual patient data from each study were extracted and collated into a single database for analysis. RFP was associated with higher all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 2.67; 95% CI, 2.23 to 3.20; P<0.001) and remained an independent predictor in multivariate analysis with age, gender, and LVEF. The overall prevalence of RFP was 20% but was highest (36%) in the quartile of patients with lowest LVEF (<39%) and lowest (9%) in patients with the highest LVEF (>53%; P<0.0001). RFP remained significant within each quartile of LVEF, and no interaction was found for RFP and LVEF (P=0.42). RFP also predicted mortality in patients with above- and below-median end-systolic volume index (1575 patients) and in different Killip classes (1746 patients). Importantly, when diabetes, current medication, and prior AMI were included in the model, RFP remained an independent predictor of outcome.

Conclusions— Restrictive filling is an important independent predictor of mortality after AMI regardless of LVEF, end-systolic volume index, and Killip class.

---

 

CLINICAL PERSPECTIVE

Related Article:

Clinical Summaries
Circulation 2008 117: 2567-2569. [Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. St John Sutton Quest for Diastolic Prognostic Indicators of Clinical Outcome After Acute Myocardial Infarction Circulation, May 20, 2008; 117(20): 2570 - 2572. [Full Text] [PDF]