4.3 Review

Management of Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Review

Journal

CLINICAL THERAPEUTICS
Volume 37, Issue 10, Pages 2186-2198

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2015.08.005

Keywords

heart failure; management; preserved ejection fraction; treatment; HFPEF

Funding

  1. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: The purpose of this article was to review the clinical management of patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFPEF). Methods: For this critical review, electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Pub Med) were searched for relevant basic research studies and randomized clinical trials recently published or presented at major meetings. Details of in-progress or planned studies were obtained from the ClinicalTrials.gov website. The range of publication dates was the year 2000 to 2015. Search terms included HFPEF, heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, HFPSF, heart failure with preserved systolic function, diastolic heart failure, diastolic dysfunction, HFNEF, heart failure with normal ejection fraction, treatment, management, therapy. Findings: Patients with HFPEF account for up to half of all patients with a clinical diagnosis of HF. Key contributing factors include hypertension, obesity, and atrial fibrillation, and other chronic diseases, including diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and anemia, frequently coexist. To date, large-scale clinical trials, particularly those focused on antagonism of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, have provided limited evidence of clinical benefit. Implications: The aggressive management of contributing factors, including hypertension, atrial fibrillation, and myocardial ischemia, is key in the management of HFPEF. New insights into the mechanisms and thus the identification of potential therapeutic strategies are urgently required. (C) 2015 Elsevier HS Journals, Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available