Insuficiência Cardíaca Aguda em Pacientes com Cardiomiopatia Chagásica: Resultados do I Registro Brasileiro de Insuficiência Cardíaca (BREATHE)

Le résumé fourni par la source

BACKGROUND: Although the clinical features of chronic Chagas' cardiomyopathy (CCC) have been well established, clinical data about the patients are scarce. OBJECTIVES: The current analysis reports the results of the I Brazilian Heart Failure Registry (BREATHE) assessing baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients with acute heart failure due to CCC. METHODS: BREATHE enrolled a total of 3,013 adult patients hospitalized with acute heart failure. We analyzed comparatively 261 (8.7%) patients with chronic CCC and 2,752 (91.3%) patients with other etiologies. Clinical and demographic information, cardiac structure/function data on echocardiogram and outcomes during the hospital stay and after discharge were assessed in both groups. Uni and multivariate tests were performed and a p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Patients with CCC presented lower systolic blood pressure (108.3 ± 26.1 vs 128.3 ± 30.3 mmHg, p<0.001) and left ventricle ejection fraction (25.4 [19 - 36]% vs 37 [27 - 54] %, p<0.001) with higher rates of jugular vein distension (54.8% vs 38.9%, p<0.001), hepatomegaly (47.9% vs 25.6%, p<0.001), and "cold and wet" clinical hemodynamic profile (27.2% vs 10.6%, p<0.001). Patients with CCC presented higher rate of the composite death or heart transplantation (17.4% vs. 11.1%, p=0.004), and higher cumulative incidence of death after 3 months (16.5% vs 10.8%, p=0.017), 6 months (25.3% vs 17.2%, p=0.006), and 12 months (39.4% vs 26.6%, p<0.001). Besides, CCC was independently associated with 12-month mortality risk with odds ratio = 2.02 (95% IC: 1.47-2.77). CONCLUSION: Patients with CCC, hospitalized due to acute heart failure, in comparison to other etiologies, presented a higher risk profile that was associated with a poorer outcome during hospital stay and after discharge.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.