Treatment response in recent-onset heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: non-ischaemic vs. ischaemic aetiology.

Aims: In heart failure (HF) with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF), the prognosis appears better in non-ischaemic than in ischaemic aetiology. Infrequent diagnostic work-up for ischaemic heart disease (IHD) in HF is reported. In this study, we compared short-term response to initiated guideline-directed medical treatment (GDMT) in recent-onset HFrEF of non-ischaemic (non-IHF) vs. ischaemic (IHF) aetiology and evaluated the frequency of coronary investigation.

Methods And Results: Patients hospitalized with recent-onset HFrEF [left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 40%] between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2019 were included. Treatment response was determined by use of a hierarchical clinical composite outcome classifying each patient as worsened, improved, or unchanged based on hard outcomes (mortality, heart transplantation, and HF hospitalization) and soft outcomes (± ≥10 unit change in LVEF, ± ≥30% change in N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, and ± ≥1 point change in New York Heart Association functional class) during 28 weeks of follow-up. The associations between baseline characteristics and composite changes were analysed with multiple logistic regression. Among the 364 patients analysed, 47 were not investigated for IHD. Comparing non-IHF (n = 203) vs. IHF (n = 114), patients were younger (mean age 61.0 vs. 69.4 years, P < 0.001) with lower mean LVEF (26% vs. 31%, P < 0.001), but with similar male predominance (70.4% vs. 75.4%, P = 0.363). For non-IHF vs. IHF, the composite outcomes were worsened (19.1% vs. 43.9%, P < 0.001) and improved (74.2% vs. 43.9%, P < 0.001). After multivariable adjustments, IHF was associated with increased odds for worsening [odds ratio (OR) 2.94; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.51-5.74; P = 0.002] and decreased odds for improvement (OR 0.35; 95% CI 0.18-0.65; P < 0.001). In cases without previous IHD or new-onset myocardial infarction (n = 261), a decision for coronary investigation was made in 69.0%.

Conclusions: In recent-onset HFrEF, patients with non-IHF responded better to GDMT than patients with IHF. Almost one-third of patients selected for follow-up at HF clinics were never investigated for IHD.