Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Published Ahead of Print
    • Current Issue
    • Article Collections
    • JASN Podcasts
    • Archives
    • Saved Searches
    • ASN Meeting Abstracts
  • Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Resources
  • Editorial Team
  • Subscriptions
  • More
    • About JASN
    • Alerts
    • Advertising
    • Editorial Fellowship Program
    • Feedback
    • Reprints
    • Impact Factor
  • ASN Kidney News
  • Other
    • CJASN
    • Kidney360
    • Kidney News Online
    • American Society of Nephrology

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
American Society of Nephrology
  • Other
    • CJASN
    • Kidney360
    • Kidney News Online
    • American Society of Nephrology
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Advertisement
American Society of Nephrology

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Published Ahead of Print
    • Current Issue
    • Article Collections
    • JASN Podcasts
    • Archives
    • Saved Searches
    • ASN Meeting Abstracts
  • Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Resources
  • Editorial Team
  • Subscriptions
  • More
    • About JASN
    • Alerts
    • Advertising
    • Editorial Fellowship Program
    • Feedback
    • Reprints
    • Impact Factor
  • ASN Kidney News
  • Follow JASN on Twitter
  • Visit ASN on Facebook
  • Follow JASN on RSS
  • Community Forum
Epidemiology and Outcomes
You have accessRestricted Access

Prognostic Value of Echocardiographic Indicators of Left Ventricular Systolic Function in Asymptomatic Dialysis Patients

Carmine Zoccali, Francesco A. Benedetto, Francesca Mallamaci, Giovanni Tripepi, Giuseppe Giacone, Alessandro Cataliotti, Giuseppe Seminara, Benedetta Stancanelli and Lorenzo S. Malatino
JASN April 2004, 15 (4) 1029-1037; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ASN.0000117977.14912.91
Carmine Zoccali
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Francesco A. Benedetto
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Francesca Mallamaci
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Giovanni Tripepi
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Giuseppe Giacone
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alessandro Cataliotti
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Giuseppe Seminara
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Benedetta Stancanelli
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lorenzo S. Malatino
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data Supps
  • Info & Metrics
  • View PDF
Loading

Abstract

ABSTRACT. Patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are at high risk for heart failure, but the prevalence and the prognostic value of asymptomatic systolic dysfunction in these patients are unknown. In this prospective cohort study, the authors have therefore assessed by echocardiography the prevalence and the prognostic value of systolic function as estimated by ejection fraction (EF), fractional shortening at endocardial level (endoFS), and at midwall (mwFS), in a cohort of 254 asymptomatic dialysis patients. Systolic dysfunction had a prevalence rate of 26% by endoFS and of 48% by mwFS. During the follow-up period, 125 patients had one or more fatal and nonfatal CV events. On multivariate COX regression analysis, the three LV systolic function indicators were independently associated with incident fatal and nonfatal CV events, and there were no differences in the predictive power of these indicators (P > 0.30). The prediction power of LV function indicators was largely independent of traditional and novel risk factors in ESRD such as C-reactive protein and asymmetric dimethyl arginine (ADMA). ADMA was significantly related with LV function indicators as well as with mortality and incident CV events, but these links were much reduced (P = NS) in models including LV function indicators. Of note, the risk of CV events was minimal in patients with normal LV mass and function, intermediate in patients with either LVH or systolic dysfunction, and maximal in patients displaying both alterations. The study of myocardial contractility by echocardiography provides prognostic information independently of LV mass and other risk factors in ESRD. Risk stratification by simple systolic function parameters may prove useful in secondary prevention strategies in these patients.

Cardiac disease is the major cause of death in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). The detection of echocardiographic abnormalities associated with subclinical cardiac disease is considered to be an important step for the characterization of individuals at risk for heart failure in the general population (1). Although the problem is now felt to be of paramount importance, there are very few studies examining the prognostic power of echocardiographic abnormalities in ESRD. Landmark observations by Parfrey and Foley (2–5⇓⇓⇓) in the 1990s showed that alterations of left ventricular (LV) mass and function are exceedingly frequent in patients with ESRD, and the prediction value of LVH in the dialysis population is now firmly established (3,5–7⇓⇓⇓). In contrast, the prognostic power of systolic function in ESRD has been scarcely studied. The issue is important because systolic function was a marker of shorter survival in a series of patients studied on the eve of renal transplantation (8) and because associations between changes in fractional shortening and subsequent cardiac failure (9) or between systolic function and survival were reported in a population with a high prevalence of heart failure (4). Yet the prevalence of systolic dysfunction in asymptomatic dialysis patients is still unknown, and it is undefined whether such an alteration predicts cardiovascular (CV) complications in these patients.

Systolic function by echocardiography may be estimated by methods based on measurements made at endocardial level (i.e., by standard fractional shortening [endoFS] or by ejection fraction [EF], which is the index used in the large majority of studies) (10). Since these methods may overestimate systolic function in patients with concentric hypertrophy or remodeling of the left ventricle, a new, geometry-independent index of myocardial contractile efficiency, midwall fractional shortening (mwFS), has been proposed as a measure of systolic function.

This prospective cohort study was conceived to assess the prevalence and the independent prognostic value of systolic function in a large cohort of asymptomatic dialysis patients. Another major goal of the study was the comparison of the prognostic value of the above-mentioned methods of measurement of LV function in the same cohort.

Materials and Methods

Protocol

The protocol conformed to the ethical guidelines of our institutions, and informed consent was obtained from each participant. All studies were performed during a nondialysis day, midweek, between 8 a.m. and 1 p.m.

Study Cohort

Two hundred and fifty-four patients with ESRD (144 men and 110 women) who had been on regular dialysis treatment (RDT; 203 on hemodialysis [HD] and 51 on chronic ambulatory peritoneal dialysis [CAPD]) for at least 6 mo, with left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) > 35% and without a history of heart failure (defined on the basis of criteria outlined by Parfrey [4]), were eligible for the study. These patients represented about 70% of the whole dialysis population of four dialysis units. The remaining 30% of patients were excluded because of the presence of circulatory congestion or major infections (20%) or because they were hospitalized for intercurrent illnesses or for logistic reasons/unwillingness to participate in the study (10%). The prevalence of diabetes mellitus in this cohort was 15% (37 of 254 patients). One hundred twenty-two patients had had one or more cardiovascular (CV) events. In particular, 63 patients had had one CV event (myocardial infarction in 8 cases, anginal episodes in 29 cases, peripheral artery diseases in 11 cases, arrhythmia in 10 cases, transient ischemic attacks in 4 cases, and stroke in 1 case) and the remaining 59 patients had had two or more CV complications. All HD patients were virtually anuric (24-h urine volume < 200 ml/d), whereas a minority (n = 6) of CAPD patients had a 24-h diuresis > 500 ml/d. HD patients were being treated thrice weekly with standard bicarbonate dialysis (38 mmol/L Na, 35 mmol/L HCO3, 1.5 mmol/L K, 1.25 mmol/L Ca, 0.75 mmol/L Mg) and cuprophan or semi-synthetic membranes (dialysis filters surface area: 1.1 to 1.7 m2). Dry weight was established for each patient on a trial-and-error basis and was defined as the weight below which the patient suffered frequent hypotensive episodes during the latter part of the dialysis session and experienced malaise, cramps, and dizziness after dialysis.

The average urea Kt/V in these patients was 1.22 ± 0.27. Patients on CAPD were all on a 4-exchange/d schedule with standard dialysis bags. The average weekly Kt/V in these patients was 1.67 ± 0.31. One hundred seven patients were habitual smokers (22 ± 17 cigarettes/d). One hundred thirty-five patients were on treatment with erythropoietin. One hundred eleven patients were being treated with antihypertensive drugs (78 on monotherapy with ACE inhibitors, AT-1 antagonists, calcium channel blockers, alpha- and beta-blockers, and the remaining 33 on double or triple therapy with various combinations of these drugs).

Follow-up Study

Patients were followed up for 41 ± 22 mo after the initial assessment. During the follow-up, CV events (myocardial infarction, documented angina, heart failure, transient ischemic attacks or stroke, peripheral artery disease, venous thrombosis, artery thrombosis, new onset of ECG-documented arrhythmia) and causes of death were accurately recorded. Each death was reviewed and assigned an underlying cause by a panel of five physicians. As a part of the review process, all available medical information about each death was collected. This information always included study and hospitalization records. In the case of an out-of-hospital death family members were interviewed by telephone to better ascertain the circumstances surrounding death.

Laboratory Measurements

Fasting blood sampling was obtained between 8.00 and 12.00 a.m. Serum lipids, albumin, hemoglobin, calcium and phosphate, C-reactive protein (CRP), and homocysteine were measured by standard methods in the routine clinical laboratory. Plasma asymmetric dimethyl arginine (ADMA) was measured as previously reported (11).

BP Measurements

In hemodialysis patients predialysis and postdialysis BP were calculated as the average value of all recordings (12 measurements [i.e., 3/wk]) taken during the month preceding the study. The mean value of predialysis and postdialysis BP was then obtained for each patient and considered for global statistical assessment. In CAPD patients, the BP values were obtained by averaging home blood pressure measurements (10 to 20 measurements/mo).

Echocardiography

These studies were performed within 2 h after blood sampling during a midweek nondialysis day in HD patients and at empty abdomen in CAPD patients. All echocardiographic measurements were carried out according to the recommendations of the American Society of Echocardiography by an observer unaware of biochemical results. Left ventricular mass (LVM) was calculated according to the Devereux formula and indexed to height2.7 (LVMI) (12). Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) was defined by a LVMI > 47 g/m2.7 in women or > 50 g/m2.7 in men. EF was calculated by the Teicholz method (13). Fractional shortening at endocardial levels was calculated by the formula: endoFS = (LVEDD − LVESD)/LVEDD × 100, where LVEDD and LVESD represent the diameter of the LV at end diastole and end systole, respectively). Fractional shortening at midwall (mwFS) was calculated according to the method of Shimizu et al. (14) as described in full detail by De Simone et al. (15). To have an estimation of end systolic stress, circumferential end-systolic stress was calculated (16). Ejection Fraction < 50%, endoFS < 28%, and mwFS < 14% (17) were considered indicative of LV systolic dysfunction.

Statistical Analyses

Data are reported as mean ± SD, median and interquartile range, or as percent frequency, and comparisons between groups were made by t test, Mann-Whitney test, or χ2 test, as appropriate. Relationships between paired parameters were analyzed by Pearson product moment correlation coefficient.

The performance of LV systolic function (estimated on the basis of EF, endoFS, and mwFS) in the prediction of survival and CV events (fatal and nonfatal) was tested by the multivariate Cox regression method. To construct multivariate Cox models, we preliminarily identified a set of variables that significantly differed (P < 0.05) in patients who died and in those who survived and in those with and without incident CV events (“basic model,” Table 1). Tested covariates included traditional risk factors (age, male gender, smoking, diabetes, cholesterol, previous CV events, arterial pressure, and antihypertensive treatment), hemoglobin, albumin, calcium and phosphate, CRP, homocysteine, and ADMA. To assess the prognostic value of the three indicators of systolic function, we compared three separate Cox models. These models included the variables of the basic model (see above) and EF, endoFS, and mwFS, respectively. End systolic circumferential stress (i.e., an indicator of the afterload of the left ventricle) and the treatment modality (HD/CAPD) were always introduced into these Cox models. To compare the statistical strength of the three models, we used the −2 log likelihood (−2 Log L) test. This test compares different Cox models fitted to the same set of survival data; the smaller the −2 Log L value, the better the agreement between the model and the observed data (18). The difference between the −2 Log L of the models, which are being compared, gives a statistical estimate as to which of them provides a better fit to the data. A 3.841 difference in −2 Log L coincides with a significance level of 0.05 in a χ2 distribution, with 1 degree of freedom and indicates a better prediction of risk estimate provided by the method leading to the lowest −2 log L value. By this strategy, we constructed models of adequate statistical power (at least 10 events for each variable in models). Hazard ratios (HR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated with the use of the estimated regression coefficients and their standard errors in the Cox regression analysis. The study of the interaction between LVH and systolic dysfunction in predicting incident cardiovascular outcomes was made by constructing multivariate Cox models, including all variables of the basic model mentioned above and listed in Table 3. All calculations were made using a standard statistical package (SPSS for Windows Version 9.0.1, Chicago IL).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup

Table 1. Demographic, anthropometric, biochemical, and hemodynamic characteristics in survivors and nonsurvivors and in patients with and without incident CV eventsa

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup

Table 3. COX regression analysis of ejection fraction, endocardial fractional shortening, and midwall fractional shortening for incident fatal and non fatal CV eventsa

Results

Seventy-seven percent (196 of 254 patients) displayed LVH at echocardiography. As expected, ejection fraction and its monodimensional equivalent (fractional shortening at endocardial level) identified a lower number of patients with LV chamber dysfunction (22% and 26%, respectively) when compared with the corresponding midwall measurement (48%). EF (r = −0.48), endoFS (r = −0.46), and mwFS (r = −0.55) were inversely related to LVMI (all P < 0.001). Of note, at comparable mwFS, both EF (Figure 1A) and endoFS (Figure 1B) were consistently higher (P < 0.001) in patients with concentric remodeling or concentric LVH than in patients with eccentric LVH or normal LV mass and geometry. This phenomenon indicates that systolic function by EF or endoFS is systematically overestimated in the presence of concentric remodeling or concentric LVH.

Figure1
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

Figure 1. Relationship between midwall fractional shortening with ejection fraction (A) and endocardial fractional shortening (B). •, patients with concentric remodelling or concentric LVH; ○, patients with eccentric LVH or normal LV geometry.

Systolic Function and Survival

During the follow-up period (41 ± 22 mo), 131 patients died, 77 of them of CV causes. The independent relationship between indicators of systolic function and all-cause mortality was tested in separate Cox models. These models included the systolic function indicators, circumferential stress, and treatment modality as well as variables that significantly differed in patients who died and in those who survived (Table 1). In these multivariate analyses, EF (P = 0.09), endoFS (P = 0.08), and mwFS (P = 0.08) just failed to predict all-cause mortality, and no differences emerged in the predictive power for survival of these indicators (−2 Log likelihood test among models, P > 0.70).

Systolic Function and Cardiovascular Outcomes

During the follow-up period, 125 patients had one or more fatal and nonfatal CV events. Patients with incident CV events were older, with a higher prevalence of individuals with background CV complications, diabetic patients, smokers, and antihypertensive drugs users. Serum CRP, plasma ADMA, and systolic BP were higher and serum albumin lower in patients with incident CV events than in those without such events (Table 1). As shown in Table 2, patients who died and those with incident CV events displayed higher LVMI and depressed EF, endoFS, and mwFS in comparison with those who survived and with those who did not develop incident events. On multivariate Cox regression analysis, the three LV systolic function indicators independently predicted fatal and nonfatal CV events (Table 3) in statistical models including circumferential stress and treatment modality as well as all covariates that significantly differed in the two groups (Table 1); again, there were no differences in the predictive power of these indicators (−2 Log likelihood test among models, P > 0.30). Introducing LVMI into these models did not affect the hazard ratios of these estimators (Figure 2). Furthermore, in these models, both ADMA and CRP failed to be independently associated with the outcome. ADMA was significantly related with LV function indicators (r ranging from −0.19 to −0.38, P ≤ 0.003) as well as with mortality and incident CV events (Table 1), but its prediction power for these complications was much reduced (P = NS) in models including LV function indicators (Table 3). Of note, LVH and systolic dysfunction however estimated interacted in predicting incident CV events (Figure 3) because the risk of such events was minimal in patients with normal LV mass and function (reference group), intermediate in patients with either LVH or systolic dysfunction, and maximal in patients displaying both alterations (P for trend ≤ 0.02).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup

Table 2. Echocardiographic data in survivors and nonsurvivors and in patients with and without incident CV eventsa

Figure2
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

Figure 2. Hazard ratios for incident CV events associated with a 1% decrease in LV function in each estimator. White columns, hazard ratios adjusted for all covariates listed in Table 3 except LVMI; gray columns, hazard ratios adjusted for all covariates listed in Table 3 and for LVMI.

Figure3
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

Figure 3. Interaction between systolic dysfunction and LVH in the prediction of incident CV events. Data are adjusted for all covariates listed in Table 3. *P for trend; **P derived from a modified Wald test comparing patients with LVH or systolic dysfunction (second column) with those displaying both LVH and systolic dysfunction (third column).

Discussion

This study shows that LV systolic dysfunction is frequent in asymptomatic dialysis patients and that, independently of LV mass and other risk factors, it carries prognostic value for incident CV complications. Furthermore, our data show that the presence of systolic dysfunction interacts with LVH in the prediction of incident CV events in these patients.

Cardiomyopathy and Systolic Dysfunction in ESRD

Although the precise mechanism responsible for cardiomyocyte dysfunction in ESRD is still incompletely understood, studies by Raine et al. (19) in the early 1990s showed that cardiac energetics and myocardial calcium utilization are impaired in the uremic heart. Other studies indicate that uremia affects the very composition of cardiac myofibrils because the proportion of V1 isomyosin is increased, and the response of this isomer to regulatory signals is set at a higher level in the rat (20). Furthermore, it has been recently documented that renal failure leads to alterations in cardiac gene expression, which in turn alters calcium cycling and contractile function (21).

Independently of the mechanism(s) responsible for cardiac dysfunction, the identification of asymptomatic individuals with left ventricular dysfunction is important and formally recommended by current guidelines (22). Asymptomatic systolic dysfunction represents a preclinical phase of congestive heart failure. Such an alteration has a 3% to 6% prevalence in the general population, and it is currently recommended that screening for this condition should be part of preventive strategy of chronic heart failure (10,23⇓). Patients with ESRD represent a population at high risk for heart failure (2,4⇓). Indeed it has been shown that more than one third of patients starting dialysis treatment (4) display clinical evidence of heart failure and that myocardiopathy progresses after starting dialysis (5). Systolic function in dialysis patients has been scarcely investigated. In a recent study in patients without coronary heart disease, systolic LV apex-base function has been reported to be unaltered (23). Other studies in unselected pediatric (24) and adult (4,25,26⇓⇓) ESRD patients showed that systolic function is depressed. Until now, only one study has tested the prognostic power of systolic function in the dialysis population (4), but this study included a substantial proportion of patients with overt heart failure. If the echocardiographic study of systolic function has to be applied in clinical practice for risk stratification in ESRD, it is important to focus the attention in asymptomatic patients because it is well demonstrated that the presence of overt heart failure per se is an ominous prognostic factor in the general (27) and dialysis populations (2). However, the prevalence of systolic dysfunction in asymptomatic patients with ESRD is unknown, and it is still undefined whether the detection of this alteration by echocardiography conveys prognostic information additional to background CV complications, LVH, and other established risk factors. By the same token, it is unknown whether the study of systolic function based on midwall mechanics (mwFS) is of greater prognostic value in these patients than that of classical indicators based on measurements made at endocardial level (EF and endoFS). This problem is important because due to the nonuniform wall thickening of LV walls during systole, midwall fractional shortening provides better estimates of myocardial contractility than ejection fraction or endocardial fractional shortening when wall thickness is increased by hypertrophy (14,15⇓), which is a notoriously common alteration in ESRD (3,4,6⇓⇓).

Our study was based on a cohort of asymptomatic patients without clinical history of heart failure and with an ejection fraction greater than 35% at baseline. On the basis of the estimate made by indicators based on measurements made at endocardial level (endoFS and EF), we found that the proportion of patients with LV systolic dysfunction was about 7 times higher in ESRD patients than in coeval cohorts in the community (28). Of note, fractional shortening at midwall was subnormal in as much as 48% of our asymptomatic ESRD patients. The much greater proportion of patients identified as having systolic dysfunction by this method in comparison to fractional shortening at endocardial level (26%) depends on the high prevalence of LVH in the dialysis population (77% in the present study), which is of concentric type in about half of cases. Indeed, as previously noted in essential hypertensive patients (29), we found that, at comparable levels of midwall fractional shortening, both ejection fraction and fractional shortening at endocardial level systematically overestimate systolic function in patients with concentric hypertrophy or remodeling.

Systolic Dysfunction and Cardiovascular Outcomes

The ability to predict the outcome is the basic requirement of any factor (risk factor) that is suspected to influence a given outcome in a given population (30). Thus it is important to test the prognostic value of echocardiographic indicators of systolic function, specifically in the ESRD population. Furthermore, the detection of systolic dysfunction appears particularly relevant in asymptomatic individuals where myocardial disease may progress despite compensatory mechanisms involving the autonomic system, neurohormones, and changes in cardiac function and structure. In this regard, our study is the first showing that LV systolic function either measured by classical indicators (EF and endoFS) or by midwall fractional shortening (mwFS) predict incident CV events in a large population of asymptomatic ESRD patients. The prediction power of these indicators was largely independent of traditional and novel risk factors in ESRD such as CRP and ADMA. In this regard, it is important to note that ADMA, a factor that has been strongly associated both with systolic dysfunction (31) and cardiovascular outcomes (32), failed to independently predict the outcome in models including LV function (Table 3). This phenomenon suggests that LV dysfunction represents not only a prognostic marker but also an intermediate mechanism whereby ADMA may cause cardiovascular complications in ESRD patients. Interestingly, the prediction power of LV dysfunction remained unmodified after adjustment for LVMI, which is considered the strongest predictor of CV complications in this population (33,36⇓). In this regard, it is noteworthy that systolic dysfunction interacted with LVH in predicting such events. Indeed there was a graded increase in CV risk depending on the presence of raised LVMI and compromised LV systolic function, the risk being maximal in individuals who displayed both of these alterations. Our finding that systolic dysfunction interacts with LVH in the prediction of adverse CV outcomes contrasts with studies performed in uncomplicated essential hypertension (34), but it is in keeping with the results of the Cardiovascular Health Study, a population based study of elderly subjects (35).

Comparison of Methods of Measurement of Systolic Function

An objective of our study was to determine which echocardiographic variables of LV function predicted adverse outcomes. We hypothesized that depressed midwall shortening would detect individuals with a normal EF or endoFS at risk for subsequent CV events. This hypothesis was suggested by studies demonstrating that endoFS overestimates systolic function in the presence of concentric LVH or remodeling and that mwFS is a stronger predictor of cardiovascular mortality in essential hypertensive patients (15). Although we confirmed in the dialysis population that mwFS is an independent predictor of cardiovascular outcomes, this indicator did not perform any better than EF or conventional endoFS. Such discrepancy may depend on the fact that dialysis patients have a much shorter CV event-free survival than essential hypertensives. Therefore, the prognostic superiority of mwFS may be apparent only in patients in the early phases of myocardial disease (i.e., those with a long cardiovascular event-free survival), such as in individuals with uncomplicated hypertension. Furthermore the overestimation of systolic function by EF and endoFS may be less problematic in a population with a high frequency of systolic dysfunction (26% by endoFS in this study) than in a population with a low prevalence of this disturbance, like in essential hypertensive patients (3.6% by the same indicator [36]). The difference in the loading conditions of the LV (28) between ESRD patients and essential hypertensive patients may be another reason for the lack of superiority of midwall shortening in ESRD. Whatever the explanation for this phenomenon noted also in other populations (34,35⇓), our data emphasize the importance of testing risk markers specifically in the ESRD population and suggest that simple systolic function parameters can predict adverse CV outcomes in asymptomatic dialysis patients.

The study of myocardial contractility by echocardiography provides prognostic information that is independent of LV mass and other risk factors in ESRD. Risk stratification by any of the systolic function indicators tested in this study may prove useful in secondary prevention strategies in these patients.

  • © 2004 American Society of Nephrology

References

  1. ↵
    McMurray JV, McDonagh TA, Davie AP, Cleland JG, Francis CM, Morrison C: Should we screen for asymptomatic left ventricular dysfunction to prevent heart failure? Eur Heart J 19: 842–846, 1998
  2. ↵
    Harnett JD, Foley RN, Kent GM, Barre PE, Murray D, Parfrey PS: Congestive heart failure in dialysis patients: prevalence, incidence, prognosis and risk factors. Kidney Int 47: 884–890, 1995
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    Foley RN, Parfrey PS, Harnett JD, Kent GM, Murray DC, Barre PE: The prognostic importance of left ventricular geometry in uremic cardiomyopathy. J Am Soc Nephrol 5: 2024–2031, 1995
    OpenUrlAbstract
  4. ↵
    Parfrey PS, Foley RN, Harnett JD, Kent GM, Murray DC, Barre PE: Outcome and risk factors for left ventricular disorders in chronic uraemia. Nephrol Dial Transplant 11: 1277–1285, 1996
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    Foley RN, Parfrey PS, Kent GM, Harnett JD, Murray DC, Barre PE: Long term evolution of cardiomyopathy in dialysis patients. Kidney Int 54: 1720–1725, 1998
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    Zoccali C, Benedetto FA, Mallamaci F, Tripepi G, Giacone G, Cataliotti A, Seminara G, Stancanelli B, Malatino LS: Prognostic impact of the indexation of left ventricular mass in patients undergoing dialysis. J Am Soc Nephrol 12: 2768–2774, 2001
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. ↵
    London GM, Pannier B, Guerin AP, Blacher J, Marchais SJ, Darne B, Metivier F, Adda H, Safar ME: Alterations of left ventricular hypertrophy in and survival of patients receiving hemodialysis: follow-up of an interventional study. J Am Soc Nephrol 12: 2759–2767, 2001
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    McGregor E, Jardine AG, Murray LS, Dargie HJ, Rodger RS, Junor BJ, McMillan MA, Briggs JD: Pre-operative echocardiographic abnormalities and adverse outcome following renal transplantation. Nephrol Dial Transplant 13: 1499–1505, 1998
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    Foley RN, Parfrey PS, Kent GM, Harnett JD, Murray DC, Barre PE: Serial change in echocardiographic parameters and cardiac failure in end stage renal disease. J Am Soc Nephrol 11: 912–916, 2000
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    Wang TJ, Levy D, Benjamin EJ, Vasan RS: The epidemiology of “asymptomatic” left ventricular systolic dysfunction: implications for screening. Ann Intern Med 138: 907–916, 2003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    Bode-Böger SM, Böger RH, Kienke S, Junker W, Frölich JC: Elevated L-arginine/dimethylarginine ratio contributes to enhanced systemic NO production by dietary L-arginine in hypercholesterolemic rabbits. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 219: 598–603, 1996
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    de Simone G, Devereux RB, Daniels SR, Koren MJ, Meyer RA, Laragh JH: Effect of growth on variability of left ventricular mass: assessment of allometric signals in adults and children and their capacity to predict cardiovascular risk. J Am Coll Cardiol 25: 1056–1062, 1995
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    Teicholz LE, Kreulen T, Herman MW, Gorlin R: Problems in echocardiographic–angiographic correlations in the presence or absence of asynergy. Am J Cardiol 37: 7–11, 1976
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    Shimizu G, Zile MR, Blaustein AS, Gaasch WH: Left ventricular chamber filling and midwall fiber lengthening in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy: Overestimation of fiber velocities by conventional midwall measurements. Circulation 71: 266–272, 1985
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. ↵
    de Simone G, Devereux RB, Koren MJ, Mensah GA, Casale PN, Laragh JH: Midwall left ventricular mechanics. An independent predictor of cardiovascular risk in arterial hypertension. Circulation 93: 259–265, 1996
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. ↵
    Ganau A, Devereux RB, Pickering TG, Roman MJ, Schnall PL, Santucci S, Spitzer MC, Laragh JH: Relation of left ventricular hemodynamic load and contractile performance to left ventricular mass in hypertension. Circulation 81: 25–36, 1990
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. ↵
    Devereux RB, Roman MJ, Palmieri V, Okin PM, Boman K, Gerdts E, Nieminen MS, Papademetriou V, Wachtell K, Dahlof B: Left ventricular wall stresses and wall stress-mass-heart rate products in hypertensive patients with electrocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy: The LIFE study. J Hypertension 18: 1129–1138, 2000
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. ↵
    Collet D: Modelling Survival Data in Medical Research. London, Chapmann & Hall, 1994, pp 72–85
  19. ↵
    Raine AE, Seymour AM, Roberts AF, Radda GK, Ledingham JG: Impairment of cardiac function and energetics in experimental renal failure. J Clin Invest 92: 2934–2940, 1993
  20. ↵
    Rambausek M, Kollmar S, Klug D, Mehls O, Ritz E: Regulation of myocardial isomyosin V1 in uremic rats. Eur J Clin Invest 21: 64–71, 1991
    OpenUrlPubMed
  21. ↵
    Kennedy D, Omran E, Periyasamy SM, Nadoor J, Priyadarshi A, Willey JC, Malhotra D, Xie Z, Shapiro JI: Effect of chronic renal failure on cardiac contractile function, calcium cycling, and gene expression of proteins important for calcium homeostasis in the rat. J Am Soc Nephrol 14: 90–97, 2003
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. ↵
    Hunt SA, Baker DW, Chin MH, Cinquegrani MP, Feldman AM, Francis GS, Ganiats TG, Goldstein S, Gregoratos G, Jessup ML, Noble RJ, Packer M, Silver MA, Stevenson LW, Gibbons RJ, Antman EM, Alpert JS, Faxon DP, Fuster V, Gregoratos G, Jacobs AK, Hiratzka LF, Russell RO, Smith SC, American College of Cardiology, American Heart Association. ACC/AHA guidelines for the evaluation and management of chronic heart failure in the adult: executive summary. J Heart Lung Transplant 21: 189–203, 2002
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. ↵
    Fathi R, Isbel N, Haluska B, Case C, Johnson DW, Marwick TH: Correlates of subclinical left ventricular dysfunction in ESRD. Am J Kidney Dis 41: 1016–1025, 2003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. ↵
    Mitsnefes MM, Kimball TR, Witt SA, Glascock BJ, Khoury PR, Daniels SR: Left ventricular mass and systolic performance in pediatric patients with chronic renal failure. Circulation 107: 864–868, 2003
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  25. ↵
    Greaves SC, Gamble GD, Collins JF, Whalley GA, Sharpe DN: Determinants of left ventricular hypertrophy and systolic dysfunction in chronic renal failure. Am J Kidney Dis 24: 768–776, 1994
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. ↵
    Kawada H, Sumimoto T, Okayama H, Hiwada K: Structure and function of the left ventricle and carotid artery in hemodialysis patients. Hypertens Res 24: 221–227, 2001
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. ↵
    Krum H, Gilbert RE: Demographics and concomitant disorders in heart failure. Lancet 362: 147–158, 2003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. ↵
    Mosterd A, Cost B, Hoes AW, de Bruijne MC, Deckers JW, Hofman A, Grobbee DE: The prognosis of heart failure in the general population: The Rotterdam Study. Eur Heart J 22: 1318–1327, 2001
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. ↵
    De Simone G, Devereux RB: Rationale of echocardiographic assessment of left ventricular wall stress and midwall mechanics in hypertensive heart disease. Eur J Echocardiogr 3: 192–198, 2002
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. ↵
    Moolgavkar SH, Lee JH, Stevens RG: Analysis of vital statistics data. In: Modern Epidemiology, edited by Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lippincot-Raven, 1998, pp 481–497
  31. ↵
    Zoccali C, Mallamaci F, Maas R, Benedetto FA, Tripepi G, Malatino LS, Cataliotti A, Bellanuova I, Boger R: Creed Investigators. Left ventricular hypertrophy, cardiac remodelling and asymmetric dimethylarginine (ADMA) in hemodialysis patients. Kidney Int 62: 339–345, 2002
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  32. ↵
    Zoccali C, Bode-Boger S, Mallamaci F, Benedetto FA, Tripepi G, Malatino LS, Cataliotti A, Bellanuova I, Fermo I, Frolich J, Boger R: Plasma concentration of asymmetric dimethylarginine and mortality in patients with end-stage renal disease: a prospective study. Lancet 358: 2113–2117, 2001
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. ↵
    Middleton RJ, Parfrey PS, Foley RN: Left ventricular hypertrophy in the renal patient. J Am Soc Nephrol 12: 1079–1084, 2001
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  34. ↵
    Verdecchia P, Schillaci G, Reboldi G, Ambrosio G, Pede S, Porcellati C: Prognostic value of midwall shortening fraction and its relation with left ventricular mass in systemic hypertension. Am J Cardiol 87: 479–482, 2001
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  35. ↵
    Aurigemma GP, Gottdiener JS, Shemanski L, Gardin J, Kitzman D: Predictive value of systolic and diastolic function for incident congestive heart failure in the elderly: The cardiovascular health study. J Am Coll Cardiol 37: 1042–1048, 2001
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  36. ↵
    Schillaci G, Verdecchia P, Reboldi G, Pede S, Porcellati C: Subclinical left ventricular dysfunction in systemic hypertension and the role of 24-hour blood pressure. Am J Cardiol 86: 509–513, 2000
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of the American Society of Nephrology: 15 (4)
Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
Vol. 15, Issue 4
1 Apr 2004
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
View Selected Citations (0)
Print
Download PDF
Sign up for Alerts
Email Article
Thank you for your help in sharing the high-quality science in JASN.
Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Prognostic Value of Echocardiographic Indicators of Left Ventricular Systolic Function in Asymptomatic Dialysis Patients
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Society of Nephrology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Society of Nephrology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Prognostic Value of Echocardiographic Indicators of Left Ventricular Systolic Function in Asymptomatic Dialysis Patients
Carmine Zoccali, Francesco A. Benedetto, Francesca Mallamaci, Giovanni Tripepi, Giuseppe Giacone, Alessandro Cataliotti, Giuseppe Seminara, Benedetta Stancanelli, Lorenzo S. Malatino
JASN Apr 2004, 15 (4) 1029-1037; DOI: 10.1097/01.ASN.0000117977.14912.91

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Request Permissions
Share
Prognostic Value of Echocardiographic Indicators of Left Ventricular Systolic Function in Asymptomatic Dialysis Patients
Carmine Zoccali, Francesco A. Benedetto, Francesca Mallamaci, Giovanni Tripepi, Giuseppe Giacone, Alessandro Cataliotti, Giuseppe Seminara, Benedetta Stancanelli, Lorenzo S. Malatino
JASN Apr 2004, 15 (4) 1029-1037; DOI: 10.1097/01.ASN.0000117977.14912.91
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • References
  • Figures & Data Supps
  • Info & Metrics
  • View PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • Survival among Patients with Kidney Failure in Jalisco, Mexico
  • A Population-Based, Prospective Study of Blood Pressure and Risk for End-Stage Renal Disease in China
  • Hepatitis C Virus and Death Risk in Hemodialysis Patients
Show more Epidemiology and Outcomes

Cited By...

  • Preoperative Noncoronary Cardiovascular Assessment and Management of Kidney Transplant Candidates
  • The Ebb and Flow of Echocardiographic Cardiac Function Parameters in Relationship to Hemodialysis Treatment in Patients with ESRD
  • Value of Excess Pressure Integral for Predicting 15-Year All-Cause and Cardiovascular Mortalities in End-Stage Renal Disease Patients
  • NT-proBNP and Echocardiographic Parameters for Prediction of Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients with CKD Stages G2-G4
  • Speckle Tracking Echocardiography Detects Uremic Cardiomyopathy Early and Predicts Cardiovascular Mortality in ESRD
  • Effects of Frequent Hemodialysis on Ventricular Volumes and Left Ventricular Remodeling
  • Asymptomatic Pulmonary Congestion and Physical Functioning in Hemodialysis Patients
  • Effects of Beta-Adrenergic Antagonists in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
  • Prognostic Value of Reduced Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction at Start of Hemodialysis Therapy on Cardiovascular and All-Cause Mortality in End-Stage Renal Disease Patients
  • Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction: A Sudden Killer in End-Stage Renal Disease Patients
  • Detection of Pulmonary Congestion by Chest Ultrasound in Dialysis Patients
  • Optimal Cardiovascular Therapy for Patients with ESRD over the Next Several Years
  • Left Ventricular Mass in Chronic Kidney Disease and ESRD
  • Hemodialysis-Induced Cardiac Injury: Determinants and Associated Outcomes
  • Urotensin II and Cardiomyopathy in End-Stage Renal Disease
  • Long-Term Survival of Incident Hemodialysis Patients Who Are Hospitalized for Congestive Heart Failure, Pulmonary Edema, or Fluid Overload
  • Echocardiography-based score to predict outcome after renal transplantation
  • Left Atrial Volume Monitoring and Cardiovascular Risk in Patients with End-Stage Renal Disease: A Prospective Cohort Study
  • Left Ventricular Systolic Function Monitoring in Asymptomatic Dialysis Patients: A Prospective Cohort Study
  • Kidney-Heart Interactions: Epidemiology, Pathogenesis, and Treatment
  • Google Scholar

Similar Articles

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Articles

  • Current Issue
  • Early Access
  • Subject Collections
  • Article Archive
  • ASN Annual Meeting Abstracts

Information for Authors

  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Author Resources
  • Editorial Fellowship Program
  • ASN Journal Policies
  • Reuse/Reprint Policy

About

  • JASN
  • ASN
  • ASN Journals
  • ASN Kidney News

Journal Information

  • About JASN
  • JASN Email Alerts
  • JASN Key Impact Information
  • JASN Podcasts
  • JASN RSS Feeds
  • Editorial Board

More Information

  • Advertise
  • ASN Podcasts
  • ASN Publications
  • Become an ASN Member
  • Feedback
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Password/Email Address Changes
  • Subscribe

© 2021 American Society of Nephrology

Print ISSN - 1046-6673 Online ISSN - 1533-3450

Powered by HighWire