Diastolic Dysfunction Assessed Using Contemporary Guidelines and Prognosis Following Myocardial Infarction

Abstract

Background: Recent American Society of Echocardiography and European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging guidelines for the assessment of diastolic dysfunction (DD) recommend a simplified approach with four key variables incorporated into a novel diagnostic algorithm. The aim of this study was to assess the prognostic value of significant DD assessed using the algorithm recommended in the 2016 American Society of Echocardiography and European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging guidelines (DD2016) in comparison with the prognostic value of significant DD assessed using the 2009 guidelines (DD2009) as well as the individual parameters incorporated in the 2016 algorithm.

Methods: Retrospective data on 419 consecutive patients with first ever myocardial infarction were included. Doppler echocardiography was performed within 24 hours of admission in all patients. Significant DD was defined as grade 2 or 3 DD. The primary outcome measure was composite major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), comprising death, myocardial infarction, and heart failure.

Results: At a median follow-up of 24 months, there were 61 MACEs. On Kaplan-Meier analysis, DD2016 showed a better association with MACEs than DD2009 (log-rank χ² = 21.01 [P < .001] vs 13.13 [P = .001]). On Cox proportional-hazards multivariate analysis incorporating significant clinical predictors and left ventricular ejection fraction, DD2016 (hazard ratio, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.25-3.98; P = .007) was the strongest independent predictor of MACEs, whereas DD2009 (hazard ratio, 1.63; 95% CI, 0.95-2.80; P = .074) was not a significant predictor. Of the four key diastolic parameters, only left atrial volume index was independently associated with MACEs (hazard ratio, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.02-3.14; P = .041) when included in a Cox proportional-hazards multivariate model incorporating significant clinical predictors and left ventricular ejection fraction, although the association was weaker than DD2016. Intermodel comparisons with model χ² and Harrell's C statistic were satisfactory for DD2016.

Conclusions: Significant DD assessed using the 2016 American Society of Echocardiography and European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging guidelines is a robust independent predictor of clinical outcomes following myocardial infarction and compares favorably with DD2009 as well as the individual parameters incorporated in the novel 2016 algorithm.

Keywords: Diastolic dysfunction; Myocardial infarction; Prognosis.