ライフサイエンスコーパス: HFpEF

1 cularly HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).

2 ts with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).

3 rt failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).

4 reserved left ventricular ejection fraction (HFpEF).

5 rt failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).

6 rt failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).

7 rt failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).

8 rt failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).

9 ith HFrEF and HFbEF compared with those with HFpEF.

10 larly prevalent in those with or at risk for HFpEF.

11 patients with HFpEF and 12 patients without HFpEF.

12 exercise echocardiography may help rule out HFpEF.

13 emodynamic and structural changes typical of HFpEF.

14 ncidence of cardiac arrhythmias in rats with HFpEF.

15 ascular compromise in the pathophysiology of HFpEF.

16 bjected to sham or volume overload to induce HFpEF.

17 olated myocardium from patients with HHD and HFpEF.

18 ty to VA was markedly increased in rats with HFpEF.

19 impairment in cardiac function in rats with HFpEF.

20 from 36 control patients, 29 HHD and 19 HHD+HFpEF.

21 EF categories except all-cause mortality in HFpEF.

22 sociated with an increased risk of HFrEF and HFpEF.

23 and elastance were observed in subjects with HFpEF.

24 increase in diastolic tension in HHD and HHD+HFpEF.

25 ath represent an important competing risk in HFpEF.

26 ed with the placebo group, in both HFREF and HFPEF.

27 bolites associated with clinical outcomes in HFpEF.

28 NO pathway in reducing arterial stiffness in HFpEF.

29 her inhaled nitrite improves hemodynamics in HFpEF.

30 g left atrial pressure might be effective in HFPEF.

31 ion independent of blood pressure changes in HFpEF.

32 aluate chronic effects of inhaled nitrite in HFpEF.

33 m outcomes among patients with decompensated HFpEF.

34 powerful clinical and prognostic factors in HFpEF.

35 ould be a new strategy for the management of HFPEF.

36 escence could be a new therapeutic avenue in HFpEF.

37 l ET-1 receptor antagonists in patients with HFpEF.

38 ed therapy to reduce left atrial pressure in HFpEF.

39 ential of becoming an important biomarker in HFpEF.

40 le for coronary microvascular dysfunction in HFpEF.

41 here remains no evidence-based therapies for HFpEF.

42 predicts invasively measured LV stiffness in HFpEF.

43 CV to differentiate among pathomechanisms in HFpEF.

44 ationship between MOLLI-ECV and prognosis in HFpEF.

45 ted clinical diagnosis, and 745 did not have HFpEF.

46 unction or its effect on cardiac function in HFpEF.

47 sease (</=125 pg/mL) in 18% of subjects with HFpEF.

48 heart failure and hence were diagnosed with HFpEF.

49 initively confirm or refute the diagnosis of HFpEF.

50 associated with adverse clinical outcomes in HFpEF.

51 ed myocardium from patients with HHD and HHD+HFpEF.

52 s induce renal dysfunction in both HFREF and HFPEF.

53 with outcomes in hospitalized patients with HFpEF.

54 rse prognosis compared with patients with no HFpEF.

55 there were 2636 total HF events (34.6% were HFpEF, 15.5% were borderline HFpEF, 37.1% were HFrEF, an

56 Of HF cases, 38 (64%) had EF>/=50% (HFpEF), 18 (31%) had EF<50% (HF with reduced EF), and 3

57 005 and 2009 were included: 18,299 (46%) had HFpEF, 3,285 (8.2%) had HFbEF, and 18,398 (46%) had HFrE

58 nts (34.6% were HFpEF, 15.5% were borderline HFpEF, 37.1% were HFrEF, and 12.8% were HF of unknown ty

59 Overall, 23% had HFpEF (52% IHD), 21% had HFmrEF (61% IHD), and 55% had H

60 ad similar 5-year mortality (HFrEF 75.3% vs. HFpEF 75.7%; hazard ratio: 0.99 [95% confidence interval

61 e interval: 0.958 to 1.022]; HFbEF 75.7% vs. HFpEF 75.7%; hazard ratio: 0.99 [95% confidence interval

62 451 participants with 3,180 HF events (1,252 HFpEF, 914 HFrEF, and 1,014 unclassified HF).

63 Among hospitalized patients with HFpEF, a lower discharge heart rate was independently as

64 e (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (EF; HFpEF) accounts for 50% of HF cases, and its prevalence

65 We demonstrate that MOLLI-ECV in HFpEF accurately reflects histological ECV, correlates w

66 We performed T1 mapping in 24 patients with HFpEF and 12 patients without heart failure symptoms.

67 cardial feature tracking in 22 patients with HFpEF and 12 patients without HFpEF.

68 or cardiopulmonary exercise testing: 79 with HFpEF and 55 controls.

69 th/first HF hospitalization in patients with HFpEF and 6% (95% CI, 4%-9%; P < .001) to 8% (95% CI, 5%

70 munity-based cohorts, 982 developed incident HFpEF and 909 HFrEF during a median follow-up of 12 year

71 and management of patients with concomitant HFpEF and AF.

72 conduit strain is significantly impaired in HFpEF and associated with exercise intolerance.

73 Compared with those with nonobese HFpEF and control subjects, obese patients with HFpEF di

74 Compared with both subjects with nonobese HFpEF and control subjects, subjects with obese HFpEF di

75 Obesity is common in HFpEF and has many cardiovascular effects, suggesting th

76 d the risk factors for incident hospitalized HFpEF and HFrEF in a multiracial cohort of 42 170 postme

77 Risk factors for both HFpEF and HFrEF were as follows: older age, white race,

78 th/first HF hospitalization in patients with HFpEF and HFrEF, respectively.

79 Some risk factors differed between HFpEF and HFrEF, supporting the notion of pathogenetic d

80 different clinical course than patients with HFpEF and HFrEF, with lower mortality, less frequent hos

81 death and cardiovascular hospitalization in HFpEF and HFrEF.

82 ustment were used to define risk factors for HFpEF and HFrEF.

83 at rest and during exercise in subjects with HFpEF and hypertensive control subjects to examine their

84 and central chemoreflexes are hyperactive in HFpEF and if chemoreflex activation exacerbates cardiac

85 microvascular density tended to be lower in HFpEF and inversely correlated with betaLA.

86 ound that central chemoreflex is enhanced in HFpEF and neuronal activation is increased in pre-sympat

87 ertion-is a common factor among all forms of HFpEF and one of the primary reasons for dyspnea and exe

88 that the central chemoreflex is enhanced in HFpEF and that acute activation of central chemoreceptor

89 eview describes the biological phenotypes of HFpEF and therapeutic interventions aimed at targeting t

90 F) is similarly prevalent both in those with HFpEF and those at risk for HFpEF, similarly associating

91 ction increases the risk of future HFrEF and HFpEF and to assess if this risk varies by sociodemograp

92 rt failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

93 lization in patients with HF with preserved (HFpEF) and reduced (HFrEF) ejection fractions.

94 1 (3.4-24.4) for any HF, 16.9 (3.9-73.7) for HFpEF, and 3.17 (0.8-13.0) for HF with reduced EF.

95 with no HF and rEF, 33.9% (412 of 1216) with HFpEF, and 42.9% (1481 of 3456) with HFrEF.

96 bjects with obese HFpEF, those with nonobese HFpEF, and control subjects.

97 have an increased risk of HFpEF, borderline HFpEF, and HFrEF compared with uninfected individuals.

98 Age was more strongly associated with HFpEF, and male sex, left ventricular hypertrophy, bundl

99 n patients with no HF and rEF, patients with HFpEF, and patients with HFrEF.

100 ic transcatheter interatrial shunt device in HFpEF, and we describe the design of REDUCE Elevated Lef

101 attributable to the lack of well-established HFpEF animal models.

102 Elevated calcium levels in HFpEF are neither a result of an impaired Na(+) gradient

103 erlying deterioration of cardiac function in HFpEF are poorly understood.

104 Subjects with obese HFpEF (body mass index >/=35 kg/m(2); n=99), nonobese HF

105 dy mass index >/=35 kg/m(2); n=99), nonobese HFpEF (body mass index <30 kg/m(2); n=96), and nonobese

106 infected with HIV have an increased risk of HFpEF, borderline HFpEF, and HFrEF compared with uninfec

107 as prolonged by 13% in HHD and by 18% in HHD+HFpEF (both P<0.05).

108 re than one comorbidity were associated with HFpEF but not with HFrEF.

109 dual ET-A/ET-B receptor inhibition improves HFpEF by abrogating adverse cardiac remodeling via antih

110 ype natriuretic peptide (BNP) level; 160 had HFpEF by documented clinical diagnosis, and 745 did not

111 the diagnostic performance of T1 mapping in HFpEF by examining the relationship between ECV and inva

112 rt failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) by enhancing cGMP signaling and improving hemodyn

113 rt failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), cardiomyocyte-extracellular matrix interactions

114 At week 24, SAM-WD had developed HFpEF, characterized by diastolic dysfunction, left vent

115 In the overall HFpEF cohort (n=19 047; mean [SD] age, 76 [12] years; 46

116 Within the HFpEF cohort, patients with ECV greater than the median

117 with worse composite outcome in the matched HFpEF cohort, with 1-year event-free survival of 62% (95

118 reduced by 34+/-2% (mean+/-SEM, P<0.001) in HFpEF compared with controls of similar age, sex, and bo

119 e consistently associated with lower risk of HFpEF compared with HFrEF.

120 rt failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) compared with heart failure with reduced ejection

121 agonist (TOPCAT) trial of 1372 patients with HFpEF, conducted between August 2006 and January 2012, a

122 rt failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) continues to rise.

123 /=40%), HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) (defined as current and all previous LVEF reports

124 In HFpEF, defined as left ventricular ejection fraction >/=

125 Patients either at risk for HFpEF or with HFpEF demonstrated similarly higher prevalence/extent of

126 In HFpEF, despite a larger brown AT mass (5.96 versus 4.50

127 aladaptive LA remodeling occurs early during HFpEF development, supporting a concept of global myocar

128 vestigate the role of cellular senescence in HFpEF development.

129 Conceivably, MF might precede clinical HFpEF diagnosis.

130 Currently proposed HFpEF diagnostic guidelines on the basis of resting data

131 ) patients with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) display irregular breathing, sympatho-vagal imbal

132 EF and control subjects, subjects with obese HFpEF displayed increased plasma volume (3907 mL [3563-4

133 EF and control subjects, obese patients with HFpEF displayed worse exercise capacity (peak oxygen con

134 In HFmrEF and HFpEF during routine care, decreases in NT-proBNP were a

135 In those with HFpEF, ECV was associated with baseline log BNP (disease

136 Of the 8,873 hospitalized patients with HFpEF (EF >/=50%) in the Medicare-linked OPTIMIZE-HF (Or

137 tcomes included HFpEF (EF>/=50%), borderline HFpEF (EF 40%-49%), HFrEF (EF<40%), and HF of unknown ty

138 rt Failure Registry, HFmrEF (EF=40%-49%) and HFpEF (EF>/=50%) patients reporting at least 2 consecuti

139 Outcomes included HFpEF (EF>/=50%), borderline HFpEF (EF 40%-49%), HFrEF (

140 rt failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) (EF >/=50%), heart failure with borderline ejecti

141 range (HFmrEF; EF 40%-50%) and preserved EF (HFpEF; EF >/=50%) has been much less explored.

142 s between LTPA, BMI, and risk of overall HF, HFpEF (ejection fraction >/=45%), and HFrEF (ejection fr

143 icipants who were admitted for decompensated HFpEF (ejection fraction >/=50%) from January 2009 throu

144 analyses were performed in a model of early HFpEF (elderly dogs, renal wrap-induced hypertension, ex

145 es of 160 stable outpatient individuals with HFpEF enrolled in the RELAX clinical trial were analyzed

146 acking echocardiography in 357 patients with HFpEF enrolled in the Treatment Of Preserved Cardiac Fun

147 vation of the central chemoreflex pathway in HFpEF exacerbates diastolic dysfunction, worsens sympath

148 years, 61 patients at risk for HFpEF or with HFpEF experienced adverse events (19 hospitalization for

149 In HFpEF, extracardiac comorbidities such as metabolic risk

150 on (HFmrEF) and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), feasible surrogate end points are needed for pha

151 We included 34233 patients with HFpEF from 224 sites with measured troponin levels (33.4

152 e, 56 [44-66] years), 250 were "at risk" for HFpEF given elevated brain-type natriuretic peptide (BNP

153 The vast majority (97%) of patients with HFpEF harbored defects at multiple steps of the O2 pathw

154 of LA mechanics (ie, LA strain measures) in HFpEF has not been well studied.

155 rt failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) has a complex etiology.

156 oad (RV-pulmonary arterial [PA] coupling) in HFpEF have not been defined.

157 is imperative to realize that patients with HFpEF have significant impairment in their functional ca

158 V-infected veterans had an increased risk of HFpEF (hazard ratio [HR], 1.21; 95% CI, 1.03-1.41), bord

159 similar for HFmrEF versus HFrEF and lower in HFpEF (hazard ratio, 0.89 [0.84-0.95] versus HFmrEF and

160 k) were associated with an 19% lower risk of HFpEF (hazard ratio: 0.81; 95% confidence interval: 0.68

161 Optical mapping of HFpEF hearts demonstrated prolonged action potentials (P

162 o [HR], 1.21; 95% CI, 1.03-1.41), borderline HFpEF (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.09-1.72), and HFrEF (HR, 1.61

163 zation (the O2 pathway) in each patient with HFpEF, identifying the defective steps that impair each

164 th diuretic therapy supports the presence of HFpEF in patients with concomitant AF.

165 een developed and evaluated in patients with HFpEF in single-arm, nonblinded clinical trials.

166 entification of the mechanisms for HFrEF and HFpEF in the HIV-infected population.

167 rt failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) in humans, there remains no evidence-based therap

168 rt failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) in the PhosphodiesteRasE-5 Inhibition to Improve

169 HFpEF, in the absence of known history for obstructive e

170 A total of 8 studies (6 HFREF and 2 HFPEF, including 28 961 patients) were included in our a

171 The relative risk of HFpEF increases with increasing cardiac radiation exposu

172 ile aortic loading during exercise occurs in HFpEF independent of hypertension and is correlated with

173 it function represents a distinct feature of HFpEF, independent of LV stiffness and relaxation.

174 Similar findings were seen in HFpEF induced by transverse aortic constriction.

175 rt failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) involves multiple pathophysiological mechanisms,

176 Obesity-related HFpEF is a genuine form of cardiac failure and a clinica

177 Although HFpEF is a heterogeneous clinical syndrome, elevated lef

178 on among patients with acutely decompensated HFpEF is associated with worse in-hospital and postdisch

179 The pathophysiology of HFPEF is complex but characterised by increased left atr

180 The transition from asymptomatic to overt HFpEF is linked to diastolic, systolic, and chronotropic

181 Although the etiology of HFpEF is most commonly related to long-standing hyperten

182 The leading cause of mortality in HFpEF is sudden death, but little is known about the und

183 rt failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a common syndrome with a pressing shortage of

184 rt failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFPEF) is a common, globally recognised, form of heart f

185 ilure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a heterogeneous syndrome.

186 rt failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is associated with disordered breathing patterns,

187 rt failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is challenging and relies largely on demonstratio

188 rt failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is common, recalcitrant to treatment, and associa

189 rt failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is essential to tailor successful treatment strat

190 ensated HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is not well established.

191 rt failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), its functional implications beyond the reflectio

192 d conduit strain were significantly lower in HFpEF (LA reservoir strain, 22+/-7% versus 29+/-6%, P=0.

193 relationship was shifted upward/leftward in HFpEF (LA stiffness constant [betaLA] 0.16 [0.11-0.18]mm

194 In early-stage hypertensive HFpEF, LA cardiomyocyte hypertrophy, titin hyperphosphor

195 nin levels among patients with decompensated HFpEF may be useful for risk stratification.

196 ease in LV filling pressure in patients with HFpEF may define a subgroup with warranting trial of spi

197 HFpEF mice developed hypertension, left ventricular hype

198 However, HFpEF mice failed to regulate body temperature during co

199 ic peptide signaling was seen in white AT of HFpEF mice.

200 iated with PH-HFpEF, we developed a 2-hit PH-HFpEF model in rats with multiple features of metabolic

201 We established a feline HFpEF model induced by slow-progressive pressure overloa

202 pressures and vascular remodeling in the PH-HFpEF model with robust activation of skeletal muscle SI

203 trolled, parallel-group trial, subjects with HFpEF (n=26) underwent cardiac catheterization with simu

204 diet (8% NaCl) from 7 weeks of age to induce HFpEF (n=38).

205 exercise in subjects with invasively proven HFpEF (n=50) and participants with dyspnea but no identi

206 he accuracy of current approaches to exclude HFpEF on the basis of resting data alone and reinforce t

207 4% to 60% of subjects with invasively proven HFpEF on the basis of resting echocardiographic data alo

208 l) whether grouped with patients at risk for HFpEF or not.

209 Patients either at risk for HFpEF or with HFpEF demonstrated similarly higher preval

210 median of 1.9 years, 61 patients at risk for HFpEF or with HFpEF experienced adverse events (19 hospi

211 Among those at risk for HFpEF or with HFpEF, the actual diagnosis of HFpEF was n

212 HFrEF), HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), or both is critical because HF types differ with

213 American women compared with white women for HFpEF (P for interaction=0.007).

214 2 and 0.27, both P<0.05) but not in nonobese HFpEF (P>/=0.3).

215 ucted a systematic review of 1,608 published HFpEF papers from January 1, 1985, to December 31, 2015,

216 al and there are no effective treatments for HFpEF, partially attributable to the lack of well-establ

217 Although HFpEF pathophysiology remains incompletely understood, e

218 mitochondrial function, and EI in HFrEF and HFpEF patients and in healthy controls.

219 HFpEF patients exhibited severe EI, the most rapid rates

220 sclerosis, a significant number of suspected HFpEF patients have a restrictive cardiomyopathy or chro

221 One-hundred seventeen consecutive HFpEF patients underwent cardiac magnetic resonance imag

222 HFrEF and HFpEF patients with EI and increased fatigability manife

223 HFpEF patients with marked impairment in RV-PA coupling

224 where mortality increase with WRF is small, HFPEF patients with RAAS inhibitor-induced WRF have an i

225 HFpEF patients with RVD and impaired RV-PA coupling have

226 and ATP flux rates were normal in HFrEF and HFpEF patients.

227 ty in an unselected population of HFmrEF and HFpEF patients.

228 y was to further characterize LA function in HFpEF patients.

229 We report for the first time in HFpEF perivascular fluid cuff formation around extra-alv

230 Because of phenotypic diversity in HFpEF, personalized therapeutic strategies are proposed,

231 apeutic strategies to treat the ever growing HFpEF population.

232 ath must be standardized and tailored to the HFpEF population.

233 with HFpEF presentations in the abscissa and HFpEF predispositions in the ordinate.

234 posed, which are configured in a matrix with HFpEF presentations in the abscissa and HFpEF predisposi

235 ed with body mass and plasma volume in obese HFpEF (r=0.22 and 0.27, both P<0.05) but not in nonobese

236 F patients with preserved ejection fraction (HFPEF), RAAS inhibitors have not been shown to improve o

237 t and Kv4.3 protein levels were decreased in HFpEF rat hearts.

238 monstrated increased susceptibility to VA in HFpEF rats (P<0.001 versus controls).

239 l recordings of cardiomyocytes isolated from HFpEF rats confirmed a delay of repolarization (P=0.001)

240 HFpEF rats displayed [mean +/- SD; chronic heart failure

241 Accordingly, hypercapnic stimulation in HFpEF rats exacerbated increases in sympathetic outflow

242 Furthermore, HFpEF rats showed increase central chemoreflex sensitivi

243 T interval on ECG was prolonged (P<0.001) in HFpEF rats.

244 We hypothesized that in HFpEF, reduced (worse) LA strain is a key pathophysiolog

245 s strongly associated with worse outcomes in HFPEF (relative risk, 1.78 (1.43-2.21); P<0.001), wherea

246 rt Failure with preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF) represents a major public health problem.

247 rt failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) represents approximately half of heart failure, a

248 ed with existing treatment for patients with HFPEF requires validation in a randomised controlled tri

249 ed or preserved ejection fraction (HFrEF and HFpEF, respectively) are not known.

250 Perhaps the future of HFpEF risk assessment lies in a multimodality approach t

251 t that the current 1-dimensional approach to HFpEF risk prediction based on noninvasive measures of d

252 The dose-response relationship for BMI with HFpEF risk was also more consistent than with HFrEF risk

253 , and dose-dependent associations with lower HFpEF risk were observed at higher levels.

254 (<500 MET-min/week) were not associated with HFpEF risk, and dose-dependent associations with lower H

255 function (DD) is an independent predictor of HFpEF risk, associated clinical manifestations, and long

256 re similar for HFmrEF and HFrEF and lower in HFpEF (risk ratio, 0.91 [0.89-0.93] versus HFmrEF and ri

257 These findings were replicated in HFmrEF and HFpEF separately.

258 Patients with HFpEF showed higher ECV (p < 0.01), elevated load-indepe

259 Patients with HFpEF showed lower oxygen uptake (17+/-6 versus 29+/-8 m

260 Systematic analysis of the O2 pathway in HFpEF showed that exercise capacity was undermined by mu

261 th in those with HFpEF and those at risk for HFpEF, similarly associating with disease severity and o

262 reatment strategy is proposed that addresses HFpEF-specific signaling and phenotypic diversity.

263 A subset of HFpEF subjects (n = 52) received sodium nitrite or place

264 Before study drug administration, HFpEF subjects displayed an increase in pulmonary capill

265 During submaximal exercise, HFpEF subjects displayed reduced total arterial complian

266 l of 22 hypertensive control subjects and 98 HFpEF subjects underwent hemodynamic exercise testing wi

267 a rodent model of metabolic syndrome and PH-HFpEF, suggesting a potential role of nitrite and metfor

268 ssociated with a greater increase in risk of HFpEF than HFrEF.

269 cts were less pronounced in patients with PH-HFpEF than typical IPAH; with atypical IPAH in between.

270 rt failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFPEF), the most common form of heart failure among olde

271 Among those at risk for HFpEF or with HFpEF, the actual diagnosis of HFpEF was not associated

272 In HFpEF, the use of nitrates was not associated with impro

273 and reserve capacity in subjects with obese HFpEF, those with nonobese HFpEF, and control subjects.

274 ownstream effects, may allow the syndrome of HFpEF to be distilled into distinct diagnoses based on t

275 ulticenter, global registry of patients with HFpEF to map its natural history.

276 In this review, an HFpEF treatment strategy is proposed that addresses HFpE

277 esent the rationale and design for the INDIE-HFpEF trial (Inorganic Nitrite Delivery to Improve Exerc

278 HODS AND In this ancillary study of the NEAT-HFpEF trial (Nitrate's Effects on Activity Tolerance in

279 d which have potentially confounded previous HFpEF trials.

280 HFpEF-verified and control rats underwent programmed ele

281 ume relationship slope 2.4 [1.9-3.2]mm Hg/mL HFpEF versus 1.5 [1.2-2.2]mm Hg/mL controls, P=0.01).

282 A microvascular reactivity was diminished in HFpEF versus controls.

283 ediating MF represent therapeutic targets in HFpEF warrants further evaluation.

284 A diagnosis of HFpEF was associated with 2.62 times greater unadjusted

285 The increase in heart volumes in obese HFpEF was associated with greater pericardial restraint

286 Early HFpEF was associated with LA enlargement, cardiomyocyte

287 HFpEF or with HFpEF, the actual diagnosis of HFpEF was not associated with significant differences in

288 ite in metabolic syndrome associated with PH-HFpEF, we developed a 2-hit PH-HFpEF model in rats with

289 mass index, 39.3 [5.6]) with chronic, stable HFPEF were enrolled (366 excluded by inclusion and exclu

290 Patients with HFpEF were more likely to be older, female, and have com

291 Arterial load and wave reflections in HFpEF were similar to those in control subjects at rest.

292 s occurring during the apparent evolution of HFpEF where elevated BNP is prevalent, MF was similarly

293 gulation leads to abnormal repolarization in HFpEF, which in turn predisposes to VA and sudden cardia

294 ed baseline LA function in 308 patients with HFpEF who were followed up longitudinally for adverse ou

295 pironolactone in the subset of patients with HFpEF with exercise-induced increase in ratio between ea

296 The increased odds of any HF or HFpEF with increasing MCRD remained significant after ad

297 HFmrEF resembled HFrEF rather than HFpEF with regard to both a higher prevalence of IHD and

298 stands out as a significant risk factor for HFpEF, with the strongest association in African America

299 abnormalities exist in MFR in patients with HFpEF without epicardial coronary artery disease.

300 xercise intolerance is a cardinal symptom of HFpEF, yet its pathophysiology remains uncertain.