Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences Large Type Edition
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ahmed, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ahmed, A.
The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences 60:1339-1344 (2005)
© 2005 The Gerontological Society of America

Association of Diastolic Dysfunction and Outcomes in Ambulatory Older Adults With Chronic Heart Failure

Ali Ahmed

Geriatric Heart Failure Clinic, and Division of Gerontology and Geriatric Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, and Geriatric Heart Failure Clinic and Section of Geriatrics, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Birmingham, Alabama.

Address correspondence to Ali Ahmed, MD, MPH, Division of Gerontology and Geriatric Medicine, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1530 3rd Ave. South, CH-19, Ste-219, Birmingham, AL 35294-2041. E-mail: aahmed{at}uab.edu


   Abstract
Top
 Abstract
Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Background. Studies of patients with heart failure and preserved systolic function report variable outcomes compared with those of patients with impaired systolic function.

Objective. To study outcomes of diastolic (vs systolic) heart failure in older adults with chronic heart failure.

Methods. Patients were ambulatory chronic heart failure patients 65 years and older (N = 3984) who participated in the Digitalis Investigation Group trial. Of these, 3405 had systolic heart failure (ejection fraction ≤45%) and 579 had diastolic heart failure (ejection fraction >45%). By using a 1:1 match by age, sex, and race, 571 diastolic heart failure patients were matched with 571 systolic heart failure patients. Kaplan–Meier survival analyses and multivariable Cox proportional hazard analyses were used to estimate the risk of various outcomes between the groups.

Results. During the 1044 mean days of follow up, compared with 41% of systolic heart failure patients, 27% of diastolic heart failure patients died (p <.001). Presence of diastolic heart failure was independently associated with a 27% decreased risk of all-cause death (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58–0.91) and a 32% reduction in risk of hospitalization due to heart failure (adjusted HR = 0.68; 95% CI, 0.52–0.88). There was no difference in overall hospitalization between the groups. However, compared with systolic heart failure patients, diastolic heart failure patients were more likely to be hospitalized due to noncardiovascular causes (adjusted HR = 1.38; 95% CI, 1.02–1.88).

Conclusions. Older adults with diastolic heart failure had lower risk of all-cause mortality and heart failure-related hospitalizations, but higher risk of noncardiovascular hospitalization.

HEART failure with preserved left ventricular systolic function, also known as diastolic heart failure, is relatively common among older adults (1–8). Most studies of outcomes of diastolic heart failure in older adults involved hospitalized patients (1,8–11). Those studies involved all-cause mortality and heart failure hospitalization, and are limited by selection bias. Community-based studies, most of which include patients of all age groups, are limited by their small sample size (4,6,7). The purpose of our study was to determine various outcomes in older adults with diastolic heart failure compared to an age-, sex-, and race-matched cohort with systolic heart failure.


   METHODS
Top
 Abstract
 Methods
Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Study Design
The Digitalis Investigation Group (DIG) trial was a randomized controlled trial of patients with heart failure. The purpose of the DIG trial was to determine the effects of digoxin on mortality and hospitalizations in chronic systolic heart failure patients with normal sinus rhythm. The trial was conducted at 302 centers in the United States and Canada, and details of the study design, baseline characteristics of the patients, and results are published elsewhere (12,13). The DIG data set was obtained from the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health. All patients provided written informed consent, and the protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Boards of all the participating centers. The DIG trial enrolled 7788 ambulatory patients with chronic heart failure. The Institutional Review Board of the University of Alabama at Birmingham approved the use of the data set.

Study Patients
In the original DIG trial, 7788 heart failure patients were randomized to either the digoxin or placebo group (5). Of these, 6800 had systolic heart failure and 988 had diastolic heart failure. Patients were recruited irrespective of their heart failure etiology or New York Heart Association functional class. Patients with nonsinus rhythm were excluded, and all patients were encouraged to be on angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. For the present study, we excluded 3804 patients younger than 65 years. Of the 3984 patients in this study, 579 had diastolic heart failure and 3405 had systolic heart failure. Of the 579 patients with diastolic heart failure, 571 were matched by age, sex, and race with 571 patients with systolic heart failure.

Diagnosis of Heart Failure and Evaluation of Systolic Function
In the DIG trial, the diagnosis of heart failure was established based on current or past clinical symptoms or signs or radiographic evidence of pulmonary congestion. Left ventricular systolic function was evaluated by two-dimensional echocardiography, radionuclide ventriculography, and contrast left ventriculography. In the original trial, 6800 patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤45% (systolic heart failure) were randomized in the main trial, and 988 patients with left ventricular ejection fraction>45% (preserved systolic function or "probable" diastolic heart failure) (14) were randomized in the ancillary trial. For the purpose of this study, we used the same ejection fraction cutoff to define systolic and diastolic heart failure.

Study Outcomes
Patients in the DIG trial were followed for a mean of 37 months, with a range from 28 to 58 months (13). The primary outcome of the main DIG trial was all-cause mortality. For the purpose of this study, we also studied prespecified outcomes of all-cause mortality, mortality due to heart failure, all-cause hospitalization, heart failure hospitalization, hospitalizations due to cardiovascular and noncardiovascular causes, and the combined outcome of heart failure hospitalization or all-cause mortality.

Statistical Analysis
Baseline characteristics of 579 diastolic heart failure and 3405 systolic heart failure patients were compared at first. Then, we compared the baseline characteristics of 571 diastolic heart failure patients with 571 age-, sex-, and race-matched systolic heart failure patients. Pearson chi-square tests and Student's t tests were used as appropriate to test for statistical significance.

Then, we used Kaplan–Meier survival analyses to compare various outcomes between the two groups, and tested statistical significance using the log rank test. Bivariate and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare various outcomes between the two groups of heart failure patients. Covariates used in the multivariable models included duration and etiology of heart failure, comorbidities (myocardial infarction, angina, hypertension, diabetes, and chronic kidney disease [defined by estimated glomerular filtration rate of 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 body surface area]), medications (digoxin, nonpotassium-sparing diuretics, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors), New York Heart Association functional class, clinical features, vital signs (heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure), and signs of heart failure (jugular venous distention, third heart sound, pulmonary rales, lower extremity edema, and pulmonary congestion by chest x-ray). All statistical tests were evaluated using a two-tailed 95% confidence level. Analyses were performed using SPSS for Windows (release 13) (15).


   RESULTS
Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
Discussion
 References
 
Patient Characteristics
In the prematch cohort, older adults with diastolic heart failure were more likely to be older and female. In the matched cohort, patients had a mean (±SD) age of 72.6 (±5.6) years, 42.7% were female, and 11.2% were non-whites (Table 1). Patients with diastolic heart failure were more likely to have hypertension and hypertensive cardiomyopathy, and were less likely to have a history of acute myocardial infarction and ischemic cardiomyopathy. They were also less likely to have chronic kidney disease. Diastolic heart failure patients were more likely to present with lower extremity edema, and were less likely to have a third heart sound, jugular venous distension, or pulmonary congestion by chest x-ray. However, there were no significant differences in the prevalence of dyspnea and activity limitations between the groups.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 1. Baseline Patient Characteristics by Left Ventricular Systolic Function After Age, Sex, and Race Matching.

 
Mortality Due to All Causes and Worsening Heart Failure
Three hundred eighty-six patients (33.8%) died from all causes during the study. Compared with 41.0% (234/571) of systolic heart failure patients, 26.6% (152/571) of diastolic heart failure patients died during the study (p <.0001). The Kaplan–Meier survival curves for all-cause mortality are displayed in Figure 1a. Mean survival was over 6 months longer in patients with diastolic heart failure (mean survival of 1426 days compared with 1230 days for systolic heart failure patients; log rank test p <.0001). Compared with systolic heart failure patients, those with diastolic heart failure had a 41% lower risk of death from any cause (unadjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48–0.72) (Table 2). After adjustment for covariates, presence of diastolic heart failure was independently associated with a significant 27% lower risk of death (adjusted HR = 0.73; 95% CI, 0.58–0.91) (Table 2).



View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 1. Kaplan–Meier plots for all-cause mortality (A) and heart failure-related mortality (B) in patients with systolic heart failure (SHF) versus diastolic heart failure (DHF)

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 2. Crude and Adjusted Hazard Ratios (95% Confidence Intervals) for Various Outcomes in Older Adults With Systolic Versus Diastolic Heart Failure.

 
Overall, 121 patients (10.6%) died due to worsening heart failure during the follow-up. Compared with 14.2% (81/571) deaths in systolic heart failure patients, 7.0% (40/571) diastolic heart failure patients died from worsening heart failure during the study (p <.0001). The Kaplan–Meier survival curves for heart failure-related deaths between the groups are displayed in Figure 1b. Diastolic heart failure patients had a 114-day-longer mean survival from heart failure related-death (1650 vs 1536 days for systolic heart failure patients; p <.0001). Compared with systolic heart failure patients, those patients with diastolic heart failure had a 46% lower risk of death from worsening heart failure (adjusted HR = 0.73; 95% CI, 0.58–0.91) (Table 2).

Hospitalizations
Seven hundred sixty-nine (67.3%) participants were hospitalized due to all causes during the study. There were no differences in the number of overall hospitalizations between the groups (Table 2). The number of hospitalizations due to worsening heart failure was significantly lower in diastolic heart failure patients (20.0% vs 31.3% in systolic heart failure patients; p <.0001). The Kaplan–Meier survival curves for all-cause and heart failure hospitalizations are displayed in Figure 2, a and b, respectively. Diastolic heart failure was associated with a 32% independent reduction in hospitalizations due to worsening heart failure (adjusted HR = 0.68; 95% CI, 0.52–0.88). The risk of combined end point of hospitalization due to worsening heart failure or all-cause death was 28% lower in older adults with diastolic heart failure (Table 2). The risk of hospitalization due to cardiovascular causes were lower (adjusted HR = 0.83; 95% CI, 0.69–0.99) in diastolic heart failure patients, but those patients were more likely to be hospitalized due to noncardiovascular causes (Figure 3A and B; Table 2). There were no differences between the two groups in risks of hospitalization due to acute myocardial infarction, unstable angina, supraventricular arrhythmias, coronary revascularization, or stroke.



View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 2. Kaplan–Meier plots for hospitalization due to all cause (A) and worsening heart failure (B) in patients with systolic heart failure (SHF) versus diastolic heart failure (DHF)

 


View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 3. Kaplan–Meier plots demonstrating hospitalization due to cardiovascular (A) and noncardiovascular (B) causes in patients with systolic heart failure (SHF) versus diastolic heart failure (DHF)

 

   DISCUSSION
Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
References
 
The results of this study are important for several reasons. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that reports various outcomes in ambulatory older adults with diastolic heart failure relative to those with systolic heart failure. The results of this study demonstrate that, compared with systolic heart failure patients, diastolic heart failure patients had overall lower risks of death. However, there were no differences in the number of overall hospitalizations between the groups. Even though diastolic heart failure patients were less likely to have hospitalizations due to cardiovascular causes, they had a higher risk for noncardiovascular hospitalizations, suggesting significant burden of morbidity in these patients.

In a recent review of literature, Hogg and colleagues (9) identified 12 studies of hospitalized diastolic heart failure patients published since January 2000. While some of these studies were restricted to patients 65 years and older, as most hospitalized heart failure patients are older adults, all of these studies involved older adults (1,11,16–25). Nine of these studies reported mortality (all-cause) as an outcome (1,16,18–21,23–25). Results from seven of these studies suggest that older adults with diastolic heart failure have better survival compared with systolic heart failure patients (1,16,18–20,23,24). In one study, mortality rates between diastolic and systolic heart failure patients were similar (21). Several other previous studies have also observed no difference in morality between patients with systolic and diastolic heart failure (26–28). In one study of hospitalized veterans, presence of diastolic heart failure was associated with increased risk of death (25). However, in that study, heart failure patients were identified using an electronic search of computerized medical record for administrative coding of heart failure as the primary discharge diagnosis. In one study of older adults with heart failure associated with prior myocardial infarction living in long-term care facilities, adults with impaired systolic function had a higher mortality rate than those adults with preserved systolic function (29).

Most population-based studies of diastolic heart failure suffer from small numbers of diastolic heart failure patients (6,7,30–32). Most of these studies are also not restricted to patients 65 years and older. In the Cardiovascular Health Study that involved 5532 community-dwelling persons 65 years and older, 249 had heart failure (6). One hundred seventy (63%) of these patients had diastolic heart failure based on left ventricular ejection fraction>55%. Thirty nine patients had ejection fraction between 45% and 54%, and 60 patients had systolic heart failure (ejection fraction <45%). In that study, respective annual mortality rates for diastolic, borderline, and systolic heart failure patients were 8.7%, 11.5%, and 15.4% (6). Relative to healthy cohorts with normal systolic function, presence of diastolic, borderline, and systolic heart failure were independently associated with, respectively, 48%, 140%, and 88% higher risk of death from any cause (6). Several other community-based studies did not observe any mortality differences between diastolic and systolic heart failure (6,7,30). In all these studies, the number of diastolic heart failure patients was relatively low: 20 in the Helsinki Aging Study (30), 37 in the Framingham Heart Study (7), and 59 in the Mayo Clinic Olmsted County study (31). To our knowledge, the current study is the first to demonstrate significantly lower risk of all-cause mortality and mortality due to worsening heart failure in a large cohort of ambulatory older adults with diastolic heart failure. Using the Veterans Administration Cooperative Study trial data set, Cohn and Johnson (33) demonstrated a similar survival benefit associated with diastolic heart failure (ejection fraction ≥45%). However, patients in that study were younger (mean age 60 years).

Data on hospitalization among patients with diastolic heart failure is relatively scarce in the literature. In the Olmsted County study, 51% (30/59) of patients with diastolic heart failure had one hospitalization due to heart failure and 25% (15/59) had two or more hospitalizations due to heart failure. In contrast, in that study 41% (32/78) of patients with systolic heart failure had one hospitalization and 49% (38/78) had two or more hospitalizations due to heart failure (31). There are no reports on hospitalization in patients with diastolic heart failure from the Framingham Heart Study or the Cardiovascular Heart Study (6,7). In hospitalized heart failure patients, the risk of heart failure-related hospitalization has been variously reported to be lower than (1) or similar to that of systolic heart failure (18,23). Several of these studies reported all-cause hospitalization and did not find any difference between the two groups (16–18). We too observed a similar all-cause hospitalization between patients with systolic and diastolic heart failure. However, we noted that although hospitalizations due to all cardiovascular causes were lower in diastolic heart failure patients, except for those due to worsening heart failure, there were no differences between the two groups in terms of hospitalizations due to other major cardiovascular causes such as myocardial infarction or unstable angina. This is likely to due to the fact that patients with diastolic (vs systolic) heart failure have more viable myocardium, thereby increasing their risk for hospitalizations due to ischemic myocardial injury. In contrast, risk of hospitalizations due to noncardiovascular causes was higher in patients with diastolic heart failure.

One of the limitations of our study is that patients in our study were in normal sinus rhythm. Atrial fibrillation is common in older adults with heart failure and is associated with poor outcomes (34,35). In addition, we did not exclude patients with valvular heart disease. Only 56 of the 3984 patients 65 years and older (1.4%) had valvular heart disease identified as the primary cause of heart failure. A subgroup analysis excluding these patients demonstrated similar results on key outcomes.

Conclusion
The results of our study suggest that, among ambulatory older adults compared with an age-/sex-/race-matched cohort of systolic heart failure patients, those with diastolic heart failure have better survival. However, despite a lower risk for hospitalization due to heart failure, hospitalizations due to other cardiovascular causes were similar and noncardiovascular hospitalizations were higher. With the population aging, this will likely impose a burden on older adults and the health care system. Future studies should examine if more aggressive evaluation and management of comorbidities such as coronary artery disease, diabetes, or hypertension would reduce this burden.


   Acknowledgments
Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Dr. Ahmed is supported by a National Institute on Aging Research Career Development Award 1-K23-AG19211-01.

The Digitalis Investigation Group (DIG) study was conducted and supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) in collaboration with the DIG Investigators. This manuscript has been reviewed by NHLBI for scientific content and consistency of data interpretation with previous DIG publications, and significant comments have been incorporated prior to submission for publication.


   Footnotes
Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Decision Editor: John E. Morley, MB, BCh

Received August 27, 2004

Accepted October 12, 2004


   References
Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 

  1. Ahmed A, Roseman JM, Duxbury AS, et al. Correlates and outcomes of preserved left ventricular systolic function among older adults hospitalized with heart failure. Am Heart J. 2002;144:365-372.[Medline]
  2. Rich MW. Epidemiology, pathophysiology, and etiology of congestive heart failure in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1997;45:968-974.[Medline]
  3. Aronow WS, Ahn C, Kronzon I. Comparison of incidences of congestive heart failure in older African-Americans, Hispanics, and whites. Am J Cardiol. 1999;84:611-612, A619.[Medline]
  4. Senni M, Redfield MM. Heart failure with preserved systolic function. A different natural history? J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;38:1277-1282.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Pernenkil R, Vinson JM, Shah AS, et al. Course and prognosis in patients > or = 70 years of age with congestive heart failure and normal versus abnormal left ventricular ejection fraction. Am J Cardiol. 1997;79:216-219.[Medline]
  6. Gottdiener JS, McClelland RL, Marshall R, et al. Outcome of congestive heart failure in elderly persons: influence of left ventricular systolic function. The Cardiovascular Health Study. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:631-639.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. Vasan RS, Larson MG, Benjamin EJ, et al. Congestive heart failure in subjects with normal versus reduced left ventricular ejection fraction: prevalence and mortality in a population-based cohort. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999;33:1948-1955.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Lenzen MJ, Scholte op, Reimer WJ, Boersma E, et al. Differences between patients with a preserved and a depressed left ventricular function: a report from the EuroHeart Failure Survey. Eur Heart J. 2004;25:1214-1220.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  9. Hogg K, Swedberg K, McMurray J. Heart failure with preserved left ventricular systolic function; epidemiology, clinical characteristics, and prognosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;43:317-327.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Ibrahim SA, Burant CJ, Kent Kwoh C. Elderly hospitalized patients with diastolic heart failure: lack of gender and ethnic differences in 18-month mortality rates. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2003;58:56-59.
  11. Masoudi FA, Havranek EP, Smith G, et al. Gender, age, and heart failure with preserved left ventricular systolic function. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;41:217-223.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Rationale, design, implementation, and baseline characteristics of patients in the DIG trial: a large, simple, long-term trial to evaluate the effect of digitalis on mortality in heart failure. Control Clin Trials. 1996;17:77-97.[Medline]
  13. The effect of digoxin on mortality and morbidity in patients with heart failure. The Digitalis Investigation Group. N Engl J Med. 1997;336:525-533.
  14. Vasan RS, Levy D. Defining diastolic heart failure: a call for standardized diagnostic criteria. Circulation. 2000;101:2118-2121.[Free Full Text]
  15. SPSS for Windows, Release 13.0.3. SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL; 2005.
  16. Philbin EF, Rocco TA, Jr, Lindenmuth NW, et al. Systolic versus diastolic heart failure in community practice: clinical features, outcomes, and the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. Am J Med. 2000;109:605-613.[Medline]
  17. Malki Q, Sharma ND, Afzal A, et al. Clinical presentation, hospital length of stay, and readmission rate in patients with heart failure with preserved and decreased left ventricular systolic function. Clin Cardiol. 2002;25:149-152.[Medline]
  18. Dauterman KW, Go AS, Rowell R, et al. Congestive heart failure with preserved systolic function in a statewide sample of community hospitals. J Card Fail. 2001;7:221-228.[Medline]
  19. Cohen-Solal A, Desnos M, Delahaye F, et al. A national survey of heart failure in French hospitals. The Myocardiopathy and Heart Failure Working Group of the French Society of Cardiology, the National College of General Hospital Cardiologists and the French Geriatrics Society. Eur Heart J. 2000;21:763-769.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  20. Varela-Roman A, Gonzalez-Juanatey JR, Basante P, et al. Clinical characteristics and prognosis of hospitalised inpatients with heart failure and preserved or reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. Heart. 2002;88:249-254.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Tsutsui H, Tsuchihashi M, Takeshita A. Mortality and readmission of hospitalized patients with congestive heart failure and preserved versus depressed systolic function. Am J Cardiol. 2001;88:530-533.[Medline]
  22. Thomas JT, Kelly RF, Thomas SJ, et al. Utility of history, physical examination, electrocardiogram, and chest radiograph for differentiating normal from decreased systolic function in patients with heart failure. Am J Med. 2002;112:437-445.[Medline]
  23. Smith GL, Masoudi FA, Vaccarino V, et al. Outcomes in heart failure patients with preserved ejection fraction: mortality, readmission, and functional decline. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;41:1510-1518.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Gustafsson F, Torp-Pedersen C, Brendorp B, et al. Long-term survival in patients hospitalized with congestive heart failure: relation to preserved and reduced left ventricular systolic function. Eur Heart J. 2003;24:863-870.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  25. Varadarajan P, Pai RG. Prognosis of congestive heart failure in patients with normal versus reduced ejection fractions: results from a cohort of 2,258 hospitalized patients. J Card Fail. 2003;9:107-112.[Medline]
  26. Taffet GE, Teasdale TA, Bleyer AJ, et al. Survival of elderly men with congestive heart failure. Age Ageing. 1992;21:49-55.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  27. McDermott MM, Feinglass J, Lee PI, et al. Systolic function, readmission rates, and survival among consecutively hospitalized patients with congestive heart failure. Am Heart J. 1997;134:728-736.[Medline]
  28. McAlister FA, Teo KK, Taher M, et al. Insights into the contemporary epidemiology and outpatient management of congestive heart failure. Am Heart J. 1999;138:87-94.[Medline]
  29. Aronow WS, Ahn C, Kronzon I. Prognosis of congestive heart failure after prior myocardial infarction in older men and women with abnormal versus normal left ventricular ejection fraction. Am J Cardiol. 2000;85:1382-1384.[Medline]
  30. Kupari M, Lindroos M, Iivanainen AM, et al. Congestive heart failure in old age: prevalence, mechanisms and 4-year prognosis in the Helsinki Ageing Study. J Intern Med. 1997;241:387-394.[Medline]
  31. Senni M, Tribouilloy CM, Rodeheffer RJ, et al. Congestive heart failure in the community: a study of all incident cases in Olmsted County, Minnesota, in 1991. Circulation. 1998;98:2282-2289.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  32. Cortina A, Reguero J, Segovia E, et al. Prevalence of heart failure in Asturias (a region in the north of Spain). Am J Cardiol. 2001;87:1417-1419.[Medline]
  33. Cohn JN, Johnson G. Heart failure with normal ejection fraction. The V-HeFT Study. Veterans Administration Cooperative Study Group. Circulation. 1990;81:III48-III53.
  34. Ahmed A, Thornton P, Perry GJ, et al. Impact of atrial fibrillation on mortality and readmission in older adults hospitalized with heart failure. Eur J Heart Fail. 2004;6:421-426.[Medline]
  35. Aronow WS, Ahn C, Kronzon I. Prognosis of congestive heart failure after prior myocardial infarction in older persons with atrial fibrillation versus sinus rhythm. Am J Cardiol. 2001;87:224-225, A228–229.[Medline]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 CirculationHome page
A. Ahmed, M. W. Rich, J. L. Fleg, M. R. Zile, J. B. Young, D. W. Kitzman, T. E. Love, W. S. Aronow, K. F. Adams Jr, and M. Gheorghiade
Effects of Digoxin on Morbidity and Mortality in Diastolic Heart Failure: The Ancillary Digitalis Investigation Group Trial
Circulation, August 1, 2006; 114(5): 397 - 403.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Gerontol. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci.Home page
F. Formiga, J. Mascaro, and R. Pujol
Geriatric assessment in elderly heart failure patients.
J. Gerontol. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci., June 1, 2006; 61(6): 634 - 634.
[Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ahmed, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ahmed, A.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
All GSA journals The Gerontologist
Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences