Background: Diagnosis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is challenging in euvolemic patients with dyspnea, and no evidence-based criteria are available. We sought to develop and then validate noninvasive diagnostic criteria that could be used to estimate the likelihood that HFpEF is present among patients with unexplained dyspnea to guide further testing. Methods: Consecutive patients with unexplained dyspnea referred for invasive hemodynamic exercise testing were retrospectively evaluated. Diagnosis of HFpEF (case) or noncardiac dyspnea (control) was ascertained by invasive hemodynamic exercise testing. Logistic regression was performed to evaluate the ability of clinical findings to discriminate cases from controls. A scoring system was developed and then validated in a separate test cohort. Results: The derivation cohort included 414 consecutive patients (267 cases with HFpEF and 147 controls; HFpEF prevalence, 64%). The test cohort included 100 consecutive patients (61 with HFpEF; prevalence, 61%). Obesity, atrial fibrillation, age >60 years, treatment with ≥2 antihypertensives, echocardiographic E/e’ ratio >9, and echocardiographic pulmonary artery systolic pressure >35 mm Hg were selected as the final set of predictive variables. A weighted score based on these 6 variables was used to create a composite score (H ₂ FPEF score) ranging from 0 to 9. The odds of HFpEF doubled for each 1-unit score increase (odds ratio, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.74–2.30; P <0.0001), with an area under the curve of 0.841 ( P <0.0001). The H ₂ FPEF score was superior to a currently used algorithm based on expert consensus (increase in area under the curve of 0.169; 95% CI, 0.120–0.217; P <0.0001). Performance in the independent test cohort was maintained (area under the curve, 0.886; P <0.0001). Conclusions: The H ₂ FPEF score, which relies on simple clinical characteristics and echocardiography, enables discrimination of HFpEF from noncardiac causes of dyspnea and can assist in determination of the need for further diagnostic testing in the evaluation of patients with unexplained exertional dyspnea.

Background: Heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a heterogeneous syndrome. Phenotyping patients into pathophysiologically homogeneous groups may enable better targeting of treatment. Obesity is common in HFpEF and has many cardiovascular effects, suggesting that it may be a viable candidate for phenotyping. We compared cardiovascular structure, function, and reserve capacity in subjects with obese HFpEF, those with nonobese HFpEF, and control subjects. Methods: Subjects with obese HFpEF (body mass index ≥35 kg/m ² ; n=99), nonobese HFpEF (body mass index <30 kg/m ² ; n=96), and nonobese control subjects free of HF (n=71) underwent detailed clinical assessment, echocardiography, and invasive hemodynamic exercise testing. Results: Compared with both subjects with nonobese HFpEF and control subjects, subjects with obese HFpEF displayed increased plasma volume (3907 mL [3563–4333 mL] versus 2772 mL [2555–3133 mL], and 2680 mL [2380–3006 mL]; P <0.0001), more concentric left ventricular remodeling, greater right ventricular dilatation (base, 34±7 versus 31±6 and 30±6 mm, P =0.0005; length, 66±7 versus 61±7 and 61±7 mm, P <0.0001), more right ventricular dysfunction, increased epicardial fat thickness (10±2 versus 7±2 and 6±2 mm; P <0.0001), and greater total epicardial heart volume (945 mL [831–1105 mL] versus 797 mL [643–979 mL] and 632 mL [517–768 mL]; P <0.0001), despite lower N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels. Pulmonary capillary wedge pressure was correlated with body mass and plasma volume in obese HFpEF ( r =0.22 and 0.27, both P <0.05) but not in nonobese HFpEF ( P ≥0.3). The increase in heart volumes in obese HFpEF was associated with greater pericardial restraint and heightened ventricular interdependence, reflected by increased ratio of right- to left-sided heart filling pressures (0.64±0.17 versus 0.56±0.19 and 0.53±0.20; P =0.0004), higher pulmonary venous pressure relative to left ventricular transmural pressure, and greater left ventricular eccentricity index (1.10±0.19 versus 0.99±0.06 and 0.97±0.12; P <0.0001). Interdependence was enhanced as pulmonary artery pressure load increased ( P for interaction <0.05). Compared with those with nonobese HFpEF and control subjects, obese patients with HFpEF displayed worse exercise capacity (peak oxygen consumption, 7.7±2.3 versus 10.0±3.4 and12.9±4.0 mL/min·kg; P <0.0001), higher biventricular filling pressures with exercise, and depressed pulmonary artery vasodilator reserve. Conclusions: Obesity-related HFpEF is a genuine form of cardiac failure and a clinically relevant phenotype that may require specific treatments.

Background: Diagnosis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is challenging and relies largely on demonstration of elevated cardiac filling pressures (pulmonary capillary wedge pressure). Current guidelines recommend use of natriuretic peptides (N-terminal pro-B type natriuretic peptide) and rest/exercise echocardiography (E/e′ ratio) to make this determination. Data to support this practice are conflicting. Methods: Simultaneous echocardiographic-catheterization studies were prospectively conducted at rest and during exercise in subjects with invasively proven HFpEF (n=50) and participants with dyspnea but no identifiable cardiac pathology (n=24). Results: N-Terminal pro-B type natriuretic peptide levels were below the level considered to exclude disease (≤125 pg/mL) in 18% of subjects with HFpEF. E/e′ ratio was correlated with directly measured pulmonary capillary wedge pressure at rest ( r =0.63, P <0.0001) and during exercise ( r =0.57, P 14) improved sensitivity (to 90%) and thus negative predictive value, but decreased specificity (71%). Conclusions: Currently proposed HFpEF diagnostic guidelines on the basis of resting data are poorly sensitive. Adding exercise E/e′ data improves sensitivity and negative predictive value but compromises specificity, suggesting that exercise echocardiography may help rule out HFpEF. These results question the accuracy of current approaches to exclude HFpEF on the basis of resting data alone and reinforce the value of exercise testing using invasive and noninvasive hemodynamic assessments to definitively confirm or refute the diagnosis of HFpEF. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique Identifier: NCT01418248.

Obesity and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) represent two intermingling epidemics driving perhaps the greatest unmet health problem in cardiovascular medicine in the 21st century. Many patients with HFpEF are either overweight or obese, and recent data have shown that increased body fat and its attendant metabolic sequelae have widespread, protean effects systemically and on the cardiovascular system leading to symptomatic HFpEF. The paucity of effective therapies in HFpEF underscores the importance of understanding the distinct pathophysiological mechanisms of obese HFpEF to develop novel therapies. In this review, we summarize the current understanding of the cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular features of the obese phenotype of HFpEF, how increased adiposity might pathophysiologically contribute to the phenotype, and how these processes might be targeted therapeutically.