Browsing by Author "Upadhya, Bharathi"

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Associations between physical activity, sedentary behaviour and left ventricular structure and function from the Echocardiographic Study of Latinos (ECHO-SOL).
    (Open heart, 2021-07) Berdy, Andrew E; Upadhya, Bharathi; Ponce, Sonia; Swett, Katrina; Stacey, Richard B; Kaplan, Robert; Vasquez, Priscilla M; Qi, Qibin; Schneiderman, Neil; Hurwitz, Barry E; Daviglus, Martha L; Kansal, Mayank; Evenson, Kelly R; Rodriguez, Carlos J
    The cross-sectional association between accelerometer-measured physical activity (PA), sedentary behaviour (SB) and cardiac structure and function is less well described. This study's primary aim was to compare echocardiographic measures of cardiac structure and function with accelerometer measured PA and SB. Participants included 1206 self-identified Hispanic/Latino men and women, age 45-74 years, from the Echocardiographic Study of Latinos. Standard echocardiographic measures included M-mode, two-dimensional, spectral, tissue Doppler and myocardial strain. Participants wore an Actical accelerometer at the hip for 1 week. The mean±SE age for the cohort was 56±0.4 years, 57% were women. Average moderate to vigorous PA (MVPA) was 21±1.1 min/day, light PA was 217±4.2 min/day and SB was 737±8.1 min/day. Both higher levels of light PA and MVPA (min/day) were associated with lower left ventricular (LV) mass index (LVMI)/end-diastolic volume and a lower E/e' ratio. Higher levels of MVPA (min/day) were associated with better right ventricular systolic function. Higher levels of SB were associated with increased LVMI. In a multivariable linear regression model adjusted for demographics and cardiovascular disease modifiable factors, every 10 additional min/day of light PA was associated with a 0.03 mL/m2 increase in left atrial volume index (LAVI) (p<0.01) and a 0.004 cm increase in tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (p<0.01); every 10 additional min/day of MVPA was associated with a 0.18 mL/m2 increase in LAVI (p<0.01) and a 0.24% improvement in global circumferential strain (p<0.01). Our findings highlight the potential positive association between the MVPA and light PA on cardiac structure and function.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: New approaches to diagnosis and management.
    (Clinical cardiology, 2020-02) Upadhya, Bharathi; Kitzman, Dalane W
    The majority of older patients who develop heart failure (HF), particularly older women, have a preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (HFpEF). Patients with HFpEF have severe symptoms of exercise intolerance, poor quality-of-life, frequent hospitalizations, and increased mortality. The prevalence of HFpEF is increasing and its prognosis is worsening. However, despite its importance, our understanding of the pathophysiology of HFpEF is incomplete, and drug development has proved immensely challenging. Currently, there are no universally accepted therapies that alter the clinical course of HFpEF. Originally viewed as a disorder due solely to abnormalities in left ventricular (LV) diastolic function, our understanding has evolved such that HFpEF is now understood as a systemic syndrome, involving multiple organ systems, likely triggered by inflammation and with an important contribution of aging, lifestyle factors, genetic predisposition, and multiple-comorbidities, features that are typical of a geriatric syndrome. HFpEF is usually progressive due to complex mechanisms of systemic and cardiac adaptation that vary over time, particularly with aging. In this review, we examine evolving data regarding HFpEF that may help explain past challenges and provide future directions to care patients with this highly prevalent, heterogeneous clinical syndrome.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Rehabilitation Intervention in Older Patients With Acute Heart Failure With Preserved Versus Reduced Ejection Fraction.
    (JACC. Heart failure, 2021-10) Mentz, Robert J; Whellan, David J; Reeves, Gordon R; Pastva, Amy M; Duncan, Pamela; Upadhya, Bharathi; Nelson, M Benjamin; Chen, Haiying; Reed, Shelby D; Rosenberg, Paul B; Bertoni, Alain G; O'Connor, Christopher M; Kitzman, Dalane W

    Objectives

    This study assessed for treatment interactions by ejection fraction (EF) subgroup (≥45% [heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF); vs <45% [heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF)]).

    Background

    The REHAB-HF trial showed that an early multidomain rehabilitation intervention improved physical function, frailty, quality-of-life, and depression in older patients hospitalized with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF).

    Methods

    Three-month outcomes were: Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), 6-min walk distance (6MWD), and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ). Six-month end points included all-cause rehospitalization and death and a global rank of death, all-cause rehospitalization, and SPPB. Prespecified significance level for interaction was P ≤ 0.1.

    Results

    Among 349 total participants, 185 (53%) had HFpEF and 164 (47%) had HFrEF. Compared with HFrEF, HFpEF participants were more often women (61% vs 43%) and had significantly worse baseline physical function, frailty, quality of life, and depression. Although interaction P values for 3-month outcomes were not significant, effect sizes were larger for HFpEF vs HFrEF: SPPB +1.9 (95% CI: 1.1-2.6) vs +1.1 (95% CI: 0.3-1.9); 6MWD +40 meters (95% CI: 9 meters-72 meters) vs +27 (95% CI: -6 meters to 59 meters); KCCQ +9 (2-16) vs +6 (-2 to 14). All-cause rehospitalization rate was nominally lower with intervention in HFpEF but not HFrEF [effect size 0.83 (95% CI: 0.64-1.09) vs 0.99 (95% CI: 0.74-1.33); interaction P = 0.40]. There were significantly greater treatment benefits in HFpEF vs HFrEF for all-cause death [interaction P = 0.08; intervention rate ratio 0.63 (95% CI: 0.25-1.61) vs 2.21 (95% CI: 0.78-6.25)], and the global rank end point (interaction P = 0.098) with benefit seen in HFpEF [probability index 0.59 (95% CI: 0.50-0.68)] but not HFrEF.

    Conclusions

    Among older patients hospitalized with ADHF, compared with HFrEF those with HFpEF had significantly worse impairments at baseline and may derive greater benefit from the intervention. (A Trial of Rehabilitation Therapy in Older Acute Heart Failure Patients [REHAB-HF]; NCT02196038).