Hemodynamic force assessment by cardiovascular magnetic resonance in HFpEF: A case-control substudy from the HFpEF stress trial

Sören J. Backhaus, Harun Uzun, Simon F. Rösel, Alexander Schulz, Torben Lange, Richard J. Crawley, Ruben Evertz, Gerd Hasenfuß, Andreas Schuster*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

7 Citations (Scopus)


Background: The diagnosis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains challenging. Exercise-stress testing is recommended in case of uncertainty; however, this approach is time-consuming and costly. Since preserved EF does not represent normal systolic function, we hypothesized comprehensive cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) assessment of cardiac hemodynamic forces (HDF) may identify functional abnormalities in HFpEF. Methods: The HFpEF Stress Trial (DZHK-17; Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03260621) prospectively recruited 75 patients with exertional dyspnea, preserved EF (≥50%) and signs of diastolic dysfunction (E/e’ ≥8) on echocardiography. Patients underwent rest and exercise-stress right heart catheterisation, echocardiography and CMR. The final study cohort consisted of 68 patients (HFpEF n = 34 and non-cardiac dyspnea n = 34 according to pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP)). HDF assessment included left ventricular (LV) longitudinal, systolic peak and impulse, systolic/diastolic transition, E-wave deceleration as well as A-wave acceleration forces. Follow-up after 24 months evaluated cardiovascular mortality and hospitalisation (CVH) – only two patients were lost to follow-up. Findings: HDF assessment revealed impairment of LV longitudinal function in patients with HFpEF compared to non-cardiac dyspnoea (15.8% vs. 18.3%, p = 0.035), attributable to impairment of systolic peak (38.6% vs 51.6%, p = 0.003) and impulse (20.8% vs. 24.5%, p = 0.009) forces as well as late diastolic filling (−3.8% vs −5.4%, p = 0.029). Early diastolic filling was impaired in HFpEF patients identified at rest compared with patients identified during stress only (7.7% vs. 9.9%, p = 0.004). Impaired systolic peak was associated with CVH (HR 0.95, p = 0.016), and was superior to LV global longitudinal strain assessment in prediction of CVH (AUC 0.76 vs. 0.61, p = 0.048). Interpretation: Assessment of HDF indicates impairment of LV systolic ejection force in HFpEF which is associated with cardiovascular events. Funding: German Centre for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK).

Original languageEnglish
Article number104334
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2022


  • Cardiovascular magnetic resonance
  • Deformation imaging
  • Hemodynamic force
  • HFpEF
  • Strain


Dive into the research topics of 'Hemodynamic force assessment by cardiovascular magnetic resonance in HFpEF: A case-control substudy from the HFpEF stress trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this