Browsing by Author "Ozden, Ozge"

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Heart failure with non-reduced ejection fraction: Epidemiology, pathophysiology, phenotypes, diagnosis and treatment approaches
    (2022) Cavusoglu, Yuksel; Celik, Ahmet; Altay, Hakan; Nalban, Sanem; Ozden, Ozge; Temizhan, Ahmet; Ural, Ditek; Unlu, Serkan; Yilmaz, Mehmet Birhan; Zoghi, Mehdi; 35969235
    Heart failure (HF) has been classified as reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) by the recent HF guidelines. In addition, HF with improved ejection fraction has been defined as a subgroup of HFrEF. In HFrEF, diagnostic workup and evidence-based pharmacological and device-based therapies have been well established. However, HFpEF, which comprises almost half of the HF population, represents significant uncertainties regarding its pathophysiology, clinical phenotypes, diagnosis and treatment. Diagnostic criteria of HFpEF have been changed a few times over the years and still remained a matter of debate. New paradigms including a prominent role of co-morbidities. inflammation, endothelial dysfunction have been proposed in its pathophysiology. As a complex, multifactorial syndrome HFpEF consists of many overlapping clinical and hemodynamic phenotypes. In contrast to HFrEF, clinical outcomes of HFpEF have not improved over the last decades due to lack of proven effective therapies. Although HFrEF and HFpEF have different clinical spectrums and proposed pathophysiological mechanisms, there is no clear defining syndrome postulated for HFmrEF. Clinical characteristics and risk factors of HFmrEF overlap with HFrEF and HFpEF. HFmrEF is also referred as a transitional zone for dynamic temporal changes in EF. So. HFpEF and HFmrEF, both namely HF with non-reduced ejection fraction (HF-NEF), have some challenges in the management of HF. The purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive review including epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical presentation and phenotypes of HF-NEF and to guide clinicians for the diagnosis and therapeutic approaches based on the available data in the literature.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Real-World Data on the Incidence of Stroke, Myocardial Infarction, and Mortality Among Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Patients in Türkiye: New Oral Anticoagulants-TURKey Study
    (2023) Unlu, Serkan; Altay, Servet; Gedikli, Omer; Ozden, Ozge; Canpolat, Ugur; Askin, Lutfu; Yayla, Cagri; Yanik, Ahmet; Cakmak, Huseyin Altug; Sinan, Umit Yasar; Besli, Feyzullah; Sahin, Mahmut; Pehlivanoglu, Seckin; 0000-0002-4837-7099; 37888785; A-7003-2017
    Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is strongly associated with an increased risk of isch- emic events. Anticoagulation focuses on reducing the risk of embolism. Guideline recom- mended CHA2DS2-VASc scoring system is most widely used; however, different scoring systems do exist. Thus, we sought to assess the impact of anticoagulant treatment and different scoring systems on the development of stroke, myocardial infarction, and allcause mortality in patients with nonvalvular AF. Methods: The present study was designed as a prospective cohort study. The enrollment of the patients was conducted between August 1, 2015, and January 1, 2016. The followup period was defined as the time from enrollment to the end of April 1, 2017, which also provided at least 12 months of prospective follow-up for each patient. Results: A total of 1807 patients with AF were enrolled. During the follow-up, 2.7% (48) of patients had stroke, 0.8% (14) had myocardial infarction, and 7.5% (136) died. The antico- agulation and risk factors in AF (ATRIA) score had a better accuracy for the prediction of stroke compared to other scoring systems (0.729, 95% CI, 0.708-0.750, P < .05). Patients under low -dose rivaroxaban treatment had significantly worse survival (logrankP < .001). Age, CHA2DS2-VASc score, R2CHADS2 score, ATRIA score, chronic heart failure, prior stroke, and being under low -dose rivaroxaban treatment were independent predictors of clinical endpoint (P < .001). Conclusion: Low -dose rivaroxaban treatment was independently and strongly associated with the combined clinical endpoint. Furthermore, the ATRIA score proved to be a stronger predictor of stroke in the Turkish population.