The baseline patient characteristics of the three defined patient groups are outlined in Table 1. Across all groups, baseline clinical characteristics were comparable, except for the presence of aortic valve stenosis, where patients with ATTRwt had a significantly higher prevalence of this condition as compared to the control group (24% vs. 0%, p=0.03). The NAC disease stage was found to be similar between the two groups of patients with ATTRwt (p=0.53).
Table 1: Patient characteristics and medication at baseline.
VARIABLE
|
HFrEF (n=25)
|
ATTRwt (n=25)
|
ATTRwt & CTS (n=50)
|
P
|
Age, years
|
81.5 (4.2)
|
83.1 (4.7)
|
82.0 (4.9)
|
0.52
|
Male, n (%)
|
23 (92)
|
25 (100)
|
48 (96)
|
0.35
|
BMI
|
24.6 (3.3)
|
24.8 (2.4)
|
25.8 (2.9)
|
0.13
|
Hypertension, n (%)
|
15 (60)
|
14 (55)
|
27 (55)
|
0.26
|
Pacemaker, n (%)
|
11 (44)
|
8 (32)
|
11 (22)
|
0.17
|
Atrial fibrillation, n (%)
|
21 (84)
|
16 (64)
|
34 (68)
|
0.24
|
Diabetes mellitus, n (%)
|
24 (6)
|
3 (12)
|
11 (22)
|
0.70
|
Ischemic heart disease, n (%)
|
13 (52)
|
7 (28)
|
15 (30)
|
0.15
|
Aortic stenosis, n (%)
|
0 (0)
|
6 (24)
|
12 (24)
|
0.03*
|
NYHA, I/II/III-IV, n (%)
|
8/15/2 (32/60/8)
|
7/11/7 (28/44/28)
|
11/19/20 (22/38/40)
|
0.16
|
NAC-disease stage, n (%)
|
N/A
|
11/10/4 (44/40/16)
|
22/19/9 (44/38/18)
|
0.53
|
Medication
|
|
|
|
|
Loop diuretics, n (%)
|
18 (72)
|
16 (64)
|
38 (76)
|
0.55
|
Equivalent Furosemide diuretics dosage, mg
|
40 [40-80]
|
80 [40-80]
|
60 [40-100]
|
0.25
|
Thiazide, n (%)
|
1 (4)
|
4 (16)
|
7 (14)
|
0.35
|
Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, n (%)
|
13 (52)
|
3 (12)
|
6 (12)
|
<0.01*
|
Betablocker, n (%)
|
23 (92)
|
9 (36)
|
19 (36)
|
<0.01*
|
Metoprolol dosage, mg
|
100 [75-200]
|
50 [50-100]
|
50 [25-80]
|
0.01*
|
ACE-I/ARB, n (%)
|
21 (84)
|
12 (48)
|
18 (36)
|
<0.01*
|
Anti-coagulants*, n (%)
|
10 (40)
|
15 (60)
|
32 (64)
|
0.19
|
ACE, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor; *Anticoagulation= Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant /Warfarin; ARB, angiotensin receptor blockers; ATTRwt, wild-type transthyretin amyloidosis; BMI, body mass index; CTS, Carpal tunnel syndrome; eGFR; estimated glomerular filtration rate; HFrEF; Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction; IVS, intraventricular septum; NAC, national amyloid center; NT-proBNP, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide; NYHA, New York heart association functional class.
The pharmacological treatment differed as expected as a significantly higher proportion of patients with HFrEF received mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists compared to those with ATTRwt and the patients with ATTRwt and CTS (52% vs. 12% and 3%, p<0.01), beta blockers (92% vs. 38% and 9%, p<0.01), and angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) (84% vs. 48% and 36%, p<0.01). Patients with HFrEF received a significantly higher average dose of metoprolol compared to all patients with ATTRwt (100 mg vs 50 mg, p=0.01).
Biomarkers & echocardiographic characteristics
NT-proBNP and eGFR were comparable between groups, whereas troponin I (TnI) were significantly elevated in ATTRwt with CTS surgery as compared to HFrEF patients (60 ng/L [32-103] vs 26 [13-39] ng/L, p<0.01). As for echocardiographic parameters, patients with HFrEF and ATTRwt differed significantly with respect to LVEF (39% vs 45%, p=0.02), interventricular septum thickness (11 ± 2 vs 18 ± 3, p<0.01), and posterior wall thickness (10±3 mm vs 17±7 mm, p<0.01). Otherwise, cardiac structure and functional echocardiographic parameters were comparable between groups, as shown in Table 2.
Table 2: Biomarkers & echocardiographic characteristics
VARIABLE
|
HFrEF (n=25)
|
ATTRwt (n=25)
|
ATTRwt & CTS (n=50)
|
P
|
LVEF, %
|
39 (7.4)
|
47 (11.9)
|
45 (10.6)
|
0.02
|
LVGLS, %
|
10.6 (3.0)
|
10.1 (2.8)
|
10.2 (3.6)
|
0.87
|
IVS, mm
|
10.9 (2.1)
|
17.2 (3.9)
|
17.9 (3.2)
|
<0.01*
|
PW, mm
|
10.0 (2.6)
|
13.2 (3.7)
|
16.6 (7.4)
|
<0.01*
|
LAVI, mL/m2
|
40.8 (20.7)
|
47.6 (21.1)
|
46.4 (13.3)
|
0.33
|
E/A ratio
|
1.5 [1.0-2.4]
|
1.5 [0.9-2.6]
|
1.5 [0.9-2.5]
|
0.95
|
E/e’
|
11 (5.1)
|
13.9 (4.6)
|
14 (4.9)
|
0.23
|
RAVI, mL/m2
|
35.1 (16.9)
|
41.3 (17.6)
|
38.2 (15.7)
|
0.47
|
TAPSE, mm
|
17.5 (5.7)
|
173 (4.8)
|
16.1 (5.8)
|
0.53
|
TRPG, mmHg
|
24.9 (8.6)
|
27.7 (13.5)
|
26.6 (12.8)
|
0.75
|
Biomarkers
|
|
|
|
|
NT-proBNP, ng/L
|
1712 [625-3105]
|
2302 [1084- 5489]
|
1712 [1036-3825]
|
0.25
|
Troponin I, ng/L
|
26 [13-39]
|
57 [42-91]
|
60 [32-103]
|
<0.01*
|
eGFR,ml/min/1.73m2
|
58 (18.6)
|
62 (20.3)
|
60 (19.0)
|
0.15
|
Creatinine, mmol/L
|
101[87-141]
|
109 [82-118]
|
98 [91-104]
|
0.69
|
ATTRwt, wild-type transthyretin amyloidosis; CTS, Carpal tunnel syndrome; eGFR; estimated glomerular filtration rate; HFrEF; Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction; IVS, intraventricular septum thickness; LAVI, left atrial volume index; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; LVGLS; left ventricular global longitudinal strain (numerical values); NT-proBNP, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide; PW, posterior wall thickness; RAVI, right atrium volume index; TRPG, tricuspid regurgitation pressure gradient.
Physical work exposure characteristics
A self-reported scale of the degree strenuous physical exposure in the main occupation demonstrated a significantly higher degree of physical exposure in ATTRwt as compared to the age and gender matched HFrEF patients (Figure 1A). The highest reported scale value was reported among ATTRwt patients with previous CTS surgery. Patients with ATTRwt and no CTS had the longest time working in their primary occupation, but it was not statistically significant. (41 ± 15 years vs. 40 ± 12 years for ATTRwt and CTS, p= 0.12, vs. 36 ± 12 years, p=0.15)
The patients were grouped according to the DISCO-88 (figure 1B-D). In patients with ATTRwt and CTS, 38 (76%) patients had occupations classified with increased occupational physical exposure. Occupations with increased physical exposure consisted primarily of farmers, but also craft and trades related occupation and lastly machinery. The remaining twelve (24%) patients had occupations without physical exposure consisting of: Managers, technicians and associate professionals, clerical, services and sales workers. In patients with ATTRwt and no CTS, 15 (60%) had had occupations with increased physical exposure. Finally, in patients with HFrEF only 6 (24%) had had occupations with increased physical exposure. Therefore, demonstrating that individuals with ATTRwt and CTS were significantly more likely to have had occupations with increased physical exposure as compared to HFrEF patients (p<0.01). The occupations among subgroups varied greatly, but a notable proportion of all patients with ATTRwt had been working as farmers (23 (30%) vs. 1 (4%) patients, p=0.01).
Knee or hip replacement had been performed in 31 (41%) of patients with ATTRwt where 23 (46%) were patients with ATTRwt and CTS, eight (28%) patients with ATTRwt and without CTS, and only two (8%) patients with HFrEF. Surgery of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) was performed, in 10 (20%) patients with ATTRwt as eight (16%) patients with ATTRwt and CTS had LSS surgery performed in contrast to two (8%) patients with ATTRwt without CTS had LSS surgery performed. No patients with HFrEF had had LSS surgery. Spontaneous or low-energy trauma tendon ruptures (STR) were noted in twelve (16%) of patients with ATTRwt and CTS, four (16%) patients with ATTRwt without CTS, while one (4%) of patients with HFrEF was noted with STR (Figure 2).
Hand volumetry and orthopedic disorders
Upon examining hand volume, we did not register any difference in the number of individuals with left- or right-hand dominance across all three groups (p=0.43). Patients with ATTRwt had larger hands compared to those with HFrEF, with both the left and right hands being significantly larger (dominant hand (DH), 518±80 mL vs. 421±64 mL, p<0.01) (Figure 3)
Physical limitations, self-efficacy, and overall quality of life
The ATTRwt with CTS patients reported significantly lower KCCQ scores regarding physical limitation (44.8±21.7 vs. 52.8±18.9, p=0.01) as compared to the HFrEF patients (Figure 4). In addition, the self-efficacy KCCQ score was significantly lower in ATTRwt with CTS patients as compared to HFrEF patients (39.5±26.2 vs. 59.5±13.5, p<0.001) (Figure 4). Significant differences were found in multiple categories of the KCCQ between patients with ATTRwt and CTS and patients with HFrEF. Both overall summary score, and the clinical summary score, differed significantly between ATTRwt patients with CTS and the HFrEF group, respectively (49±19 vs. 61±14.4, p<0.01) and (50±18 vs. 63.2±18, p<0.01) (Figure 4). Although no statistical difference was found between patients with ATTRwt and no CTS and patients with HFrEF, the group with ATTRwt scored lower in all categories as well.