Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 11, 2026

A Surgical Model of Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction in Tibetan Minipigs
Published on: February 18, 2022
Comparing diagnostic tools for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction across community and clinical cohorts
Luca Monzo1, Olivier Huttin1, Biykem Bozkurt2
1Université de Lorraine, Centre d'Investigations Cliniques Plurithématique 1433 and INSERM U1116 - DCAC, CHRU Nancy, and F-CRIN INI-CRCT (Cardiovascular and Renal Clinical Trialists), Nancy, France.
Background:
Diagnosing heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains challenging, particularly in older adults. While the Heart Failure Association (HFA)-PEFF and H2FPEF Scores offer structured diagnostic approaches, their clinical utility is still debated. This study aims to compare the diagnostic accuracy of HFpEF Scores versus inclusion criteria used in sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) trials, age-adjusted N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) thresholds and the universal definition of heart failure (HF).
Methods:
Diagnostic tools were assessed using sex-weighted and age-weighted propensity score adjustment in individuals aged 60-80 years from two established HFpEF cohorts (MEtabolic Road to DIAstolic Heart Failure (MEDIA), n=297; Karolinska-Rennes (KaRen), n=174) and two community-based cohorts without HF (Suivi Temporaire Annuel Non-Invasif de la Santé des Lorrains Assurés Sociaux (STANISLAS), n=461; Malmö, n=1030).
Results:
HFA-PEFF and H2FPEF Scores classified a large proportion of participants in both community-based cohorts (up to 81% in Malmö) and HFpEF cohorts (up to 75% in MEDIA) in the intermediate-likelihood category, requiring further diagnostic evaluation. Their diagnostic discrimination ranged from moderate to good. The universal definition of HF, SGLT2i trial criteria and NT-proBNP age-adjusted thresholds showed diagnostic performance comparable to HFA-PEFF Scores in the HFpEF cohorts and correctly excluded almost all individuals in the community cohorts. The universal definition of HF demonstrated a diagnostic discrimination higher than H2FPEF and comparable to HFA-PEFF, with the most balanced performance in terms of sensitivity and specificity.
Conclusions:
Using scores, a substantial proportion of HFpEF individuals fall into the intermediate likelihood category, highlighting diagnostic uncertainty. Simpler tools, such as the universal definition of HF, demonstrate comparable or even superior diagnostic and rule-out performances for HFpEF, emphasising the need for more practical and reliable approaches to HFpEF diagnosis.
Related Concept Videos
Heart Failure IV: Classification and Diagnostic Evaluation
Acute Coronary Syndrome III: Diagnostic Studies
Imaging Studies for Cardiovascular System II:Types of Echocardiography
Types of Echocardiography
Transthoracic Echocardiography (TTE)
TTE is the most common type of echocardiogram which involves placing a transducer on the patient's chest, emitting sound waves to create heart images. TTE is invaluable for evaluating the heart's size, structure, and motion, making it particularly useful for...
Aortic Regurgitation II: Clinical Features and Diagnostic Tests
Rheumatic Heart Disease II: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Studies
Mitral Regurgitation II: Clinical Features and Diagnostic Tests

