Microvascular dysfunction across organs in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: the PROSE-HFpEF case-control study

Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2025 Jul 30;24(1):310. doi: 10.1186/s12933-025-02850-1.

Abstract

Background: Systemic microvascular dysfunction is proposed as a key pathophysiological process in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). This study compared microvasculature across vascular beds in HFpEF patients and controls.

Methods: This prospective, case-control study included subjects ≥ 60years. HFpEF patients were diagnosed in an expert centre. Controls without HF were selected from the Maastricht Study, a population cohort enriched with diabetes mellitus. Microvascular assessments included central retinal venular/arteriolar calibres (CRVE/CRAE), flicker-light-induced retinal dilation, skin microvascular flowmotion and heat-induced hyperemia, and urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR). Group differences were evaluated with confounder-adjustments (age, sex, blood pressure, body mass index, diabetes, haemoglobin, smoking). Interactions with sex and diabetes mellitus were tested, and stratified analyses were performed when significant interactions were present.

Results: Microvascular assessments were performed in 138 HFpEF patients and 2140 controls. Microvascular differences were present between groups in all vascular beds. However, confounder-adjusted analyses attenuated differences. Confounder-adjusted analyses indicated that HFpEF patients versus controls still had retinal differences: narrower CRVE (- 8.1 μm, p = 0.008) and narrower CRAE trend (- 3.5 μm, p = 0.073), but similar flicker-light-induced retinal venular/arteriolar dilation (- 0.23%, p = 0.392; - 0.18%, p = 0.593, respectively). Confounder-adjusted analyses showed similar skin flowmotion measures (i.e. endothelial power - 0.09log(PU2), p = 0.181), and heat-induced hyperemia (0.02log(%), p = 0.605) between groups. UACR remained higher in HFpEF after confounder adjustments (0.56log(g/mol), p = < 0.001). Interaction analyses revealed that female patients had narrower CRVE versus controls (pint=0.023; females - 13.8 μm, p < 0.001; males 1.2 μm, p = 0.812). Patients had lower skin endothelial flowmotion power only when diabetes was co-occurring (pint=0.048; - 0.36 log(PU2 ), p = 0.014). UACR was higher in male and female patients versus controls, but was more pronounced in males (pint=0.002).

Conclusions: HFpEF patients showed microvascular differences versus controls across all vascular beds studied. However, confounder-adjusted differences remained significant in eyes and kidneys. The findings across multiple organs support that MVD is likely a more systemic process than only local MVD in HFpEF, and possible sex-specific underlying pathophysiology.

Registration: URL: https://onderzoekmetmensen.nl ; Unique identifier: NL7655.

Keywords: Diastolic heart failure; HFpEF; Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction; Microcirculation; Microvascular dysfunction; Pathophysiology; Sex differences.

MeSH terms

  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Albuminuria / physiopathology
  • Case-Control Studies
  • Female
  • Heart Failure* / diagnosis
  • Heart Failure* / physiopathology
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Microcirculation*
  • Microvessels* / physiopathology
  • Middle Aged
  • Netherlands / epidemiology
  • Prospective Studies
  • Retinal Vessels* / physiopathology
  • Risk Factors
  • Skin* / blood supply
  • Stroke Volume*
  • Vasodilation
  • Ventricular Function, Left*