Back

Multivariate Echocardiographic Phenotyping of Hypertensive Heart Failure Using Unsupervised Machine Learning: A Pilot Study

Onyemachi, J.; Maduka, C. J.

2026-06-23 cardiovascular medicine
10.64898/2026.06.20.26356124 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background Heart failure in hypertensive patients is heterogeneous and poorly captured by traditional left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) based classification. Multivariate echocardiographic data combined with unsupervised machine learning may provide a more precise phenotypic characterization. This pilot study evaluated the feasibility of unsupervised clustering of routine transthoracic echocardiographic data to identify phenotypic subgroups of hypertensive heart failure. Methods This retrospective pilot study analyzed transthoracic echocardiography reports from hypertensive patients with clinical heart failure. After data cleaning and exclusion of incomplete records, 102 patients with 11 echocardiographic variables were included. Variables describing left ventricular geometry, systolic function, and diastolic performance were standardized and subjected to K-means clustering. Optimal cluster number was determined using the elbow method and silhouette analysis. Cluster characteristics were assessed using descriptive statistics and Kruskal Wallis testing. Concordance with LVEF based heart failure categories was evaluated. Results Three distinct echocardiographic phenotypes were identified. Cluster 0 (n = 50) demonstrated preserved LVEF with concentric remodeling, consistent with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) phenotype. Cluster 1 (n = 37) showed marked ventricular dilation and reduced systolic function, consistent with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Cluster 2 (n = 15) exhibited concentric hypertrophy with intermediate LVEF, consistent with heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) like phenotype. All echocardiographic variables differed significantly across clusters (p < 0.001). While Cluster 0 showed strong concordance with HFpEF (96%), Clusters 1 and 2 demonstrated substantial overlap across LVEF categories, indicating partial discordance between structural phenotypes and LVEF based classification. Conclusion Application of unsupervised machine learning to routine echocardiographic data identifies distinct heart failure phenotypes in hypertensive patients. These phenotypes demonstrate significant structural heterogeneity beyond LVEF based classification, supporting the utility of data-driven approaches for refined cardiac phenotyping. This pilot study provides a foundation for larger prospective studies.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of the American Heart Association
119 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
17.2%
2
The American Journal of Cardiology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.1%
3
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
49 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
10.2%
4
American Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology
32 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.7%
5
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.2%
50% of probability mass above
6
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 29%
6.2%
7
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 25%
4.8%
8
Open Heart
19 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.8%
9
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.9%
10
Heart
10 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.0%
11
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
12
Circulation: Genomic and Precision Medicine
42 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.7%
13
European Heart Journal - Digital Health
15 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.6%
14
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.6%
15
European Journal of Preventive Cardiology
13 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.3%
16
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 11%
0.9%
17
European Heart Journal
16 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.8%
18
Journal of Molecular and Cellular Cardiology
39 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%
19
Physiological Measurement
12 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.6%
20
Circulation
66 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%
21
Frontiers in Neurology
91 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.6%