The term "heart failure" has withstood scrutiny and controversy for years. The viewpoint expressed by Kirsch and Levin focuses exclusively on public perception, and all of us involved in this specialty of cardiology have endured the cynicism of our lay friends who deride us for our interest in a condition that must be equivalent to death. Of equal importance, however, are our professional colleagues for whom the diagnosis of "heart failure" may lead to misunderstanding of pathophysiology, inappropriate therapy, and misguided perceptions of prognosis. Could any of these misleading interpretations of the diagnostic name be corrected by a change in terminology?
展开▼
