Epidemiology and one-year outcomes in patients with chronic heart failure and preserved, mid-range and reduced ejection fraction: an analysis of the ESC Heart Failure Long-Term Registry

No effects of cardiac resynchronization therapy and right ventricular pacing on the right ventricle in patients with heart failure and atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

The right ventricle (RV) function is crucial in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), especially in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Aims. To assess the RV structure and function in patients with HFrEF, permanent atrial fibrillation (AF), cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and RV pacing (RVp) with two- and three-dimensional echocardiography. Methods. Patients with ischemic HFrEF (NYHA II-III; LVEF ≤40%) were enrolled. The studied groups were: sinus rhythm (SR, control); AF and no implanted devices - AF/0; AF and CRT - AF/CRT; AF and RVp - AF/RVp. Two- and three-dimensional echocardiographic parameters of RV structure and function were analyzed in study groups. Results. The study included a group of 126 patients: n = 32 with SR, n = 28 with AF/0, n = 25 with AF/CRT and n = 41 with AF/RVp. Results were worse in AF groups than in SR: right ventricular ejection fraction, %, mean (SD): SR - 48.2 (7.5), AF/0 - 36.5 (6.5), AF/CRT - 38.3 (7.6), AF/RVp - 37.1 (7.7), p < .001. Other parameters lower in AF groups than in SR were: RV end-systolic volume, longitudinal strain of the free wall and tricuspid lateral annular systolic velocity. There were no differences between groups with AF and CRT and RV pacing in other analyzed parameters between AF groups and SR. Conclusions. In heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction and atrial fibrillation right ventricular pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy were not associated with modified right ventricular function. Further prospective studies are needed to evaluate prognostic significance of these results.

Non-insulin antihyperglycaemic drugs and heart failure: an overview of current evidence from randomized controlled trials

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is highly prevalent in the general population and especially in patients with heart failure (HF). It is not only a risk factor for incident HF, but is also associated with worse outcomes in prevalent HF. Therefore, antihyperglycaemic management in patients at risk of or with established HF is of importance to reduce morbidity/mortality. Following revision of the drug approval process in 2008 by the Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency, several cardiovascular outcome trials on antihyperglycaemic drugs have recently investigated HF endpoints. Signals of harm in terms of increased risk of HF have been identified for thiazolidinediones and the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor saxagliptin, and therefore, these drugs are not currently recommended in HF. Sulfonylureas also have an unfavourable safety profile and should be avoided in patients at increased risk of/with HF. Observational studies have assessed the use of metformin in patients with HF, showing potential safety and potential survival/morbidity benefits. Overall use of glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists has not been linked with any clear benefit in terms of HF outcomes. Sodium-glucose cotransporter protein 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) have consistently shown to reduce risk of HF-related outcomes in T2DM with and without HF and are thus currently recommended to lower risk of HF hospitalization in T2DM. Recent findings from the DAPA-HF trial support the use of dapagliflozin in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction and, should ongoing trials with empagliflozin, sotagliflozin, and canagliflozin prove efficacy, will pave the way for SGLT2i as HF treatment regardless of T2DM.

The Treatment of Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction

BACKGROUND

Chronic congestive heart failure is a common condition that, if untreated, markedly impairs the quality of life and is associated with a high risk of recurrent hospitalization and death.

METHODS

This review is based on articles retrieved by a selective search in PubMed, as well as on relevant guidelines.

RESULTS

Evidence-based treatment options are available only for congestive heart failure with a low ejection fraction. Pharma - cotherapy is based on neurohumoral inhibition of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system and the adrenergic system. The prognosis of patients with this condition has been further improved recently through the introduction of combined angiotensin receptor antagonists and neprilysin inhibitors. Modern implantable devices are a further component of treatment. Implantable defibrillators and special pacemakers for cardiac resynchronization are well established; the utility of alternative devices (baroreflex modulation or cardiac contractility modulation) needs to be investigated in further studies. It was recently shown that the catheter-based treatment of secondary mitral regurgitation with a MitraClip improves the outcome of selected patients.

CONCLUSION

The treatment of chronic systolic heart failure as recommended in the relevant guidelines, with drugs and implanted devices if indicated, can significantly improve the clinical outcome.

Association between atrial fibrillation and heart failure with different ejection fraction categories and its influence on outcomes

Background: The important role of atrial fibrillation (AF) in different types of heart failure (HF) according to ejection fraction (EF) is much less explored. In this study, we compared AF in HF with preserved (HFpEF), mid-range (HFmrEF) and reduced (HFrEF) EF with regard to prevalence, association, and prognostic role.Methods and results: A total of 405 inpatients with HF between February 2014 and June 2016 were prospectively analysed in this study. Patients were divided into three groups: HFrEF group (n = 109, 26.9%), HFmrEF group (n = 94, 23.2%), and HFpEF group (n = 202, 49.8%). There was a higher prevalence of AF in patients in the HFpEF and HFmrEF groups than in patients in the HFrEF. Several baseline variables were found to be independently associated with AF, including age, coronary heart disease, heart rate, left atrial diameter, and left ventricular (LV) end-diastolic diameter, regardless of EF category after multivariable adjustment. In addition, AF was found to be a more powerful predictor of all-cause mortality, HF rehospitalisation, and the composite event of all-cause mortality or rehospitalisation in HFpEF and HFmrEF patients, but not in HFrEF patients.Conclusions: HFmrEF resembled HFpEF rather than HFrEF with regard to both a higher prevalence of AF and a greater risk of all-cause mortality, HF rehospitalisation, and the composite event of all-cause mortality or rehospitalisation.

Effects of neurohormonal antagonists on blood pressure in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF): a systematic review protocol

BACKGROUND

Several cardiovascular pathologies cause heart failure. Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is deteriorated by neurohormonal activation, so neurohormonal antagonists are recommended in HFrEF patients. They improve morbidity, mortality, and quality of life and reduce hospital admissions. Heart failure treatment guidelines recommend achieving target doses of those drugs. However, many clinicians prescribe suboptimal doses for the fear of inducing hypotension. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to understand whether it is still beneficial to uptitrate the doses of those drugs even if the patient is at the risk of developing hypotension.

METHODS

The primary outcome is symptomatic or asymptomatic hypotension in patients on neurohormonal antagonist drugs for HFrEF. Secondary outcomes are blood pressure reduction, New Yok Heart Association functional class deterioration, non-fatal cardiovascular events, cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalizations, and adverse events. Randomized controlled trials involving adults with HFrEF will be included. Comprehensive literature search will be done in MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, WHO Global Index Medicus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. MEDLINE will be searched first using controlled vocabulary and free text terms and then adapted to other databases. Linear and nonlinear dose-response meta-analyses will be conducted. Publication bias and statistical heterogeneity will be tested by Egger's regression and Cochran's Q tests, respectively. Sensitivity, subgroup, and meta-regression analyses will be performed. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach will be used to judge the quality of evidence.

DISCUSSION

This systematic review and meta-analysis will provide information about the risk of hypotension in patients on neurohormonal antagonist drugs for HFrEF. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. The implications for further research will be discussed.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019140307.

Diagnosis and Management of Patients with Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF): Current Perspectives and Recommendations

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a major global public health problem. Diagnosis of HFpEF is still challenging and built based on the comprehensive echocardiographic analysis. Currently, there are no universally accepted therapies that alter the clinical course of HFpEF. This review attempts to summarize the current advances in the diagnosis of HFpEF and provide future directions of the patients´ management with this very widespread, heterogeneous clinical syndrome.

Secondary valve regurgitation in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction, and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

Secondary mitral regurgitation and secondary tricuspid regurgitation due to heart failure (HF) remain challenging in almost every aspect: increasing prevalence, poor prognosis, notoriously elusive in diagnosis, and complexity of therapeutic management. Recently, defined HF subgroups according to three ejection fraction (EF) ranges (reduced, mid-range, and preserved) have stimulated a structured understanding of the HF syndrome but the role of secondary valve regurgitation (SVR) across the spectrum of EF remains undefined. This review expands this structured understanding by consolidating the underlying phenotype of myocardial impairment with each type of SVR. Specifically, the current understanding, epidemiological considerations, impact, public health burden, mechanisms, and treatment options of SVR are discussed separately for each lesion across the HF spectrum. Furthermore, this review identifies important gaps in knowledge, future directions for research, and provides potential solutions for diagnosis and treatment. Mastering the challenge of SVR requires a multidisciplinary collaborative effort, both, in clinical practice and scientific approach to optimize patient outcomes.

Mildly symptomatic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: diagnostic and therapeutic considerations

AIMS

Whereas up to about half of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) report no or only mild symptoms and are considered as clinically stable, the progressive nature of HFrEF, often silent, renders clinical stability a misleading situation, especially if disease progression is unrecognized. We highlight the challenges in the definition of clinical stability and mild symptomatic status in HFrEF, outline clinical characteristics and available diagnostic tools, and discuss evidence and gaps in the current guidelines for the management of these patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This is a state-of-the-art review that focuses on clinical, diagnostic, and therapeutic aspects in mildly symptomatic HFrEF patients; summarizes the challenges; and proposes directions for future research in this group of patients. The New York Heart Association classification has been widely used as a measure of prognosis in HFrEF, but it lacks objectivity and reproducibility in terms of symptoms assessment. The definition of clinical stability as described in current guidelines is vague and may often lead to underdiagnosis of disease progression in patients who appear to be 'stable' but in fact are at an increased risk of clinical worsening, hospitalization, or death. Although an increasing number of clinical trials proved that the efficacy of HFrEF therapies was unrelated to the symptomatic status of patients and led to their implementation early in the course of the disease, clinical inertia in terms of under-prescription or underdosing of guideline-recommended medications in mildly symptomatic HFrEF patients is still a challenging issue to deal with.

CONCLUSIONS

Mildly symptomatic status in a patient with HFrEF is very frequent; it should not be ignored and should not be regarded as an index of disease stability. The application of risk scores designed to predict mortality and mode of death should be engaged among mildly symptomatic patients, not only to identify the most suitable HF candidates for cardioverter defibrillator implantation, but also to identify patients who might benefit from early intensification of medical treatment before the implementation of more interventional approaches.

Temporal Trends in Prevalence and Prognostic Implications of Comorbidities Among Patients With Acute Decompensated Heart Failure: The ARIC Study Community Surveillance

BACKGROUND

Patients with heart failure (HF) have multiple coexisting comorbidities. The temporal trends in the burden of comorbidities and associated risk of mortality among patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) are not well established.

METHODS

HF-related hospitalizations were sampled by stratified design from 4 US areas in 2005 to 2014 by the community surveillance component of the ARIC study (Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities). Acute decompensated HF was classified by standardized physician review and a previously validated algorithm. An ejection fraction <50% was considered HFrEF. A total of 15 comorbidities were abstracted from the medical record. Mortality outcomes were ascertained for up to 1-year postadmission by linking hospital records with death files.

RESULTS

A total of 5460 hospitalizations (24 937 weighted hospitalizations) classified as acute decompensated HF had available ejection fraction data (53% female, 68% white, 53% HFrEF, 47% HFpEF). The average number of comorbidities was higher for patients with HFpEF versus HFrEF, both for women (5.53 versus 4.94; P<0.0001) and men (5.20 versus 4.82; P<0.0001). There was a significant temporal increase in the overall burden of comorbidities, both for patients with HFpEF (women: 5.17 in 2005-2009 to 5.87 in 2010-2013; men: 4.94 in 2005-2009 and 5.45 in 2010-2013) and HFrEF (women: 4.78 in 2005-2009 to 5.14 in 2010-2013; men: 4.62 in 2005-2009 and 5.06 in 2010-2013; P-trend<0.0001 for all). Higher comorbidity burden was significantly associated with higher adjusted risk of 1-year mortality, with a stronger association noted for HFpEF (hazard ratio [HR] per 1 higher comorbidity, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.14-1.25] versus HFrEF (HR, 1.10 [95% CI, 1.05-1.14]; P for interaction by HF type=0.02). The associated mortality risk per 1 higher comorbidity also increased significantly over time for patients with HFpEF and HFrEF, as well (P for interaction with time=0.002 and 0.02, respectively) Conclusions: The burden of comorbidities among hospitalized patients with acute decompensated HFpEF and HFrEF has increased over time, as has its associated mortality risk. Higher burden of comorbidities is associated with higher risk of mortality, with a stronger association noted among patients with HFpEF versus HFrEF.

Heart Failure in Patients Undergoing Elective and Emergency Noncardiac Surgery: Still a Poorly Addressed Risk Factor

BACKGROUND

Noncardiac surgery is increasingly offered to an older, more comorbid population. The aim was to characterize patients with the diagnosis of heart failure (HF) undergoing elective and emergency noncardiac surgery in a broad, contemporary Swedish cohort, and to assess the short- and long-term mortality in patients with HF as compared with patients without HF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Data from 200,638 and 97,129 patients undergoing elective and emergency surgical procedures at 23 Swedish university, county, and district hospitals during 2007 to 2013 were analyzed through linkage of the surgical Orbit Database to the National Patient and the Cause of Death registries. In total 7212 patients (3.6%) with a diagnosis of HF before surgery underwent elective and 6455 patients (6.6%) underwent emergency surgery. Patients with HF were older had more comorbidities, and higher mortality than patients without HF. Crude and adjusted risk ratios for 30-day mortality after elective surgery were 5.36 (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.67-6.16) and 1.79 (95% CI 1.50-2.14) (adjusted for comorbidities, surgical risk level, age, and sex). Corresponding data for emergency surgery was 3.84 (95% CI 3.58-4.12) and 1.48 (95% CI 1.31-1.62). Mortality in patients with HF after elective surgery at 30 days, 90 days, and 1 year was 3.2%, 6.5%, and 16.2% and after emergency surgery it was 13.7%, 22.4%, and 39.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with HF undergoing elective or emergency noncardiac surgery in a modern surgical setting have a substantial mortality risk and HF is both a risk factor and a strong marker for increasd risk. The reasons for the high mortality are not well-understood and warrant further attention.

Estimated Population Prevalence of Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction in Spain, According to DAPA-HF Study Criteria

Heart failure (HF) is one of the main causes of morbidity, mortality, and high healthcare costs. Dapagliflozin, a sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor, reduced cardiovascular mortality and hospitalization for HF compared to placebo in patients with chronic HF, and reduced ejection fraction (EF) in the Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in Heart Failure (DAPA-HF) study. Our aim was to estimate the number of patients with DAPA-HF characteristics in Spain. Our literature review identified epidemiological studies whose objective was to quantify the prevalence of HF and its comorbidities in Spain. We estimated the prevalence of HF with reduced EF, of New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class II-IV, and with a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) ≥ 30 mL/min/1.73 m². In this population, we analysed the prevalence of diabetes using data from the REDINSCOR (Spanish Network for Heart Failure) registry. Our estimations indicate there are 594,684 patients ≥45 years old with HF in Spain (2.6% of this population age group), of which 52.4%, 84.0%, and 93.9% have reduced EF, are NYHA II-IV, and have a GFR ≥ 30 mL/min/1.73 m², respectively. By our calculations, approximately 245,789 Spanish patients would meet the DAPA-HF patient profile, and therefore could benefit from the protective cardiovascular effects of dapagliflozin.

Is heart failure misdiagnosed in hospitalized patients with preserved ejection fraction? From the European Society of Cardiology - Heart Failure Association EURObservational Research Programme Heart Failure Long-Term Registry

Aims

In hospitalized patients with a clinical diagnosis of acute heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), the aims of this study were (i) to assess the proportion meeting the 2016 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) HFpEF criteria and (ii) to compare patients with restrictive/pseudonormal mitral inflow pattern (MIP) vs. patients with MIP other than restrictive/pseudonormal.

Methods and results

We included hospitalized participants of the ESC‐Heart Failure Association (HFA) EURObservational Research Programme (EORP) HF Long‐Term Registry who had echocardiogram with ejection fraction (EF) ≥ 50% during index hospitalization. As no data on e', E/e' and left ventricular (LV) mass index were gathered in the registry, the 2016 ESC HFpEF definition was modified as follows: elevated B‐type natriuretic peptide (BNP) (≥100 pg/mL for acute HF) and/or N‐terminal pro‐BNP (≥300 pg/mL) and at least one of the echocardiographic criteria: (i) presence of LV hypertrophy (yes/no), (ii) left atrial volume index (LAVI) of >34 mL/m²), or (iii) restrictive/pseudonormal MIP. Next, all patients were divided into four groups: (i) patients with restrictive/pseudonormal MIP on echocardiography [i.e. with presumably elevated left atrial (LA) pressure], (ii) patients with MIP other than restrictive/pseudonormal (i.e. with presumably normal LA pressure), (iii) atrial fibrillation (AF) group, and (iv) ‘grey area’ (no consistent description of MIP despite no report of AF). Of 6365 hospitalized patients, 1848 (29%) had EF ≥ 50%. Natriuretic peptides were assessed in 28%, LV hypertrophy in 92%, LAVI in 13%, and MIP in 67%. The 2016 ESC HFpEF criteria could be assessed in 27% of the 1848 patients and, if assessed, were met in 52%. Of the 1848 patients, 19% had restrictive/pseudonormal MIP, 43% had MIP other than restrictive/pseudonormal, 18% had AF and 20% were grey area. There were no differences in long‐term all‐cause or cardiovascular mortality, or all‐cause hospitalizations or HF rehospitalizations between the four groups. Despite fewer non‐cardiac comorbidities reported at baseline, patients with MIP other than restrictive/pseudonormal (i.e. with presumably normal LA pressure) had more non‐cardiovascular (14.0 vs. 6.7 per 100 patient‐years, P < 0.001) and cardiovascular non‐HF (13.2 vs. 8.0 per 100 patient‐years, P = 0.016) hospitalizations in long‐term follow‐up than patients with restrictive/pseudonormal MIP.

Conclusions

Acute HFpEF diagnosis could be assessed (based on the 2016 ESC criteria) in only a quarter of patients and confirmed in half of these. When assessed, only one in three patients had restrictive/pseudonormal MIP suggestive of elevated LA pressure. Patients with MIP other than restrictive/pseudonormal (suggestive of normal LA pressure) could have been misdiagnosed with acute HFpEF or had echocardiography performed after normalization of LA pressure. They were more often hospitalized for non‐HF reasons during follow‐up. Symptoms suggestive of acute HFpEF may in some patients represent non‐HF comorbidities.

Hospitalization for acute heart failure: the in-hospital care pathway predicts one-year readmission

In patients with heart failure, some organizational and modifiable factors could be prognostic factors. We aimed to assess the association between the in-hospital care pathways during hospitalization for acute heart failure and the risk of readmission. This retrospective study included all elderly patients who were hospitalized for acute heart failure at the Universitary Hospital Lariboisière (Paris) during 2013. We collected the wards attended, length of stay, admission and discharge types, diagnostic procedures, and heart failure discharge treatment. The clinical factors were the specific medical conditions, left ventricular ejection fraction, type of heart failure syndrome, sex, smoking status, and age. Consistent groups of in-hospital care pathways were built using an ascending hierarchical clustering method based on a primary components analysis. The association between the groups and the risk of readmission at 1 month and 1 year (for heart failure or for any cause) were measured via a count data model that was adjusted for clinical factors. This study included 223 patients. Associations between the in-hospital care pathway and the 1 year-readmission status were studied in 207 patients. Five consistent groups were defined: 3 described expected in-hospital care pathways in intensive care units, cardiology and gerontology wards, 1 described deceased patients, and 1 described chaotic pathways. The chaotic pathway strongly increased the risk (p = 0.0054) of 1 year readmission for acute heart failure. The chaotic in-hospital care pathway, occurring in specialized wards, was associated with the risk of readmission. This could promote specific quality improvement actions in these wards. Follow-up research projects should aim to describe the processes causing the generation of chaotic pathways and their consequences.

Rationale and design of the AUGUST-AHF Study

Aims

We aim to assess the effect of a lyophilized herbal injection on 90 day mortality and readmission rates in patients with acute heart failure (AHF).

Methods and results

The AUGUST‐AHF study is a multicentre, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial enrolling 1270 hospitalized patients for AHF. Patients are randomized to receive YiqiFumai lyophilized injection (5.2 g/day) or placebo for 10 days, in addition to standard therapy, using a 1:1 ratio via an interactive web response system. The primary endpoint is the 90 day all‐cause mortality or AHF readmission rates. Secondary endpoints include 180 day all‐cause mortality or heart failure readmission rates, length of hospital stay for the indexed AHF, 90 day cardiac‐specific mortality rate, occurrence of worsening heart failure through Day 10, changes in the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Quality of Life scale score through Day 180, and 90 day major adverse cardiac events. Additional secondary endpoints include change in dyspnoea via visual analogue scale (VAS) and Likert 7‐point comparator scale, N terminal pro‐B‐type natriuretic peptide value and New York Heart Association functional class, and the total amount of diuretics for the indexed AHF hospitalization. Study recruitment is expected to be completed by March 2021, and follow‐up will end in September 2021. In an optional sub‐study, patients will be followed up for 3 years.

Conclusions

To our best knowledge, AUGUST‐AHF is the first study assessing the efficacy of a Chinese herbal injection in patients with AHF. The results will be valuable to guide clinicians in using YiqiFumai lyophilized injection, which was included in the latest Chinese Health Insurance Catalog.

A registry-based algorithm to predict ejection fraction in patients with heart failure

Aims

Left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) is required to categorize heart failure (HF) [i.e. HF with preserved (HFpEF), mid‐range (HFmrEF), and reduced (HFrEF) EF] but is often not captured in population‐based cohorts or non‐HF registries. The aim was to create an algorithm that identifies EF subphenotypes for research purposes.

Methods and results

We included 42 061 HF patients from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry. As primary analysis, we performed two logistic regression models including 22 variables to predict (i) EF≥ vs. <50% and (ii) EF≥ vs. <40%. In the secondary analysis, we performed a multivariable multinomial analysis with 22 variables to create a model for all three separate EF subphenotypes: HFrEF vs. HFmrEF vs. HFpEF. The models were validated in the database from the CHECK‐HF study, a cross‐sectional survey of 10 627 patients from the Netherlands. The C‐statistic (discrimination) was 0.78 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77–0.78] for EF ≥50% and 0.76 (95% CI 0.75–0.76) for EF ≥40%. Similar results were achieved for HFrEF and HFpEF in the multinomial model, but the C‐statistic for HFmrEF was lower: 0.63 (95% CI 0.63–0.64). The external validation showed similar discriminative ability to the development cohort.

Conclusions

Routine clinical characteristics could potentially be used to identify different EF subphenotypes in databases where EF is not readily available. Accuracy was good for the prediction of HFpEF and HFrEF but lower for HFmrEF. The proposed algorithm enables more effective research on HF in the big data setting.

Coexisting Morbidities in Heart Failure: No Robust Interaction with the Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Heart failure (HF) patients often present with multiple coexisting morbidities. In this review, we contend that coexisting morbidities are highly prevalent and clinically important regardless of the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).

RECENT FINDINGS

Multimorbidity is prevalent in the ambulatory subjects of the community and increases with age. Differences in the prevalence of coexisting morbidities between HF with preserved LVEF (> 50%), mid-range LVEF (40-50%), and reduced LVEF (< 40%) are either not demonstrable or whenever present are small and unrelated to morbidity and mortality. The constellation of coexisting morbidities together with the disease modifiers (age, sex, genes, other) defines the HF phenotype and outcome. There is no robust evidence supporting an interaction in HF patients between the prevalence and clinical significance of coexisting morbidities and the LVEF.

Rationale and design of the CardioMEMS Post-Market Multinational Clinical Study: COAST

AIMS

Chronic heart failure reduces quality and quantity of life and is expensive for healthcare systems. Medical treatment relies on guideline-directed therapy, but clinical follow-up and remote management is highly variable and poorly effective. New remote management strategies are needed to maintain clinical stability and avoid hospitalizations for acute decompensation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The CardioMEMS Post-Market Study is a prospective, international, single-arm, multicentre, open-label study (NCT02954341) designed to examine the feasibility of haemodynamic guided heart failure management using a small pressure sensor permanently implanted in the pulmonary artery (PA). Daily uploaded PA pressures will be reviewed weekly to remotely guide medical management of patients with persistent NYHA Class III symptoms at baseline and a hospitalization in the prior 12 months. The study will enrol up to 800 patients from 85 sites across the United Kingdom, Europe, and Australia. The primary safety endpoint will assess device or system-related complications or sensor failures after 2 years of follow-up. Efficacy will be estimated after 1 year of follow-up comparing HF hospitalization rates before and after sensor implantation. Observational endpoints will include mortality, patient, and investigator monitoring compliance, PA pressure changes, quality of life, and several pre-defined subgroup analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

The CardioMEMS Post-Market Study will investigate the generalizability of remote haemodynamic guided HF management in a number of national settings. The results may support the more widespread implementation of this novel clinical management approach.

Early experience of Sacubitril-Valsartan in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in real-world clinical setting

AIMS

Sacubitril/Valsartan (Sac/Val) was proven more effective than enalapril for symptomatic patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). This study aimed to investigate eligibility, titration, and tolerability for Sac/Val in a real-world clinical setting.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This retrospective cohort study consists of two parts. In Part 1 (eligibility study), all patients discharged from Sahlgrenska University Hospital due to HF were consecutively included during 1 year. Data from the patients' medical records were collected. Patients were adjudicated to be eligible based on European Society of Cardiology (ESC) criteria for angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) with the exception of N-terminal (NT)-proBNP levels. Patients who received <50% of target dose angiotensin-converting enzyme/angiotensin receptor blocker and otherwise fulfilled ESC criteria were adjudicated to be potentially eligible. In Part 2 (tolerability study), all patients receiving Sac/Val during the same period were included. Medical data regarding dose, titration, and adverse effects and events were registered. A total of 1355 patients (mean age 78 ± 13 years) were hospitalized for HF and 619 patients had an EF ≤40%. Twenty percent were eligible for initiation of ARNI, and additionally 8% were potentially eligible. In all 95 patients (mean age 65 ± 12 years) were initiated with Sac/Val, which correlates to 13%. The patients who were initiated were younger (65 years), more often had dilated cardiomyopathy (31%), more often were on guideline-directed medical therapy, and had a higher frequency of cardiac resynchronization therapy and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator compared with the patients who did not receive Sac/Val. Of the initiated patients, 59% reached target dose of Sac/Val, and 15% discontinued due to adverse effects. The most common cause of discontinuation was benign gastrointestinal adverse effects, followed by elevated creatinine, malaise, and vertigo. Female gender [odds ratio (OR) 3.58; 95% CI 1.07-2.00; P = 0.038] and NT-proBNP ≥ median level (OR 0.48; 95% CI 0.26-0.90; P = 0.021) was associated with termination of the medication.

CONCLUSIONS

Among HFrEF patients in this real-world cohort, 20% were eligible for ARNI; however, only 13% received the treatment. Sac/Val was well tolerated, but 41% of the patients did not reach target dose. How this affects outcome is not known and needs further investigation.

Clinical significance of nutritional status in patients with chronic heart failure-a systematic review

Chronic heart failure (CHF) and nutritional disorders are recognized as major challenges for contemporary medicine. This study aims to estimate the role of nutritional disorders as risk factors for CHF development and prognostic factors for CHF patients and the outcome of nutritional intervention in CHF. Full-text English articles published between January 2013 and February 2019 available in the PubMed and Scopus databases were considered. Seventy-five prospective, retrospective, and cross-sectional studies as well as meta-analyses on patients with CHF, reporting correlation of their nutritional status with the risk and prognosis of CHF and the outcome of nutritional interventions in CHF were all included. Higher BMI increases the risk of CHF by 15-70%, especially when associated with severe, long-lasting and abdominal obesity. Overweight and obesity are associated with the reduction of mortality in CHF by 24-59% and 15-65%, respectively, and do not affect the outcome of invasive CHF treatment. Malnutrition increases the risk of mortality (by 2- to 10-fold) and the risk of hospitalization (by 1.2- to 1.7-fold). Favorable outcome of nutritional support in CHF patients was reported in a few studies. Nutritional disorders are prevalent in patients with CHF and play a significant role in the incidence, course, and prognosis of the disease. The existence of an "obesity paradox" in patients with CHF was confirmed. Further studies on the effect of nutritional support and body weight reduction in patients with CHF are necessary.

Effect of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists on cardiac function in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a disease with limited evidence-based treatment options. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA) offer benefit in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), but their impact in HFpEF remains unclear. We therefore evaluated the effect of MRA on echocardiographic, functional, and systemic parameters in patients with HFpEF by a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, clinicaltrials.gov, and Cochrane Clinical Trial Collection to identify randomized controlled trials that (a) compared MRA versus placebo/control in patients with HFpEF and (b) reported echocardiographic, functional, and/or systemic parameters relevant to HFpEF. Studies were excluded if: they enrolled asymptomatic patients; patients with HFrEF; patients after an acute coronary event; compared MRA to another active comparator; or reported a follow-up of less than 6 months. Primary outcomes were changes in echocardiographic parameters. Secondary end-points were changes in functional capacity, quality of life measures, and systemic parameters. Quantitative analysis was performed by generating forest plots and calculating effect sizes by random-effect models. Between-study heterogeneity was assessed through Q and I² statistics. Nine trials with 1164 patients were included. MRA significantly decreased E/e′ (mean difference − 1.37, 95% confidence interval − 1.72 to − 1.02), E/A (− 0.04, − 0.08 to 0.00), left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (− 0.78 mm, − 1.34 to − 0.22), left atrial volume index (− 1.12 ml/m², − 1.91 to − 0.33), 6-min walk test distance (− 11.56 m, − 21 to − 2.13), systolic (− 4.75 mmHg, − 8.94 to − 0.56) and diastolic blood pressure (− 2.91 mmHg, − 4.15 to − 1.67), and increased levels of serum potassium (0.23 mmol/L, 0.19 to 0.28) when compared with placebo/control. In patients with HFpEF, MRA treatment significantly improves indices of cardiac structure and function, suggesting a decrease in left ventricular filling pressure and reverse cardiac remodeling. MRA increase serum potassium and decrease blood pressure; however, a small decrease in 6-min-walk distance is also noted. Larger prospective studies are warranted to provide definitive answers on the effect of MRA in patients with HFpEF.

Early Initiation of Sacubitril/Valsartan in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure After Acute Decompensation: A Case Series Analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Sacubitril/valsartan improved the prognosis of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in the PARADIGM-HF study. Recently, the TRANSITION and PIONEER-HF studies demonstrated the safety and efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan in patients hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure, with treatment initiated after hemodynamic and clinical stabilization. In this case series study, we assessed the short-term effects of sacubitril/valsartan on exercise capacity, inflammation, and biomarkers in patients with acute decompensated heart failure.

METHODS

Patients admitted for acute decompensated heart failure to the Department of Internal Medicine of Telese Terme Hospital and Cardiovascular Department, University of Bari, from 9 March, 2017 to 9 June, 2018 were enrolled. Following hemodynamic stabilization, patients initiated sacubitril/valsartan 24/26 mg twice a day for 4 weeks, with up-titration to 49/51 mg twice a day based on tolerability after 1 week. Efficacy outcomes included the 6-min walking test, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, and lymphocyte count. Safety outcomes included renal function, hyperkalemia, and symptomatic hypotension.

RESULTS

In total, 40 patients completed the study and 27 (67.5%) patients were up-titrated. Compared with baseline, exercise capacity and relative lymphocyte count increased significantly after 4 weeks of treatment, while N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein decreased significantly. N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide and relative lymphocyte count independently predicted the 6-min walking test distance (p = 0.021). No patients experienced any relevant side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Early initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction after acute decompensated heart failure may be safe and effective in terms of functional capacity and biomarkers.

Ejection fraction in heart failure revisited- where does the evidence start?

Collapse

Heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction: pro and cons of the new classification of Heart Failure by European Society of Cardiology guidelines

Currently, the assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is the cornerstone of the classification of patients with heart failure (HF). The mid-range LVEF (HFmrEF) category was identified in an attempt to uncover specific characteristics of these patients. So far, the analysis of trials, registries, and observational studies have demonstrated that patients with mid-range LVEF belong to a patient cohort with generally intermediate clinical profile as compared with other groups but with a remarkable variety of intrinsic phenotypes. This is due to the limitations of LVEF as the sole criterion to categorize patients with HF and characterize their prognosis, above all when it is >40%. To better define the HFmrEF phenotype, it is reasonable to consider other parameters, such as LVEF changes over time, HF aetiology, co-morbidities, and other imaging parameters. A multiparametric evaluation may contextualize a patient with HFmrEF in a more defined phenotype with a specific prognosis.

Video-based AI for beat-to-beat assessment of cardiac function

Accurate assessment of cardiac function is crucial for the diagnosis of cardiovascular disease1, screening for cardiotoxicity2 and decisions regarding the clinical management of patients with a critical illness3. However, human assessment of cardiac function focuses on a limited sampling of cardiac cycles and has considerable inter-observer variability despite years of training4,5. Here, to overcome this challenge, we present a video-based deep learning algorithm-EchoNet-Dynamic-that surpasses the performance of human experts in the critical tasks of segmenting the left ventricle, estimating ejection fraction and assessing cardiomyopathy. Trained on echocardiogram videos, our model accurately segments the left ventricle with a Dice similarity coefficient of 0.92, predicts ejection fraction with a mean absolute error of 4.1% and reliably classifies heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (area under the curve of 0.97). In an external dataset from another healthcare system, EchoNet-Dynamic predicts the ejection fraction with a mean absolute error of 6.0% and classifies heart failure with reduced ejection fraction with an area under the curve of 0.96. Prospective evaluation with repeated human measurements confirms that the model has variance that is comparable to or less than that of human experts. By leveraging information across multiple cardiac cycles, our model can rapidly identify subtle changes in ejection fraction, is more reproducible than human evaluation and lays the foundation for precise diagnosis of cardiovascular disease in real time. As a resource to promote further innovation, we also make publicly available a large dataset of 10,030 annotated echocardiogram videos.

One-year clinical events and management of patients with atrial fibrillation hospitalized in cardiology centers: Data from the BLITZ-AF study

BACKGROUND

The management of atrial fibrillation (AF) has changed with the introduction of direct anticoagulants (DOACs) and new techniques such as catheter ablation. An update collection of data from "real world" AF patients followed by cardiologists is useful to obtain information on both management, outcomes and guideline adherence in clinical practice.

METHODS

Follow-up information on survival, embolic and bleeding events and hospital readmission, persistence of oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy was collected in 84 centers participating to the BLITZ-AF study.

RESULTS

Patients were followed for a median of 366 days (IQR: 356-378) and vital status was available for 2159 patients. Mortality was 9.2%. Heart failure was the most common cardiovascular cause of death (70%) followed by arrhythmias (6.7%), acute coronary syndrome (5.0%) and ischemic stroke (2.5%). During follow-up 18.1% of the patients were readmitted, mainly (81.3%) for cardiovascular causes. Patients on OAC were 83.4%, 9.1% were on antiplatelets and 7.5% did not receive antithrombotic therapy. The use of DOACs increased from 42.1% to 46.4% during the follow-up, OAC discontinuation occurred in 9.1%. AF recurrences occurred in 23.4% of the patients discharged in sinus rhythm. Rate control strategy was adopted in 55.9% and beta-blockers were the most used drugs (81.9%). Amiodarone (22%) and flecainide (9.7%) were the most frequent used antiahrrythmic drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

The follow-up of the BLITZ-AF study provide an up to date picture of the clinical course of patients with AF, who appear frequently affected by heart failure and severe comorbidities which might have led to the high mortality rate.

Rehospitalization burden and morbidity risk in patients with heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction

Aims

Heart failure with mid‐range ejection fraction (HFmrEF) has been proposed as a distinct HF phenotype, but whether patients on this category fare worse, similarly, or better than those with HF with reduced EF (HFrEF) or preserved EF (HFpEF) in terms of rehospitalization risks over time remains unclear.

Methods and results

We prospectively included 2961 consecutive patients admitted for acute HF (AHF) in our institution. Of them, 158 patients died during the index admission, leaving the sample size to be 2803 patients. Patients were categorized according to their EF: HFrEF if EF ≤ 40% (n = 908, 32.4%); HFmrEF if EF = 41–49% (n = 449, 16.0%); and HFpEF if EF ≥ 50% (n = 1446, 51.6%). Covariate‐adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were used to evaluate the association between EF status and recurrent all‐cause and HF‐related admissions. At a median follow‐up of 2.6 years (inter‐quartile range: 1.0–5.3), 1663 (59.3%) patients died, and 6035 all‐cause readmissions were registered in 2026 patients (72.3%), 2163 of them HF related. Rates of all‐cause readmission per 100 patients‐years of follow‐up were 150.1, 176.9, and 163.6 in HFrEF, HFmrEF, and HFpEF, respectively (P = 0.097). After multivariable adjustment, when compared with that of patients with HFrEF and HFpEF, HFmrEF status was not significantly associated with a different risk of all‐cause readmissions (IRR = 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77–1.27; P = 0.926; and IRR = 0.93; 95% CI, 0.74–1.18; P = 0.621, respectively) or HF‐related readmissions (IRR = 1.06; 95% CI, 0.77–1.46; P = 0.725; and IRR = 1.11; 95% CI, 0.82–1.50; P = 0.511, respectively).

Conclusions

Following an admission for AHF, patients with HFmrEF had a similar rehospitalization burden and a similar risk of recurrent all‐cause and HF‐related admissions than had patients with HFrEF or HFpEF. Regarding morbidity risk, HFmrEF seems not to be a distinct HF phenotype.

Natriuretic peptides for heart failure screening in nursing homes: a systematic review

The high burden of heart failure in nursing-home populations is due to advanced age and comorbidities. Heart failure is often undiagnosed or misdiagnosed in this population and therefore remains untreated. We review the use of natriuretic peptide biomarkers for screening heart failure in nursing-home residents. The study was performed in accordance with recommendations from the Cochrane Collaboration using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement (PRISMA) and is registered in PROSPERO Register of Systematic Reviews. Databases PubMed, Embase, and Trip were searched from 2000 to March 2019, supplemented by hand-searching of references. Studies investigating the nursing-home population were included. The prevalence of heart failure among nursing-home residents was higher than in the general population of comparable age (23% vs 10%, respectively). The rate of misdiagnosis in nursing homes ranged from 25 to 76%. NT-proBNP was the most commonly used natriuretic peptide biomarker for heart failure screening. The mean value of NT-proBNP was significantly higher in residents with heart failure than in residents overall (pooled means of 2409 pg/mL vs 1074 pg/mL, respectively). In comparison with current guidelines, the proposed cut-off values for ruling out heart failure were higher in the analyzed studies, with ranges of 230-760 pg/mL for NT-proBNP and 50-115 pg/mL for BNP. NT-proBNP and BNP are used for screening heart failure in the nursing-home population. The current screening cut-off values are probably too low for use in nursing homes. Our most conservative estimation for ruling out heart failure is an NT-proBNP cut-off value of 230 pg/mL.

How to diagnose heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: the HFA-PEFF diagnostic algorithm: a consensus recommendation from the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC)

Making a firm diagnosis of chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains a challenge. We recommend a new stepwise diagnostic process, the 'HFA-PEFF diagnostic algorithm'. Step 1 (P=Pre-test assessment) is typically performed in the ambulatory setting and includes assessment for heart failure symptoms and signs, typical clinical demographics (obesity, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, elderly, atrial fibrillation), and diagnostic laboratory tests, electrocardiogram, and echocardiography. In the absence of overt non-cardiac causes of breathlessness, HFpEF can be suspected if there is a normal left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction, no significant heart valve disease or cardiac ischaemia, and at least one typical risk factor. Elevated natriuretic peptides support, but normal levels do not exclude a diagnosis of HFpEF. The second step (E: Echocardiography and Natriuretic Peptide Score) requires comprehensive echocardiography and is typically performed by a cardiologist. Measures include mitral annular early diastolic velocity (e'), LV filling pressure estimated using E/e', left atrial volume index, LV mass index, LV relative wall thickness, tricuspid regurgitation velocity, LV global longitudinal systolic strain, and serum natriuretic peptide levels. Major (2 points) and Minor (1 point) criteria were defined from these measures. A score ≥5 points implies definite HFpEF; ≤1 point makes HFpEF unlikely. An intermediate score (2-4 points) implies diagnostic uncertainty, in which case Step 3 (F₁ : Functional testing) is recommended with echocardiographic or invasive haemodynamic exercise stress tests. Step 4 (F₂ : Final aetiology) is recommended to establish a possible specific cause of HFpEF or alternative explanations. Further research is needed for a better classification of HFpEF.

Heart Failure With Mid-range or Recovered Ejection Fraction: Differential Determinants of Transition

The recent definition of an intermediate clinical phenotype of heart failure (HF) based on an ejection fraction (EF) of between 40% and 49%, namely HF with mid-range EF (HFmrEF), has fuelled investigations into the clinical profile and prognosis of this patient group. HFmrEF shares common clinical features with other HF phenotypes, such as a high prevalence of ischaemic aetiology, as in HF with reduced EF (HFrEF), or hypertension and diabetes, as in HF with preserved EF (HFpEF), and benefits from the cornerstone drugs indicated for HFrEF. Among the HF phenotypes, HFmrEF is characterised by the highest rate of transition to either recovery or worsening of the severe systolic dysfunction profile that is the target of disease-modifying therapies, with opposite prognostic implications. This article focuses on the epidemiology, clinical characteristics and therapeutic approaches for HFmrEF, and discusses the major determinants of transition to HFpEF or HFrEF.

[Characteristics and one-year outcomes in elderly patients hospitalised with heart failure and preserved, mid-range and reduced ejection fraction]

INTRODUCTION

The latest European Society of Cardiology Heart Failure (HF) guidelines define three types of HF according to the ejection fraction (EF): HF with reduced EF (HFrEF) when EF<40%, HF with mid-range EF (HFmrEF), when EF 40-49%, and HF with preserved EF (HFpEF) when EF≥50%. The objective of this study was to analyse the characteristics and results of elderly patients hospitalised with HF according to the new classification using EF.

METHODS

A prospective study was carried out with 531 HF patients aged ≥75 years classified according to EF, and admitted in the geriatric wards of 6 hospitals in Spain. An analysis was performed on the demographic and clinical characteristics, as well as well as the morbidity and mortality at one year of follow-up.

RESULTS

As regards EF, 17.1% had HFrEF, 10% had HFmrEF, and 72.9% had HFpEF. Patients with HFmrEF were more similar to those with HFrEF in terms of a younger age, predominance of men, and previous admission due to HF. This was also the case with the use of drugs for neurohormonal blockade. Patients with HFrEF (compared to those with HFmrEF and HFpEF), had higher mortality (35.2%, 24.5%, and 25.6%, respectively), more readmissions for HF (17.6%, 15.1%, and 14.5%, respectively), and more events (61.5%, 45.3%, and 52.5%, respectively), although there were no significant differences. There were also no differences observed in the survival analysis between the EF groups and the time-dependent outcome variables.

CONCLUSIONS

In elderly patients hospitalised with HF, those classified as HFmrEF did not show any clear differences with respect to those with HFrEF or HFpEF. There were no differences in terms of morbidity and mortality.

Implementation of Guideline-Recommended Therapies for Patients With Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Regional Arab Middle East Experience

We describe the characteristics of ambulatory patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in the Gulf region (Middle East) and the implementation of guideline-recommended treatments. We included 2427 HFrEF outpatients (mean age 59 ± 13 years, 75% males and median left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] of 30%). A high proportion of patients received guideline-recommended medications (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor [ACEI]/angiotensin receptor blocker [ARB]/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor [ARNI] 87%, β-blocker 91%, mineralocorticoid antagonist [MRA] 64%). However, only a minority of patients received guideline-recommended target doses (ACEI/ARB/ARNI 13%, β-blocker 27%, and MRA 4.4%). Old age was a significant independent predictor for not prescribing treatment (P < .001 for ACEI/ARB/ARNI and MRA; and P = .002 for β-blockers). Other independent predictors were chronic kidney disease (for both ACEI/ARB/ARNI and MRA, P < .001) and higher LVEF (P = .014 for β-blockers and P < .001 for MRA). Patients with HFrEF managed by heart failure specialists more often received recommended target doses of ACEI/ARB/ARNI (40% vs 11%, P < .001) and β-blockers (56% vs 26%, P < .001) compared to those treated by general cardiologists. Although the majority of our patients with HFrEF received guideline-recommended medications, the doses they were prescribed were suboptimal. Understanding the reasons behind this is important for improved practice.

Enhanced clinical phenotyping by mechanistic bioprofiling in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: insights from the MEDIA-DHF study (The Metabolic Road to Diastolic Heart Failure)

Background: Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a heterogeneous syndrome for which clear evidence of effective therapies is lacking. Understanding which factors determine this heterogeneity may be helped by better phenotyping. An unsupervised statistical approach applied to a large set of biomarkers may identify distinct HFpEF phenotypes.Methods: Relevant proteomic biomarkers were analyzed in 392 HFpEF patients included in Metabolic Road to Diastolic HF (MEDIA-DHF). We performed an unsupervised cluster analysis to define distinct phenotypes. Cluster characteristics were explored with logistic regression. The association between clusters and 1-year cardiovascular (CV) death and/or CV hospitalization was studied using Cox regression.Results: Based on 415 biomarkers, we identified 2 distinct clusters. Clinical variables associated with cluster 2 were diabetes, impaired renal function, loop diuretics and/or betablockers. In addition, 17 biomarkers were higher expressed in cluster 2 vs. 1. Patients in cluster 2 vs. those in 1 experienced higher rates of CV death/CV hospitalization (adj. HR 1.93, 95% CI 1.12-3.32, p = 0.017). Complex-network analyses linked these biomarkers to immune system activation, signal transduction cascades, cell interactions and metabolism.Conclusion: Unsupervised machine-learning algorithms applied to a wide range of biomarkers identified 2 HFpEF clusters with different CV phenotypes and outcomes. The identified pathways may provide a basis for future research.Clinical significanceMore insight is obtained in the mechanisms related to poor outcome in HFpEF patients since it was demonstrated that biomarkers associated with the high-risk cluster were related to the immune system, signal transduction cascades, cell interactions and metabolismBiomarkers (and pathways) identified in this study may help select high-risk HFpEF patients which could be helpful for the inclusion/exclusion of patients in future trials.Our findings may be the basis of investigating therapies specifically targeting these pathways and the potential use of corresponding markers potentially identifying patients with distinct mechanistic bioprofiles most likely to respond to the selected mechanistically targeted therapies.

Gender differences in the impact of health literacy on hospital readmission among older heart failure patients: A prospective cohort study

AIMS

To investigate the impact of limited health literacy on 1-year hospital readmission among both older men and women with heart failure.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

METHODS

A total of 286 patients with heart failure (men = 144, women = 142) aged 65 years or older at baseline from two tertiary hospitals were enrolled from June-November 2017. Patients were followed up until November 2018. The Brief Health Literacy Screening Tool was used to assess baseline health literacy. One-year readmission after discharge was assessed via medical records or telephone interview. A hierarchical logistic regression was performed.

RESULTS

The prevalence rates of limited health literacy and 1-year hospital readmission among older women were 74.7% and 35.9%, respectively, compared with 48.6% and 27.1% in older men. Limited health literacy significantly increased the risk of 1-year hospital readmission in both older men and women with heart failure. More importantly, older women with limited health literacy had a much higher risk of hospital readmission (odds ratio: 10.17, 95% confidence interval: 2.19-47.14) than did older men with limited health literacy (odds ratio: 5.27, 95% confidence interval: 2.04-13.59).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings highlight that a baseline assessment of health literacy would help prevent unplanned hospital readmissions after discharge in both older men and women with heart failure. Health professionals should recognize that women with limited health literacy are more vulnerable to re-hospitalization than are men with limited health literacy.

IMPACT

Few studies have addressed gender differences in the link between health literacy and hospital readmission among patients with heart failure. We found that older women with limited health literacy had a much higher risk of hospital readmission than did their male counterparts. Health professionals should be aware of gender differences in health literacy in discharge planning, including self-management counselling for older patients with heart failure.

Medical treatment of octogenarians with chronic heart failure: data from CHECK-HF

BACKGROUND

Elderly heart failure (HF) patients are underrepresented in clinical trials, though are a large proportion of patients in real-world practice. We investigated practice-based, secondary care HF management in a large group of chronic HF patients aged ≥ 80 years (octogenarians).

METHODS

We analyzed electronic health records of 3490 octogenarians with chronic HF at 34 Dutch outpatient clinics in the period between 2013 and 2016 , 49% women. Study patients were divided into HFpEF [LVEF ≥ 50%; n = 911 (26.1%)], HFrEF [LVEF < 40%; n = 2009 (57.6%)] and HF with mid-range EF [HFmrEF: LVEF 40-49%; n = 570 (16.3%)].

RESULTS

Most HFrEF patients aged ≥ 80 years received a beta blocker and a renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitor (angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker), i.e. 78.3% and 72.8% respectively, and a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) was prescribed in 52.0% of patients. All three of these guideline-recommended medications (triple therapy) were given in only 29.9% of octogenarians with HFrEF, and at least 50% of target doses of triple therapy, beta blockers, RAS inhibitor and MRA, were prescribed in 43.8%, 62.2% and 53.5% of the total group of HFrEF patients. Contraindications or intolerance for beta blockers was present in 3.5% of the patients, for RAS inhibitors and MRAs in, 7.2% and 6.1% CONCLUSIONS: The majority of octogenarians with HFrEF received one or more guideline-recommended HF medications. However, triple therapy or target doses of the medications were prescribed in a minority. Comorbidities and reported contraindications and tolerances did not fully explain underuse of recommended HF therapies.

Management of Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction after ESC 2016 Heart Failure Guidelines: The Linx Registry

AIMS

In May 2016, a new version of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Guidelines for the management of heart failure (HF) was released. The aim of this study was to describe the management of HF with reduced ejection fraction after the publication of ESC Guidelines.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The Linx registry is a multicentre, observational, cross-sectional study from 14 Catalan hospitals that enrolled 1056 patients with HF and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (≤40%) from 1 February to 30 April 2017 in outpatient cardiology clinics. Results were compared between hospitals according to their level of complexity in our own registry and compared with previously published registries similar to ours. Sacubitril/valsartan was prescribed to 23.9% of patients in our population, as a consequence, use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blockers in monotherapy decreased to 48.1% and 16.9%, respectively, and prescription of beta-blockers (91.8%), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (72.7%), and ivabradine (21.4%) remained similar to previous registries. Target doses of beta-blockers (25.4%), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (24.9%), angiotensin receptor blockers (7.7%), sacubitril/valsartan (8.1%), and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (19.7%) were accomplished in a low proportion of patients. Our results also suggest that prescription and up-titration of class I HF drugs were greater in hospitals with higher level of complexity.

CONCLUSIONS

The Linx registry shows an appropriate adherence to pharmacological recommendations from ESC HF Guidelines despite a low proportion of patients reached target doses. Almost one-quarter of patients were under treatment with sacubitril/valsartan a few months after ESC HF Guidelines recommendations.

Spironolactone use is associated with improved outcomes in heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction

AIMS

Spironolactone has been shown to improve outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (EF). We investigated whether the discharge use of spironolactone could be associated with better long-term outcomes among patients with HF with mid-range EF (HFmrEF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

We analysed HFmrEF (left ventricular EF 40-49%) patients enrolled in the Japanese Cardiac Registry of Heart Failure in Cardiology, which prospectively studied the clinical characteristics, treatments, and long-term outcomes of patients hospitalized due to HF. Patients were divided into two groups according to the use of spironolactone at discharge. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause death or HF rehospitalization. A total of 457 patients had HFmrEF. The mean age was 69.3 years and 286 (62.6%) were male. Among them, spironolactone was prescribed at discharge in 158 patients (34.6%). Chronic kidney disease (7.6% vs. 16.8%, P = 0.007) was less prevalent and loop diuretics (89.2% vs. 70.2%, P < 0.001) were more often prescribed in patients with spironolactone. During a mean follow-up of 2.2 years, patients with spironolactone had a lower incidence rate of the primary outcome than those without it (171.5 vs. 278.8 primary outcome per 1000 patient-years, incidence rate ratio 0.61, 95% confidence interval 0.44-0.86; P = 0.004). After multivariable adjustment, spironolactone use at discharge was associated with a significant reduction in the composite of all-cause death or HF rehospitalization (adjusted hazard ratio 0.63, 95% confidence interval 0.44-0.90, P = 0.010).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with HF hospitalized for HFmrEF, spironolactone use at discharge was associated with better long-term outcomes.

Heart Failure With Mid-range Ejection Fraction

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To describe the epidemiology, pathophysiology, management, and prognosis of patients with heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction (HFmrEF).

RECENT FINDINGS

In 2013, The American Heart Association (AHA)/American College of Cardiology (ACC) assigned an ejection fraction (EF) range to heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF, EF ≤ 40%) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF, EF ≥50%). This classification created a "gray zone" of patients with EFs between 41% and 49% that ultimately came to be known as heart failure with borderline or mid-range ejection fraction. HFmrEF patients represent a group with heterogeneous clinical characteristics that at times resembles HFrEF, at others HFpEF, and at others still a unique phenotype altogether. No randomized controlled trials exist in those with HFmrEF, though HFrEF and HFpEF studies that include overlap suggest some potential benefit of beta blockers, angiotensin receptor blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors. Mortality rates among the HFmrEF population are significant, and are similar to those in patients with HFrEF and HFpEF. HFmrEF is a complex disorder that remains poorly understood. Future research is needed to better elucidate the pathophysiology, management, and prognosis of this condition.

Long-term outcome of carvedilol therapy in Japanese patients with nonischemic heart failure

Nonischemic heart failure (HF) is common in Japan. We evaluated the long-term outcome of Japanese patients with nonischemic HF receiving carvedilol based on left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) category. We conducted a single-center observation study of 1550 patients with nonischemic HF who were initiated with carvedilol between 2005 and 2015. Of these patients, 38% had an LVEF < 40% (HFrEF, median age 57 years, 28% female) and 62% had an LVEF ≥ 40% (HFpEF, 64 years, 38% female). The primary outcome was all-cause.death The secondary outcomes were cardiac death and sudden cardiac death (SCD). After a median follow-up of 5.5 [interquartile range, 2.9-8.8] years, the median daily maintenance doses of carvedilol in patients with HFrEF and HFpEF were 7.5 [5-12.5] mg and 7.5 [5-10] mg, respectively. The cumulative survival rates of HFrEF patients at 1, 3 and 5 years were 96.1%, 90.2% and 85.5%, respectively, and the cumulative survival rates of HFpEF patients at 1, 3 and 5 years were 97.8%, 94.4% and 90.7%, respectively. The cumulative cardiac death-free rates at 5 years were 94.4% in HFrEF patients and 97.7% in HFpEF patients, and the cumulative SCD-free rates at 5 years were 96.7% in HFrEF patients and 97.9% in HFpEF patients. The adjusted survival rate showed that a higher dose (≥ 7.5 mg daily) was associated with more favourable outcomes than a lower dose (< 7.5 mg daily) in HFrEF patients, but not in HFpEF patients. The adjusted survival rate showed that a lower heart rate (< 75 bpm) was associated with favourable outcomes than a higher heart rate (≥ 75 bpm) in HFrEF patients, but not in HFpEF patients. Long-term survival was good in Japanese patients with nonischemic HF receiving carvedilol. Higher doses and lower heart rates were associated with favourable survival for HFrEF patients, but not in HFpEF patients.

Improved Left Atrial Function in CRT Responders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is associated with reverse left atrial (LA) remodeling. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the relationship between clinical response to CRT and LA function changes. We conducted a systematic search of all electronic databases up to September 2019 which identified 488 patients from seven studies. At (mean) 6 months follow-up, LA systolic strain and emptying fraction (EF) were increased in CRT responders, with a -5.70% weighted mean difference (WMD) [95% confidence interval (CI) -8.37 to -3.04, p < 0.001 and a WMD of -8.98% [CI -15.1 to -2.84, p = 0.004], compared to non-responders. The increase in LA strain was associated with a fall in left ventricle (LV) end-systolic volume (LVESV) r = -0.56 (CI -0.68 to -0.40, p < 0.001) and an increase in the LV ejection fraction (LVEF) r = 0.58 (CI 0.42 to 0.69, p < 0.001). The increase in LA EF correlated with the fall in LVESV r = -0.51 (CI -0.63 to -0.36, p < 0.001) and the increase in the LVEF r = 0.48 (CI 0.33 to 0.61, p = 0.002). The increase in LA strain correlated with the increase in the LA EF, r = 0.57 (CI 0.43 to 0.70, p < 0.001). Thus, the improvement of LA function in CRT responders reflects LA reverse remodeling and is related to its ventricular counterpart.