Prognostic significance of the HFA-PEFF score in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Heart Failure score and outcomes in patients with preserved ejection fraction after catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation

AIMS

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is frequently associated with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), but the diagnosis and prediction of the outcomes of HFpEF are difficult. Notably, the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology proposed the use of the HFA-PEFF score in the diagnosis of HFpEF. This study aimed to assess the prognostic value of the pre- and post-procedural HFA-PEFF scores in patients with preserved ejection fraction (EF) after catheter ablation (CA) for AF. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiac hospitalization for cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality. The secondary endpoint was AF recurrence.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Overall, 354 patients with AF and preserved EF who underwent CA as well as blood tests and transthoracic echocardiography 2 weeks before and 6 months after CA from January 2018 to December 2019 were retrospectively enrolled in the study. In the 354 participants, univariate analysis showed that the post-procedural HFA-PEFF score was associated with a 3-year risk of the primary endpoint (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.73; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.07-6.73; P < 0.001), whereas the pre-procedural HFA-PEFF score was not (HR = 1.24, 95% CI = 0.82-1.86, P = 0.307). Further, the association between the post-procedural HFA-PEFF score and primary endpoint was not modified even after including other relevant variables into the score. Similar to the primary endpoint, the post-procedural HFA-PEFF score was associated with the 3-year risk of AF recurrence (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with preserved EF undergoing AF ablation, the HFA-PEFF score at 6 months after CA was associated with the primary endpoint and AF recurrence at the 3-year follow-up.

Pathophysiological insights into machine learning-based subphenotypes of acute heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

OBJECTIVE

The heterogeneous pathophysiology of the diverse heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) phenotypes needs to be examined. We aim to assess differences in the biomarkers among the phenotypes of HFpEF and investigate its multifactorial pathophysiology.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective analysis of the PURSUIT-HFpEF Study (N=1231), an ongoing, prospective, multicentre observational study of acute decompensated HFpEF. In this registry, there is a predefined subcohort in which we perform multibiomarker tests (N=212). We applied the previously established machine learning-based clustering model to the subcohort with biomarker measurements to classify them into four phenotypes: phenotype 1 (n=69), phenotype 2 (n=49), phenotype 3 (n=41) and phenotype 4 (n=53). Biomarker characteristics in each phenotype were evaluated.

RESULTS

Phenotype 1 presented the lowest value of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), high-sensitive C reactive protein, tumour necrosis factor-α, growth differentiation factor (GDF)-15, troponin T and cystatin C, whereas phenotype 2, which is characterised by hypertension and cardiac hypertrophy, showed the highest value of these markers. Phenotype 3 showed the second highest value of GDF-15 and cystatin C. Phenotype 4 presented a low NT-proBNP value and a relatively high GDF-15.

CONCLUSIONS

Distinctive characteristics of biomarkers in HFpEF phenotypes would indicate differential underlying mechanisms to be elucidated. The contribution of inflammation to the pathogenesis varied considerably among different HFpEF phenotypes. Systemic inflammation substantially contributes to the pathophysiology of the classic HFpEF phenotype with cardiac hypertrophy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

UMIN-CTR ID: UMIN000021831.

Medications for specific phenotypes of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction classified by a machine learning-based clustering model

OBJECTIVE

Our previously established machine learning-based clustering model classified heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) into four distinct phenotypes. Given the heterogeneous pathophysiology of HFpEF, specific medications may have favourable effects in specific phenotypes of HFpEF. We aimed to assess effectiveness of medications on clinical outcomes of the four phenotypes using a real-world HFpEF registry dataset.

METHODS

This study is a posthoc analysis of the PURSUIT-HFpEF registry, a prospective, multicentre, observational study. We evaluated the clinical effectiveness of the following four types of postdischarge medication in the four different phenotypes: angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) or angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARB), beta blockers, mineralocorticoid-receptor antagonists (MRA) and statins. The primary endpoint of this study was a composite of all-cause death and heart failure hospitalisation.

RESULTS

Of 1231 patients, 1100 (83 (IQR 77, 87) years, 604 females) were eligible for analysis. Median follow-up duration was 734 (398, 1108) days. The primary endpoint occurred in 528 patients (48.0%). Cox proportional hazard models with inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting showed the following significant effectiveness of medication on the primary endpoint: MRA for phenotype 2 (weighted HR (wHR) 0.40, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.75, p=0.005); ACEi or ARB for phenotype 3 (wHR 0.66 0.48 to 0.92, p=0.014) and statin therapy for phenotype 3 (wHR 0.43 (0.21 to 0.88), p=0.020). No other medications had significant treatment effects in the four phenotypes.

CONCLUSIONS

Machine learning-based clustering may have the potential to identify populations in which specific medications may be effective. This study suggests the effectiveness of MRA, ACEi or ARB and statin for specific phenotypes of HFpEF.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

UMIN000021831.

The prognostic value of cardiopulmonary exercise testing and HFA-PEFF in patients with unexplained dyspnea and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction

BACKGROUND

HFA-PEFF and cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) are comprehensive diagnostic tools for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). We aimed to investigate the incremental prognostic value of CPET for the HFA-PEFF score among patients with unexplained dyspnea with preserved ejection fraction (EF).

METHODS

Consecutive patients with dyspnea and preserved EF (n = 292) were enrolled between August 2019 and July 2021. All patients underwent CPET and comprehensive echocardiography, including two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography in the left ventricle, left atrium and right ventricle. The primary outcome was defined as a composite cardiovascular event including cardiovascular-related mortality, acute recurrent heart failure hospitalization, urgent repeat revascularization/myocardial infarction or any hospitalization due to cardiovascular events.

RESULTS

The mean age was 58 ± 14.5 years, and 166 (56.8%) participants were male. The study population was divided into three groups based on the HFA-PEFF score: < 2 (n = 81), 2-4 (n = 159), and ≥ 5 (n = 52). HFA-PEFF score ≥ 5, VE/VCO₂ slope, peak systolic strain rate of the left atrium and resting diastolic blood pressure were independently associated with composite cardiovascular events. Furthermore, the addition of VE/VCO₂ and HFA-PEFF to the base model showed incremental prognostic value for predicting composite cardiovascular events (C-statistic 0.898; integrated discrimination improvement 0.129, p = 0.032; net reclassification improvement 1.043, p ≤0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

CPET could be exploited for the HFA-PEFF approach in terms of incremental prognostic value and diagnosis among patients with unexplained dyspnea with preserved EF.

Discriminative Role of Invasive Left Heart Catheterization in Patients Suspected of Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction

Background Recently, diastolic stress testing and invasive hemodynamic measurements have been emphasized for diagnosis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) because when determined using noninvasive parameters it can fall into a nondiagnostic intermediate range. The current study evaluated the discriminative and prognostic roles of invasive measured left ventricular end-diastolic pressure in the population with suspected HFpEF, particularly for patients with intermediate Heart Failure Association Pre-test Assessment, Echocardiography & Natriuretic Peptide, Functional Testing, Final Etiology (HFA-PEFF) score. Methods and Results A total of 404 patients with symptoms or signs of HF and preserved left ventricular systolic function were enrolled. All subjects underwent left heart catheterization with left ventricular end-diastolic pressure measurement for confirmation of HFpEF (≥16 mm Hg). The primary outcome was all-cause death or readmission due to HF within 10 years. Among the study population, 324 patients (80.2%) were diagnosed as invasively confirmed HFpEF, and 80 patients (19.8%) were as noncardiac dyspnea. The patients with HFpEF showed a significantly higher HFA-PEFF score than the patients with noncardiac dyspnea (3.8±1.8 versus 2.6±1.5, P<0.001). The discriminative ability of the HFA-PEFF score for diagnosing HFpEF was modest (area under the curve, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.64-0.75], P<0.001). The HFA-PEFF score was associated with a significantly higher 10-year risk of death or HF readmission (per-1 increase, hazard ratio [HR], 1.603 [95% CI, 1.376-1.868], P<0.001). Among the 226 patients with an intermediate HFA-PEFF score (2-4), those with invasively confirmed HFpEF had a significantly higher risk of death or HF readmission within 10 years than the patients with noncardiac dyspnea (24.0% versus 6.9%, HR, 3.327 [95% CI, 1.109-16.280], P=0.030). Conclusions The HFA-PEFF score is a moderately useful tool for predicting future adverse events in suspected HFpEF, and invasively measured left ventricular end-diastolic pressure can provide additional information to discriminate patient prognosis, particularly in those with intermediate HFA-PEFF scores. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04505449.

Validation of the MEDIA echo score for the prognosis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

There is currently no widely used prognostic score in heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). The MEDIA echo score, including four variables (pulmonary arterial systolic pressure > 40 mmHg, inferior vena cava collapsibility index < 50%, average E/e' > 9, and lateral mitral annular s' < 7 cm/s), has been proposed as a useful risk stratification tool. This study aimed at further validating the MEDIA echo score in both hospitalised and ambulatory HFpEF patients. The MEDIA echo score ranges from 0 to 4 (each criterion scores 1 point). The associations between MEDIA echo score and cardiovascular outcomes were assessed in two independent HFpEF cohorts, namely patients hospitalised for worsening HFpEF (N = 242, mean age 78 ± 11), and stable ambulatory HFpEF patients (N = 76, mean age 65 ± 8). Using multivariable Cox models, in the worsening HFpEF cohort, patients with a MEDIA echo score of 3-4 displayed a significant increased risk of death (HR 2.10, 95%CI 1.02-4.33, P = 0.043, score 0-1 as reference). In the ambulatory HFpEF cohort, patients with a MEDIA echo score of 2 had a significantly higher risk of death or HF hospitalisation (HR 3.44, 95%CI 1.27-9.30, P = 0.015, score 0 as reference), driven by HF hospitalisation; in that cohort, adding the MEDIA echo score to the clinical model significantly improved reclassification for the combined endpoint (integrated discrimination improvement 6.2%, P = 0.006). The MEDIA echo score significantly predicted the outcome of HFpEF patients in both hospital and ambulatory settings; its use may help refine routine risk stratification on top of well-established prognosticators in stable HFpEF patients.

Epidemiology, Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and Therapy of Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction in Japan

Heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a global health care problem, with diagnostic difficulty, limited treatment options and high morbidity and mortality rates. The prevalence of HFpEF is increasing because of the aging population and the increasing burden of cardiac and metabolic comorbidities, such as systemic hypertension, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and obesity. The knowledge base is derived primarily from the United States and Europe, and data from Asian countries, including Japan, remain limited. Given that phenotypic differences may exist between Japanese and Western patients with HFpEF, careful characterization may hold promise to deliver new therapy specific to the Japanese population. In this review, we summarize the current knowledge regarding the epidemiology, pathophysiology and diagnosis of and the potential therapies for HFpEF in Japan.

[Risk Assessment of Adverse Outcomes in Symptomatic Patients With Arterial Hypertension and Chronic Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction Using THE HFA-PEFF Algorithm]

Aim      To study the incidence of heart failure (HF) in patients with arterial hypertension (AH), symptoms of HF, and left ventricular ejection fraction (LV EF) ≥50 % using a novel, modified HFA-PEFF diagnostic algorithm and to evaluate the liver hydration status and density depending on the established HF profiles and the prognostic significance of this algorithm.Material and methods  This study included 180 patients (median age, 72 years) with AH, symptoms of HF, and LV EF ≥50 %. The incidence of chronic HF with preserved ejection fraction (CHFpEF) was studied with the stepwise, modified HFA-PEFF diagnostic algorithm, and long-term outcomes were assessed at 3, 6, and 12 months of follow-up. The hydration status was determined by a bioimpedance vector analysis, and the liver density was measured by indirect fibroelastometry. The following tests were performed for all patients: standard, general clinical and laboratory examination with evaluation of CH symptoms (including N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide test); extended echocardiography with assessment of structural and functional parameters of the heart; a KCCQ questionnaire was used for evaluation of patients' condition and quality of life (QoL). Long-term outcomes were studied by phone calls at 3, 6, and 12 months following discharge from the hospital/visit (worsened QoL, repeated hospitalization for cardiovascular causes, cardiovascular death or all-cause death).Results The following profiles were determined by the HFA-PEFF algorithm: with CHFpEF, with intermediate probability of HF, and without HF (58.9, 31.1, and 10 %, respectively). The study showed that patients with CHFpEF compared to patients of the intermediate group and without HF, had higher levels of brain natriuretic peptide, more pronounced signs of congestion according to results of the bioimpedance vector analysis and a higher liver density according to results of indirect fibroelastometry of the liver, which allowed identification of a group of patients with a high probability of CHFpEF. The diagnosis of HF by HFA-PEFF had an adverse prognostic significance with respect of worsened QoL according to the KCCQ questionnaire, and of repeated admission for HF during a year.Conclusion      In AH patients with symptoms of HF and LV EF ≥50 %, CHFpEF was detected with the HFA-PEFF algorithm in 58.9 % of cases. Patients with AH and verified CHFpEF had a high incidence of hyperhydration and increased liver density. A diagnosis of CHFpEF by the HFA-PEFF algorithm had an adverse prognostic significance with respect of long-term outcomes.

Reduced functional capacity is associated with the proportion of impaired myocardial deformation assessed in heart failure patients by CMR

Aims

Heart failure (HF) does not only reduce the life expectancy in patients, but their life is also often limited by HF symptoms leading to a reduced quality of life (QoL) and a diminished exercise capacity. Novel parameters in cardiac imaging, including both global and regional myocardial strain imaging, promise to contribute to better patient characterization and ultimately to better patient management. However, many of these methods are not part of clinical routine yet, their associations with clinical parameters have been poorly studied. An imaging parameters that also indicate the clinical symptom burden of HF patients would make cardiac imaging more robust toward incomplete clinical information and support the clinical decision process.

Methods and results

This prospective study conducted at two centers in Germany between 2017 and 2018 enrolled stable outpatient subjects with HF [n = 56, including HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), HF with mid-range ejection fraction (HFmrEF), and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF)] and a control cohort (n = 19). Parameters assessed included measures for external myocardial function, for example, cardiac index and myocardial deformation measurements by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging, left ventricular global longitudinal strain (GLS), the global circumferential strain (GCS), and the regional distribution of segment deformation within the LV myocardium, as well as basic phenotypical characteristics including the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) and the 6-minute walk test (6MWT). If less than 80% of the LV segments are preserved in their deformation capacity the functional capacity by 6MWT (6 minutes walking distance: MyoHealth ≥ 80%: 579.8 ± 177.6 m; MyoHealth 60-<80%: 401.3 ± 121.7 m; MyoHealth 40-<60%: 456.4 ± 68.9 m; MyoHealth < 40%: 397.6 ± 125.9 m, overall p-value: 0.03) as well as the symptom burden are significantly impaired (NYHA class: MyoHealth ≥ 80%: 0.6 ± 1.1 m; MyoHealth 60-<80%: 1.7 ± 1.2 m; MyoHealth 40-<60%: 1.8 ± 0.7 m; MyoHealth < 40%: 2.4 ± 0.5 m; overall p-value < 0.01). Differences were also observed in the perceived exertion assessed by on the Borg scale (MyoHealth ≥ 80%: 8.2 ± 2.3 m; MyoHealth 60-<80%: 10.4 ± 3.2 m; MyoHealth 40-<60%: 9.8 ± 2.1 m; MyoHealth < 40%: 11.0 ± 2.9 m; overall p-value: 0.20) as well as quality of life measures (MLHFQ; MyoHealth ≥ 80%: 7.5 ± 12.4 m; MyoHealth 60-<80%: 23.4 ± 23.4 m; MyoHealth 40-<60%: 20.5 ± 21.2 m; MyoHealth < 40%: 27.4 ± 24.4 m; overall p-value: 0.15)-while these differences were not significant.

Conclusion

The share of LV segments with preserved myocardial contraction promises to discriminate between symptomatic and asymptomatic subjects based on the imaging findings, even when the LV ejection fraction is preserved. This finding is promising to make imaging studies more robust toward incomplete clinical information.

HFA-PEFF score as an independent predictor of 2-year mortality in liver cirrhosis patients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Cardiovascular complications of liver cirrhosis include high cardiac output heart failure with reduced afterload and diastolic dysfunction. Heart Failure Association Pre-test assessment, Echocardiography and natriuretic peptide, Functional testing, Final etiology (HFA-PEFF) (values 0-6) is a diagnostic tool for heart failure. It is a cluster of echocardiographic and biochemical parameters. The purpose of this prospective study was to assess if HFA-PEFF score is associated with the severity of liver disease and to determine its prognostic significance in patients with cirrhosis.

METHODS

Patients with cirrhosis without an acute event were enrolled. A comprehensive echocardiography study was conducted, brain natriuretic peptide and N-terminal-pro-B-type Natriuretic Peptide levels were measured and HFA-PEFF score was calculated. All patients were prospectively followed up after enrollment. The study end-point was defined as the composite of all-cause death.

RESULTS

Seventy-two consecutive patients [median age 59 years (inter-quartile range: 52-65), 72.2% males, Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) 12.9 (8.5-16.3)] were included. The 52.8% had a high HFA-PEFF score (5 or 6) and the 47.2% intermediate/low score (0-4). HFA-PEFF score was correlated with MELD score (rho = 0.566, P  < 0.001), but not with age, SBP and heart rate. The median follow-up was 24.2 (9.5-38.8) months. The 1- and 2-year cumulative mortality was higher in patients with high HFA-PEFF compared to those with intermediate/low (log-rank P  < 0.001 for both). The predicted 2-year probability of survival in high vs intermediate/low HFA-PEFF was found to be a prognostic factor of death even when adjusted for age, gender and MELD score [hazard ratio = 3.539 (1.134-11.046), P  = 0.029].

CONCLUSION

HFA-PEFF score is high among patients with liver cirrhosis, especially those with advanced liver disease. HFA-PEFF score is associated with survival even when adjusting for cirrhosis severity.

External validation of the ACUTE HF score for risk stratification in acute heart failure

BACKGROUND

The ACUTE HF score is a simple risk score that predicts the prognosis of patients with acute heart failure (HF) using clinical and echocardiographic parameters. As this score was developed for a small European population, we aimed to validate this score in an external population.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This retrospective observational cohort analysis included patients hospitalized with acute HF during 2015-2019. Of 744 patients, 703 patients with available ACUTE HF scores were analyzed (75 ± 13 years; 61% male; left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] 49 ± 17%). Approximately one-third (34.4%) of the patients had reduced LVEF (<40%), and 51.4% exhibited preserved LVEF (≥50%). During a median follow-up of 452 days, primary and secondary outcomes were observed in 110 and 204 patients, respectively. The ACUTE HF score successfully stratified patients for primary (all-cause mortality) and secondary endpoints (a composite of all-cause mortality and heart failure rehospitalization) in Kaplan-Meier analyses (log-rank test, P < 0.001). Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models showed that the score was significantly independently associated with both primary and secondary endpoints after adjusted by covariates (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

We validated the risk prediction ability of ACUTE HF score in an Asian population. This score may be applicable in clinical practice.

Research Update on the Pathophysiological Mechanisms of Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction

Heart failure (HF) is a serious clinical syndrome, usually occurs at the advanced stage of various cardiovascular diseases, featured by high mortality and rehospitalization rate. According to left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (LVEF), HF has been categorized as HF with reduced EF (HFrEF; LVEF<40%), HF with mid-range EF (HFmrEF; LVEF 40-49%), and HF with preserved EF (HFpEF; LVEF ≥50%). HFpEF accounts for about 50% of cases of heart failure and has become the dominant form of heart failure. The mortality of HFpEF is similar to that of HFrEF. There are no welldocumented treatment options that can reduce the morbidity and mortality of HFpEF now. Understanding the underlying pathological mechanisms is essential for the development of novel effective therapy options for HFpEF. In recent years, significant research progress has been achieved on the pathophysiological mechanism of HFpEF. This review aimed to update the research progress on the pathophysiological mechanism of HFpEF.

Evaluation of the HFA-PEFF Score: results from the prospective DIAST-CHF cohort

AIMS

Although the number of patients suffering from heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) increases, the routine diagnosis remains a challenge. In the absence of a pathognomonic sign for HFpEF or specific treatment strategies, a prognosis-based characterization of suspected patients remains promising for both the risk stratification of the patients and a disease definition. The Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the European Society of Cardiology has introduced an algorithm with different levels of likelihood regarding the diagnosis of HFpEF, the HFA-PEFF score. We aimed to evaluate the predictive value of this algorithm in a large cohort regarding mortality, symptom burden, and the functional status.

METHODS AND RESULTS

DIAST-CHF is a multicentre, population-based, prospective, observational study in subjects with at least one risk factor for HFpEF between the age of 50 and 85. We calculated the HFA-PEFF score (n = 1668) and analysed the risk groups for overall mortality, cardiovascular hospitalization, and submaximal functional capacity (6-min walk distance) at baseline and after a follow-up period of 10 years. Patients with high HFA-PEFF score values 5&6 showed a higher mortality than those with an intermediate score (score values 2-4) and low score values (high 21.3% vs. intermediate 10.1% vs. low 4.3%, P < 0.001). Also, the burden of MACE (death, cardiovascular hospitalization, new myocardial infarction, first diagnosis of HF) was increased in the high score values group (high 40.7% vs. intermediate 25.9% vs. low 13.9%, P < 0.001). Similarly, patients with higher scores had higher cumulative incidences of cardiovascular hospitalizations (P = 0.011). Subjects with higher scores also had lower 6-min walk distance both at baseline and during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The HFA-PEFF score provides a reliable instrument to stratify suspected HFpEF patients by their risk for mortality, symptom burden, and functional status in cohort at risk with a follow-up period of 10 years. As high HFA-PEFF scores are associated with worse outcome, the HFA-PEFF algorithm describes a defining approach towards HFpEF.

Nitric oxide metabolites: associations with cardiovascular biomarkers and clinical parameters in patients with HFpEF

AIMS

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is one of the most rapidly growing cardiovascular health burden worldwide, but there is still a lack of understanding about the HFpEF pathophysiology. The nitric oxide (NO) signalling pathway has been identified as a potential key element. The aim of our study was to investigate markers of NO metabolism [l-arginine (l-Arg), homoarginine (hArg), and asymmetric and symmetric dimethylarginine (ADMA and SDMA)], additional biomarkers [N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), endothelin-1 (ET-1), mid-regional pro-adrenomedullin (MR-proADM), copeptin, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP)], and the endothelial function in an integrated approach focusing on associations with clinical characteristics in patients with HFpEF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Seventy-three patients, prospectively enrolled in the 'German HFpEF Registry', were analysed. Inclusion criteria were left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥ 50%; New York Heart Association functional class ≥ II; elevated levels of NT-proBNP > 125 pg/mL; and at least one additional criterion for structural heart disease or diastolic dysfunction. All patients underwent transthoracic echocardiography, cardiopulmonary exercise testing, and pulse amplitude tonometry (EndoPAT™). Patients were categorized in two groups based on their retrospectively calculated HFA-PEFF score. Serum concentrations of l-Arg, hArg, ADMA, SDMA, NT-proBNP, ET-1, MR-proADM, copeptin, and hsCRP were determined. Patients had a median age of 74 years, 47% were female, and median LVEF was 57%. Fifty-two patients (71%) had an HFA-PEFF score ≥ 5 (definitive HFpEF), and 21 patients (29%) a score of 3 to 4 (risk for HFpEF). Overall biomarker concentrations were 126 ± 32 μmol/L for l-Arg, 1.67 ± 0.55 μmol/L for hArg, 0.74 (0.60;0.85) μmol/L for SDMA, and 0.61 ± 0.10 μmol/L for ADMA. The median reactive hyperaemia index (RHI) was 1.55 (1.38;1.87). SDMA correlated with NT-proBNP (r = 0.291; P = 0.013), ET-1 (r = 0.233; P = 0.047), and copeptin (r = 0.381; P = 0.001). ADMA correlated with ET-1 (r = 0.250; P = 0.033) and hsCRP (r = 0.303; P = 0.009). SDMA was associated with the left atrial volume index (β = 0.332; P = 0.004), also after adjustment for age, sex, and comorbidities. Biomarkers were non-associated with the RHI. A principal component analysis revealed two contrary clusters of biomarkers.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest an impaired NO metabolism as one possible key pathogenic determinant in at least a subgroup of patients with HFpEF. We argue for further evaluation of NO-based therapies. Upcoming studies should clarify whether subgroups of HFpEF patients can take more benefit from therapies that are targeting NO metabolism and pathway.

Genomic, Proteomic, and Metabolic Comparisons of Small Animal Models of Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Tale of Mice, Rats, and Cats

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains a medical anomaly that baffles researchers and physicians alike. The overall phenotypical changes of diastolic function and left ventricular hypertrophy observed in HFpEF are definable; however, the metabolic and molecular alterations that ultimately produce these changes are not well established. Comorbidities such as obesity, hypertension, and diabetes, as well as general aging, play crucial roles in its development and progression. Various animal models have recently been developed to better understand the pathophysiological and metabolic developments in HFpEF and to illuminate novel avenues for pharmacotherapy. These models include multi‐hit rodents and feline aortic constriction animals. Recently, genomic, proteomic, and metabolomic approaches have been used to define altered signaling pathways in the heart associated with HFpEF, including those involved in inflammation, cGMP‐related, Ca²⁺ handling, mitochondrial respiration, and the unfolded protein response in endoplasmic reticulum stress. This article aims to present an overview of what has been learnt by these studies, focusing mainly on the findings in common while highlighting unresolved issues. The knowledge gained from these research models will not simply be of benefit for treating HFpEF but will undoubtedly provide new insights into the mechanisms by which the heart deals with external stresses and how the processes involved can fail.

Prognostic Value of HFA-PEFF Score in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Background

The HFA-PEFF score may help in predicting long-term outcomes in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for severe aortic stenosis and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (EF).

Methods

We retrieved data from 1,332 patients undergoing TAVI between 2010 and 2019 from the Prospective Segeberg TAVI Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03192774). We calculated the HFA-PEFF score for 1,022 patients who had preserved EF (≥50%). To assess the prognostic value of the HFA-PEFF score in predicting adverse events, we dichotomised the patients according to a cut-off score of five (score <5 group: n=528 (51.6%), score ≥5 group: n=494 (48.3%)).

Results

The HFA-PEFF score ≥5 groups were older (81.9±6.3 years vs. 80.3±6.9 years; p<0.001) and had a higher prevalence of atrial fibrillation (35.1% vs 20.8%; p<0.001) and chronic kidney disease (30.1% vs 26.1%; p<0.001). Kaplan-Meier survival analyses over 24 months showed increased cardiovascular (CV) mortality (12.5% vs. 7.7%, log-rank; p=0.028) and first heart failure-related rehospitalisation (7.7% vs. 4.0%, log-rank p=0.014) in the HFA-PEFF score ≥5 groups compared with those of lower scores. No significant difference in all-cause mortality between both groups was observed (22.0% vs. 17.9%, log-rank p=0.127). In multivariate analysis, HFA-PEFF score ≥5 failed to predict CV mortality (aHR 1.37, 95% CI: 0.90-2.08, p=0.140) and time to first heart failure-related rehospitalisation (aHR 1.49, 95% CI: 0.83-2.65, p=0.181).

Conclusion

The HFA-PEFF score showed limited value in predicting long-term mortality and adverse heart failure-related events in patients with preserved EF undergoing TAVI. Clinical variables specific to this population could complement the HFA-PEFF score for better risk prediction.

Minimal subphenotyping model for acute heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Aims

Application of the latent class analysis to acute heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) showed that the heterogeneous acute HFpEF patients can be classified into four distinct phenotypes with different clinical outcomes. This model‐based clustering required a total of 32 variables to be included. However, this large number of variables will impair the clinical application of this classification algorithm. This study aimed to identify the minimal number of variables for the development of optimal subphenotyping model.

Methods and results

This study is a post hoc analysis of the PURSUIT‐HFpEF study (N = 1095), a prospective, multi‐referral centre, observational study of acute HFpEF [UMIN000021831]. We previously applied the latent class analysis to the PURSUIT‐HFpEF dataset and established the full 32‐variable model for subphenotyping. In this study, we used the Cohen's kappa statistic to investigate the minimal number of discriminatory variables needed to accurately classify the phenogroups in comparison with the full 32‐variable model. Cohen's kappa statistic of the top‐X number of discriminatory variables compared with the full 32‐variable derivation model showed that the models with ≥16 discriminatory variables showed kappa value of >0.8, suggesting that the minimal number of discriminatory variables for the optimal phenotyping model was 16. The 16‐variable model consists of C‐reactive protein, creatinine, gamma‐glutamyl transferase, brain natriuretic peptide, white blood cells, systolic blood pressure, fasting blood sugar, triglyceride, clinical scenario classification, infection‐triggered acute decompensated HF, estimated glomerular filtration rate, platelets, neutrophils, GWTG‐HF (Get With The Guidelines‐Heart Failure) risk score, chronic kidney disease, and CONUT (Controlling Nutritional Status) score. Characteristics and clinical outcomes of the four phenotypes subclassified by the minimal 16‐variable model were consistent with those by the full 32‐variable model. The four phenotypes were labelled based on their characteristics as ‘rhythm trouble’, ‘ventricular‐arterial uncoupling’, ‘low output and systemic congestion’, and ‘systemic failure’, respectively.

Conclusions

The phenotyping model with top 16 variables showed almost perfect agreement with the full 32‐variable model. The minimal model may enhance the future clinical application of this clustering algorithm.

Tailored risk assessment of 90-day acute heart failure readmission or all-cause death to heart failure with preserved versus reduced ejection fraction

BACKGROUND

After incident heart failure (HF) admission, patients are vulnerable to readmission or death in the 90-day post-discharge. Although risk models for readmission or death incorporate ejection fraction (EF), patients with HF with preserved EF (HFpEF) and those with HF with reduced EF (HFrEF) represent distinct cohorts. To better assess risk, this study developed machine learning models and identified risk factors for the 90-day acute HF readmission or death by HF subtype.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Approximately 1965 patients with HFpEF and 1124 with HFrEF underwent an index admission. Acute HF rehospitalization or death occurred in 23% of HFpEF and 28% of HFrEF groups. Of the 101 variables considered, multistep variable selection identified 24 and 25 significant factors associated with 90-day events in HFpEF and HFrEF, respectively. In addition to risk factors common to both groups, factors unique to HFpEF patients included cognitive dysfunction, low-pulse pressure, β-blocker, and diuretic use, and right ventricular dysfunction. In contrast, factors unique to HFrEF patients included a history of arrhythmia, acute HF on presentation, and echocardiographic characteristics like left atrial dilatation or elevated mitral E/A ratio. Furthermore, the model tailored to HFpEF (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.770; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.767-0.774) outperformed a model for the combined groups (AUC = 0.759; 95% CI 0.756-0.763).

CONCLUSION

The UF 90-day post-discharge acute HF Re admission or Death Risk Assessment (UF90-RADRA) models help identify HFpEF and HFrEF patients at higher risk who may require proactive outpatient management.

HFA-PEFF scores: prognostic value in heart failure with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The Heart Failure Association (HFA)-PEFF score is recognized as a simple method to diagnose heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between HFA-PEFF scores and cardiovascular outcomes in HFpEF patients.

METHODS

A total of 502 consecutive HFpEF patients were prospectively observed for up to 1,500 days. Cardiovascular outcomes were compared between two groups of patients, defined by their HFA-PEFF scores: those who scored 2-4 (the intermediate-score group) and those who scored 5-6 group (the high-score group). Overall, 236 cardiovascular events were observed during the follow-up period (median, 1,159 days).

RESULTS

Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that there were significant differences in composite cardiovascular events and HF-related events between the intermediate-score group and the high-score group (p = 0.003 and p < 0.001, respectively). Multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis showed that the HFA-PEFF scores significantly predicted future HF-related events (hazard ratio, 1.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11 to 2.50; p = 0.014); receiver operating characteristic analysis confirmed this relationship (area under the curve, 0.633; 95% CI, 0.574 to 0.692; p < 0.001). The cutoff HFA-PEFF score for the identification of HF-related events was 4.5. Decision curve analysis revealed that combining the HFA-PEFF score with conventional prognostic factors improved the prediction of HF-related events.

CONCLUSION

HFA-PEFF scores may be useful for predicting HF-related events in HFpEF patients.

The Prognostic Value of Lung Ultrasound in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction in the Ambulatory Setting

Background: Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a growing healthcare burden, and its prevalence is steadily increasing. Lung ultrasound (LUS) is a promising screening and prognostic tool in the heart failure population. However, more information on its value in predicting outcome is needed.

Aims: The aim of our study was to assess the prognostic performance of LUS B-lines compared to traditional and novel clinical and echocardiographic parameters and natriuretic peptide levels in patients with newly diagnosed HFpEF in an ambulatory setting.

Methods: In our prospective cohort study, all ambulatory patients with clinical suspicion of HFpEF underwent comprehensive echocardiography, lung ultrasound and NT-proBNP measurement during their first appointment at our cardiology outpatient clinic. Our endpoint was a composite of worsening heart failure symptoms requiring hospitalization or loop diuretic dose escalation and death.

Results: We prospectively enrolled 75 consecutive patients with HFpEF who matched our inclusion and exclusion criteria. We detected 11 events on a 26 ± 10-months follow-up. We found that the predictive value of B-lines is similar to the predictive value of NT-proBNP (AUC 0.863 vs. 0.859), with the best cut-off at >15 B-lines. Having more B-lines than 15 significantly increased the likelihood of adverse events with a hazard ratio of 20.956 (p = 0.004). The number of B-lines remained an independent predictor of events at multivariate modeling. Having more than 15 B-lines lines was associated with a significantly worse event-free survival (Log-rank: 16.804, p < 0.001).

Conclusion: The number of B-lines seems to be an independent prognostic factor for adverse outcomes in HFpEF. Since it is an easy-to-learn, feasible and radiation-free method, it may add substantial value to the commonly used diagnostic and risk stratification models.

Prognostic significance of the HFA-PEFF score in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

AIMS

The HFA-PEFF score is a part of the stepwise diagnostic algorithm of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). We aimed to evaluate the prognostic significance of the HFA-PEFF score on the clinical outcomes in patients with HFpEF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The Prospective mUlticenteR obServational stUdy of patIenTs with Heart Failure with preserved Ejection Fraction (PURSUIT-HFpEF) study is a prospective, multicentre, observational study in which collaborating hospitals in Osaka record clinical, echocardiographic, and outcome data of patients with acute decompensated heart failure with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (≥50%) [UMIN-CTR ID: UMIN000021831]. Acute decompensated heart failure was diagnosed on the basis of the following criteria: (i) clinical symptoms and signs according to the Framingham Heart Study criteria; and (ii) serum N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide level of ≥400 pg/mL or brain natriuretic peptide level of ≥100 pg/mL. The HFA-PEFF score has functional, morphological, and biomarker domains. We evaluated the prognostic significance of the HFA-PEFF score (calculated based on the data at hospital discharge) on post-discharge clinical outcomes in this cohort. The primary endpoint of the present study was a composite of all-cause death and heart failure readmission. Between June 2016 and December 2019, 871 patients were enrolled from 26 hospitals (mean follow-up duration 399 ± 349 days). A total of 804 patients were finally analysed after excluding patients with scores of 0 (N = 5) and 1 (N = 15) from 824 patients with available HFA-PEFF score based on the echocardiographic and laboratory data at discharge. According to the laboratory and echocardiographic data at the time of discharge, 487 patients (59.1%) were diagnosed as HFpEF (HFA-PEFF score ≥ 5) while 317 patients (38.5%) had intermediate score. Kaplan-Meier analysis divided by the HFA-PEFF score [low, score 2-5 (N = 494) vs. high, score 6 (N = 310)] indicated that the HFA-PEFF score successfully stratified the patients for the primary endpoint (log-rank test P < 0.001). Cox proportional hazard model showed that the HFA-PEFF score was significantly associated with the primary endpoint (high score with reference to low score, adjusted hazard ratio 1.446, 95% confidence interval [1.099-1.902], P = 0.008).

CONCLUSION

The HFA-PEFF score at discharge was significantly associated with the post-discharge clinical outcomes in acute decompensated heart failure patients with preserved ejection fraction. This study suggested clinical usefulness of the HFA-PEFF score not only as a diagnostic tool but also a practical prognostic tool.