Risk factors for asymptomatic echocardiographic abnormalities that predict symptomatic heart failure

Adropin Predicts Asymptomatic Heart Failure in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Independent of the Levels of Natriuretic Peptides

In patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), asymptomatic adverse cardiac remodeling plays a pivotal role in the development of heart failure (HF). Patients with T2DM often have low or near-normal levels of natriuretic peptides, including N-terminal brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), which have been inconclusive in predicting the transition from asymptomatic adverse cardiac remodeling to HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). The aim of this study was to elucidate the predictive ability of adropin for HFpEF depending on the circulating levels of NT-proBNP. We prospectively enrolled 561 T2DM patients (glycated hemoglobin < 6.9%) with echocardiographic evidence of structural cardiac abnormalities and left ventricular ejection fractions >50%. All patients underwent B-mode transthoracic echocardiographic and Doppler examinations. Circulating biomarkers, i.e., NT-proBNP and adropin, were assessed at baseline. All individuals were divided into two groups according to the presence of low levels (<125 pmol/mL; n = 162) or elevated levels (≥125 pmol/mL; n = 399) of NT-proBNP. Patients with known asymptomatic adverse cardiac remodeling and elevated NT-proBNP were classified as having asymptomatic HFpEF. A multivariate logistic regression showed that low serum levels of adropin (<3.5 ng/mL), its combination with any level of NT-proBNP, and use of SGLT2 inhibitors were independent predictors of HFpEF. However, low levels of adropin significantly increased the predictive ability of NT-proBNP for asymptomatic HFpEF in patients with T2DM, even though the concentrations of NT-proBNP were low, while adropin added discriminatory value to all concentrations of NT-proBNP. In conclusion, low levels of adropin significantly increase the predictive ability of NT-proBNP for asymptomatic HFpEF in patients with T2DM.

Long-term outcomes of phenoclusters in preclinical heart failure with preserved and mildly reduced ejection fraction

AIMS

The identification of subjects at higher risk for incident heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (EF) suitable for more intensive preventive programmes remains challenging. We applied phenomapping to the DAVID-Berg population, comprising subjects with preclinical HF, aiming to refine HF risk stratification.

METHODS

The DAVID-Berg study prospectively enrolled 596 asymptomatic outpatients with EF > 40% with hypertension, diabetes mellitus or known cardiovascular disease. In this cohort, we performed an unsupervised cluster analysis on 591 patients, including clinical, laboratory, electrocardiographic and echocardiographic parameters. We tested the association between each cluster and a composite outcome of HF/death.

RESULTS

The median age was 70 years, 55.5% were males and the median EF was 61.0%. Phenomapping provided three different clusters. Subjects in Cluster 3 were the oldest and had the highest prevalence of atrial fibrillation, the lowest estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), the highest N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and the largest left atrium. During a median follow-up of 5.7 years, 13.4% of subjects experienced HF/death events (N = 79). Compared with Clusters 1 and 2, Cluster 3 had the worst prognosis (log-rank test: Cluster 3 vs. 1 P < 0.001; Cluster 3 vs. 2 P = 0.008). Cluster 3 was associated with a risk of HF/death 2.5 times higher than Cluster 1 [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 2.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.24-4.90].

CONCLUSIONS

Based on phenomapping, older patients with lower kidney function and worse diastolic function might represent a subset of preclinical HF with EF > 40% who deserve more efforts to prevent clinical HF.

Biomarkers for the Diagnosis of Heart Failure in People with Diabetes: A Consensus Report from Diabetes Technology Society

Diabetes Technology Society assembled a panel of clinician experts in diabetology, cardiology, clinical chemistry, nephrology, and primary care to review the current evidence on biomarker screening of people with diabetes (PWD) for heart failure (HF), who are, by definition, at risk for HF (Stage A HF). This consensus report reviews features of HF in PWD from the perspectives of 1) epidemiology, 2) classification of stages, 3) pathophysiology, 4) biomarkers for diagnosing, 5) biomarker assays, 6) diagnostic accuracy of biomarkers, 7) benefits of biomarker screening, 8) consensus recommendations for biomarker screening, 9) stratification of Stage B HF, 10) echocardiographic screening, 11) management of Stage A and Stage B HF, and 12) future directions. The Diabetes Technology Society panel recommends 1) biomarker screening with one of two circulating natriuretic peptides (B-type natriuretic peptide or N-terminal prohormone of B-type natriuretic peptide), 2) beginning screening five years following diagnosis of type 1 diabetes (T1D) and at the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes (T2D), 3) beginning routine screening no earlier than at age 30 years for T1D (irrespective of age of diagnosis) and at any age for T2D, 4) screening annually, and 5) testing any time of day. The panel also recommends that an abnormal biomarker test defines asymptomatic preclinical HF (Stage B HF). This diagnosis requires follow-up using transthoracic echocardiography for classification into one of four subcategories of Stage B HF, corresponding to risk of progression to symptomatic clinical HF (Stage C HF). These recommendations will allow identification and management of Stage A and Stage B HF in PWD to prevent progression to Stage C HF or advanced HF (Stage D HF).

Clinical implications of the universal definition for the prevention and treatment of heart failure

The diagnosis of heart failure (HF) primarily relies on signs and symptoms that are neither sensitive nor specific. This impedes timely diagnosis and delays effective therapies or interventions, despite the availability of several evidence-based treatments for HF. Through monumental collaborative efforts from representatives of HF societies worldwide, the universal definition of HF was published in 2021, to provide the necessary standardized framework required for clinical management, clinical trials, and research. This review elaborates the key concepts of the new universal definition of HF, highlighting the key merits and potential avenues, which can be nuanced further in future iterations. We also discuss the key implications of the universal definition document from the perspectives of various stakeholders within the healthcare framework, including patients, care providers, system/payers and policymakers.

Development and Validation of a Risk Score in Chinese Patients With Chronic Heart Failure

Background

Acute exacerbation of chronic heart failure contributes to substantial increases in major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). The study developed a risk score to evaluate the severity of heart failure which was related to the risk of MACE.

Methods

This single-center retrospective observational study included 5,777 patients with heart failure. A credible random split-sample method was used to divide data into training and validation dataset (split ratio = 0.7:0.3). Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (Lasso) logistic regression was applied to select predictors and develop the risk score to predict the severity category of heart failure. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, and calibration curves were used to assess the model’s discrimination and accuracy.

Results

Body-mass index (BMI), ejection fraction (EF), serum creatinine, hemoglobin, C-reactive protein (CRP), and neutrophil lymphocyte ratio (NLR) were identified as predictors and assembled into the risk score (P &lt; 0.05), which showed good discrimination with AUC in the training dataset (0.770, 95% CI:0.746–0.794) and validation dataset (0.756, 95% CI:0.717–0.795) and was well calibrated in both datasets (all P &gt; 0.05). As the severity of heart failure worsened according to risk score, the incidence of MACE, length of hospital stay, and treatment cost increased (P &lt; 0.001).

Conclusion

A risk score incorporating BMI, EF, serum creatinine, hemoglobin, CRP, and NLR, was developed and validated. It effectively evaluated individuals’ severity classification of heart failure, closely related to MACE.