Association between beta‐blocker use and mortality/morbidity in older patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. A propensity score‐matched analysis from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and chronic kidney disease: a focus on therapies and interventions

In heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), the presence of concomitant chronic kidney disease (CKD) predicts poorer cardiovascular outcomes, more aggravated heart failure (HF) status, and higher mortality. Physicians might be reluctant to initiate life-saving anti-HF medications out of fear of worsening renal function and a higher incidence of adverse events. Moreover, international guidelines do not give clear recommendations on managing this subgroup of patients as well as advanced CKD was always an exclusion criterion in most major HF trials. Nevertheless, in this review, we will highlight several recent clinical trials and post-hoc analyses of major trials that showed the safety and efficacy of the different therapies in HFrEF patients with CKD, besides several small-scale cohorts that tested guideline-directed medical therapies in End Stage Kidney Disease (ESKD). Regarding interventions in this subgroup of patients, we will provide up-to-date data on implantable cardioverter defibrillators, cardiac resynchronization therapy, and coronary revascularization, in addition to mitral valve transcatheter edge-to-edge repair and implantable pulmonary artery pressure sensors.

How to tackle therapeutic inertia in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. A scientific statement of the Heart Failure Association of the ESC

Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) reduces morbidity and mortality, but its implementation is often poor in daily clinical practice. Barriers to implementation include clinical and organizational factors that might contribute to clinical inertia, i.e. avoidance/delay of recommended treatment initiation/optimization. The spectrum of strategies that might be applied to foster GDMT implementation is wide, and involves the organizational set-up of heart failure care pathways, tailored drug initiation/optimization strategies increasing the chance of successful implementation, digital tools/telehealth interventions, educational activities and strategies targeting patient/physician awareness, and use of quality registries. This scientific statement by the Heart Failure Association of the ESC provides an overview of the current state of GDMT implementation in HFrEF, clinical and organizational barriers to implementation, and aims at suggesting a comprehensive framework on how to overcome clinical inertia and ultimately improve implementation of GDMT in HFrEF based on up-to-date evidence.

The management of heart failure in Sweden-the physician's perspective: a survey

Aims

To assess the barriers to guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) use in heart failure (HF), diagnostic workup and general knowledge about HF among physicians in Sweden.

Methods

A survey about the management of HF was sent to 828 Swedish physicians including general practitioners (GPs) and specialists during 2021-2022. Answers were reported as percentages and comparisons were made by specialty (GPs vs. specialists).

Results

One hundred sixty-eight physicians participated in the survey (40% females, median age 43 years; 41% GPs and 59% specialists). Electrocardiography and New York Heart Association class evaluations are mostly performed once a year by GPs (46%) and at every outpatient visit by specialists (40%). Echocardiography is mostly requested if there is clinical deterioration (60%). One-third of participants screen for iron deficiency only if there is anemia. Major obstacles to implementation of different drug classes in HF with reduced ejection fraction are related to side effects, with no significant differences between specialties. Device implantation is deemed appropriate regardless of aetiology (69%) and patient age (86%). Specialists answered correctly to knowledge questions more often than GPs. Eighty-six percent of participants think that GDMT should be implemented as much as possible. Most participants (57%) believe that regular patient assessment in nurse-led HF clinics improve adherence to GDMT.

Conclusion

Obstacles to GDMT implementation according to physicians in Sweden mainly relate to potential side effects, lack of specialist knowledge and organizational aspects. Further efforts should be placed in educational activities and structuring of nurse-led clinics.

How to Manage Beta-Blockade in Older Heart Failure Patients: A Scoping Review

Beta blockers (BBs) play a crucial role in enhancing the quality of life and extending the survival of patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Initiating the therapy at low doses and gradually titrating the dose upwards is recommended to ensure therapeutic efficacy while mitigating potential adverse effects. Vigilant monitoring for signs of drug intolerance is necessary, with dose adjustments as required. The management of older HF patients requires a case-centered approach, taking into account individual comorbidities, functional status, and frailty. Older adults, however, are often underrepresented in randomized clinical trials, leading to some uncertainty in management strategies as patients with HF in clinical practice are older than those enrolled in trials. The present article performs a scoping review of the past 25 years of published literature on BBs in older HF patients, focusing on age, outcomes, and tolerability. Twelve studies (eight randomized-controlled and four observational) encompassing 26,426 patients were reviewed. The results indicate that BBs represent a viable treatment for older HFrEF patients, offering benefits in symptom management, cardiac function, and overall outcomes. Their role in HF with preserved EF, however, remains uncertain. Further research is warranted to refine treatment strategies and address specific aspects in older adults, including proper dosing, therapeutic adherence, and tolerability.

The role of multimorbidity in patients with heart failure across the left ventricular ejection fraction spectrum: Data from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry

AIMS

The aim of this analysis was to provide data on the overall comorbidity burden, both cardiovascular (CV) and non-CV, in a large real-world heart failure (HF) population across the ejection fraction (EF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients with HF from the Swedish HF Registry between 2000 and 2021 were included. Of 91 463 patients (median age 76 years [interquartile range 67-82]), 98% had at least one among the 17 explored comorbidities (94% at least one CV and 85% at least one non-CV comorbidity). All comorbidities, except for coronary artery disease (CAD), were more frequent in HF with preserved EF (HFpEF). Patients with multiple comorbidities were older, more likely female, inpatients, with HFpEF, worse New York Heart Association class and higher N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels. In a multivariable Cox model, 12 comorbidities were independently associated with a higher risk of death from any cause. The highest risk was associated with dementia (hazard ratio [HR] 1.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.45-1.65), chronic kidney disease (HR 1.37, 95% CI 1.34-1.41), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR 1.32, 95% CI 1.28-1.35). Obesity was associated with a lower risk of all-cause death (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.79-0.84). CAD and valvular heart disease were associated with a higher risk of all-cause and CV mortality, but not non-CV mortality, whereas cancer and musculo-skeletal disease increased the risk of non-CV mortality. A significant interaction with EF was observed for several comorbidities. Occurrence of CV and non-CV outcomes was related to the number of CV and non-CV comorbidities, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The burden of both CV and non-CV comorbidities was high in HF regardless of EF, but overall higher in HFpEF. Multimorbidity was associated with a high risk of death with a different burden on CV or non-CV outcomes.

The State of Use and Utility of Negative Controls in Pharmacoepidemiologic Studies

Uses of real-world data in drug safety and effectiveness studies are often challenged by various sources of bias. We undertook a systematic search of the published literature through September 2020 to evaluate the state of use and utility of negative controls to address bias in pharmacoepidemiologic studies. Two reviewers independently evaluated study eligibility and abstracted data. Our search identified 184 eligible studies for inclusion. Cohort studies (115, 63%) and administrative data (114, 62%) were, respectively, the most common study design and data type used. Most studies used negative control outcomes (91, 50%), and for most studies the target source of bias was unmeasured confounding (93, 51%). We identified 4 utility domains of negative controls: 1) bias detection (149, 81%), 2) bias correction (16, 9%), 3) P-value calibration (8, 4%), and 4) performance assessment of different methods used in drug safety studies (31, 17%). The most popular methodologies used were the 95% confidence interval and P-value calibration. In addition, we identified 2 reference sets with structured steps to check the causality assumption of the negative control. While negative controls are powerful tools in bias detection, we found many studies lacked checking the underlying assumptions. This article is part of a Special Collection on Pharmacoepidemiology.

Long-Term Outcomes of Early Coronary Artery Disease Testing After New-Onset Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

Coronary artery disease (CAD) testing remains underutilized in patients with newly diagnosed heart failure (HF). The longitudinal clinical impact of early CAD testing has not been well-characterized. We investigated changes in clinical management and long-term outcomes after early CAD evaluation in patients with incident HF.

METHODS

We identified Medicare patients with incident HF from 2006 to 2018. The exposure variable was early CAD testing within 1 month of initial HF diagnosis. Covariate-adjusted rates of cardiovascular interventions after testing, including CAD-related management, were modeled using mixed-effects regression with clinician as a random intercept. We assessed mortality and hospitalization outcomes using landmark analyses with inverse probability-weighted Cox proportional hazards models. Falsification end points and mediation analysis were employed for bias assessment.

RESULTS

Among 309 559 patients with new-onset HF without prior CAD, 15.7% underwent early CAD testing. Patients who underwent prompt CAD evaluation had higher adjusted rates of subsequent antiplatelet/statin prescriptions and revascularization, guideline-directed therapy for HF, and stroke prophylaxis for atrial fibrillation/flutter than controls. In weighted Cox models, 1-month CAD testing was associated with significantly reduced all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.91-0.96]). Mediation analyses indicated that ≈70% of this association was explained by CAD management, largely from new statin prescriptions. Falsification end points (outpatient diagnoses of urinary tract infection and hospitalizations for hip/vertebral fracture) were nonsignificant.

CONCLUSIONS

Early CAD testing after incident HF was associated with a modest mortality benefit, driven mostly by subsequent statin therapy. Further investigation on clinician barriers to testing and treating high-risk patients may improve adherence to guideline-recommended cardiovascular interventions.

One-year rehospitalisation and mortality after acute heart failure hospitalisation: a competing risk analysis

OBJECTIVE

To identify factors that independently predict the risk of rehospitalisation and death after acute heart failure (AHF) hospital discharge in a real-world setting, considering death without rehospitalisation as a competing event.

METHODS

Single-centre, retrospective, observational study enrolling 394 patients discharged from an index AHF hospitalisation. Overall survival was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression models. For the risk of rehospitalisation, survival analysis considering competing risks was performed: rehospitalisation was the event of interest, and death without rehospitalisation was the competing event.

RESULTS

During the first year after discharge, 131 (33.3%) patients were rehospitalised for AHF and 67 (17.0%) died without being readmitted; the remaining 196 patients (49.7%) lived without further hospitalisations. The 1-year overall survival estimate was 0.71 (SE=0.02). After adjusting for gender, age and left ventricle ejection fraction, the results showed that the risk of death was higher in patients with dementia, higher levels of plasma creatinine (PCr), lower levels of platelet distribution width (PDW) and at Q4 of red cell distribution width (RDW). Multivariable models showed that the risk of rehospitalisation was increased in patients with atrial fibrillation, higher PCr or taking beta-blockers at discharge. Furthermore, the risk of death without AHF rehospitalisation was higher in males, those aged ≥80 years, patients with dementia or RDW at Q4 on admission (compared with Q1). Taking beta-blockers at discharge and having a higher PDW on admission reduced the risk of death without rehospitalisation.

CONCLUSION

When assessing rehospitalisation as a study endpoint, death without rehospitalisation should be considered a competing event in the analyses. Data from this study reveal that patients with atrial fibrillation, renal dysfunction or taking beta-blockers are more likely to be rehospitalised for AHF, while older men with dementia or high RDW are more prone to die without hospital readmission.

Frailty interferes with the guideline-directed medical therapy in heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction

AIMS

Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is recommended in clinical guidelines, but elderly patients have not fully received GDMT in the clinical situation. The aim of this study was to determine the clinical characteristics of patients who have not received GDMT and the association between implementation of GDMT at discharge and physical frailty in patients with HFrEF who were hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

This study was a cross-sectional study with a retrospective analysis of the Kochi YOSACOI study, a prospective multicentre observational study that enrolled 1061 patients hospitalized for ADHF from May 2017 to December 2019 in Japan. Of 339 patients (32.0%) with HFrEF, 268 patients who were assessed for physical frailty by the Japanese version of the Cardiovascular Health Study criteria were divided into two groups: those with GDMT (135 patients, 50.4%) and those without GDMT (133 patients, 49.6%). GDMT was defined as the prescription of a combination of renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors (angiotensin-converting inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers) and beta-blockers. The median age of patients with HFrEF was 76 years (interquartile range, 67-83 years). Patients without GDMT were older than patients with GDMT (73 years vs. 78 years, P < 0.001). Patients without GDMT tended to have more prior HF admission than did patients with GDMT (P = 0.004), and patients without GDMT had lower levels of estimated glomerular filtration rate (P < 0.001) than those in patients with GDMT. Physical frailty was observed in 54.1% of the patients without GDMT and in 38.5% of the patients with GDMT (P = 0.014). Patients without GDMT had a higher rate of cognitive impairment than that in patients with GDMT (P = 0.009). RAS inhibitors only, beta-blockers only, and both RAS inhibitors and beta-blockers were less frequently prescribed in patients with physical frailty than in patients with physical non-frailty (52.0% vs. 86.7%, P < 0.05; 70.1% vs. 100.0%, P < 0.05; 42.5% vs. 86.7%, P < 0.01, respectively). In logistic regression analysis, compared with physical non-frailty, physical frailty was significantly associated with no implementation of GDMT (odds ratio: 6.900, 95% confidence interval: 1.420-33.600; P = 0.017), independent of older age and severe renal dysfunction.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that physical frailty is one of the factors that may withhold GDMT in patients with HFrEF.

Beta receptor blocker therapy for the elderly in the COVID-19 era

When the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic spread globally from the Hubei region of China in December 2019, the impact on elderly people was particularly unfavorable. The mortality associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection was highest in older individuals, in whom frailty and comorbidities increased susceptibility to severe forms of COVID-19. Unfortunately, in older patients, the course of COVID-19 was often characterized by significant cardiovascular complications, such as heart failure decompensation, arrhythmias, pericarditis, and myopericarditis. Ensuring that the elderly have adequate therapeutic coverage against known cardiovascular diseases and risk factors is particularly important in the COVID-19 era. Beta blockers are widely used for the treatment and prevention of cardiovascular disease. The clinical benefits of beta blockers have been confirmed in elderly patients, and in addition to their negative chronotropic effect, sympathetic inhibition and anti-inflammatory activity are theoretically of great benefit for the treatment of COVID-19 infection. Beta blockers have not been clearly shown to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection, but there is evidence from published studies including elderly patients that beta blockers are associated with a more favorable clinical course of COVID-19 and reduced mortality. In this minireview, we summarize the most important evidence available in the literature on the usefulness of beta blocker therapy for older patients in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Medical Treatment of Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction in the Elderly

The aging population, higher burden of predisposing conditions and comorbidities along with improvements in therapy all contribute to the growing prevalence of heart failure (HF). Although the majority of trials have not demonstrated age-dependent heterogeneity in the efficacy or safety of medical treatment for HF, the latest trials demonstrate that older participants are less likely to receive established drug therapies for HF with reduced ejection fraction. There remains reluctance in real-world clinical practice to prescribe and up-titrate these medications in older people, possibly because of (mis)understanding about lower tolerance and greater propensity for developing adverse drug reactions. This is compounded by difficulties in the management of multiple medications, patient preferences and other non-medical considerations. Future research should provide a more granular analysis on how to approach medical and device therapies in elderly patients, with consideration of biological differences, difficulties in care delivery and issues relevant to patients’ values and perspectives. A variety of approaches are needed, with the central principle being to ‘add years to life – and life to years’. These include broader representation of elderly HF patients in clinical trials, improved education of healthcare professionals, wider provision of specialised centres for multidisciplinary HF management and stronger implementation of HF medical treatment in vulnerable patient groups.

Evidence-based Therapy in Older Patients with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction

Older patients are becoming prevalent among people with heart failure (HF) as the overall population ages. However, older patients are largely under-represented, or even excluded, from randomised controlled trials on HF with reduced ejection fraction, limiting the generalisability of trial results in the real world and leading to weaker evidence supporting the use and titration of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) in older patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction. This, in combination with other factors limiting the application of guideline recommendations, including a fear of poor tolerability or adverse effects, the heavy burden of comorbidities and the need for multiple therapies, classically leads to lower adherence to GDMT in older patients. Although there are no data supporting the under-use and under-dosing of HF medications in older patients, large registry-based studies have confirmed age as one of the major obstacles to treatment optimisation. In this review, the authors provide an overview of the contemporary state of implementation of GDMT in older groups and the reasons for the lower use of treatments, and discuss some measures that may help improve adherence to evidence-based recommendations in older age groups.

A year in heart failure: an update of recent findings

Major changes have occurred in these last years in heart failure (HF) management. Landmark trials and the 2021 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of HF have established four classes of drugs for treatment of HF with reduced ejection fraction: angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors, namely, dapagliflozin or empagliflozin. These drugs consistently showed benefits on mortality, HF hospitalizations, and quality of life. Correction of iron deficiency is indicated to improve symptoms and reduce HF hospitalizations. AFFIRM-AHF showed 26% reduction in total HF hospitalizations with ferric carboxymaltose vs. placebo in patients hospitalized for acute HF (P = 0.013). The guanylate cyclase activator vericiguat and the myosin activator omecamtiv mecarbil improved outcomes in randomized placebo-controlled trials, and vericiguat is now approved for clinical practice. Treatment of HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) was a major unmet clinical need until this year when the results of EMPEROR-Preserved (EMPagliflozin outcomE tRial in Patients With chrOnic HFpEF) were issued. Compared with placebo, empagliflozin reduced by 21% (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.69 to 0.90; P < 0.001), the primary outcome of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization. Advances in the treatment of specific phenotypes of HF, including atrial fibrillation, valvular heart disease, cardiomyopathies, cardiac amyloidosis, and cancer-related HF, also occurred. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic still plays a major role in HF epidemiology and management. All these aspects are highlighted in this review.

Admission Resting Heart Rate as an Independent Predictor of All-Cause Mortality in Elderly Patients with Hip Fracture

Purpose

To investigate the relationship between admission resting heart rate (RHR) and all-cause mortality in elderly patients with hip fracture.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study with 837 patients based on the established hip fracture database was conducted. Admission RHR was measured via electrocardiogram, and patients were grouped by the median RHR value (beats per minute, bpm). The main outcomes were 1-year and total all-cause mortality. Cox proportional hazard models and restricted cubic spline were used to assess the relationship between RHR and mortality. Sensitivity analyses were further performed to determine whether the results were stable.

Results

The mean and median RHR were 82.3 and 80.0 bpm, respectively. After a median follow-up of 31.8 months, the 1-year and total all-cause mortality were 17.6% and 31.2%. Multivariable Cox analyses showed that high RHR was an independent risk factor for 1-year mortality (HR = 1.51; 95% CI: 1.08–2.13; p = 0.016), and total mortality (HR = 1.44; 95% CI: 1.12–1.85; p = 0.005). For each 10 bpm increase in RHR, the risk of 1-year death increased by 23.0% (HR = 1.23; 95% CI: 1.09–1.39; p = 0.001), and total death increased by 21.0% (HR = 1.21; 95% CI: 1.09–1.34; p < 0.001). A typical J-shaped curve was observed in the restricted cubic spline for the association between RHR and 1-year mortality, with the lowest mortality risk at 70 bpm. Sensitivity analyses yielded similar findings.

Conclusion

An increase in RHR was independently associated with all-cause mortality, and may be a useful prognostic predictor for elderly patients with hip fracture.

Heart failure drug titration, discontinuation, mortality and heart failure hospitalization risk: a multinational observational study (US, UK and Sweden)

AIMS

Use and dosing of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) in patients with heart failure (HF) have been shown to be suboptimal. Among new users of GDMT in HF, we followed the real-life patterns of dose titration and discontinuation of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA) and angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI).

METHODS AND RESULTS

New users were identified in health care databases in Sweden, UK and US between 2016-2019. Inclusion criterion was a recent HF hospitalization (HHF) triggering the initiation of GDMT. Patients were grouped by GDMT, i.e. ACEi, ARB, beta-blocker, MRA and ARNI, and stratified by initial dose. Follow-up was 12 months, until death or study end. Outcomes were dose titration within each drug class, discontinuation and first HHF or death. Dose/discontinuation follow-up was assessed daily based on the coverage length of a filled prescription and reported on day 365. New users of ACEi (n = 8426), ARB (n = 2303), beta-blockers (n = 10 476), MRA (n = 17 421), and ARNI (n = 29 546) were identified. Over 12 months, target dose achievement was 15%, 10%, 12%, 30%, and discontinuation was 55%, 33%, 24% and 27% for ACEi, ARB, beta-blockers and ARNI, respectively. MRA was rarely titrated and discontinuation rates were high (40%). Event rates for HHF or death ranged from 40.0-86.9 per 100 patient-years across the treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

Despite high risk of clinical events following HHF, new initiation of GDMT was followed by consistent patterns of low up-titration and early GDMT discontinuation in three countries with different health care and economies. Our data highlight the urgent need for moving away from long sequential approach when initiating HF treatment and for improving just-in-time decision support for patients and health care providers.

Adrenergic and Glucocorticoid Receptors in the Pulmonary Health Effects of Air Pollution

Adrenergic receptors (ARs) and glucocorticoid receptors (GRs) are activated by circulating catecholamines and glucocorticoids, respectively. These receptors regulate the homeostasis of physiological processes with specificity via multiple receptor subtypes, wide tissue-specific distribution, and interactions with other receptors and signaling processes. Based on their physiological roles, ARs and GRs are widely manipulated therapeutically for chronic diseases. Although these receptors play key roles in inflammatory and cellular homeostatic processes, little research has addressed their involvement in the health effects of air pollution. We have recently demonstrated that ozone, a prototypic air pollutant, mediates pulmonary and systemic effects through the activation of these receptors. A single exposure to ozone induces the sympathetic–adrenal–medullary and hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axes, resulting in the release of epinephrine and corticosterone into the circulation. These hormones act as ligands for ARs and GRs. The roles of beta AR (βARs) and GRs in ozone-induced pulmonary injury and inflammation were confirmed in a number of studies using interventional approaches. Accordingly, the activation status of ARs and GRs is critical in mediating the health effects of inhaled irritants. In this paper, we review the cellular distribution and functions of ARs and GRs, their lung-specific localization, and their involvement in ozone-induced health effects, in order to capture attention for future research.

Patient profiling in heart failure for tailoring medical therapy. A consensus document of the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology

Despite guideline recommendations and available evidence, implementation of treatment in heart failure (HF) is poor. The majority of patients are not prescribed drugs at target doses that have been proven to positively impact morbidity and mortality. Among others, tolerability issues related to low blood pressure, heart rate, impaired renal function or hyperkalaemia are responsible. Chronic kidney disease plays an important role as it affects up to 50% of patients with HF. Also, dynamic changes in estimated glomerular filtration rate may occur during the course of HF, resulting in inappropriate dose reduction or even discontinuation of decongestive or neurohormonal modulating therapy in clinical practice. As patients with HF are rarely naïve to pharmacologic therapies, the challenge is to adequately prioritize or select the most appropriate up-titration schedule according to patient profile. In this consensus document, we identified nine patient profiles that may be relevant for treatment implementation in HF patients with a reduced ejection fraction. These profiles take into account heart rate (<60 bpm or >70 bpm), the presence of atrial fibrillation, symptomatic low blood pressure, estimated glomerular filtration rate (<30 or >30 mL/min/1.73 m² ) or hyperkalaemia. The pre-discharge patient, frequently still congestive, is also addressed. A personalized approach, adjusting guideline-directed medical therapy to patient profile, may allow to achieve a better and more comprehensive therapy for each individual patient than the more traditional, forced titration of each drug class before initiating treatment with the next.

Perceived risk profile and treatment optimization in heart failure: an analysis from BIOlogy Study to TAilored Treatment in chronic heart failure

Background

Achieving target doses of angiotensin‐converting‐enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin‐receptor blockers (ACEi/ARB) and beta‐blockers in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is often underperformed. In BIOlogy Study to TAilored Treatment in chronic heart failure (BIOSTAT‐CHF) study, many patients were not up‐titrated for which no clear reason was reported. Therefore, we hypothesized that perceived‐risk profile might influence treatment optimization.

Methods

We studied 2100 patients with HFrEF (LVEF≤40%) to compare the clinical characteristics and adverse events associated with treatment up‐titration (after a 3‐month titration protocol) between; a) patients not reaching target doses for unclear reason; b) patients not reaching target doses due to symptoms and/or side effects; c) patients reaching target doses.

Results

For ACEi/ARB, (a), (b) and (c) was observed in 51.3%, 25.9% and 22.7% of patients, respectively. For beta‐blockers, (a), (b) and (c) was observed in 67.5%, 20.2% and 12.3% of patients, respectively. By multinomial logistic regression analysis for ACEi/ARB, patients in group (a) and (b) had lower blood pressure and poorer renal function, and patients in group (a) were older and had lower ejection fraction. For beta‐blockers, patients in group (a) and (b) had more severe congestion and lower heart rate. At 9 months, adverse events (i.e., hypotension, bradycardia, renal impairment, and hyperkalemia) occurred similarly among the three groups.

Conclusions

Patients in whom clinicians did not give a reason why up‐titration was missed were older and had more co‐morbidities. Patients in whom up‐titration was achieved did not have excess adverse events. However, from these observational findings, the pattern of subsequent adverse events among patients in whom up‐titration was missed cannot be determined.

Identification of distinct phenotypic clusters in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

AIMS

We aimed to derive and validate clinically useful clusters of patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF; left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50%).

METHODS AND RESULTS

We derived a cluster model from 6909 HFpEF patients from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry (SwedeHF) and externally validated this in 2153 patients from the Chronic Heart Failure ESC-guideline based Cardiology practice Quality project (CHECK-HF) registry. In SwedeHF, the median age was 80 [interquartile range 72-86] years, 52% of patients were female and most frequent comorbidities were hypertension (82%), atrial fibrillation (68%), and ischaemic heart disease (48%). Latent class analysis identified five distinct clusters: cluster 1 (10% of patients) were young patients with a low comorbidity burden and the highest proportion of implantable devices; cluster 2 (30%) patients had atrial fibrillation, hypertension without diabetes; cluster 3 (25%) patients were the oldest with many cardiovascular comorbidities and hypertension; cluster 4 (15%) patients had obesity, diabetes and hypertension; and cluster 5 (20%) patients were older with ischaemic heart disease, hypertension and renal failure and were most frequently prescribed diuretics. The clusters were reproduced in the CHECK-HF cohort. Patients in cluster 1 had the best prognosis, while patients in clusters 3 and 5 had the worst age- and sex-adjusted prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Five distinct clusters of HFpEF patients were identified that differed in clinical characteristics, heart failure drug therapy and prognosis. These results confirm the heterogeneity of HFpEF and form a basis for tailoring trial design to individualized drug therapy in HFpEF patients.

Heart failure medication after a first hospital admission and risk of heart failure readmission, focus on beta-blockers and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system medication: A retrospective cohort study in linked databases

BACKGROUND

This study assessed the association between heart failure (HF) medication (angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACEI)/angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARB), beta-blockers (BB), mineralocorticoid-receptor antagonists (MRA) and diuretics) and HF readmissions in a real-world unselected group of patients after a first hospital admission for HF. Furthermore we analysed readmission rates for ACEI versus ARB and for carvedilol versus β1-selective BB and we investigated the effect of HF medication in relation to time since discharge.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Medication at discharge was determined with dispensing data from the Dutch PHARMO Database Network including 22,476 patients with HF between 2001 and 2015. After adjustment for age, gender, number of medications and year of admission no associations were found for users versus non-users of ACEI/ARB (hazard ratio, HR = 1.01; 95%CI 0.96-1.06), BB (HR = 1.00; 95%CI 0.95-1.05) and readmissions. The risk of readmission for patients prescribed MRA (HR = 1.11; 95%CI 1.05-1.16) or diuretics (HR = 1.17; 95%CI 1.09-1.25) was higher than for non-users. The HR for ARB relative to ACEI was 1.04 (95%CI 0.97-1.12) and for carvedilol relative to β1-selective BB 1.33 (95%CI 1.20-1.46). Post-hoc analyses showed a protective effect shortly after discharge for most medications. For example one month post discharge the HR for ACEI/ARB was 0.77 (95%CI 0.69-0.86). Although we did try to adjust for confounding by indication, probably residual confounding is still present.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who were prescribed carvedilol have a higher or at least a similar risk of HF readmission compared to β1-selective BB. This study showed that all groups of HF medication -some more pronounced than others- were more effective immediately following discharge.

Prognostic impact of additional mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists in octogenarian heart failure patients

AIMS

Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) including beta-blockers and renin-angiotensin system inhibitors is shown to reduce mortality risk in patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). However, there is little evidence about the efficacy of additional administration of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) with GDMT in patients ≥80 years presenting with HF. We aimed to investigate the prognostic impact of GDMT with MRA in relation to the age of patients with HF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This observational study included patients admitted for HF with reduced LVEF who were discharged alive; among them, 224 patients were ≥80 years, and 661 patients were <80 years. Both populations were divided into three groups depending on whether they received GDMT with or without MRA or single/no GDMT drugs (GDMT+MRA+, GDMT+MRA-, or non-GDMT, respectively). The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. In patients ≥80 years, all-cause mortality was the lowest in the GDMT+MRA+ group (log-rank trend, P = 0.034), and no significant differences were observed between the GDMT+MRA- and non-GDMT groups. Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that GDMT+MRA+ was superior to GDMT+MRA-, even after adjusting for parameters at discharge (hazard ratio: 0.32, 95% confidence interval: 0.11-0.99). In patients <80 years, GDMT reduced all-cause mortality; however, additional MRA was not associated with an improved outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that additional MRA to GDMT at discharge is one of the therapeutic options for elderly HF patients with reduced LVEF. This finding is not well documented in previous clinical trials.

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.