Intersection of atrial fibrillation and heart failure with mildly reduced and preserved ejection fraction in >400 000 participants in the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure Registry

The Aging Heart in Focus: The Advanced Understanding of Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) accounts for 50% of heart failure (HF) cases, making it the most common type of HF, and its prevalence continues to increase in the aging society. HFpEF is a systemic syndrome resulting from many risk factors, such as aging, metabolic syndrome, and hypertension, and its clinical features are highly heterogeneous in different populations. HFpEF syndrome involves the dysfunction of multiple organs, including the heart, lung, muscle, and vascular system. The heart shows dysfunction of various cells, including cardiomyocytes, endothelial cells, fibroblasts, adipocytes, and immune cells. The complex etiology and pathobiology limit experimental research on HFpEF in animal models, delaying a comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms and making treatment difficult. Recently, many scientists and cardiologists have attempted to improve the clinical outcomes of HFpEF. Recent advances in clinically related animal models and systemic pathology studies have improved our understanding of HFpEF, and clinical trials involving sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors have significantly enhanced our confidence in treating HFpEF. This review provides an updated comprehensive discussion of the etiology and pathobiology, molecular and cellular mechanisms, preclinical animal models, and therapeutic trials in animals and patients to enhance our understanding of HFpEF and improve clinical outcomes.

Characteristics and outcomes of heart failure in Japan: A hospital-based administrative database analysis

AIMS

Epidemiological and outcome studies on patients in Japan with heart failure (HF) categorized by left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) are currently limited. The aim of this non-interventional database study was to provide further information on these patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Administrative claims data and electronic medical records from hospitals participating in the Voluntary Hospitals in Japan (VHJ) organization were used. Patients hospitalized with a primary diagnosis of HF between 1 April 2017 and 30 March 2020 were categorized by baseline LVEF on echocardiogram: HF with reduced EF (HFrEF, LVEF <40%); HF with preserved EF (HFpEF, LVEF ≥50%); and HF with mildly reduced EF (HFmrEF, 40% to <50% LVEF). Patients were evaluated for baseline characteristics, pre-admission diagnosis, prescription drugs, length of hospitalization, HF treatment cost, overall cost of hospitalization, and in-hospital prescription. An exploratory analysis compared post-hospitalization mortality and re-hospitalization rates. In total, 10 646 hospitalized patients from 17 VHJ hospitals were enrolled. Of these, 7212 were included in the analysis set and categorized into HFpEF (3183, 44.1%), HFmrEF (1280, 17.7%), and HFrEF (2749, 38.1%) groups based on baseline LVEF. Beta-blocker use increased during hospitalization, with a mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) of 23.3% (22.3-24.3) of patients receiving these agents before admission versus 69.4% (68.3-70.5) at discharge. Administration of diuretics, angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) showed a similar trend. Differences in treatments were observed between HF categories at discharge, with a higher proportion (95% CI) of ACE inhibitor use in the HFrEF group (40.6% [38.7-42.4]) versus HFmrEF (27.5% [25.1-30.0]) and HFpEF (20.6% [19.2-22.1]) groups (P < 0.0001), and more ARB use in the HFmrEF and HFpEF groups (32.5% [29.9-35.1] and 31.2% [29.6-32.9], respectively) versus HFrEF (25.1% [23.5-26.8]; P < 0.0001). Mean (standard deviation [SD]) length of hospitalization was 22.2 (23.3) days, and the median (interquartile range) was 17 (11-25) days. Estimated average cost of HF treatment per patient during index hospitalization was 300 090 yen with HFrEF treatment costing the most. Average total healthcare expenditure during hospitalization was 1 225 650 yen per index hospitalization per patient, with HFrEF also the most expensive. During a mean (SD) observation period of 324 (304) days, ~21% of patients in each group required re-hospitalization for HF, and 625 patients (8.7%) died.

CONCLUSIONS

The proportion of patients in each HF category was largely consistent with existing data. Discharge medications indicated high prescription of guideline-directed therapy. This study provides real-world data on patients with HF in Japan that can help inform future clinical decision-making.

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment

The aetiology of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is heterogenous and overlaps with that of several comorbidities like atrial fibrillation, diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease, valvular heart disease, iron deficiency, or sarcopenia. The diagnosis of HFpEF involves evaluating cardiac dysfunction through imaging techniques and assessing increased left ventricular filling pressure, which can be measured directly or estimated through various proxies including natriuretic peptides. To better narrow down the differential diagnosis of HFpEF, European and American heart failure guidelines advocate the use of different algorithms including comorbidities that require diagnosis and rigorous treatment during the evaluation process. Therapeutic recommendations differ between guidelines. Whilst sodium glucose transporter 2 inhibitors have a solid evidence base, the recommendations differ with regard to the use of inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone axis. Unless indicated for specific comorbidities, the use of beta-blockers should be discouraged in HFpEF. The aim of this article is to provide an overview of the current state of the art in HFpEF diagnosis, clinical evaluation, and treatment.

Prognosis and treatment strategies for atrial fibrillation in heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction

AIMS

The study investigates the prognosis of atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF). Data concerning the prognostic impact of AF in patients with HFmrEF is scarce.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Consecutive patients with HFmrEF [i.e. left ventricular ejection fraction 41-49% and signs and/or symptoms of heart failure (HF)] were retrospectively included at one institution from 2016 to 2022. Patients with AF were compared with patients without with regard to the primary composite endpoint of all-cause mortality and HF-related rehospitalization at 30 months (median follow-up). Statistical analyses included Kaplan-Meier, multivariable Cox proportional regression analyses, and propensity score matching. A total of 2148 patients with HFmrEF were included with an overall prevalence of AF of 43%. The presence of AF was associated with a higher risk of the primary composite endpoint all-cause mortality and HF-related rehospitalization at 30 months [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.068; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.802-2.375; P = 0.01], which was confirmed after propensity score matching (HR = 1.494; 95% CI 1.216-1.835; P = 0.01). AF was an independent predictor of both all-cause mortality (HR = 1.340; 95% CI 1.066-1.685; P = 0.01) and HF-related rehospitalization (HR = 2.061; 95% CI 1.538-2.696; P = 0.01). Finally, rhythm control may be associated with lower risk of all-cause mortality compared with rate control for AF (HR = 0.342; 95% CI 0.199-0.587; P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Atrial fibrillation affects 43% of patients with HFmrEF and represents an independent predictor of adverse long-term prognosis.

Prediction of 90 day readmission in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction by interpretable machine learning

AIMS

Certain critical risk factors of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) patients were significantly different from those of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) patients, resulting in the limitations of existing predictive models in real-world situations. This study aimed to develop a machine learning model for predicting 90 day readmission for HFpEF patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Data were extracted from electronic health records from 1 August 2020 to 1 August 2021 and follow-up records of patients with HFpEF within 3 months after discharge. Feature extraction was performed by univariate analysis combined with the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) algorithms. Machine learning models like eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), random forest, neural network and logistic regression were adopted to construct models. The discrimination and calibration of each model were compared, and the Shapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) method was used to explore the interpretability of the model. The cohort included 746 patients, of whom 103 (13.8%) were readmitted within 90 days. XGBoost owned the best performance [area under the curve (AUC) = 0.896, precision-recall area under the curve (PR-AUC) = 0.868, sensitivity = 0.817, specificity = 0.837, balanced accuracy = 0.827]. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) statistic was 0.694 at 0.468 in the XGBoost model. SHAP identified the top 12 risk features, including activities of daily living (ADL), left atrial dimension (LAD), left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVDD), shortness, nitrates, length of stay, nutritional risk, fall risk, accompanied by other symptoms, educational level, anticoagulants and edema.

CONCLUSIONS

Our model could help medical agencies achieve the early identification of 90 day readmission risk in HFpEF patients and reveal risk factors that provide valuable insights for treatments.

Rapid Uptitration of Guideline-Directed Medical Therapies in Acute Heart Failure With and Without Atrial Fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Rapid uptitration of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) before and after discharge in hospitalized heart failure (HF) patients is feasible, is safe, and improves outcomes; whether this is also true in patients with coexistent atrial fibrillation/flutter (AF/AFL) is not known.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to investigate whether rapid GDMT uptitration before and after discharge for HF is feasible, safe and beneficial in patients with and without AF/AFL.

METHODS

In this secondary analysis of the STRONG-HF (Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy of Rapid Optimization, Helped by NT-proBNP Testing, of Heart Failure Therapies) trial, GDMT uptitration and patient outcomes were analyzed by AF/AFL status and type (permanent, persistent, paroxysmal).

RESULTS

Among 1,078 patients enrolled in STRONG-HF, 496 (46%) had a history of AF, including 238 assigned to high-intensity care (HIC) and 258 to usual care (UC), and 581 did not have a history of AF/AFL, including 304 assigned to HIC and 277 to UC. By day 90, the average percent optimal dose of neurohormonal inhibitors achieved in the HIC arm was similar in patients with and without AF/AFL, reaching approximately 80% of the optimal dose (average absolute difference between AF/AFL and non-AF/AFL groups: -0.81%; 95% CI: -3.51 to 1.89). All-cause death or HF readmission by day 180 occurred less frequently in the HIC than the UC arm, both in patients with and without AF (adjusted HR: 0.75 [95% CI: 0.48-1.19] in AF vs adjusted HR: 0.50 [95% CI: 0.31-0.79] in non-AF/AFL patients; P for interaction = 0.2107). Adverse event rates were similar in patients with and without AF/AFL. AF/AFL type did not affect either uptitration or patient outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly half of acute HF patients have AF/AFL history. Rapid GDMT uptitration before and early after discharge is feasible, is safe, and may improve outcomes regardless of AF presence or type. (Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy of Rapid Optimization, Helped by NT-proBNP Testing, of Heart Failure Therapies [STRONG-HF]; NCT03412201).

Characteristics and Clinical Outcomes of Patients Hospitalized for Acute Heart Failure Who Develop Atrial Fibrillation or Convert to Sinus Rhythm

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained arrhythmia in acute heart failure (AHF), with a prevalence of approximately 35%. However, little is known about the clinical characteristics and outcomes of in-hospital conversion from AF to sinus rhythm and vice versa.

METHODS

In a post hoc secondary analysis of the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled PROTECT trial in patients with AHF, we identified 4 groups of patients: AF at admission and in-hospital conversion to sinus rhythm (n = 44); in-hospital development of AF (n = 31); persistent AF (n = 278); and continuous sinus rhythm (n = 410).

RESULTS

Conversion from AF to sinus rhythm (13.7%) and from sinus rhythm to AF (7.0%) occurred only in a minority of patients. Patients with AF who converted to sinus rhythm were more often classified as being in New York Heart Association class IV, had higher heart rates and higher respiratory rates at hospital admission, whereas patients who developed AF were older, more likely to be female and had the highest ejection fractions compared to continuous sinus rhythm (all P < 0.05). Conversion to sinus rhythm or development of AF occurred mainly within the first 24 hours after hospital admission. Patients with persistent AF and those who developed AF had longer median lengths of hospital stay (8 vs 7 days; P < 0.001 and 9 vs 7 days; P < 0.001, respectively), compared to those with continuous sinus rhythm. In both univariable and multivariable analyses, there was no significant association between the AF groups and the primary clinical outcomes of either 180-day all-cause mortality or 60-day death or readmission for heart failure.

CONCLUSION

In patients hospitalized for AHF, only few converted from AF to sinus rhythm or sinus rhythm to AF. Although development of AF or persistent AF was associated with longer lengths of hospitalization, midterm mortality and readmission rates were similar in the groups.

2024 update in heart failure

In the last years, major progress has occurred in heart failure (HF) management. The 2023 ESC focused update of the 2021 HF guidelines introduced new key recommendations based on the results of the last years of science. First, two drugs, sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and finerenone, a novel nonsteroidal, selective mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA), are recommended for the prevention of HF in patients with diabetic chronic kidney disease (CKD). Second, SGLT2 inhibitors are now recommended for the treatment of HF across the entire left ventricular ejection fraction spectrum. The benefits of quadruple therapy in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) are well established. Its rapid and early up-titration along with a close follow-up with frequent clinical and laboratory re-assessment after an episode of acute HF (the so-called 'high-intensity care' strategy) was associated with better outcomes in the STRONG-HF trial. Patients experiencing an episode of worsening HF might require a fifth drug, vericiguat. In the STEP-HFpEF-DM and STEP-HFpEF trials, semaglutide 2.4 mg once weekly administered for 1 year decreased body weight and significantly improved quality of life and the 6 min walk distance in obese patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) with or without a history of diabetes. Further data on safety and efficacy, including also hard endpoints, are needed to support the addition of acetazolamide or hydrochlorothiazide to a standard diuretic regimen in patients hospitalized due to acute HF. In the meantime, PUSH-AHF supported the use of natriuresis-guided diuretic therapy. Further options and most recent evidence for the treatment of HF, including specific drugs for cardiomyopathies (i.e., mavacamten in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and tafamidis in transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis), device therapies, cardiac contractility modulation and percutaneous treatment of valvulopathies, with the recent finding from the TRILUMINATE Pivotal trial, are also reviewed in this article.

Associations of Circulating Vascular Cell Adhesion Molecule-1 and Intercellular Adhesion Molecule-1 With Long-Term Cardiac Function

BACKGROUND

Although VCAM-1 (vascular cell adhesion molecule-1) and ICAM-1 (intercellular adhesion molecule-1) have been associated with incident heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and atrial fibrillation (AF), the associations of VCAM-1 and ICAM-1 with sensitive measures of cardiac structure/function are unclear. The objective of this study is to evaluate associations between VCAM-1, ICAM-1, and measures of cardiac structure and function as potential pathways through which cellular adhesion molecules promote HFpEF and AF risk.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis), we evaluated the associations of circulating VCAM-1 and ICAM-1 at examination 2 (2002-2004) with measures of cardiac structure/function on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging at examination 5 (2010-2011) after multivariable adjustment. Mediation analysis of left atrial (LA) strain on the association between VCAM-1 or ICAM-1 and AF or HFpEF was also performed. Overall, 2304 individuals (63±10 years; 47% men) with VCAM-1 or ICAM-1, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, and covariate data were included in analysis. Higher VCAM-1 and ICAM-1 were associated with lower LA peak longitudinal strain and worse global circumferential left ventricular strain but were not associated with left ventricular myocardial scar or interstitial fibrosis. Lower LA peak longitudinal strain mediated 8% (95% CI, 2-30) of the relationship between VCAM-1 and HFpEF and 9% (95% CI, 2-21) of the relationship between VCAM-1 and AF.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher VCAM-1 and ICAM-1 were associated with lower LA function and left ventricular systolic function but were not associated with myocardial scar or interstitial fibrosis. VCAM-1 and ICAM-1 may promote HFpEF and AF risk through impaired LA reservoir function.

Asymptomatic vs. symptomatic atrial fibrillation: Clinical outcomes in heart failure patients

BACKGROUND

The outcome implications of asymptomatic vs. symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) in specific groups of patients according to clinical heart failure (HF) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) need to be clarified.

METHODS

In a prospective observational study, patients were categorized according to overt HF with LVEF≤40 %, or with LVEF>40 %, or without overt HF with LVEF40 %≤ or > 40 %, as well as according to the presence of asymptomatic or symptomatic AF.

RESULTS

A total of 8096 patients, divided into 8 groups according to HF and LVEF, were included with similar proportions of asymptomatic AF (ranging from 43 to 48 %). After a median follow-up of 730 [699 -748] days, the composite outcome (all-cause death and MACE) was significantly worse for patients with asymptomatic AF associated with HF and reduced LVEF vs. symptomatic AF patients of the same group (p = 0.004). On adjusted Cox regression analysis, asymptomatic AF patients with HF and reduced LVEF were independently associated with a higher risk for the composite outcome (aHR 1.32, 95 % CI 1.04-1.69) and all-cause death (aHR 1.33, 95 % CI 1.02-1.73) compared to symptomatic AF patients with HF and reduced LVEF. Kaplan-Meier curves showed that HF-LVEF≤40 % asymptomatic patients had the highest cumulative incidence of all-cause death and MACE (p < 0.001 for both).

CONCLUSIONS

In a large European cohort of AF patients, the risk of the composite outcome at 2 years was not different between asymptomatic and symptomatic AF in the whole cohort but adverse implications for poor outcomes were found for asymptomatic AF in HF with LVEF≤40 %.

The prognostic value of systemic vascular resistance in heart failure patients with permanent atrial fibrillation: a retrospective study

Heart failure (HF) and permanent atrial fibrillation (AF) interact mutually, exacerbating hemodynamic effects and causing adverse outcomes and increased healthcare costs. Monitoring hemodynamic indicators in patients with these comorbidities is crucial for effective clinical management. Transthoracic impedance cardiography (ICG) has been widely employed in assessing hemodynamic status in clinical settings. Given the limited research on the prognostic significance of ICG parameters in HF with permanent AF, we undertook this study. A total of 66 HF patients with permanent AF were included in this retrospective study, and the primary outcome was rehospitalization due to worsening HF within 180-day post-discharge. Cox regression analysis was performed to explore the connection between ICG-evaluated parameters and the outcome risk. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis determined the optimal cutoff values of risk factors, subsequently applied in plotting Kaplan Meier (KM) survival curves. Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that systemic vascular resistance (SVR) both on admission and at discharge independently predicted rehospitalization for worsening HF. ROC analysis established optimal SVR cutoff values: 320.89 (kPa s/L) on admission and 169.94 (kPa s/L) at discharge (sensitivity 70%, specificity 94.4%, area under the curve (AUC) 0.831, respectively, sensitivity 90%, specificity 55.6%, AUC 0.742). KM survival curves analysis showed that patients with SVR > 320.89 (kPa s/L) on admission had an 8.14-fold (P < 0.001) increased risk of the end-point event compared with those with SVR ≤ 320.89 (kPa s/L). Similarly, patients with SVR > 169.94 (kPa s/L) at discharge faced a risk elevated by 6.57 times (P = 0.002) relative to those with SVR ≤ 169.94 (kPa s/L). In HF patients with permanent AF, SVR measured by ICG emerges as an independent risk factor and clinical predictor for HF deterioration-related readmission within 180 days after discharge. Higher SVR levels, both upon admission and at discharge, correlate with an incremental rehospitalization risk.

Outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation on oral anticoagulation with and without heart failure: the ETNA-AF-Europe registry

AIMS

Heart failure (HF) is a risk factor for major adverse events in atrial fibrillation (AF). Whether this risk persists on non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and varies according to left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is debated.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We investigated the relation of HF in the ETNA-AF-Europe registry, a prospective, multicentre, observational study with an overall 4-year follow-up of edoxaban-treated AF patients. We report 2-year follow-up for ischaemic stroke/transient ischaemic attack (TIA)/systemic embolic events (SEE), major bleeding, and mortality. Of the 13 133 patients, 1854 (14.1%) had HF. Left ventricular ejection fraction was available for 82.4% of HF patients and was <40% in 671 (43.9%) and ≥40% in 857 (56.1%). Patients with HF were older, more often men, and had more comorbidities. Annualized event rates (AnERs) of any stroke/SEE were 0.86%/year and 0.67%/year in patients with and without HF. Compared with patients without HF, those with HF also had higher AnERs for major bleeding (1.73%/year vs. 0.86%/year) and all-cause death (8.30%/year vs. 3.17%/year). Multivariate Cox proportional models confirmed HF as a significant predictor of major bleeding [hazard ratio (HR) 1.65, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.20-2.26] and all-cause death [HF with LVEF <40% (HR 2.42, 95% CI: 1.95-3.00) and HF with LVEF ≥40% (HR 1.80, 95% CI: 1.45-2.23)] but not of ischaemic stroke/TIA/SEE.

CONCLUSION

Anticoagulated patients with HF at baseline featured higher rates of major bleeding and all-cause death, requiring optimized management and novel preventive strategies. NOAC treatment was similarly effective in reducing risk of ischaemic events in patients with or without concomitant HF.

Coronary microvascular dysfunction in heart failure patients

Coronary microcirculation has multiple layers of autoregulatory function to maintain resting flow and augment hyperemic flow in response to myocardial demands. Functional or structural alterations in the coronary microvascular function are frequently observed in patients with heart failure with preserved or reduced ejection fraction, which may lead to myocardial ischemic injury and resultant worsening of clinical outcomes. In this review, we describe our current understanding of coronary microvascular dysfunction in the pathogenesis of heart failure with preserved and reduced ejection fraction.