Stable but Progressive Nature of Heart Failure: Considerations for Primary Care Physicians

A qualitative analysis of the barriers and enablers faced by Australian rural general practitioners in the non-pharmacological management of congestive heart failure in community dwelling patients

BACKGROUND

Congestive heart failure (CHF) is a significant health problem in Australia, and disproportionately affects rural Australians. Management of CHF in Australia is heavily centred around the general practitioner (GP). Australian and international literature indicates there is a gap between current and best practice in CHF management. There is little known about the non-pharmacological aspects of management, or CHF management in a rural Australian context. This study aimed to identify what Australian GPs practicing in the Northern Rivers Region of New South Wales, Australia, perceived were the barriers and enablers in the non-pharmacological management of CHF amongst community dwelling patients, to inform healthcare access, resourcing and delivery in Australian rural environments.

METHODS

Qualitative study involving a realist thematic analysis of data collected from semi-structured face-to-face interviews.

RESULTS

Fifteen GPs and GP trainees participated. Four interlinked key themes underpinning GPs' experiences with non-pharmacological management of CHF were interpreted from the interview data: (1) resources, (2) complexity of heart failure, (3) relationships, and (4) patient demographics, priorities and views affect how patients engage with non-pharmacological management of CHF.

CONCLUSION

Rural Australian GPs face considerable barriers to non-pharmacological management of CHF. The data suggests that increased rural Australian health services and community transportation, multidisciplinary management, and stronger professional networks have the potential to be invaluable enablers of CHF management. Further research exploring non-pharmacological management of CHF in other rural contexts may provide additional insights to better inform rural healthcare access and resourcing.

PRospective Evaluation of natriuretic peptide-based reFERral of patients with chronic heart failure in primary care (PREFER): a real-world study

Objective

To assess current management practice of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in multinational primary care (PC) and determine whether N-terminal-pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-pro-BNP)-guided referral of HFrEF patients from PC to a cardiologist could improve care, defined as adherence to European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guideline-recommended pharmacotherapy.

Methods

PRospective Evaluation of natriuretic peptide-based reFERral of patients with chronic HF in PC (PREFER) study enrolled HFrEF patients from PC considered clinically stable and those with NT-pro-BNP ≥600 pg/mL were referred to a cardiologist for optimisation of HF treatment. The primary outcome of adherence to ESC HF guidelines after referral to specialist was assessed at the second visit within 4 weeks of cardiologist’s referral and no later than 6 months after the baseline visit. Based on futility interim analysis, the study was terminated early.

Results

In total, 1415 HFrEF patients from 223 PCs from 18 countries in Europe were enrolled. Of these, 1324 (96.9%) were considered clinically stable and 920 (65.0%) had NT-pro-BNP ≥600 pg/mL (mean: 2631 pg/mL). In total, 861 (60.8%) patients fulfilled both criteria and were referred to a cardiologist. Before cardiologist consultation, 10.1% of patients were on ESC guideline-recommended HFrEF medications and 2.7% were on recommended dosages of HFrEF medication (defined as ≥50% of ESC guideline-recommended dose). Postreferral, prescribed HFrEF drugs remained largely unchanged except for an increase in diuretics (+4.6%) and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (+7.9%). No significant increase in patients’ adherence to guideline-defined drug combinations (11.2% post-referral vs 10.1% baseline) or drug combinations and dosages (3.3% postreferral vs 2.7% baseline) was observed after cardiologist consultation.

Conclusions

PREFER demonstrates substantial suboptimal treatment of HFrEF patients in the real world. Referral of patients with elevated NT-pro-BNP levels from PC to cardiologist did not result in meaningful treatment optimisation for treatments with known mortality and morbidity benefit.

The in- and out-of-hospital management of HF patients: results from a nationwide Belgian survey

BACKGROUND

We conducted a nationwide survey to describe the in-and out-of-hospital flow (diagnosis, treatment and follow-up) of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

METHOD

A survey was developed with five dedicated HF cardiologists. The data are all self-reported by cardiologists.

RESULTS

The response rate was 84%. Presence of a dedicated HF cardiologist or HF nurse was indicated by 49% and 46% of the hospitals respectively. Devices (p < .05), angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors, and rehabilitation are considered more standard of care therapy by dedicated compared to non-dedicated HF cardiologists. Most cardiologists indicated that target dosages of HF drugs can be reached in 25‒75% of patients. Achieving >75% of the target dose seems easier for angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blockers (ACEI/ARB) (22%) and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (25%), compared to β-blockers (10%) and angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (7%). 62%, 49% and 4% of the cardiologists indicated to use subtypes of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers and β-blockers respectively not validated in the HF population. In the acute setting, dedicated HF cardiologists (23%) are less influenced by blood parameters for decongestion compared to non-dedicated HF cardiologists (39%). They tend to change patients more to guideline-recommended drugs (60% vs 47%). Six minutes walk test and ergospirometry are significantly more used by dedicated compared to non-dedicated HF cardiologists for HF drug change (17% and 29% vs 2% and 4%).

CONCLUSION

This survey showed that a minority of hospitals have HF care. Those that do, report a higher implementation of guideline-recommended diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of HF patients. Competent authorities could use this survey as a tool to improve HF care.

Clinical Utility of Fluid Volume Assessment in Heart Failure Patients Using Bioimpedance Spectroscopy

Background: Bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) is a non-invasive method used to measure fluid volumes. In this report, we compare BIS measurements from patients with heart failure (HF) to those from healthy adults, and describe how these point-of-care fluid volume assessments may be applied to HF management.

Methods and results: Fluid volumes were measured in 64 patients with NYHA class II or III HF and 69 healthy control subjects. BIS parameters including extracellular fluid (ECF), intracellular fluid (ICF), total body water (TBW), and ECF as a percentage of TBW (ECF%TBW) were analyzed. ECF%TBW values for the HF and control populations differed significantly (49.2 ± 3.2% vs. 45.2 ± 2.1%, respectively; p < 0.001); both distributions satisfied criteria for normality. Interquartile ranges did not overlap (46.7–51.0% vs. 43.8–46.4%, respectively; p < 0.001). Subgroup analyses of HF patients who underwent transthoracic echocardiography showed that impedance measurements correlated with inferior vena cava size (Pearson correlation −0.73, p < 0.0001). A case study is presented for illustrative purposes.

Conclusions: BIS-measured ECF%TBW values were significantly higher in HF patients as compared to adults without HF. We describe three strata of ECF%TBW (normal, elevated, fluid overload) that may aid in clinical risk stratification and fluid volume monitoring of HF patients.

Clinical Trial Registration: COMPARE – www.ClinicalTrials.gov; IMPEL – www.ClinicalTrials.gov; Heart Failure at Home – www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT02939053; NCT02857231; NCT04013373.

Cardiac Regeneration: New Insights Into the Frontier of Ischemic Heart Failure Therapy

Ischemic heart disease is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the world. While pharmacological and surgical interventions developed in the late twentieth century drastically improved patient outcomes, mortality rates over the last two decades have begun to plateau. Following ischemic injury, pathological remodeling leads to cardiomyocyte loss and fibrosis leading to impaired heart function. Cardiomyocyte turnover rate in the adult heart is limited, and no clinical therapies currently exist to regenerate cardiomyocytes lost following ischemic injury. In this review, we summarize the progress of therapeutic strategies including revascularization and cell-based interventions to regenerate the heart: transiently inducing cardiomyocyte proliferation and direct reprogramming of fibroblasts into cardiomyocytes. Moreover, we highlight recent mechanistic insights governing these strategies to promote heart regeneration and identify current challenges in translating these approaches to human patients.

Do advance directive attitudes and perceived susceptibility and end-of-life life-sustaining treatment preferences between patients with heart failure and cancer differ?

There is limited evidence on the relationships of preference for end-of-life life-sustaining treatments [LSTs] and diagnostic contexts like heart failure [HF] or cancer, and patient attitudes toward and perceived susceptibility to use advance directives [ADs]. Thus, this study aimed to compare attitudes and perceived susceptibility between HF patients and community-dwelling patients with cancer, and examine the associations of these variables with their preference for each LST (cardiopulmonary resuscitation [CPR], ventilation support, hemodialysis, and hospice care). Secondary data were obtained from 36 outpatients with HF (mean age, 65.44 years; male, 69.4%) and 107 cancer patients (mean age, 67.39 years; male, 32.7%). More patients with HF preferred CPR than cancer patients (41.7% and 15.9%, χ2 = 8.88, P = 0.003). Attitudes and perceived susceptibility were similar between the two diagnostic cohorts. HF patients and those with more positive attitudes had greater odds of preferring CPR (odds ratio [OR] = 3.02, confidence interval [CI] = 1.19, 7.70) and hospice care (OR = 1.14, CI = 1.06, 1.23), respectively. HF diagnosis and AD attitudes increased the preference for CPR and hospice care, respectively. This suggests that it is important to gain positive attitudes toward ADs and consider diagnostic context to facilitate informed decision-making for LSTs.

Rho-kinase pathway activation and apoptosis in circulating leucocytes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

Background

Increased Rho‐kinase activity in circulating leucocytes is observed in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, there is little information in HFrEF regarding other Rho‐kinase pathway components an on the relationship between Rho‐kinase and apoptosis. Here, Rho‐kinase activation levels and phosphorylation of major downstream molecules and apoptosis levels were measured for the first time both in HFrEF patients and healthy individuals.

Methods

Cross‐sectional study comparing HFrEF patients (n = 20) and healthy controls (n = 19). Rho‐kinase activity in circulating leucocytes (peripheral blood mononuclear cells, PBMCs) was determined by myosin light chain phosphatase 1 (MYPT1) and ezrin‐radixin‐moesin (ERM) phosphorylation. Rho‐kinase cascade proteins phosphorylation p38‐MAPK, myosin light chain‐2, JAK and JNK were also analysed along with apoptosis.

Results

MYPT1 and ERM phosphorylation were significantly elevated in HFrEF patients, (3.9‐ and 4.8‐fold higher than in controls, respectively). JAK phosphorylation was significantly increased by 300% over controls. Phosphorylation of downstream molecules p38‐MAPK and myosin light chain‐2 was significantly higher by 360% and 490%, respectively, while JNK phosphorylation was reduced by 60%. Catecholamine and angiotensin II levels were significantly higher in HFrEF patients, while angiotensin‐(1‐9) levels were lower. Apoptosis in circulating leucocytes was significantly increased in HFrEF patients by 2.8‐fold compared with controls and significantly correlated with Rho‐kinase activation.

Conclusion

Rho‐kinase pathway is activated in PMBCs from HFrEF patients despite optimal treatment, and it is closely associated with neurohormonal activation and with apoptosis. ROCK cascade inhibition might induce clinical benefits in HFrEF patients, and its assessment in PMBCs could be useful to evaluate reverse remodelling and disease regression.

Evolution of functional class, biochemical and echocardiographic parameters and clinical outcomes after sacubitril/valsartan initiation in daily practice

Aim: To analyze the impact of sacubitril/valsartan on functional class, surrogate parameters and clinical outcomes in clinical practice. Methods: Retrospective study of patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction that started treatment with sacubitril/valsartan. Results: 149 patients (70.7 ± 9.6 years) were included. At baseline, 83.9, 15.4 and 0.7% were taking sacubitril/valsartan 24/26, 49/51 and 97/103 mg, respectively. After 316.1 ± 155.9 days, these numbers moved to 38.9, 39.6, 12.8% (8.7% discontinued). Sacubitril/valsartan improved functional class (from 2.3 ± 0.6 to 1.8 ± 0.5; p < 0.001), increased ejection fraction (from 31.2 ± 7.0 to 37.3 ± 10.5%; p < 0.001) and reduced NT-proBNP (from 3884 ± 4871 to 1975.3 ± 3006.6 pg/ml; p = 0.0001). Rates of any event, cardiovascular death and heart failure hospitalization/decompensation were 13.2 events/100 patient-years. Conclusion: Sacubitril/valsartan is effective and safe in routine practice.

Mesenchymal stem cell therapy for heart failure: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) treatment has emerged as an important adjunct therapy for heart failure. However, the use of MSC to treat heart failure has not been well established. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of MSC treatment for heart failure.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the influence of MSC treatment on cardiac function in heart failure were included in this analysis. Two investigators independently searched the articles, extracted data, and assessed the quality of the included studies. Meta-analysis was performed using the fixed-effect model or random-effect model when appropriate.

RESULTS

Six RCTs involving 625 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with control interventions in heart failure patients, MSC treatment had no significant influence on cardiovascular death (RR = 0.76; 95% CI = 0.38-1.52; p = 0.43); however, it was associated with significantly increased left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF; mean = 9.64; 95% CI = 7.56-11.71; p < 0.00001) and reduced rehospitalization rate (RR = 0.41; 95% CI = 0.23-0.73; p = 0.003). In addition, no significant difference between the two groups was observed for the incidence of myocardial infarction (RR = 0.72; 95% CI = 0.10-5.02; p = 0.74), the recurrence of heart failure (RR = 0.88; 95% CI = 0.28-2.81; p = 0.83), and total death (RR = 0.68; 95% CI = 0.37-1.25; p = 0.21).

CONCLUSION

Although MSC treatment can significantly improve LVEF and reduce rehospitalization rates, it does not have a significant influence on cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, heart failure, and total death.