Long-term prognostic implications of the ADHF/NT-proBNP risk score in patients admitted with advanced heart failure

Risk scores did not reliably predict individual risk of mortality for patients with decompensated heart failure

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the performance of four prognostic tools in predicting 180-day mortality for patients admitted for acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) by calculating sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) over a range of risk thresholds, in addition to discrimination and calibration.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We studied 1,458 patients. The risk assessment was performed using the Acute Decompensated Heart Failure National Registry (ADHERE) model and the Get With The Guidelines (GWTG), ADHF/NT-proBNP, and Acute Study of Clinical Effectiveness of Nesiritide in Decompensated Heart Failure (ASCEND) risk scores.

RESULTS

C-statistics ranged from 0.727 for the ADHERE model to 0.767 for the ADHF/NT-proBNP score. The ADHF/NT-proBNP risk score, the ADHERE model, and the ASCEND risk score, but not the GWTG risk score, were also well calibrated. Sensitivity and PPV were modest at the >30% risk threshold and ranged from 55% for the ADHF/NT-proBNP risk score to 38.8% for the ADHERE model and from 46.7% for the ADHF/NT-proBNP risk score to 42.1% for the ASCEND risk score, respectively. There was a modest agreement between the risk scores in classifying the patients across risk strata or in classifying those who died as being at >30% risk of death.

CONCLUSION

Although risk assessment tools work well for stratifying patients, their use in estimating the risk of mortality for individuals has limited clinical utility.

Cardiac Biomarkers in Advanced Heart Failure: How Can They Impact Our Pre-transplant or Pre-LVAD Decision-making

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Decision-making in advanced heart failure (HF) is a complex process that involves careful consideration of competing tradeoffs of risks and benefits in regard to heart transplantation (HT) or left ventricular assist device (LVAD) placement. The purpose of this review is to discuss how biomarkers may affect decision-making for HT or LVAD implantation.

RECENT FINDINGS

N-Terminal probrain natriuretic peptide, soluble suppression of tumorigenicity-2, galectin-3, copeptin, and troponin T levels are associated with HF survival and can help identify the appropriate timing for advanced HF therapies. Patients at risk of right ventricular failure after LVAD implantation can be identified with preimplant biomarkers of extracellular matrix turnover, neurohormonal activation, and inflammation. There is limited data on the adoption of biomarker measurement for decision-making in the allocation of advanced HF therapies. Nonetheless, biomarkers can improve risk stratification and prognostication thereby optimizing patient selection for HT and LVAD implantation.