Opportunistic screening for heart failure with natriuretic peptides in patients with atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of individual participant data of four screening studies

Risk of bias assessments in individual participant data meta-analyses of test accuracy and prediction models: a review shows improvements are needed

OBJECTIVES

Risk of bias assessments are important in meta-analyses of both aggregate and individual participant data (IPD). There is limited evidence on whether and how risk of bias of included studies or datasets in IPD meta-analyses (IPDMAs) is assessed. We review how risk of bias is currently assessed, reported, and incorporated in IPDMAs of test accuracy and clinical prediction model studies and provide recommendations for improvement.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We searched PubMed (January 2018-May 2020) to identify IPDMAs of test accuracy and prediction models, then elicited whether each IPDMA assessed risk of bias of included studies and, if so, how assessments were reported and subsequently incorporated into the IPDMAs.

RESULTS

Forty-nine IPDMAs were included. Nineteen of 27 (70%) test accuracy IPDMAs assessed risk of bias, compared to 5 of 22 (23%) prediction model IPDMAs. Seventeen of 19 (89%) test accuracy IPDMAs used Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2), but no tool was used consistently among prediction model IPDMAs. Of IPDMAs assessing risk of bias, 7 (37%) test accuracy IPDMAs and 1 (20%) prediction model IPDMA provided details on the information sources (e.g., the original manuscript, IPD, primary investigators) used to inform judgments, and 4 (21%) test accuracy IPDMAs and 1 (20%) prediction model IPDMA provided information or whether assessments were done before or after obtaining the IPD of the included studies or datasets. Of all included IPDMAs, only seven test accuracy IPDMAs (26%) and one prediction model IPDMA (5%) incorporated risk of bias assessments into their meta-analyses. For future IPDMA projects, we provide guidance on how to adapt tools such as Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (for prediction models) and QUADAS-2 (for test accuracy) to assess risk of bias of included primary studies and their IPD.

CONCLUSION

Risk of bias assessments and their reporting need to be improved in IPDMAs of test accuracy and, especially, prediction model studies. Using recommended tools, both before and after IPD are obtained, will address this.

Vasostatin-1 as a potential novel circulating biomarker in patients with chronic systolic heart failure: A pilot study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Previous studies have shown that circulating chromogranin A (CgA) increases in patients with chronic systolic heart failure (HF). Aim of the present study is to evaluate the potential role of circulating vasostatin-1 (VS-1), a cardioregulatory fragment of CgA, as prognostic marker in patients with chronic HF.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The plasma levels of CgA and VS-1 were determined in 80 patients with chronic systolic HF. Patients were followed-up to evaluate the occurrence of cardiovascular (CV) events.

RESULTS

CgA and VS-1 plasma levels were significantly higher in patients with CV events at follow-up. VS-1, but not CgA, was associated to NT-proBNP. No significant association of CgA and VS-1 with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was observed. CgA, NT-proBNP and age, but not VS-1, were independent predictors of CV events.

CONCLUSION

In patients with chronic systolic HF those who experienced CV events had higher levels of VS-1 and CgA. Given its established effect on cardiac cells, the association of VS-1 levels with NT-proBNP levels but not with LVEF, suggests that this fragment might provide complementary information to NT-proBNP and CgA in HF patients.

Biomarkers in the clinical management of patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) are two cardiovascular diseases with an increasing prevalence worldwide. These conditions share common pathophysiologiesand frequently co-exit. In fact, the occurrence of either condition can 'cause' the development of the other, creating a new patient group that demands different management strategies to that if they occur in isolation. Regardless of the temproral association of the two conditions, their presence is linked with adverse cardiovascular outcomes, increased rate of hospitalizations, and increased economic burden on healthcare systems. The use of low-cost, easily accessible and applicable biomarkers may hasten the correct diagnosis and the effective treatment of AF and HF. Both AF and HF effect multiple physiological pathways and thus a great number of biomarkers can be measured that potentially give the clinician important diagnostic and prognostic information. These will then guide patient centred therapeutic management. The current biomarkers that offer potential for guiding therapy, focus on the physiological pathways of miRNA, myocardial stretch and injury, oxidative stress, inflammation, fibrosis, coagulation and renal impairment. Each of these has different utility in current clinincal practice.

Under-recognition of heart failure in patients with atrial fibrillation and the impact of gender: a UK population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) complicated by heart failure (HF) have a poor prognosis. We investigated whether long term loop-diuretic therapy in patients with AF and no known diagnosis of HF, as a potential surrogate marker of undiagnosed HF, is also associated with worse outcomes.

METHODS

Adults with incident AF were identified from UK primary and secondary care records between 2004 and 2016. Repeat prescriptions for loop diuretics, without a diagnosis of HF or documented non-cardiac indication, were classified as 'isolated' loop diuretic use.

RESULTS

Amongst 124,256 people with incident AF (median 76 years, 47% women), 22,001 (17.7%) had a diagnosis of HF, and 22,325 (18.0%) had isolated loop diuretic use. During 2.9 (LQ-UQ 1-6) years' follow-up, 12,182 patients were diagnosed with HF (incidence rate 3.2 [95% CI 3.1-3.3]/100 person-years). Of these, 3999 (32.8%) had prior isolated loop diuretic use, including 31% of patients diagnosed with HF following an emergency hospitalisation. The median time from AF to HF diagnosis was 3.6 (1.2-7.7) years in men versus 5.1 (1.8-9.9) years in women (p = 0.0001). In adjusted models, patients with isolated loop diuretic use had higher mortality (HR 1.42 [95% CI 1.37-1.47], p < 0.0005) and risk of HF hospitalisation (HR 1.60 [95% CI 1.42-1.80], p < 0.0005) than patients with no HF or loop diuretic use, and comparably poor survival to patients with diagnosed HF.

CONCLUSIONS

Loop diuretics are commonly prescribed to patients with AF and may indicate increased cardiovascular risk. Targeted evaluation of these patients may allow earlier HF diagnosis, timely intervention, and better outcomes, particularly amongst women with AF, in whom HF appears to be under-recognised and diagnosed later than in men.

Prognostic significance of the HFA-PEFF score in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

AIMS

The HFA-PEFF score is a part of the stepwise diagnostic algorithm of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). We aimed to evaluate the prognostic significance of the HFA-PEFF score on the clinical outcomes in patients with HFpEF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The Prospective mUlticenteR obServational stUdy of patIenTs with Heart Failure with preserved Ejection Fraction (PURSUIT-HFpEF) study is a prospective, multicentre, observational study in which collaborating hospitals in Osaka record clinical, echocardiographic, and outcome data of patients with acute decompensated heart failure with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (≥50%) [UMIN-CTR ID: UMIN000021831]. Acute decompensated heart failure was diagnosed on the basis of the following criteria: (i) clinical symptoms and signs according to the Framingham Heart Study criteria; and (ii) serum N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide level of ≥400 pg/mL or brain natriuretic peptide level of ≥100 pg/mL. The HFA-PEFF score has functional, morphological, and biomarker domains. We evaluated the prognostic significance of the HFA-PEFF score (calculated based on the data at hospital discharge) on post-discharge clinical outcomes in this cohort. The primary endpoint of the present study was a composite of all-cause death and heart failure readmission. Between June 2016 and December 2019, 871 patients were enrolled from 26 hospitals (mean follow-up duration 399 ± 349 days). A total of 804 patients were finally analysed after excluding patients with scores of 0 (N = 5) and 1 (N = 15) from 824 patients with available HFA-PEFF score based on the echocardiographic and laboratory data at discharge. According to the laboratory and echocardiographic data at the time of discharge, 487 patients (59.1%) were diagnosed as HFpEF (HFA-PEFF score ≥ 5) while 317 patients (38.5%) had intermediate score. Kaplan-Meier analysis divided by the HFA-PEFF score [low, score 2-5 (N = 494) vs. high, score 6 (N = 310)] indicated that the HFA-PEFF score successfully stratified the patients for the primary endpoint (log-rank test P < 0.001). Cox proportional hazard model showed that the HFA-PEFF score was significantly associated with the primary endpoint (high score with reference to low score, adjusted hazard ratio 1.446, 95% confidence interval [1.099-1.902], P = 0.008).

CONCLUSION

The HFA-PEFF score at discharge was significantly associated with the post-discharge clinical outcomes in acute decompensated heart failure patients with preserved ejection fraction. This study suggested clinical usefulness of the HFA-PEFF score not only as a diagnostic tool but also a practical prognostic tool.

How to diagnose heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: the HFA-PEFF diagnostic algorithm: a consensus recommendation from the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC)

Making a firm diagnosis of chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains a challenge. We recommend a new stepwise diagnostic process, the 'HFA-PEFF diagnostic algorithm'. Step 1 (P=Pre-test assessment) is typically performed in the ambulatory setting and includes assessment for HF symptoms and signs, typical clinical demographics (obesity, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, elderly, atrial fibrillation), and diagnostic laboratory tests, electrocardiogram, and echocardiography. In the absence of overt non-cardiac causes of breathlessness, HFpEF can be suspected if there is a normal left ventricular ejection fraction, no significant heart valve disease or cardiac ischaemia, and at least one typical risk factor. Elevated natriuretic peptides support, but normal levels do not exclude a diagnosis of HFpEF. The second step (E: Echocardiography and Natriuretic Peptide Score) requires comprehensive echocardiography and is typically performed by a cardiologist. Measures include mitral annular early diastolic velocity (e'), left ventricular (LV) filling pressure estimated using E/e', left atrial volume index, LV mass index, LV relative wall thickness, tricuspid regurgitation velocity, LV global longitudinal systolic strain, and serum natriuretic peptide levels. Major (2 points) and Minor (1 point) criteria were defined from these measures. A score ≥5 points implies definite HFpEF; ≤1 point makes HFpEF unlikely. An intermediate score (2-4 points) implies diagnostic uncertainty, in which case Step 3 (F1: Functional testing) is recommended with echocardiographic or invasive haemodynamic exercise stress tests. Step 4 (F2: Final aetiology) is recommended to establish a possible specific cause of HFpEF or alternative explanations. Further research is needed for a better classification of HFpEF.

Deliberating the Diagnostic Dilemma of Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction

There is a lack of consensus on how we define heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), with wide variation in diagnostic criteria across society guidelines. This lack of uniformity in disease definition stems in part from an incomplete understanding of disease pathobiology, phenotypic heterogeneity, and natural history. We review current knowledge gaps and existing diagnostic tools and algorithms. We present a simple approach to implement these tools within the constraints of the current knowledge base, addressing separately (1) hospitalized individuals with rest congestion, where diagnosis is more straightforward; and (2) individuals with exercise intolerance, where diagnosis is more complex. Here, a potential role for advanced or provocative testing, including evaluation of hemodynamic responses to exercise is considered. More importantly, we propose focus areas for future studies to develop accurate and feasible diagnostic tools for HFpEF, including animal models that recapitulate human HFpEF, and human studies that both address a fundamental understanding of HFpEF pathobiology, and new diagnostic approaches and tools, as well. In sum, there is an urgent need to more accurately define the syndrome of HFpEF to inform diagnosis, patient selection for clinical trials, and, ultimately, future therapeutic approaches.

Clinical Applications of Natriuretic Peptides in Heart Failure and Atrial Fibrillation

Natriuretic peptides (NPs) have become important diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers in cardiovascular diseases, particularly in heart failure (HF). Diagnosis and management of coronary artery disease and atrial fibrillation (AF) can also be guided by NP levels. When interpreting NP levels, however, the caveat is that age, sex, body mass index, renal dysfunction, and race affect the clearance of NPs, resulting in different cut-off values in clinical practice. In AF, NP levels have been associated with incident AF in the general population, recurrences after catheter ablation, prediction of clinical prognosis, and the risk of stroke. In this article, we first review and summarize the current evidence and the roles of B-type NP and atrial NP in HF and coronary artery disease and then focus on the increasing utility of NPs in the diagnosis and management of and the research into AF.