Predicting Risk in Patients Hospitalized for Acute Decompensated Heart Failure and Preserved Ejection Fraction: The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study Heart Failure Community Surveillance

Prognostic models for patients suffering a heart failure with a preserved ejection fraction: a systematic review

The purpose of this study was to systematically review the development, performance, and applicability of prognostic models developed for predicting poor events in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Databases including Embase, PubMed, Web of Science Core Collection, the Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wan Fang, Wei Pu, and China Biological Medicine were queried from their respective dates of inception to 1 June 2023, to examine multivariate models for prognostic prediction in HFpEF. Both forward and backward citations of all studies were included in our analysis. Two researchers individually used the Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies (CHARMS) checklist to extract data and assess the quality of the models using the Predictive Mode Bias Risk Assessment Tool (PROBAST). Among the 6897 studies screened, 16 studies derived and/or validated a total of 39 prognostic models. The sample size ranges for model development, internal validation, and external validation are 119 to 5988, 152 to 1000, and 30 to 5957, respectively. The most frequently employed modelling technique was Cox proportional hazards regression. Six studies (37.50%) conducted internal validation of models; bootstrap and k-fold cross-validation were the commonly used methods for internal validation of models. Ten of these models (25.64%) were validated externally, with reported the c-statistic in the external validation set ranging from 0.70 to 0.96, while the remaining models await external validation. The MEDIA echo score and I-PRESERVE-sudden cardiac death prediction mode have been externally validated using multiple cohorts, and the results consistently show good predictive performance. The most frequently used predictors identified among the models were age, n-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide, ejection fraction, albumin, and hospital stay in the last 5 months owing to heart failure. All study predictor domains and outcome domains were at low risk of bias, high or unclear risk of bias of all prognostic models due to underreporting in the area of analysis. All studies did not evaluate the clinical utility of the prognostic models. Predictive models for predicting prognostic outcomes in patients with HFpEF showed good discriminatory ability but their utility and generalization remain uncertain due to the risk of bias, differences in predictors between models, and the lack of clinical application studies. Future studies should improve the methodological quality of model development and conduct external validation of models.

An Updated Review on the Role of Non-dihydropyridine Calcium Channel Blockers and Beta-blockers in Atrial Fibrillation and Acute Decompensated Heart Failure: Evidence and Gaps

PURPOSE

The 2021 European Society of Cardiology guidelines on acute and chronic heart failure (HF) recommend that non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (NDCC) should be avoided in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction. It also emphasizes that beta-blockers only be initiated in clinically stable, euvolemic patients. Despite these recommendations, NDCC and beta-blockers are often still employed in patients with AF with rapid ventricular response and acute decompensated HF. The relative safety and efficacy of these therapies in this setting is unclear.

METHODS

To address the question of the safety and efficacy of NDCC and beta-blockers for acute rate control in decompensated HF, we provide a perspective on the literature of NDCC and beta-blockers in chronic HF with reduced and preserved ejection fraction and AF, including trials on the management of AF with rapid ventricular response with and without HF.

RESULTS

Robust data demonstrates mortality benefits when beta-blockers are used in patients with chronic HF with reduced ejection fraction. The data that inform the contraindication of NDCC in HF with reduced ejection fraction are outdated and were not primarily designed to address the efficacy and safety of rate control of AF in patients with HF. Several studies indicate that for acute rate control, NDCC and beta-blockers are both efficacious therapies, especially in the setting of tachycardia-induced cardiomyopathy.

CONCLUSION

Future studies are needed to assess the safety and efficacy of beta-blockers and NDCC in both acute and chronic AF with HF with reduced and preserved ejection fraction.

Palliative Care for Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) has become the leading form of heart failure worldwide, particularly among elderly patient populations. HFpEF is associated with significant morbidity and mortality that may benefit from incorporation of palliative care (PC). Patients with HFpEF have similarly high mortality rates to patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. PC trials for heart failure have shown improvement in quality of life, quality of death, and health care utilization, although most trials defined heart failure clinically without differentiating between HFpEF and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. As such, the timing and role of PC for HFpEF care remains uncertain, and PC referral rates for HFpEF are very low despite potential improvements in important patient-centered outcomes. Specific barriers to referral include limited data, prognostic uncertainty, provider misconceptions about PC, inadequate specialty PC workforce, complexities of treating multimorbidity, and limited home care options for patients with heart failure. While there are many barriers to integration of PC into HFpEF care, there are multiple potential benefits to patients with HFpEF throughout their disease course. As this population continues to grow, targeted efforts to study and implement PC interventions are needed to improve patient quality of life and death.

Risk Prediction Models and Novel Prognostic Factors for Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Systematic and Comprehensive Review

BACKGROUND

Patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) have large individual differences, unclear risk stratification, and imperfect treatment plans. Risk prediction models are helpful for the dynamic assessment of patients' prognostic risk and early intensive therapy of high-risk patients. The purpose of this study is to systematically summarize the existing risk prediction models and novel prognostic factors for HFpEF, to provide a reference for the construction of convenient and efficient HFpEF risk prediction models.

METHODS

Studies on risk prediction models and prognostic factors for HFpEF were systematically searched in relevant databases including PubMed and Embase. The retrieval time was from inception to February 1, 2023. The Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool was used to assess the risk of bias in included studies. The predictive value of risk prediction models for end outcomes was evaluated by sensitivity, specificity, the area under the curve, C-statistic, C-index, etc. In the literature screening process, potential novel prognostic factors with high value were explored.

RESULTS

A total of 21 eligible HFpEF risk prediction models and 22 relevant studies were included. Except for 2 studies with a high risk of bias and 2 studies with a moderate risk of bias, other studies that proposed risk prediction models had a low risk of bias overall. Potential novel prognostic factors for HFpEF were classified and described in terms of demographic characteristics (age, sex, and race), lifestyle (physical activity, body mass index, weight change, and smoking history), laboratory tests (biomarkers), physical inspection (blood pressure, electrocardiogram, imaging examination), and comorbidities.

CONCLUSION

It is of great significance to explore the potential novel prognostic factors of HFpEF and build a more convenient and efficient risk prediction model for improving the overall prognosis of patients. This review can provide a substantial reference for further research.

Targeting efficacy of spironolactone in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: the TOPCAT study

AIMS

We aimed to explore the heterogeneous treatment effects (HTEs) for spironolactone treatment in patients with Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and examine the efficacy and safety of spironolactone medication, ensuring a better individualized therapy.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We used the causal forest algorithm to discover the heterogeneous treatment effects (HTEs) from patients in the Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure with an Aldosterone Antagonist (TOPCAT) trial. Cox regressions were performed to assess the hazard ratios (HRs) of spironolactone medication for cardiovascular death and drug discontinuation in each group. The causal forest model revealed three representative covariates and participants were partitioned into four subgroups which were Group 1 (baseline BMI ≤ 31.71 kg/m² and baseline ALP ≤ 80 U/L, n = 759); Group 2 (BMI ≤ 31.71 kg/m² and ALP > 80 U/L, n = 1088); Group 3 (BMI > 31.71 kg/m² , and WBC ≤ 6.6 cells/μL, n = 633); Group 4 (BMI > 31.71 kg/m² and WBC > 6.6 cells/μL, n = 832), respectively. In the four subgroups, spironolactone therapy reduced the risk of cardiovascular death in high-risk group (Group 4) with both high BMI and WBC count (HR: 0.76; 95% CI 0.58 to 0.99; P = 0.045) but increased the risk in low-risk group (Group 1) with both low BMI and ALP (HR: 1.45; 95% CI 1.02 to 2.07; P = 0.041; P for interaction = 0.020) but showed similar risk of drug discontinuation (P for interaction = 0.498).

CONCLUSION

Our study manifested the HTEs of spironolactone in patients with HFpEF. Spironolactone treatment in HFpEF patients is feasible and effective in patients with high BMI and WBC while harmful in patients with low BMI and ALP. Machine learning model could be meaningful for improved categorization of patients with HFpEF, ensuring a better individualized therapy in the clinical setting.

Prevalence and Prognostic Significance of Microvascular Dysfunction in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction

BACKGROUND

The pathophysiological and clinical significance of microvascular dysfunction (MVD) in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to use cardiovascular magnetic resonance to: 1) quantify coronary microvascular function; 2) examine the relationship between perfusion and fibrosis; and 3) evaluate the impact of MVD and fibrosis on long-term clinical outcomes.

METHODS

In a prospective, observational study, patients with HFpEF and control subjects underwent multiparametric cardiovascular magnetic resonance (comprising assessment of left ventricular volumetry, perfusion, and fibrosis [focal by late gadolinium enhancement and diffuse by extracellular volume]). The primary endpoint was the composite of death or hospitalization with heart failure.

RESULTS

One hundred and one patients with HFpEF (mean age 73 ± 9 years, mean ejection fraction 56% ± 5%) and 43 control subjects (mean age 73 ± 5 years, mean ejection fraction 58% ± 5%) were studied. Myocardial perfusion reserve (MPR) was lower in patients with HFpEF versus control subjects (1.74 ± 0.76 vs 2.22 ± 0.76; P = 0.001). MVD (defined as MPR <2.0) was present in 70% of patients with HFpEF (vs 48% of control subjects; P = 0.014). There was no significant linear correlation between MPR and diffuse fibrosis (r = -0.10; P = 0.473) and no difference in MPR between those with and without focal fibrosis (mean difference -0.03; 95% CI: -0.37 to 0.30). In the HFpEF group, during median follow-up of 3.1 years, there were 45 composite events. MPR was independently predictive of clinical outcome following adjustment for clinical, blood, and imaging parameters (1 SD increase: HR: 0.673 [95% CI: 0.463 to 0.978; P = 0.038]; HR: 0.694 [95% CI: 0.491 to 0.982; P = 0.039]; and HR: 0.690 [95% CI: 0.489 to 0.973; P = 0.034], respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

MVD is highly prevalent among patients with HFpEF and is an independent predictor of prognosis. The lack of correlation between MVD and fibrosis may challenge the assertion of a direct causal link between these entities. (Developing Imaging and Plasma Biomarkers in Describing Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction [DIAMONDHFpEF]; NCT03050593).

Development and Validation of a Prediction Model for Irreversible Worsened Cardiac Function in Patients With Acute Decompensated Heart Failure

Background: Irreversible worsening of cardiac function is an adverse event associated with significant morbidity among patients with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). We aimed to develop a parsimonious model which is simple to use in clinical settings for the prediction of the risk of irreversible worsening of cardiac function. Methods: A total of 871 ADHF patients were enrolled in this study. Data for each patient were collected from the medical records. Irreversible worsening of cardiac function included cardiac death within 30-days of patient hospitalization, implantation of a left ventricular assistance device, or emergency heart transplantation. We performed LASSO regression for variable selection to derive a multivariable logistic regression model. Five candidate predictors were selected to derive the final prediction model. The prediction model was verified using C-statistics, calibration curve, and decision curve. Results: Irreversible worsening of cardiac function occurred in 7.8% of the patients. Advanced age, NYHA class, high blood urea nitrogen, hypoalbuminemia, and vasopressor use were its strongest predictors. The prediction model showed good discrimination C-statistic value, 0.866 (95% CI, 0.817-0.907), which indicated good identical calibration and clinical efficacy. Conclusion: In this study, we developed a prediction model and nomogram to estimate the risk of irreversible worsening of cardiac function among ADHF patients. The findings may provide a reference for clinical physicians for detection of irreversible worsening of cardiac function and enable its prompt management.

Assessment of acute heart failure prognosis: the promising role of prognostic models and biomarkers

Numerous models and biomarkers have been proposed to estimate prognosis and improve decision-making in patients with acute heart failure (AHF). The present literature review provides a critical appraisal of externally validated prognostic models in AHF, combining clinical data and biomarkers. We perform a literature review of clinical studies, using the following terms: "acute heart failure," "acute decompensated heart failure," "prognostic models," "risk scores," "mortality," "death," "hospitalization," "admission," and "biomarkers." We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from 1990 to 2020 for studies documenting prognostic models in AHF. External validation of each prognostic model to another AHF cohort, containing at least one biomarker, was prerequisites for study selection. Among 358 initially screened studies, 9 of them fulfilled all searching criteria. The majority of prognostic models were simplified, including a narrow number of variables (up to 10), with good performance regarding calibration and discrimination (c-statistics > 0.65). Unfortunately, the derived and validated cohorts showed a wide variety in patients' characteristics (e.g., cause of AHF and therapy). Moreover, the prognostic models used various time-points and a plethora of combinations of variables determining different cut-off values. Although the application of valid prognostic models in AHF population is quite promising, a precise methodological approach should be set for the derivation and validation of prognostic models in AHF with unified characteristics to establish an effective performance in clinical practice.

Risk Stratification and Efficacy of Spironolactone in Patients with Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction: Secondary Analysis of the TOPCAT Randomized Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

We aimed to develop a simple risk score for patients with HFpEF and assessed the efficacy of spironolactone across baseline risk.

METHODS

We developed risk stratification scheme for cardiovascular death in placebo arm of the Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure with an Aldosterone Antagonist trial (TOPCAT). We screened candidate risk indicators and determined strong risk predictors using COX regression. The absolute risk reduction (ARR) in cardiovascular death with spironolactone was evaluated across baseline risk groups. COX regressions were performed to assess the hazard ratios (HRs) of spironolactone therapy for cardiovascular death and drug discontinuation in each risk category.

RESULTS

A simple risk score scheme was constructed based on five risk indicators weighted by estimates from the model, including age, diastolic blood pressure, renal dysfunction, white blood cell, and left ventricular ejection fraction. The risk score scheme showed good discrimination in placebo cohort (C index=0.70). ARR with spironolactone therapy was observed only in patients at very high risk (7.9%). Spironolactone therapy significantly reduced the risk of cardiovascular death in the very high-risk group (HR: 0.57; 95%CI, 0.39-0.84; P =0.005 and P for interaction 0.03) but showed similar risk of drug discontinuation across risk categories (P for interaction=0.928).

CONCLUSION

This simple risk score stratifies patients with HFpEF by their baseline risk of cardiovascular death. Patients at very high risk derive great benefits from spironolactone therapy. This easy-to-use risk score provides a practical tool that can facilitate risk stratification and tailoring therapy for those who benefit most from spironolactone.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00094302.

Risk Prediction in Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction Using Gene Expression Data and Machine Learning

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) has become a major health issue because of its high mortality, high heterogeneity, and poor prognosis. Using genomic data to classify patients into different risk groups is a promising method to facilitate the identification of high-risk groups for further precision treatment. Here, we applied six machine learning models, namely kernel partial least squares with the genetic algorithm (GA-KPLS), the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO), random forest, ridge regression, support vector machine, and the conventional logistic regression model, to predict HFpEF risk and to identify subgroups at high risk of death based on gene expression data. The model performance was evaluated using various criteria. Our analysis was focused on 149 HFpEF patients from the Framingham Heart Study cohort who were classified into good-outcome and poor-outcome groups based on their 3-year survival outcome. The results showed that the GA-KPLS model exhibited the best performance in predicting patient risk. We further identified 116 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between the two groups, thus providing novel therapeutic targets for HFpEF. Additionally, the DEGs were enriched in Gene Ontology terms and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes pathways related to HFpEF. The GA-KPLS-based HFpEF model is a powerful method for risk stratification of 3-year mortality in HFpEF patients.

A heart failure phenotype stratified model for predicting 1-year mortality in patients admitted with acute heart failure: results from an individual participant data meta-analysis of four prospective European cohorts

BACKGROUND

Prognostic models developed in general cohorts with a mixture of heart failure (HF) phenotypes, though more widely applicable, are also likely to yield larger prediction errors in settings where the HF phenotypes have substantially different baseline mortality rates or different predictor-outcome associations. This study sought to use individual participant data meta-analysis to develop an HF phenotype stratified model for predicting 1-year mortality in patients admitted with acute HF.

METHODS

Four prospective European cohorts were used to develop an HF phenotype stratified model. Cox model with two rounds of backward elimination was used to derive the prognostic index. Weibull model was used to obtain the baseline hazard functions. The internal-external cross-validation (IECV) approach was used to evaluate the generalizability of the developed model in terms of discrimination and calibration.

RESULTS

3577 acute HF patients were included, of which 2368 were classified as having HF with reduced ejection fraction (EF) (HFrEF; EF < 40%), 588 as having HF with midrange EF (HFmrEF; EF 40-49%), and 621 as having HF with preserved EF (HFpEF; EF ≥ 50%). A total of 11 readily available variables built up the prognostic index. For four of these predictor variables, namely systolic blood pressure, serum creatinine, myocardial infarction, and diabetes, the effect differed across the three HF phenotypes. With a weighted IECV-adjusted AUC of 0.79 (0.74-0.83) for HFrEF, 0.74 (0.70-0.79) for HFmrEF, and 0.74 (0.71-0.77) for HFpEF, the model showed excellent discrimination. Moreover, there was a good agreement between the average observed and predicted 1-year mortality risks, especially after recalibration of the baseline mortality risks.

CONCLUSIONS

Our HF phenotype stratified model showed excellent generalizability across four European cohorts and may provide a useful tool in HF phenotype-specific clinical decision-making.

H2FPEF Score Reflects the Left Atrial Strain and Predicts Prognosis in Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction

BACKGROUND

The H₂FPEF score is a validated algorithm for the diagnosis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). We investigated the associations of the H₂FPEF score with echocardiographic parameters and prognosis in patients with HFpEF admitted for acute heart failure.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In total, 4312 patients at 3 tertiary centers were identified. Among 1335 patients with HFpEF, the H₂FPEF score was available in 1105 patients (39% male) with a median age of 77 years (interquartile range 69-82). The median H₂FPEF score was 4 (interquartile range 3-6). Patients with higher H₂FPEF scores had worse left atrial (LA) size, peak atrial longitudinal strain of the left atrium, mitral E/e' ratio, and peak tricuspid regurgitation velocity. Peak atrial longitudinal strain of the left atrium demonstrated a significant association with the H₂FPEF score, in patients without atrial fibrillation and those without atrial fibrillation. After adjustment for clinical factors and echocardiographic parameters, patients with higher H₂FPEF scores had a higher risk of mortality and hospitalization for heart failure, regardless of the presence of atrial fibrillation.

CONCLUSIONS

The H₂FPEF score reflects left atrial function in patients with HFpEF admitted for acute heart failure. This association supports the clinical usefulness of the H₂FPEF score as an indicator of diastolic dysfunction, a diagnostic algorithm for HFpEF, and a prognostic factor in patients with HFpEF.

Predicting High-Risk Patients and High-Risk Outcomes in Heart Failure

Identifying patients with heart failure at high risk for poor outcomes is important for patient care, resource allocation, and process improvement. Although numerous risk models exist to predict mortality, hospitalization, and patient-reported health status, they are infrequently used for several reasons, including modest performance, lack of evidence to support routine clinical use, and barriers to implementation. Artificial intelligence has the potential to enhance the performance of risk prediction models, but has its own limitations and remains unproved.

Clinical implication of pulmonary hospitalization in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: from the TOPCAT

Aims

The aim of the study was to explore the risk factors and evaluate the prognostic implication of pulmonary hospitalization on heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).

Methods and results

We performed a secondary analysis of the Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure with an Aldosterone Antagonist Trial (TOPCAT). A total of 1714 patients with HFpEF were analysed in our study. In the multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis, history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), smoking, bone fracture after the age of 45, and previous HF hospitalization were identified as independent risk factors for pulmonary hospitalization. To evaluate the prognostic significance of pulmonary hospitalization, patients were categorized into five groups according to the causes of their first hospitalization. The all‐cause and cardiovascular (CV) mortality risks in these five groups were compared using time‐varying Cox proportional hazards model. Compared with patients without hospitalization during follow‐up, those with pulmonary hospitalization were associated with a 204% increase [hazard ratio (HR) 3.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.07–4.47, P < 0.001] and 164% increase (HR 2.64, 95% CI 1.60–4.36, P < 0.001) in risks of all‐cause and CV mortality, respectively, while the corresponding risk increases associated with HF hospitalization were 146% (HR 2.46, 95% CI 1.74–3.48, P < 0.001) for all‐cause mortality and 186% (HR 2.86, 95% CI 1.87–4.36, P < 0.001) for CV mortality.

Conclusions

Pulmonary hospitalization was associated with a significant increase in risks of all‐cause and CV mortality, which was comparable with that associated with HF hospitalization. The results suggested that pulmonary hospitalization could be another important clinical endpoint of HFpEF.

Novel paradigms in the therapeutic management of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: clinical perspectives

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a pathological complexity that decreases cardiac output and elevates the ventricular filling pressure. HFpEF is usually misdiagnosed and maltreated. HFpEF is usually correlated with excessive morbidity and mortality. The prevalence of HFpEF is growing, and there is a deficiency of evidence-based therapy, creating challenges for the physician with no effective management guidelines. Moreover, HFpEF is not equivalent to diastolic heart failure as previously thought, as diastolic dysfunction is not the only underlying mechanism related to HFpEF and sometimes may be absent. Several other mechanisms may work in concert to produce HFpEF syndrome, either cardiac related (chronotropic incompetence, a longitudinal left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction despite a normal ejection fraction) or extracardiac related (pulmonary hypertension, abnormal ventricular-arterial coupling, abnormal exercise-induced vasodilation, extracardiac volume overload). These complex pathophysiologic mechanisms indicate that HFpEF is heterogeneous and that this syndrome might be related to a vascular or an endothelial dysfunction or might be considered a cardiac manifestation of one or more systemic illnesses. The heterogeneity of HFpEF necessitates excluding many differential diagnoses. In addition, the multiple comorbidities that are inherent to this condition need to be controlled in order to achieve effective management. Taken together, these key mechanisms might contribute to the multiple difficulties in the management of HFpEF patients; these mechanisms also explain why medications used in patients with other heart conditions may or may not be successful in these patients. Novel therapies and clinical trials including paradigm shifts in therapeutic management are needed to effectively manage HFpEF. The current review article sheds light on novel paradigms related to pathologies, diagnoses, and strategies, along with some proposed recommendations and clinical options for effective management of HFpEF.

Do Patients With Acute Heart Failure and Preserved Ejection Fraction Have Heart Failure at Follow-Up: Implications of the Framingham Criteria

BACKGROUND

Heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) may be misdiagnosed. We assessed prevalence and consistency of Framingham criteria signs and symptoms in acute vs subsequent stable HFpEF.

METHODS

Three hundred ninety-nine patients with acute HFpEF according to Framingham criteria were re-assessed in stable condition. Four definitions of HFpEF at follow-up: (1) Framingham criteria alone, (2) Framingham criteria and natriuretic peptides (NPs), (3) Framingham criteria, NPs, and European Society of Cardiology HF guidelines echocardiographic criteria, (4) Framingham criteria, NPs, and the Efficacy and Safety of LCZ696 Compared to Valsartan, on Morbidity and Mortality in Heart Failure Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction (PARAGON) trial echocardiographic criteria.

RESULTS

At follow-up, HFpEF was still present in 27%, 22%, 21%, and 22%, respectively. Most prevalent in acute HFpEF were dyspnea at exertion (90%), pulmonary rales (71%), persisting at follow-up in 70% and 13%, respectively. Characteristics at acute HF with greater or lesser odds of stable HFpEF; (1) jugular venous distention (odds ratio [OR] 1.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13-2.87; P = .013) and pleural effusion (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.24-0.85; P = .014) and (4), older age (1.04, 95% CI 1.01-1.08; P = .014) and tachycardia (>100 bpm) 0.52, 95% CI 0.27-1.00; P = .048).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with acute HFpEF, one-quarter met the HF definition according to Framingham criteria at ambulatory follow-up. The proportion of patients with postdischarge HFpEF was largely unaffected by additional echocardiographic or NP criteria Older age and jugular venous distention at acute presentation predicted persistent HFpEF at follow-up, whereas pleural effusion and tachycardia may yield false HFpEF diagnoses. This finding has implications for HFpEF trial design.

Advanced Heart Failure Therapies and Cardiorenal Syndrome

Heart failure (HF) is extremely prevalent and for those with end-stage (stage D) disease, 1-year survival is only 25-50%. Several studies have captured the mortality impact of kidney disease on patients with HF, and measures of kidney function are a component of many HF risk stratification scores. The management of advanced HF complicated by cardiorenal syndrome (CRS) is challenging, and irreversible kidney failure often limits patient candidacy for advanced HF therapies, such as transplant or left ventricular assist device therapy. Thus, prompt institution of aggressive therapy is warranted in stage D HF patients with CRS to prevent irreversible kidney failure. In this chapter, we discuss the assessment and management of patients with CRS with end-stage HF. In addition to discussing medical therapy aimed at decongestion and increased cardiac inotropy, we provide a summary of temporary circulatory support devices that can be considered for those whom hospice is not desired. In all circumstances, a close collaboration between the advanced HF specialist and nephrologist is needed to achieve the best patient outcomes.