One-Year Mortality After Intensification of Outpatient Diuretic Therapy

Semaglutide and diuretic use in obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a pooled analysis of the STEP-HFpEF and STEP-HFpEF-DM trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In the STEP-HFpEF trial programme, treatment with semaglutide resulted in multiple beneficial effects in patients with obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Efficacy may vary according to baseline diuretic use, and semaglutide treatment could modify diuretic dose.

METHODS

In this pre-specified analysis of pooled data from the STEP-HFpEF and STEP-HFpEF-DM trials (n = 1145), which randomized participants with HFpEF and body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2 to once weekly semaglutide 2.4 mg or placebo for 52 weeks, we examined whether efficacy and safety endpoints differed by baseline diuretic use, as well as the effect of semaglutide on loop diuretic use and dose changes over the 52-week treatment period.

RESULTS

At baseline, across no diuretic (n = 220), non-loop diuretic only (n = 223), and loop diuretic [<40 (n = 219), 40 (n = 309), and >40 (n = 174) mg/day furosemide equivalents] groups, there was progressively higher prevalence of hypertension and atrial fibrillation; and greater severity of obesity and heart failure. Over 52 weeks of treatment, semaglutide had a consistent beneficial effect on change in body weight across diuretic use categories (adjusted mean difference vs. placebo ranged from -8.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) -10.3, -6.3] to -6.9% [95% CI -9.1, -4.7] from no diuretics to the highest loop diuretic dose category; interaction P = .39). Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire clinical summary score improvement was greater in patients on loop diuretics compared to those not on loop diuretics (adjusted mean difference vs. placebo: +9.3 [6.5; 12.1] vs. +4.7 points [1.3, 8.2]; P = .042). Semaglutide had consistent beneficial effects on all secondary efficacy endpoints (including 6 min walk distance) across diuretic subgroups (interaction P = .24-.92). Safety also favoured semaglutide vs. placebo across the diuretic subgroups. From baseline to 52 weeks, loop diuretic dose decreased by 17% in the semaglutide group vs. a 2.4% increase in the placebo group (P < .0001). Semaglutide (vs. placebo) was more likely to result in loop diuretic dose reduction (odds ratio [OR] 2.67 [95% CI 1.70, 4.18]) and less likely dose increase (OR 0.35 [95% CI 0.23, 0.53]; P < .001 for both) from baseline to 52 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with obesity-related HFpEF, semaglutide improved heart failure-related symptoms and physical limitations across diuretic use subgroups, with more pronounced benefits among patients receiving loop diuretics at baseline. Reductions in weight and improvements in exercise function with semaglutide vs. placebo were consistent in all diuretic use categories. Semaglutide also led to a reduction in loop diuretic use and dose between baseline and 52 weeks.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT04788511 and NCT04916470.

Rule-based natural language processing to examine variation in worsening heart failure hospitalizations by age, sex, race and ethnicity, and left ventricular ejection fraction

BACKGROUND

Prior studies characterizing worsening heart failure events (WHFE) have been limited in using structured healthcare data from hospitalizations, and with little exploration of sociodemographic variation. The current study examined the impact of incorporating unstructured data to identify WHFE, describing age-, sex-, race and ethnicity-, and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)-specific rates.

METHODS

Adult members of Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC) with a HF diagnosis between 2014-2018 were followed through 2019 to identify hospitalized WHFE. The main outcome was hospitalizations with a principal or secondary HF discharge diagnosis meeting rule-based Natural Language Processing (NLP) criteria for WHFE. In comparison, we examined hospitalizations with a principal discharge diagnosis of HF. Age-, sex-, and race and ethnicity-adjusted rates per 100 person-years (PY) were calculated among age, sex, race and ethnicity (non-Hispanic (NH) Asian/Pacific Islander [API], Hispanic, NH Black, NH White) and LVEF subgroups.

RESULTS

Among 44,863 adults with HF, 10,560 (23.5%) had an NLP-defined, hospitalized WHFE. Adjusted rates (per 100 PY) of WHFE using NLP were higher compared to rates based only on HF principal discharge diagnosis codes (12.7 and 9.3, respectively), and this followed similar patterns among subgroups, with the highest rates among adults ≥75 years (16.3 and 11.2), men (13.2 and 9.7), and NH Black (16.9 and 14.3) and Hispanic adults (15.3 and 11.4), and adults with reduced LVEF (16.2 and 14.0). Using NLP disproportionately increased the perceived burden of WHFE among API and adults with mid-range and preserved LVEF.

CONCLUSION

Rule-based NLP improved the capture of hospitalized WHFE above principal discharge diagnosis codes alone. Applying standardized consensus definitions to EHR data may improve understanding of the burden of WHFE and promote optimal care overall and in specific sociodemographic groups.

Excess long-term risk of adverse outcomes in heart failure patients with high and low levels of NT-proBNP: A 7-year follow-up study (NorthStar Trial)

Background

This study investigated excess risk in patients with heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF) with or without elevated levels of NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide).

Methods

Patients with HFrEF from the NorthStar cohort (n = 1120) were matched on age, sex, and presence of AF (atrial fibrillation/flutter) to five controls without HFrEF from The Danish National Patient Registries. Patients were compared with controls before and after stratification according to baseline NT-proBNP levels, with cutoffs defined as

Results

In the HFrEF cohort, 704 patients had high NT-proBNP (median age, 73; mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), 33%). 416 patients had low NT-proBNP (median age, 65; LVEF, 30%). Patients from both groups were in NYHA class I-III. The primary endpoint occurred in 531 patients (75.4%) with HFrEF and elevated NT-proBNP, and 748 controls (21.3%) (risk difference, 54.2%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 50.7-57.6%). In comparison, it occurred in 199 patients (47.9%) with HFrEF and without elevated NT-proBNP, and 185 controls (8,9%) (risk difference, 38.9%; 95% CI 34.0-43.9%). Risk differences for all secondary endpoints were significant, except for overall mortality in the low NT-proBNP group (risk difference, 3.8%; 95% CI, -0.4-8.0%).

Conclusion

This study identified a significant excess risk in patients with HFrEF across various endpoints, which persisted after stratification into high and low levels of NT-proBNP.

Collapse

Key Words

• Excess risk
• Heart failure
• NT-proBNP
• NorthStar

Collapse

MESH Headings Collapse

Grants Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Anna Tuxen Department of Cardiology, Herlev and Gentofte University Hospital, Denmark
Morten Malmborg Department of Cardiology, Herlev and Gentofte University Hospital, Denmark
Nina Nouravesh Department of Cardiology, Herlev and Gentofte University Hospital, Denmark
Lars Videbaek Department of Cardiology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
Mariam Malik Department of Cardiology, Herlev and Gentofte University Hospital, Denmark
Deewa Zahir Department of Cardiology, Herlev and Gentofte University Hospital, Denmark
Lars Koeber Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Denmark Department of Cardiology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
Camilla F. Andersen Department of Cardiology, Herlev and Gentofte University Hospital, Denmark
Jawad H. Butt Department of Cardiology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
Jesper Jensen Department of Cardiology, Herlev and Gentofte University Hospital, Denmark Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
Emil Foesbol Department of Cardiology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
Charlotte Andersson Department of Cardiology, Herlev and Gentofte University Hospital, Denmark Cardiovascular Division, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA
Finn Gustafsson Department of Cardiology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
Morten Schou Department of Cardiology, Herlev and Gentofte University Hospital, Denmark Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Denmark

Collapse

Incidence of clinical outcomes in heart failure patients with and without advanced chronic kidney disease

AIMS

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a well-established risk factor for heart failure (HF); however, patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 have been systematically excluded from clinical trials. This study investigated the incidence of HF and kidney outcomes in HF patients with and without advanced CKD, that is, eGFR < 30.

METHODS

From nationwide registries, HF patients were identified from 2014 to 2018 and categorized into three groups according to baseline eGFR (eGFR ≥ 60, 60 > eGFR ≥ 30 and eGFR < 30). The incidence of primary outcomes (all-cause mortality, HF hospitalization, end-stage kidney disease and sustained 50% eGFR decline) was estimated using cumulative incidence functions.

RESULTS

Of the 21 959 HF patients included, the median age was 73.9 years, and 30% of patients had an eGFR between 30 and 60 and 7% had an eGFR < 30. The 4 year incidence of all-cause mortality was highest for patients with eGFR < 30 (28.3% for patients with eGFR ≥ 60, 51.6% for patients with 60 > eGFR ≥ 30 and 72.2% for patients with eGFR < 30). The 4 year incidence of HF hospitalization was comparable between the groups (25.8%, 29.8% and 26.1% for patients with eGFR ≥ 60, 60 > eGFR ≥ 30 and eGFR < 30, respectively). For patients with eGFR < 30, kidney outcomes were four times more often the first event than patients with eGFR > 30 (4 year incidence of kidney outcome as the first event was 5.0% for eGFR ≥ 60, 4.8% for 60 > eGFR ≥ 30 and 20.1% for eGFR < 30).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with advanced CKD had a higher incidence of mortality and poorer kidney outcomes than those without advanced CKD, but a similar incidence of HF hospitalizations.

The Role of High-Sensitivity Troponin T Regarding Prognosis and Cardiovascular Outcome across Heart Failure Spectrum

Background: Cardiac troponin release is related to the cardiomyocyte loss occurring in heart failure (HF). The prognostic role of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) in several settings of HF is under investigation. The aim of the study is to assess the prognostic role of intrahospital hs-cTnT in patients admitted due to HF. Methods: In this observational, single center, prospective study, patients hospitalized due to HF have been enrolled. Admission, in-hospital peak, and discharge hs-cTnT have been assessed. Patients were followed up for 6 months. Cardiovascular (CV) death, HF hospitalization (HFH), and worsening HF (WHF) (i.e., urgent ambulatory visit/loop diuretics escalation) events have been assessed at 6-month follow up. Results: 253 consecutive patients have been enrolled in the study. The hs-cTnT median values at admission and discharge were 0.031 ng/mL (IQR 0.02-0.078) and 0.031 ng/mL (IQR 0.02-0.077), respectively. The risk of CV death/HFH was higher in patients with admission hs-cTnT values above the median (p = 0.02) and in patients who had an increase in hs-cTnT during hospitalization (p = 0.03). Multivariate Cox regression analysis confirmed that hs-cTnT above the median (OR: 2.06; 95% CI: 1.02-4.1; p = 0.04) and increase in hs-cTnT during hospitalization (OR:1.95; 95%CI: 1.006-3.769; p = 0.04) were predictors of CV death/HFH. In a subgroup analysis of patients with chronic HF, hs-cTnT above the median was associated with increased risk of CV death/HFH (p = 0.03), while in the subgroup of patients with HFmrEF/HFpEF, hs-cTnT above the median was associated with outpatient WHF events (p = 0.03). Conclusions: Inpatient hs-cTnT levels predict CV death/HFH in patients with HF. In particular, in the subgroup of chronic HF patients, hs-cTnT is predictive of CV death/HFH; while in patients with HFmrEF/HFpEF, hs-cTnT predicts WHF events.

Worsening heart failure: a concept in evolution

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Worsening heart failure (WHF) has developed as a unique definition within heart failure (HF) in recent years. It captures the disease as a dynamic process. This review describes what is currently known about WHF, why it should be considered a discrete scientific endpoint, and future directions for research.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is no single agreed upon definition for WHF. It can be identified as being due to treatment side-effects, related to concomitant comorbidity, or true disease progression. Risk scores based on criteria like those already developed for HF can be created to stratify risk for WHF.

CONCLUSIONS

WHF is an emerging entity within HF that defines itself as a unique point of interest. Understanding it as a clinical measure of where a patient's HF is evolving allows for identifying patients that require a refreshed approach to their care. Keeping this in mind will help redefine more patient-centric outcome measures in research to come.

The different risk of new-onset, chronic, worsening, and advanced heart failure: A systematic review and meta-regression analysis

AIMS

Heart failure (HF) is a chronic and progressive syndrome associated with a poor prognosis. While it may seem intuitive that the risk of adverse outcomes varies across the different stages of HF, an overview of these risks is lacking. This study aims to determine the risk of all-cause mortality and HF hospitalizations associated with new-onset HF, chronic HF (CHF), worsening HF (WHF), and advanced HF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We performed a systematic review of observational studies from 2012 to 2022 using five different databases. The primary outcomes were 30-day and 1-year all-cause mortality, as well as 1-year HF hospitalization. Studies were pooled using random effects meta-analysis, and mixed-effects meta-regression was used to compare the different HF groups. Among the 15 759 studies screened, 66 were included representing 862 046 HF patients. Pooled 30-day mortality rates did not reveal a significant distinction between hospital-admitted patients, with rates of 10.13% for new-onset HF and 8.11% for WHF (p = 0.10). However, the 1-year mortality risk differed and increased stepwise from CHF to advanced HF, with a rate of 8.47% (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.24-9.89) for CHF, 21.15% (95% CI 17.78-24.95) for new-onset HF, 26.84% (95% CI 23.74-30.19) for WHF, and 29.74% (95% CI 24.15-36.10) for advanced HF. Readmission rates for HF at 1 year followed a similar trend.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis of observational studies confirms the different risk for adverse outcomes across the distinct HF stages. Moreover, it emphasizes the negative prognostic value of WHF as the first progressive stage from CHF towards advanced HF.

Outpatient Worsening Among Patients With Mildly Reduced and Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure in the DELIVER Trial

BACKGROUND

Hospitalization is recognized as a sentinel event in the disease trajectory of patients with heart failure (HF), but not all patients experiencing clinical decompensation are ultimately hospitalized. Outpatient intensification of diuretics is common in response to symptoms of worsening HF, yet its prognostic and clinical relevance, specifically for patients with HF with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction, is uncertain.

METHODS

In this prespecified analysis of the DELIVER trial (Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the Lives of Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure), we assessed the association between various nonfatal worsening HF events (those requiring hospitalization, urgent outpatient visits requiring intravenous HF therapies, and outpatient oral diuretic intensification) and rates of subsequent mortality. We further examined the treatment effect of dapagliflozin on an expanded composite end point of cardiovascular death, HF hospitalization, urgent HF visit, or outpatient oral diuretic intensification.

RESULTS

In DELIVER, 4532 (72%) patients experienced no worsening HF event, whereas 789 (13%) had outpatient oral diuretic intensification, 86 (1%) required an urgent HF visit, 585 (9%) had an HF hospitalization, and 271 (4%) died of cardiovascular causes as a first presentation. Patients with a first presentation manifesting as outpatient oral diuretic intensification experienced rates of subsequent mortality that were higher (10 [8-12] per 100 patient-years) than those without a worsening HF event (4 [3-4] per 100 patient-years) but similar to rates of subsequent death after an urgent HF visit (10 [6-18] per 100 patient-years). Patients with an HF hospitalization as a first presentation of worsening HF had the highest rates of subsequent death (35 [31-40] per 100 patient-years). The addition of outpatient diuretic intensification to the adjudicated DELIVER primary end point (cardiovascular death, HF hospitalization, or urgent HF visit) increased the overall number of patients experiencing an event from 1122 to 1731 (a 54% increase). Dapagliflozin reduced the need for outpatient diuretic intensification alone (hazard ratio, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.64-0.82]) and when analyzed as a part of an expanded composite end point of worsening HF or cardiovascular death (hazard ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.69-0.84]).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with HF with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction, worsening HF requiring oral diuretic intensification in ambulatory care was frequent, adversely prognostic, and significantly reduced by dapagliflozin.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03619213.

Patient Selection and End Point Definitions for Decongestion Studies in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure: Part 1

Despite recent advances in the treatment of patients with chronic heart failure, acute decompensated heart failure remains associated with significant mortality and morbidity because many novel therapies have failed to demonstrate meaningful benefit. Persistent congestion in the setting of escalating diuretic therapy has been repeatedly shown to be a marker of poor prognosis and is currently being targeted by various emerging device-based therapies. Because these therapies inherently carry procedural risk, patient selection is key in the future trial design. However, it remains unclear which patients are at a higher risk of residual congestion or adverse outcomes despite maximally tolerated decongestive therapy. In the first part of this 2-part review, we aimed to outline patient risk factors and summarize current evidence for early recognition of high-risk profile for residual congestion and adverse outcomes. These factors are classified as relating to the following: (1) previous clinical course, (2) severity of congestion, (3) diuretic response, and (4) degree of renal impairment. We also aimed to provide an overview of key inclusion criteria in recent acute decompensated heart failure trials and investigational device studies and propose potential criteria for selection of high-risk patients in future trials.

Prognostic Relevance of Left Ventricular Global Longitudinal Strain in Patients With Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction

Patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) are complex patients who often have a high prevalence of co-morbidities and risk factors. In the present study, we investigated the prognostic significance of left ventricular (LV) global longitudinal strain (GLS) along with important clinical and echocardiographic variables in patients with HFrEF. Patients who had a first echocardiographic diagnosis of LV systolic dysfunction, defined as LV ejection fraction ≤45%, were selected. The study population was subdivided into 2 groups based on a spline curve analysis derived optimal threshold value of LV GLS (≤10%). The primary end point was occurrence of worsening HF, whereas the composite of worsening HF and all-cause death was chosen for the secondary end point. A total of 1,873 patients (mean age 63 ± 12 years, 75% men) were analyzed. During a median follow-up of 60 months (interquartile range 27 to 60 months), 256 patients (14%) experienced worsening HF and the composite end point of worsening HF and all-cause mortality occurred in 573 patients (31%). The 5-year event-free survival rates for the primary and secondary end point were significantly lower in the LV GLS ≤10% group compared with the LV GLS >10% group. After adjustment for important clinical and echocardiographic variables, baseline LV GLS remained independently associated with a higher risk of worsening HF (hazard ratio 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.90 to 0.99, p = 0.032) and the composite of worsening HF and all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.90 to 0.97, p = 0.001). In conclusion, baseline LV GLS is associated with long-term prognosis in patients with HFrEF, independent of various clinical and echocardiographic predictors.

Persistent Hypochloremia Is Associated with Adverse Prognosis in Patients Repeatedly Hospitalized for Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

Hypochloremia reflects neuro-hormonal activation in patients with heart failure (HF). However, the prognostic impact of persistent hypochloremia in those patients remains unclear.

METHODS

We collected the data of patients who were hospitalized for HF at least twice between 2010 and 2021 (n = 348). Dialysis patients (n = 26) were excluded. The patients were divided into four groups based on the absence/presence of hypochloremia (<98 mmol/L) at discharge from their first and second hospitalizations: Group A (patients without hypochloremia at their first and second hospitalizations, n = 243); Group B (those with hypochloremia at their first hospitalization and without hypochloremia at their second hospitalization, n = 29); Group C (those without hypochloremia at their first hospitalization and with hypochloremia at their second hospitalization, n = 34); and Group D (those with hypochloremia at their first and second hospitalizations, n = 16).

RESULTS

a Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that all-cause mortality and cardiac mortality were the highest in Group D compared to the other groups. A multivariable Cox proportional hazard analysis revealed that persistent hypochloremia was independently associated with both all-cause death (hazard ratio 3.490, p < 0.001) and cardiac death (hazard ratio 3.919, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with HF, prolonged hypochloremia over two hospitalizations is associated with an adverse prognosis.

Prognostic significance of cardiorenal dysfunction within 1 year after atrial fibrillation ablation in patients with systolic dysfunction

Atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation can improve left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and renal function and can even reduce mortality in patients with impaired LVEF. However, the effect of post-ablation cardiorenal dysfunction on the prognosis of patients with impaired LVEF who underwent AF ablation remains unclear. Of the 1243 consecutive patients undergoing AF ablation, the prognosis of 163 non-dialysis patients who underwent AF ablation with < 50% LVEF was evaluated. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization, and a need for modification of the treatment for heart failure. During the median follow-up of 4.2 years after the first AF ablation procedure, the primary outcome occurred in 30 of 163 patients (18%). The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis demonstrated that the post-LVEF (LVEF within 1 year after the procedure, and before the occurrence of primary outcome) had larger areas under the curve (0.70) than the pre-LVEF (LVEF before the procedure), and the most optimal cutoff value was LVEF ≤ 42%. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that patients with post-LVEF ≤ 42% and worsening renal function (WRF; an absolute increase in serum creatinine [SCr] ≥ 0.3 mg/dL compared with the SCr at baseline within 1 year after the procedure and before the occurrence of primary outcome) had a 3.4- to 4.3-fold and 3.4- to 3.7-fold higher risk of the primary outcome compared with those without these predictors, respectively. Patients were categorized using post-LVEF ≤ 42% and WRF as follows: group 1 (post-LVEF > 42% without WRF), group 2 (post-LVEF ≤ 42% without WRF), group 3 (post-LVEF > 42% with WRF), and group 4 (post-LVEF ≤ 42% with WRF). Group 4 had a 15.8-fold (P = 0.0001) higher risk of the primary outcome compared with group 1 after adjusting for pre-procedural factors. In patients with impaired LVEF undergoing AF ablation, post-LVEF ≤ 42% and WRF were independent predictors of poor prognosis. The combination of post-LVEF ≤ 42% and WRF is strongly associated with a poor prognosis in patients with AF undergoing ablation, who with these post-ablation cardiorenal dysfunction may have to be treated more intensively after AF ablation.

Challenges for Patients Dying of Heart Failure and Cancer

BACKGROUND

Hospice and palliative care were originally implemented for patients dying of cancer, both of which continue to be underused in patients with heart failure (HF). The objective of this study was to understand the unique challenges faced by patients dying of HF compared with cancer.

METHODS

We assessed differences in demographics, health status, and financial burden between patients dying of HF and cancer from the Health and Retirement Study.

RESULTS

The analysis included 3203 individuals who died of cancer and 3555 individuals who died of HF between 1994 and 2014. Compared with patients dying of cancer, patients dying of HF were older (80 years versus 76 years), had poorer self-reported health, and had greater difficulty with all activities of daily living while receiving less informal help. Their death was far more likely to be considered unexpected (39% versus 70%) and they were much more likely to have died without warning or within 1 to 2 hours (20% versus 1%). They were more likely to die in a hospital or nursing home than at home or in hospice. Both groups faced similarly high total healthcare out-of-pockets costs ($9988 versus $9595, P=0.6) though patients dying of HF had less wealth ($29 895 versus $39 008), thereby experiencing greater financial burden.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with patients dying of cancer, those dying from HF are older, have greater difficulty with activities of daily living, are more likely to die suddenly, in a hospital or nursing home rather than home or hospice, and had worse financial burden.

Impact of Worsening Heart Failure on Long-Term Prognosis in Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

Worsening heart failure (HF), defined as hospitalization for worsening signs and symptoms of HF or the need for urgent intravenous diuretics, is often considered a surrogate of poor prognosis in clinical trials. However, data on the prognostic implications of worsening HF in patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction is limited. Patients who had a first echocardiographic diagnosis of left ventricular systolic dysfunction, defined as left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤45%, were identified. Worsening HF was defined as hospitalization for HF or urgent need for intravenous diuretics. All-cause mortality was chosen as the study end point. A total of 1,801 patients (mean age 64 ± 12 years, 74% men) were analyzed. Worsening HF was observed in 275 patients (15%) during a median follow-up of 20 months, while, 435 patients (24%) died during a median follow-up of 60 months (Interquartile range 28 to 60 months). The 5-year survival rate was significantly lower in the worsening HF cohort compared with the non-worsening HF cohort (Log-rank p <0.0001), and it was significantly different between the worsening HF cohort and the nonworsening HF cohort for LVEF ≤25% (log-rank p <0.0001) and LVEF 26% to 34% (log-rank p = 0.038) but not for LVEF 35% to 45% (log-rank p = 0.14). After adjustment for important clinical and echocardiographic predictors, worsening HF was independently associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 1.46, 95% confidence interval 1.09 to 1.96, p = 0.011). In conclusion, worsening HF, defined by HF hospitalization or the urgent need for intravenous diuretics, is independently associated with poor long-term prognosis in patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction.

Prognostic significance of diastolic dysfunction in patients with systolic dysfunction undergoing atrial fibrillation ablation

Background

The relationship between pre-ablation left ventricular diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) and prognosis in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) undergoing atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation remains unclear.

Methods

The prognosis of 173 patients with impaired left ventricular ejection fraction (<50%) who underwent AF ablation was examined. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, heart failure (HF) hospitalization, and worsening HF symptoms requiring unplanned outpatient intensification of decongestive therapy.

Results

During the follow-up period (median, 3.5 years), the primary outcome after AF ablation occurred in 28 patients (16%). The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed that early septal diastolic mitral annular velocity (e′) had a larger area under the curve (0.70) than other LVDD parameters, and optimal cut-off values of LVDD, represented by e′, septal E (early diastolic left ventricular filling velocity)/e′, and peak tricuspid valve regurgitation velocity (TRV), were 5.0 cm/s, 13.2, and 2.5 m/s, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that e′ ≤5.0 cm/s (standard hazard ratio [HR], 3.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.73–8.69; p = 0.001), septal E/e′ ≥13.2 (HR, 3.62; 95% CI, 1.60–8.21; p = 0.002), and peak TRV ≥ 2.5 m/s (HR, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.13–5.16; p = 0.02) independently predicted the outcome. Patients with New York Heart Association functional status ≥ III had a 3.3–4.5-fold higher risk of the outcome.

Conclusions

LVDD or severe HF symptoms predict poor outcomes in patients with LVSD undergoing AF ablation. Therefore, patients with LVDD or severe HF symptoms should receive more intensive treatment even after AF ablation.

Residual Pulmonary Vascular Resistance Increase Under Left Ventricular Assist Device Support Predicts Long-Term Cardiac Function After Heart Transplantation

Aims

We compared hemodynamics and clinical events after heart transplantation (HTx) in patients stratified by the severity of residual pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation for bridge to transplantation.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed patients who had undergone HTx at the University of Tokyo Hospital. We defined the high PVR group as patients with PVR of >3 Wood Units (WU) as measured by right heart catheterization performed 1 month after LVAD implantation.

Results

We included 85 consecutive HTx recipients, 20 of whom were classified in the high PVR group and 65 in the low PVR group. The difference in PVR between the two groups became apparent at 2 years after HTx (the high PVR group: 1.77 ± 0.41 WU, the low PVR group: 1.24 ± 0.59 WU, p = 0.0009). The differences in mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP), mean right arterial pressure (mRAP), and mean pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (mPCWP) tended to increase from the first year after HTx, and were all significantly higher in the high PVR group at 3 years after HTx (mPAP: 22.7 ± 9.0 mm Hg vs. 15.4 ± 4.3 mm Hg, p = 0.0009, mRAP: 7.2 ± 3.6 mm Hg vs. 4.1 ± 2.1 mm Hg, p = 0.0042, and mPCWP: 13.4 ± 4.5 mm Hg, 8.8 ± 3.3 mm Hg, p = 0.0040). In addition, pulmonary artery pulsatility index was significantly lower in the high PVR group than in the low PVR group at 3 years after HTx (2.51 ± 1.00 vs. 5.21 ± 3.23, p = 0.0033). The composite event including hospitalization for heart failure, diuretic use, and elevated intracardiac pressure (mRAP ≥ 12 mm Hg or mPCWP ≥ 18 mm Hg) between the two groups was significantly more common in the high PVR group. Residual high PVR was still an important predictor (hazard ratio 6.5, 95% confidence interval 2.0–21.6, and p = 0.0023) after multivariate Cox regression analysis.

Conclusion

Our study demonstrates that patients with residual high PVR under LVAD implantation showed the increase of right and left atrial pressure in the chronic phase after HTx.

Practical outpatient management of worsening chronic heart failure

Management of worsening heart failure (WHF) has traditionally been hospital‐based, but with the rising burden of heart failure (HF), the pressure on healthcare systems exerted by this disease necessitates a different strategy than long (and costly) hospital stays. A strategy for outpatient intravenous (IV) diuretic treatment of WHF has been developed in certain American centres in the past 10 years, whereas European centres have been mostly favouring ‘classic’ in‐hospital management of WHF. Embracing novel, outpatient approaches for treating WHF could substantially reduce the burden on healthcare systems while improving patient's satisfaction and quality of life. The present article is intended to provide essential knowledge and practical guidelines aimed at helping clinicians implement these new ambulatory approaches using day hospital and/or at‐home hospitalization. The topics addressed by our group of HF experts include the pathophysiological background of diuretic therapy, the most suitable profile of WHF that may be managed in an ambulatory setting, the pharmacological protocols that can be used, as well as a detailed description of healthcare structures that can be proposed to deliver these ambulatory care interventions. The practical aspects of day hospital and hospital‐at‐home IV diuretic administration are specifically emphasized. The algorithm provided along with the practical IV diuretic protocols should assist HF clinicians in implementing this new approach in their local clinical setting.

Outpatient diuretic intensification as endpoint in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction trials: an analysis from TOPCAT

AIMS

Outpatient treatment for the worsening of signs and symptoms of heart failure (HF) is usually not incorporated in the main outcomes of HF trials. Patients with HF and a preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) may experience frequent episodes of outpatient worsening HF. The aim of this study was to evaluate the frequency, prognostic impact, and the effect of spironolactone on outpatient diuretic intensification (ODI), among 1767 patients enrolled in TOPCAT-Americas.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Time-updated Cox models and win ratio analysis. ODI was defined by a post-randomization loop diuretic dose increase or new initiation. The median follow-up was 2.9 years. At baseline, 1362 (77%) patients were taking loop diuretics. During the follow-up, 685 (38.8%) patients experienced ODI, which was associated with a higher risk of subsequent cardiovascular events and death [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death 1.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.36-2.04; HR for cardiovascular death 2.17, 95% CI 1.64-2.87); and HR for all-cause mortality 1.75, 95% CI 1.41-2.16] (p < 0.001 for all outcomes). Adding ODI to the composite of HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death increased the event rate by three-fold in the placebo group (from 10.4 to 29.9 events per 100 person-years). Spironolactone treatment led to a 26% relative reduction of the extended composite of ODI or HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.65-0.85; p < 0.001) compared with a 16% relative reduction of HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70-0.99; p = 0.044). Using win ratio provided similar estimates.

CONCLUSION

In HFpEF, ODI was frequent and independently associated with subsequent cardiovascular events. Spironolactone significantly reduced an extended composite outcome incorporating ODI.

Diuretic Changes, Health Care Resource Utilization, and Clinical Outcomes for Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: From the Change the Management of Patients With Heart Failure Registry

BACKGROUND

Diuretics are a mainstay therapy for the symptomatic treatment of heart failure. However, in contemporary US outpatient practice, the degree to which diuretic dosing changes over time and the associations with clinical outcomes and health care resource utilization are unknown.

METHODS

Among 3426 US outpatients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in the Change the Management of Patients with Heart Failure registry with complete medication data and who were prescribed a loop diuretic, diuretic dose increase was defined as: (1) change to a total daily dose higher than their previous total daily dose, (2) addition of metolazone to the regimen, (3) change from furosemide to either bumetanide or torsemide, and the change persists for at least 7 days. Adjusted hazard ratios or rate ratios along with 95% CIs were reported for clinical outcomes among patients with an increase in oral diuretic dose versus no increase in diuretic dose.

RESULTS

Overall, 796 (23%) had a diuretic dose increase (18 episodes per 100 patient-years). The proportion of patients with dyspnea at rest (38% versus 26%), dyspnea at exertion (79% versus 67%), orthopnea (32% versus 21%), edema (60% versus 43%), and weight gain (40% versus 23%) were significantly (all P <0.001) higher in the diuretic increase group. Baseline angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker (hazard ratio, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.65-0.87]) use were associated with lower likelihood of diuretic increase over time. Patients with a diuretic dose increase had a significantly higher number of heart failure hospitalizations (rate ratio, 2.53 [95% CI, 2.10-3.05]), emergency department visits (rate ratio, 1.84 [95% CI, 1.56-2.17]), and home health visits (rate ratio, 1.88 [95% CI, 1.39-2.54]), but not all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.89-1.36]). Similarly, greater furosemide dose equivalent increases were associated with greater resource utilization but not with mortality, compared with smaller increases.

CONCLUSIONS

In this contemporary US registry, 1 in 4 patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction had outpatient escalation of diuretic therapy over longitudinal follow-up, and these patients were more likely to have sign/symptoms of congestion. Outpatient diuretic dose escalation of any magnitude was associated with heart failure hospitalizations and resource utilization, but not all-cause mortality.

Importance of diagnostic setting in determining mortality in patients with new-onset heart failure: temporal trends in Denmark 1997-2017

Aim

To investigate temporal trends in inpatient vs. outpatient diagnosis of new-onset heart failure (HF) and the subsequent risk of death and hospitalization.

Methods and results

Using nationwide registers, 192 581 patients with a first diagnosis of HF (1997–2017) were included. We computed incidences of HF, age-standardized mortality rates, and absolute risks (ARs) of death and hospitalization (accounting for competing risk of death) to understand the importance of the diagnosis setting in relation to subsequent mortality and hospitalization. The overall incidence of HF was approximately the same (170/100 000 persons) every year during 1997–2017. However, in 1997, 77% of all first diagnoses of HF were made during a hospitalization, whereas the proportion was 39% in 2017. As inpatient diagnoses decreased, outpatient diagnoses increased from 23% to 61%. Outpatients had lower mortality and hospitalization rates than inpatients throughout the study period, although the 1-year age-standardized mortality rate decreased for each inpatient (24 to 14/100-person) and outpatient (11 to 7/100-person). One-year and five-year AR of death decreased by 11.1% and 17.0%, respectively, for all HF patients, while the risk of hospitalization for HF did not decrease significantly (1.13% and 0.96%, respectively).

Conclusion

Between 1997 and 2017, HF changed from being primarily diagnosed during hospitalization to being mostly diagnosed in the outpatient setting. Outpatients had much lower mortality rates than inpatients throughout the study period. Despite a significant decrease in mortality risk for all HF patients, neither inpatients nor outpatients experienced a reduction in the risk of an HF hospitalization.

Ambulatory Management of Worsening Heart Failure: Current Strategies and Future Directions

Heart failure (HF) is a highly prevalent and morbid disease in the USA. The chronic, progressive course of HF is defined by periodic exacerbations of symptoms, described as 'worsening heart failure' (WHF). Previously, episodes of WHF have required hospitalization for intravenous diuretics; however, recent innovations in care delivery models for patients with HF have allowed a transition from the acute care setting to the ambulatory setting. The development of remote monitoring strategies, including device-based algorithms and implantable haemodynamic monitoring systems, has facilitated more advanced surveillance of patients, aiming to prevent the clinical deterioration that leads to hospitalization. Additionally, the establishment of multidisciplinary HF clinics has provided the setting and resources for the outpatient treatment of WHF, specifically the administration of intravenous diuretics. Here we review the current state of ambulatory HF management, including mechanisms for patient monitoring and treatment, and outline future opportunities for outpatient management of this patient population.

Building a Heart Failure Clinic: A Practical Guide from the Heart Failure Society of America

Heart failure (HF) remains a leading cause of mortality and morbidity and a primary driver of health care resource use in the United States. As such, there continues to be much interest in the development and refinement of HF clinics that manage patients with HF in a guideline-directed, technology-enabled, and coordinated approach. Optimization of resource use and maintenance of collaboration with other providers are also important themes when considering implementation of HF clinics. Through this document, the Heart Failure Society of America aims to provide a contemporary, practical guide to creating and sustaining a HF clinic. The guide discusses (1) patient care considerations for delivering guideline-directed and patient-centered care, and (2) operational considerations including development of a HF clinic business plan, setting goals, leadership support, triggers for patient referral and patient follow-up, patient population served, optimal clinic staffing models, relationships with subspecialists, and continuous quality improvement. This document was developed to empower providers and clinicians who wish to build and sustain community-based, successful HF clinics.

One-Year Mortality After Intensification of Outpatient Diuretic Therapy

Background

Mortality is increased following a hospitalization for decompensated heart failure (HF), during which diuretics are usually intensified. It is unclear how risk is affected after outpatient intensification of diuretic therapy for HF.

Methods and Results

From nationwide administrative registers, we identified all Danish patients who were diagnosed with HF from 2001 to 2016 and received angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker and β blocker within 120 days. Subsequent follow‐up tracked progressive events of diuretic intensification and HF hospitalization. Intensification events were defined as new addition or doubling of loop diuretic or addition of thiazide to loop diuretic. These events were included in multivariable Cox regression models, calculating 1‐year mortality hazard after each year since inclusion. Patients with an intensification event or hospitalization were risk set matched to 2 nonworsened HF controls and absolute 1‐year mortality risks were calculated using Kaplan‐Meier estimates. We included 74 990 patients, their median age was 71 years, and 36% were women. Intensification events were associated with significantly increased mortality at all times during follow‐up. One‐year mortality was 18.0% after an intensification event, 22.6% after HF hospitalization, and 10.4% for matched controls with neither. In a multivariable Cox model adjusted for age, sex, ischemic heart disease, atrial fibrillation, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and diabetes mellitus, the hazard ratio for 1‐year death after an intensification event was 1.75 (95% CI, 1.66–1.85), and it was 2.28 (95% CI, 2.16–2.41) after HF hospitalization.

Conclusions

In a nationwide cohort of patients with HF, outpatient intensification events were associated with almost 2‐fold risk of mortality during the next year. Although HF hospitalization was associated with a higher risk, the need to intensify diuretics in the outpatient setting is a signal to review and intensify efforts to improve HF outcomes.