Recognizing the Significance of Outpatient Worsening Heart Failure

Developing Clinical Risk Prediction Models for Worsening Heart Failure Events and Death by Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction

Background There is a need to develop electronic health record-based predictive models for worsening heart failure (WHF) events across clinical settings and across the spectrum of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Methods and Results We studied adults with heart failure (HF) from 2011 to 2019 within an integrated health care delivery system. WHF encounters were ascertained using natural language processing and structured data. We conducted boosted decision tree ensemble models to predict 1-year hospitalizations, emergency department visits/observation stays, and outpatient encounters for WHF and all-cause death within each LVEF category: HF with reduced ejection fraction (EF) (LVEF <40%), HF with mildly reduced EF (LVEF 40%-49%), and HF with preserved EF (LVEF ≥50%). Model discrimination was evaluated using area under the curve and calibration using mean squared error. We identified 338 426 adults with HF: 61 045 (18.0%) had HF with reduced EF, 49 618 (14.7%) had HF with mildly reduced EF, and 227 763 (67.3%) had HF with preserved EF. The 1-year risks of any WHF event and death were, respectively, 22.3% and 13.0% for HF with reduced EF, 17.0% and 10.1% for HF with mildly reduced EF, and 16.3% and 10.3% for HF with preserved EF. The WHF model displayed an area under the curve of 0.76 and mean squared error of 0.13, whereas the model for death displayed an area under the curve of 0.83 and mean squared error of 0.076. Performance and predictors were similar across WHF encounter types and LVEF categories. Conclusions We developed risk prediction models for 1-year WHF events and death across the LVEF spectrum using structured and unstructured electronic health record data and observed no substantial differences in model performance or predictors except for death, despite differences in underlying HF cause.

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.

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.