Comparing the Diagnostic Performance of HFA-PEFF and H2FPEF Scoring Systems in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction Patients: Insights from the APOLLON Registry

BACKGROUND

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction is a complex and heterogeneous clinical syndrome, poses significant diagnostic challenges. The HFA-PEFF [Heart Failure Association of ESC diagnostic algorithm, P (Pretest Assessment), E  (Echocardiographic and Natriuretic Peptide score), F1 (Functional testing in Case of Uncertainty), F2 (Final Aetiology)] and H2FPEF [Heavy (BMI>30 kg/m2), Hypertensive (use of ≥2 antihypertensive medications), atrial Fibrillation (paroxysmal or persistent), Pulmonary hypertension (Doppler Echocardiographic estimated Pulmonary Artery Systolic Pressure >35 mm Hg), Elderly (age >60 years), Filling pressure (Doppler Echocardiographic E/e' >9)] scoring systems were developed to aid in diagnosing heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. This study aimed to assess the concordance and clinical accuracy of these scoring systems in the 'A comPrehensive, ObservationaL registry of heart faiLure with mildly reduced and preserved ejection fractiON' cohort.

METHODS

A comPrehensive, ObservationaL registry of heart faiLure with mildly reduced and preserved ejection fractiON study was conducted as a multicenter, cross-sectional, and observational study; to evaluate a group of Heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction patients who were seen by cardiologists in 13 participating centers across 12 cities in Türkiye.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 819 patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, with high probability heart failure with preserved ejection fraction rates of 40% and 26% for HFA-PEFF and H2FPEF scorings, respectively. The concordance between the 2 scoring systems was found to be low (Kendall's taub correlation coefficient of 0.242, P < .001). The diagnostic performance of both scoring systems was evaluated, revealing differences in their approach and ability to accurately identify heart failure with preserved ejection fraction patients.

CONCLUSION

The low concordance between the HFA-PEFF and H2FPEF scoring systems underscores the ongoing challenge of accurately diagnosing and managing patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Clinicians should be aware of the strengths and limitations of each scoring system and use them in conjunction with other clinical and laboratory findings to arrive at an accurate diagnosis. Future research should focus on identifying additional diagnostic factors, developing more accurate and comprehensive diagnostic algorithms, and investigating alternative methods of diagnosis or stratification of patients based on different clinical characteristics.

Contribution of Three-Dimensional Echocardiography Xplane Mode in the Evaluation of Semilunar Cusps: Two Different Case Reports

Orthogonal-biplane imaging (X-plane) is relatively a new tooL and provides comprehensive information about mitral valve and left atrial appendage evaluation. On the other hand, X-plane method is a promising method in the diagnosis of semilunar valve pathologies. Below, we report 2 cases, in which X-plane method was used, in order to clarify diagnosis. Case 1: Case 1 was a 63-year-old male patient who was admitted to our clinic with dyspnea. Right ventricular dilatation and hypertrophy were assessed. In order to determine the exact reason for right ventricular pressure overload, the pulmonary valve was evaluated by X-plane, and a bicuspid pulmonary valve was represented. This patient underwent pulmonary valve percutaneous valvuloplasty. Case 2: Case 2 was a 48-year-old male patient who was admitted to our hospital with a history of cerebrovascular event. His initial transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography showed a hyperechoic mobile mass on the non-coronary cusp. However, after X-plane was used to detect the aortic valve, it was the prolapsed part of the non-coronary cusp adjacent to the commissure. These 2 case reports demonstrated the efficacy of the X-plane method in the diagnosis of semilunar valve pathologies in daily practice.

C-reactive protein to albumin ratio provides important long-term prognostic information in patients undergoing endovascular abdominal aortic repair

BACKGROUND

The prognostic value of C-reactive protein/albumin ratio (CAR) is of import in cardiovascular diseases. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of the CAR in patients with asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).

MATERIAL AND METHOD

We retrospectively evaluated 127 consecutive patients who underwent technically successful elective EVAR procedure between December 2014 and September 2020. The optimal CAR cut-off value was determined by using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Based on the cut-off value, we investigated the association of CAR with long-term all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

32 (25.1%) of the patients experienced all-cause mortality during a mean 32.7 ± 21.7 months' follow-up. In the group with mortality, CAR was significantly higher than in the survivor group (4.63 (2.60-11.88) versus 1.63 (0.72-3.24), p < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier curves showed a higher incidence of all-cause mortality in patients with high CAR compared to patients with low CAR (log-rank test, p < 0.001). Multivariable Cox regression analysis revealed that glucose ≥ 110 mg/dL (HR: 2.740; 95% CI: 1.354-5.542; p = 0.005), creatinine ≥ 0.99 mg/dL (HR: 2.957, 95% CI: 1.282-6.819, p = 0.011) and CAR > 2.05 (HR: 8.190, 95% CI: 1.899-35.320, p = 0.005) were the independent predictors of mortality.

CONCLUSION

CAR was associated with a significant increase in postoperative long-term mortality in patients who underwent EVAR. Preoperatively calculated CAR can be used as an important prognostic factor.

A simplified acute kidney injury predictor following endovascular aortic repair: ACEF score

OBJECTIVES

Treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) with endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) has become quite common in recent years. This method, which has many advantages compared to the open surgical procedure, also has some complications. One of these complications is acute kidney injury (AKI). ACEF (age, creatinine, and ejection fraction) score, which is gaining popularity, can be an easy-to-use and cost-effective method in detecting this condition that causes increased morbidity and mortality. We aimed to evaluate whether this ACEF score may predict a development of AKI in patients who underwent EVAR.

METHODS

A total of 133 consecutive patients with AAA who underwent EVAR were analyzed. The primary endpoint of the study was the development of AKI. The best cut-off value for the ACEF score to predict the development of AKI was calculated and according to this value, the patients were divided into two groups as those with high ACEF scores and those with low ACEF scores. ACEF score was calculated by the formula of age/EF + 1 (if baseline creatinine > 2 mg/dL).

RESULTS

After the exclusion criteria, a total of 118 patients were included in the study, and 20 (16.9%) of them developed AKI after EVAR. In the ROC curve analysis, a cut-off value of 1.34 was found for the ACEF score, and scores above this value were found to be independent predictors of AKI development after EVAR. In addition to the ACEF score, the contrast media volume was also found to be an independent predictor of the development of AKI.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, ACEF is a simple and effective scoring system in patients undergoing EVAR. To the best our knowledge, our study is the first study which applies ACEF score to predict AKI in EVAR patients.

An Evaluation of Aspirin Treatment Preferences ORIGINAL INVESTIGATION of Physicians in Hypertensive Patients in Terms of Current Guidelines: A Subgroup Analysis of the ASSOS Trial in Turkey

Background

The Appropriateness of Aspirin Use in Medical Outpatients: A Multicenter, Observational Study trial has been the largest study ever conducted among patients in Turkey regarding aspirin treatment. In the subgroup analysis of the hypertensive group of the Appropriateness of Aspirin Use in Medical Outpatients: A Multicenter, Observational Study trial, we aimed to evaluate the physicians’ adherence to current guidelines regarding their aspirin treatment preferences.

Methods

The Appropriateness of Aspirin Use in Medical Outpatients: A Multicenter, Observational Study trial is a cross-sectional and multicenter study conducted among 5007 consecutive patients aged ≥18 years. The study population consisted of outpatients on aspirin treatment (80-300 mg). The patient data were obtained from 30 different cardiology clinics of 14 cities from all over Turkey. In this subgroup analysis, patients were divided into 2 groups: the hypertensive group (n = 3467, 69.3%) and the group without hypertension (n = 1540, 30.7%) according to the 2018 European Society of Cardiology/European Society of Hypertension Guidelines for the Management of Arterial Hypertension.

Results

Aspirin use for primary prevention was higher in patients with hypertension compared to patients without hypertension [328 (21.3%); 1046 (30.2%); P < .001]. Treatment with a dose of 150 mg aspirin (n = 172, 5%) was mostly preferred by internists for hypertensive patients (n =226, 6.5%); however, a daily dose of 80-100 mg aspirin therapy (n = 1457, 94.6%) was mostly prescribed by cardiologists (n = 1347, 87.5%) for patients without hypertension.

Conclusion

Aspirin was found to be used commonly among patients with hypertension for primary prevention despite the current European Society of Cardiology Arterial Hypertension Guideline not recommending aspirin for primary prevention in patients with hypertension.

Inappropriate Use of Aspirin in Real-Life Cardiology Practice: Results from the Appropriateness of Aspirin Use in Medical Outpatients: A Multicenter, Observational Study (ASSOS) Study

Background:

Indications and appropriateness of aspirin use have not been well investigated in Turkey.

Aims:

To investigate the prescription patterns and appropriateness of aspirin in a real-world clinical setting.

Study Design:

Cross-sectional study.

Methods:

The Appropriateness of Aspirin Use in Medical Outpatients: A Multicenter, Observational Study (ASSOS) is a cross-sectional and multicenter study that included 5007 consecutive patients aged 18 or over who presented to 30 different cardiology outpatient clinics from 14 cities throughout Turkey. Only patients using aspirin (80-325 mg) were included. The study population was divided into 2 groups regarding the use of aspirin: primary prevention (PP) group and secondary prevention (SP) group. The indication of aspirin use was evaluated following the 2016 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the 2016 United States Preventative Services Task Force (USPTF) guidelines in the PP group.

Results:

A total of 5007 patients (mean age 62.15 ± 11.05, 39% female) were enrolled. The PP group included 1132 (22.6%) patients, and the SP group included 3875 (77.4%) patients. Of the 1132 patients, inappropriate use of aspirin was determined in 100% of the patients according to the ESC guidelines, and 71% of the patients according to the USPTF guidelines. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed age OR: 0.98 CI (0.97-0.99) P = .037, smoking OR: 0.60 CI (0.44-0.82) P = .001, heart failure OR: 2.11 CI (1.14-3.92) P = .017, hypertension OR: 0.51 CI (0.36-0.74) P < .001, diabetes mellitus OR: 0.34 CI (0.25-0.47) P < .001, oral anticoagulant use OR: 3.01 CI (1.10-8.25) P = .032, and female sex OR: 2.73 CI (1.96-3.80) P < .001 were independent predictors of inappropriate aspirin use in PP patients.

Conclusion:

Although there are considerable differences between the USPTF and the ESC guidelines with respect to recommendations for aspirin use in PP, inappropriate use of aspirin in Turkey is frequent in real-world practice for both guidelines. Besides, heart failure, oral anticoagulant use, and the female sex of the patients were independent predictors of inappropriate use of aspirin.

Geographical Variations in Patients with Heart Failure and Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Sub-Group Analysis of the APOLLON Registry

Background:

Clinical characteristics of patients with heart failure may vary geographically. However, limited data are available regarding the geographical differences of patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction.

Aims:

The present subgroup analysis aims to investigate the geographical differences in clinical characteristics, management, and primary etiology of patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction in Turkey.

Study Design:

A cross-sectional study.

Methods:

A comPrehensive, ObservationaL registry of heart faiLure with mid-range and preserved ejection fractiON (APOLLON) is a multicenter and observational study conducted in seven regions of Turkey (NCT03026114). The present study is a post-hoc analysis of the APOLLON registry. In this substudy, we compared the clinical characteristics of 819 consecutive patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (mean age, 67 years; 57.8% women) admitted to cardiology outpatient units in different geographical regions.

Results:

Based on the geographical distribution of the entire Turkish population, the highest number of patients enrolled were from Marmara (271 patients, 33.1%). All demographical characteristics, clinical and laboratory findings, comorbidities, primary etiology, and medications prescribed were significantly different between the regions. Furthermore, inter-regional gender differences were identified. Comparatively, the Aegean and Mediterranean regions had older patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (p<0.001), and the Black Sea, Southeast, and East Anatolia regions had predominantly male patients (51.2, 54.5, and 56.9%, respectively; p=0.002). Notably, the Mediterranean and Southeast Anatolia had more symptomatic patients, and history of hospitalization for heart failure was more prevalent in Southeast Anatolia (33.3%, p<0.001). Prevalence of atrial fibrillation was higher in the Mediterranean and Southeast Anatolia regions (51 and 48.5%, p<0.001), and patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction had a higher prevalence of hypertension in the Mediterranean, Southeast Anatolia, and Black Sea regions (p=0.002). Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors were more frequently prescribed in East Anatolia (52.3%, p=0.001), and the prevalence of patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction using loop diuretics (48.8%, p=0.003) was higher in the Black Sea region.

Conclusion:

This study was the first to show geographical differences in clinical characteristics of patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction in Turkey. Determination of the clinical characteristics of the heart failure and preserved ejection fraction population based on the geographical region may enables physicians to adopt a region-specific clinical approach toward heart failure and preserved ejection fraction.

Clinical features of heart failure with mid-range and preserved ejection fraction in octogenarians: Results of a multicentre, observational study

OBJECTIVES

To compare real-world characteristics and management of individuals aged 80 and older with heart failure (HF) and mid-range ejection fraction (HFmrEF) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) derived from a large cohort of survey and to compare them with those younger than 80 from the same survey.

METHODS

This is an observational, multicentre and cross-sectional study conducted in Turkey (NCT03026114). Consecutive 1065 (mean age of 67.1 ± 10.6 years) patients admitted to the cardiology outpatient units with HFmrEF and HFpEF were included.

RESULTS

Participants aged 80 and older (n = 123, 11.5%) were more likely to be female (66.7% vs 52.5%, P = 0.003), had a higher prevalence of atrial fibrillation (49.6% vs 34%, P = 0.001), and anaemia (46.3% vs 33.4%, P = 0.005) than those who were younger than 80. N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide levels were higher in those aged 80 and older than in those younger than 80 (1037 vs 550 pg/ml, P < 0.001). The prescription rates of HF medications (including in ACE-Is/ARBs, β-blockers, MRAs, digoxin, ivabradine and diuretics) were similar (P > 0.05) in both groups. Octogenarians did not significantly differ from younger patients in the prevalence of HFmrEF (24.4% vs 22.9%) and HFpEF (75.6% vs 77.1%). Coronary artery disease was associated with HFmrEF (P < 0.05), whereas atrial fibrillation was associated with HFpEF (P < 0.05) in octogenarians.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed that nearly 12% of the individuals with HFmrEF and HFpEF in this real-world sample were aged 80 and older. Participants aged 80 and older are more likely to be female and have more comorbidities than those who were younger than 80. However, HF medication profiles were similar in both groups. This study also showed that associated factors with HFmrEF and HFpEF were differ in octogenarians.

Patients with HFpEF and HFmrEF have different clinical characteristics in Turkey: A multicenter observational study

BACKGROUND

To determine and compare the demographic characteristics, clinical profile and management of patients with heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction (HFmrEF) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) in a Turkish cohort.

METHODS

The APOLLON trial (A comPrehensive, ObservationaL registry of heart faiLure with mid-range and preserved ejection fractiON) is an observational and multicenter study conducted in Turkey. Consecutive patients admitted to the cardiology clinics who were at least 18 years of age and had HFmrEF or HFpEF were included (NCT03026114).

RESULTS

The study population included 1065 (mean age of 67.1 ± 10.6 years, 54% women) patients from 12 sites in Turkey. Among participants, 246 (23.1%) had HFmrEF and 819 (76.9%) had HFpEF. Compared to patients with HFpEF, those with HFmrEF were more likely to be male (57.7 vs 42.2%; p < 0.001), had higher N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels (853 vs 528 pg/ml, p < 0.001), were more likely to have ECG abnormalities (72.4 vs 53.5%, p < 0.001) and hospitalization history for heart failure (28 vs 18.6%; p = 0.002). HFmrEF patients were more likely to use β-blockers (69.9 vs 55.2%, p < 0.001), aldosterone receptor antagonists (24 vs 14.7%, p = 0.001), statins (37 vs 23%, p < .001), and loop diuretics (39.8 vs 30.5%, p = 0.006) compared to patients with HFpEF.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of APOLLON study support that the basic characteristics and etiology of HFmrEF are significantly different from HFpEF. This registry also showed that the patients with HFmrEF and HFpEF were younger but undertreated in Turkey compared to patients in western countries.

Comparison of clinical characteristics of patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction with atrial fibrillation versus sinus rhythm: Insights from the APOLLON registry

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the clinical characteristics of patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and atrial fibrillation (AF) and compare them with those of HFpEF patients without AF.

METHODS

This study was a sub-group analysis of a multicenter, observational, and cross-sectional registry conducted in Turkey (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03026114). Patients with HFpEF were divided into 2 groups: HFpEF with AF and HFpEF with sinus rhythm (SR), and the clinical characteristics of the groups were compared.

RESULTS

In a total of 819 HFpEF patients (median age: 67 years; 58% women), 313 (38.2%) had AF. Compared to the patients with SR, those with AF were older (70 years vs 66 years; p<0.001) and more symptomatic, with a higher rate of classification as New York Heart Association functional class III-IV, paroxysmal nocturnal dyspnea, orthopnea, palpitations, fatigue, pulmonary crepitations, and peripheral edema. The hospitalization rate for heart failure was higher (28.4% vs 12.6%; p<0.001) in patients with AF, and participants with AF had higher level of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (887 pg/mL vs 394.8 pg/mL; p<0.001) and higher left atrial volume index level. Patients without AF had a higher burden of diabetes mellitus, obstructive sleep apnea, and coronary artery disease. The prescription rate of nondihydropyridine calcium blockers, digoxin, loop diuretics, and anticoagulant drugs was higher in the AF group.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study revealed that in a large Turkish cohort with HFpEF, significant clinical differences were present between those with and without AF and. Further prospective studies are needed to clarify the prognostic implications of AF in this growing heart failure population in our country.