Misclassification of Both Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Heart Failure

Detection of heart failure in a general population not aware of having the disease

BACKGROUND

Heart failure (HF) is one of the most common causes of hospitalization and death worldwide. We aimed at identifying variables that can be helpful for early diagnosis of HF in primary care.

METHODS

In 2015-16, we included 2007 participants aged ≥ 40 years in the 7th Tromsø study. They underwent echocardiography and other examinations needed for establishing a diagnosis of HF according to European guidelines from 2016. We analyzed associations with HF among the 1863 participants who reported not to have HF. Variables significantly associated with HF were included in multivariable logistic regression analyses. Diagnostic models were further analyzed by ROC curves and areas under curve (AUC) were calculated, optimism corrected by bootstrapping.

RESULTS

The HF prevalence in the age groups 40-64 years, 65-74 years, and ≥ 75 years were 3.5%, 11.7% and 29.4%, respectively. A predictive model based on self-reported hypertension, myocardial infarction, atrial fibrillation, body-mass index and moderate to severe dyspnea had an AUC of 0.813 (95% CI 0.785-0.843). In a significantly stronger model, in which NT-proBNP was included and self-reported atrial fibrillation was replaced by atrial fibrillation on ECG, an AUC of 0.849 (95% CI 0.821-0.880) was reached.

CONCLUSION

Easily available clinical information may be used both to rule out HF an to identify patients needing further examinations. A direct referral to echocardiography should be considered for elderly patients in primary care with a known cardiovascular disease and severe shortness of breath. With less abundant history and symptoms, ECG and NT-proBNP can guide further investigations.

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Heart Failure: Challenges in Diagnosis and Treatment for HFpEF and HFrEF

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is common in heart failure (HF), and it has a significant impact on the prognosis and quality of life of patients. Additionally, COPD is independently associated with lower adherence to first-line HF therapies. In this review, we outline the challenges of identifying and managing HF with preserved (HFpEF) and reduced (HFrEF) ejection fraction with coexisting COPD.

RECENT FINDINGS

Spirometry is necessary for COPD diagnosis and prognosis but is underused in HF. Therefore, misdiagnosis is a concern. Also, disease-modifying drugs for HF and COPD are usually safe but underprescribed when HF and COPD coexist. Patients with HF-COPD are poorly enrolled in clinical trials. Guidelines recommend that HF treatment should be offered regardless of COPD presence, but modern registries show that undertreatment persists. Treatment gaps could be attenuated by ensuring an accurate and earlier COPD diagnosis in patients with HF, clarifying the concerns related to pharmacotherapy safety, and increasing the use of non-pharmacologic treatments. Acknowledging the uncertainties, this review aims to provide key clinical resources to support better physician-patient co-decision-making and improve collaboration between health professionals.

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: everything the clinician needs to know

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is increasingly recognised and diagnosed in clinical practice, a trend driven by an ageing population and a rise in contributing comorbidities, such as obesity and diabetes. Representing at least half of all heart failure cases, HFpEF is recognised as a complex clinical syndrome. Its diagnosis and management are challenging due to its diverse pathophysiology, varied epidemiological patterns, and evolving diagnostic and treatment approaches. This Seminar synthesises the latest insights on HFpEF, integrating findings from recent clinical trials, epidemiological research, and the latest guideline recommendations. We delve into the definition, pathogenesis, epidemiology, diagnostic criteria, and management strategies (non-pharmacological and pharmacological) for HFpEF. We highlight ongoing clinical trials and future developments in the field. Specifically, this Seminar offers practical guidance tailored for primary care practitioners, generalists, and cardiologists who do not specialise in heart failure, simplifying the complexities in the diagnosis and management of HFpEF. We provide practical, evidence-based recommendations, emphasising the importance of addressing comorbidities and integrating the latest pharmacological treatments, such as SGLT2 inhibitors.

Risks of Zolpidem among Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Rationale: Nonbenzodiazepine benzodiazepine receptor agonists (NBZRA, e.g., zolpidem) are frequently used to treat insomnia among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, multiple observational studies find that patients with COPD who are prescribed NBZRAs have greater risks for mortality and respiratory complications than patients without such prescriptions. Without an active comparator, these studies are susceptible to confounding by indication. Objectives: Compare the risk of death or inpatient COPD exacerbation among patients receiving zolpidem relative to patients receiving other hypnotics. Methods: Using nationwide Veterans Health Administration (VA) data, we identified patients with clinically diagnosed COPD and new receipt of zolpidem or another hypnotic available on VA formulary without prior authorization (melatonin, trazodone, doxepin). We excluded those receiving traditional benzodiazepines or multiple concurrent hypnotics. We propensity-matched patients receiving zolpidem to other hypnotics on 32 variables, including demographics, comorbidities, and markers of COPD severity. We compared risk of the primary composite outcome of death or inpatient COPD exacerbation over 1 year. In secondary analyses, we propensity-matched patients receiving zolpidem to those without hypnotic receipt. Results: Among 283,740 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 1,126 (0.4%) received zolpidem and 3,057 (1.1%) received other hypnotics. We propensity-matched patients receiving zolpidem 1:1 to peers receiving other hypnotics. We did not find a difference in the primary composite outcome of death or inpatient exacerbation (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77-1.23). In secondary analyses comparing patients receiving zolpidem to matched peers without hypnotic receipt, we observed greater risk of death or inpatient exacerbation with zolpidem (hazard ratio, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.09-1.81). Conclusions: Among patients with COPD, we did not observe greater risks after new receipt of zolpidem relative to other hypnotics. However, we did observe greater risks relative to those without hypnotic receipt. This latter finding may reflect: 1) residual, unmeasured confounding related to insomnia; or 2) true adverse effects of hypnotics across classes. Future work is needed to better understand the risks of hypnotics in COPD.

Epidemiology and treatment of heart failure with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Canadian primary care

AIMS

Heart failure (HF) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are largely managed in primary care, but their intersection in terms of disease burden, healthcare utilization, and treatment is ill-defined.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We examined a retrospective cohort including all patients with HF or COPD in the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network from 2010 to 2018. The population size in 2018 with HF, COPD, and HF with COPD was 15 778, 27 927, and 4768 patients, respectively. While disease incidence declined, age-sex-standardized prevalence per 100 population increased for HF alone from 2.33 to 3.63, COPD alone from 3.44 to 5.96, and COPD with HF from 12.70 to 15.67. Annual visit rates were high and stable around 8 for COPD alone but declined significantly over time for HF alone (9.3-8.1, P = 0.04) or for patients with both conditions (14.3-11.9, P = 0.006). For HF alone, cardiovascular visits were common (29.4%), while respiratory visits were infrequent (3.5%), with the majority of visits being non-cardiorespiratory. For COPD alone, respiratory and cardiovascular visits were common (16.4% and 11.3%) and the majority were again non-cardiorespiratory. For concurrent disease, 39.0% of visits were cardiorespiratory. The commonest non-cardiorespiratory visit reasons were non-specific symptoms or signs, endocrine, musculoskeletal, and mental health. In patients with HF with and without COPD, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor use was similar, while mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist use was marginally higher with concurrent COPD. Beta-blocker use was initially lower with concurrent COPD compared with HF alone (69.3% vs. 74.0%), but this progressively declined by 2018 (74.5% vs. 73.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of HF and COPD continues to rise. Although patients with either or both conditions are high utilizers of primary care, the majority of visits relate to non-cardiorespiratory comorbidities. Medical therapy for HF was similar and the initially lower beta-blocker utilization disappeared over time.

Determinants of survival in patients with chronic heart failure: a population-based study in Reggio Emilia, Italy

AIMS

We aim to monitor and improve the quality of the heart failure (HF) integrated assistance model defined by national and regional guidelines and implemented in the province of Reggio Emilia, Italy. Specific aims of the audit were to estimate the prevalence of HF, describe the characteristics of patients with HF and the rate of patients enrolled in the integrated care treated in primary care, and identify socioeconomic and geographic determinants of the 4-year survival of these patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Retrospective analysis of a cohort of prevalent cases of HF, diagnosed before 31 December 2015 in Reggio Emilia, Italy, alive on 1 January 2016, and residing at the time of diagnosis on the provincial territory. Age and sex-adjusted prevalence of HF by area of residence were calculated according to the standard European population 2013. Patients were followed until death or 31 December 2019, whatever came first. The outcome measure of the study was four-year case fatality. Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for age, sex, and duration of disease were used to determine the association between socio-geographic factors and death. The 4-year case-fatality rate was 36.7%, and it was the highest in the mountains (50.8%) compared with hills (34.6%), lowland (35.4%) and city (37.7%). The prevalence of HF was the lowest in the mountain [149.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) 112.1-187.7] and the highest in the lowland (340.8, 95% CI 308.7-372.9) and city (308, 95% CI 276.0-321.2). Patients living in the mountains had a lower deprivation index, and fewer hospitalizations prior to official diagnosis, although these characteristics were not statistically significant determinants of HF death in multivariate analysis. Behavioural (smoking and obesity) and socio-geographic characteristics (educational level, deprivation index and area of residence) were not significantly associated with mortality in both univariable and multivariable analysis; however, patients who live in mountains (hazard ratio 1.10, 95% CI 0.73-1.66) or hills (hazard ratio 1.11, 95% CI 0.90-1.37) had a slightly higher risk of death than those living in the city. Only 197 (12.1%) of patients in the cohort were enrolled in the integrated care pathway over the course of 4 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Although clinical determinants outweigh the geographic and behavioural disparities in the survival of patients with CHF treated in primary care, effective prevention strategies are needed to address environmental and socio-geographic inequalities in access to primary care and to hasten equitable linkage to integrated care.

Degree of Joint Risk Factor Control and Incident Heart Failure in Hypertensive Patients

BACKGROUND

Heart failure (HF) is a major complication in patients with hypertension.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate the extent to which joint risk factor control could attenuate hypertension-related excess risk of HF.

METHODS

The study included a total of 75,293 participants with diagnosed hypertension from the UK Biobank and matched with 256,619 nonhypertensive control subjects, followed up until May 31, 2021. The degree of joint risk factor control was assessed on the basis of the major cardiovascular risk factors, including blood pressure, body mass index, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, hemoglobin A1c, albuminuria, smoking, and physical activity. The Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate associations between the degree of risk factor control and risk of HF.

RESULTS

Among hypertensive patients, joint risk factor control showed an association with a stepwise reduction of incident HF risk. Each additional risk factor control was related to a 20% lower risk, and the optimal risk factor control (controlling ≥6 risk factors) was associated with a 62% lower risk (HR: 0.38; 95% CI: 0.31-0.45). In addition, the study found that the hypertension-related excess risk of HF among participants jointly controlling ≥6 risk factors were even lower than in nonhypertensive control subjects (HR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.67-0.94). The protective associations of joint risk factor control and risk of incident HF were broadly stronger among men than women and among medication users than nonusers (P for interaction < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The joint risk factor control is associated with a lower risk of incident HF in an accumulative and sex-specific manner. Optimal risk factor control may eliminate hypertension-related excess risk of HF.

Differences in Outcomes between Heart Failure Phenotypes in Patients with Coexistent COPD: A Cohort Study

RATIONALE

Differences in clinical presentation and outcomes between HF phenotypes in patients with COPD have not been assessed.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes and healthcare resource use (HRU) between patients with COPD and HF with preserved (HFpEF), mildly-reduced (HFmrEF), and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

METHODS

Patients with COPD and HF were identified in the United States (US) administrative claims database OptumLabs® DataWarehouse between 2008-2018. All-cause and cause-specific (HF) hospitalization, acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD, severe and moderate combined), mortality and HRU were compared between HF phenotypes.

RESULTS

From 5,419 patients with COPD, 70% had HFpEF, 20% had HFrEF and 10% had HFmrEF. All-cause hospitalization did not differ across groups, however patients with COPD and HFrEF had a greater risk of HF-specific hospitalization (HR 1.54, 95%CI 1.29-1.84) and mortality (HR: 1.17, 95%CI 1.03-1.33) compared to patients with COPD and HFpEF. Conversely, patients with COPD and HFrEF had a lower risk of AECOPD compared with those with COPD and HFpEF (HR 0.75, 95%CI 0.66-0.87). Rates of long-term stays (in skilled-nursing facilities) and emergency room visits were lower for those with COPD and HFrEF than for those with COPD and HFpEF.

CONCLUSION

Outcomes in patients with comorbid COPD and HFpEF are largely driven by COPD. Given the paucity in treatments for HFpEF, better differentiation between cardiac and respiratory symptoms may provide an opportunity to reduce the risk of AECOPD. Risk of death and HF hospitalization were highest among patients with COPD and HFrEF, emphasizing the importance of optimizing guideline-recommended HFrEF therapies in this group.

Prediction of chronic heart failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in a general population: the Tromsø study

Aims

Heart failure (HF) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are main causes of dyspnoea, and echocardiography and spirometry are essential investigations for these diagnoses. Our aim was to determine the prevalence of HF and COPD in a general population, also how the diseases may be identified, and to what extent their clinical characteristics differ.

Methods and results

In the seventh survey of Tromsø study (2015–16), subjects aged 40 years or more were examined with echocardiography, spirometry, lung sound recordings, questionnaires, including the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) questionnaire on dyspnoea, and N‐terminal pro‐brain natriuretic peptide analysis. A diagnosis of HF (HF with reduced ejection fraction, HF with mid‐range ejection fraction, or HF with preserved ejection fraction) or COPD was established according to current guidelines. Predictors of HF and COPD were evaluated by logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. A total of 7110 participants could be evaluated for COPD, 1624 for HF, and 1538 for both diseases. Age‐standardized prevalence of HF was 6.8% for women and 6.1% for men; the respective figures for COPD were 5.2% and 5.1%. Among the 1538 evaluated for both diseases, 139 subjects fulfilled the HF criteria, but only 17.1% reported to have the disease. Of those fulfilling the COPD criteria, 31.6% reported to have the disease. Shortness of breath at exertion was a frequent finding in HF; 59% of those with mMRC ≥2 had HF, while such shortness of breath was found in 24% among those with COPD. Reporting mMRC ≥2 had an odds ratio for HF of 19.5 (95% confidence interval 11.3–33.7), whereas the odds ratio for COPD was 6.3 (95% confidence interval 3.5–11.6). Current smoking was the strongest predictor of COPD but did not predict HF. Basal inspiratory crackles were significant predictors of HF in multivariable analysis. Among the subtypes of HF, an age <70 years was most frequently found in HF with reduced ejection fraction, in 51.7%. Clinical scores based on the predictive value in multivariable analysis of history, symptoms, and signs predicted HF and COPD with areas under the curve of 0.833 and 0.829, respectively.

Conclusions

Study participants with HF and COPD were in most cases not aware of their condition. In general practice, when an elderly patient present with shortness of breath, both diseases should be considered. Previous cardiovascular disease points at HF, while a history of smoking points at COPD. The threshold should be low for ordering echocardiography or spirometry for verifying the suspected cause of dyspnoea.