Standardized definitions for evaluation of heart failure therapies: scientific expert panel from the Heart Failure Collaboratory and Academic Research Consortium

Effect of Implantable Cardioverter-defibrillators in Nonischemic Heart Failure According to Background Medical Therapy: Extended Follow-up of the DANISH Trial

BACKGROUND

The Heart Failure Collaboratory (HFC) score integrates types and dosages of guideline-directed pharmacotherapies for heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). We examined the effects of cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation according to the modified HFC (mHFC) score in 1116 patients with nonischemic HFrEF from the Danish Study to Assess the Efficacy of ICDs in Patients with Nonischemic Systolic HF on Mortality (DANISH).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients were assigned scores for renin-angiotensin-system inhibitors, beta-blockers and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (0, no use; 1, < 50% of maximum dosage; 2, ≥ 50% of maximum dosage). The maximum score was 6, corresponding to ≥ 50% of maximum dosage for all therapies. The median baseline mHFC score was 4, and the median follow-up was 9.5 years. Compared with an mHFC score of 3-4, an mHFC score of 1-2 was associated with a higher rate of all-cause death (mHFC = 1-2: adjusted HR 1.67 [95% CI, 1.23-2.28]; mHFC = 3-4, reference; mHFC = 5-6: adjusted HR 1.07 [95% CI, 0.87-1.31]). ICD implantation did not reduce all-cause death compared with control (reference) (HR 0.89 [95% CI, 0.74-1.08]), regardless of mHFC score (mHFC = 1-2: HR 0.98 [95% CI, 0.56-1.71]; mHFC = 3-4: HR 0.89 [95% CI,0.66-1.20]; mHFC = 5-6: HR 0.85 [95% CI, 0.64-1.12]; Pinteraction, 0.65). Similarly, ICD implantation did not reduce cardiovascular death (HR 0.87 [95% CI, 0.70-1.09]), regardless of mHFC score (Pinteraction, 0.59). The ICD group had a lower rate of sudden cardiovascular death (HR, 0.60 [95% CI,0.40-0.92]); this association was not modified by mHFC score (Pinteraction, 0.35).

CONCLUSIONS

Lower mHFC scores were associated with higher rates of all-cause death. ICD implantation did not result in an overall survival benefit in patients with nonischemic HFrEF, regardless of mHFC score.

Right Atrial Remodeling and Outcome in Patients with Secondary Tricuspid Regurgitation

BACKGROUND

In patients with secondary tricuspid regurgitation (STR), right atrial remodeling (RAR) is a proven marker of disease progression. However, the prognostic value of RAR, assessed by indexed right atrial volume (RAVi) and reservoir strain (RAS), remains to be clarified. Accordingly, the aim of our study is to investigate the association with outcome of RAR in patients with STR.

METHODS

We enrolled 397 patients (44% men, 72.7 ± 13 years old) with mild to severe STR. Complete two-dimensional and speckle-tracking echocardiography analysis of right atrial and right ventricular (RV) size and function were obtained in all patients. The primary end point was the composite of death from any cause and heart failure hospitalization.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 15 months (interquartile range, 6-23), the end point was reached by 158 patients (39%). Patients with RAS <13% and RAVi >48 mL/m2 had significantly lower survival rates compared to patients with RAS ≥13% and RAVi ≤48 mL/m2 (log-rank P < .001). On multivariable analysis, RAS <13% (hazard ratio, 2.11; 95% CI, 1.43-3.11; P < .001) and RAVi > 48 mL/m2 (hazard ratio, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.01-2.18; P = .04) remained associated with the combined end point, even after adjusting for RV free-wall longitudinal strain, significant chronic kidney disease, and New York Heart Association class. Secondary tricuspid regurgitation excess mortality increased exponentially with values of 18.2% and 51.3 mL/m2 for RAS and RAVi, respectively. In nested models, the addition of RAS and RAVi provided incremental prognostic value over clinical, conventional echocardiographic parameters of RV size and function and RV free-wall longitudinal strain.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with STR, RAR was independently associated with mortality and heart failure hospitalization. Assessment of RAR could improve risk stratification of patients with STR, potentially identifying those who may benefit from optimization of medical therapy and a closer follow-up.

Baroreflex activation therapy in patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction: Long-term outcomes

AIMS

Carotid baroreflex activation therapy (BAT) restores baroreflex sensitivity and modulates the imbalance in cardiac autonomic function in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). We tested the hypothesis that treatment with BAT significantly reduces cardiovascular mortality and heart failure morbidity and provides long-term safety and sustainable symptomatic improvement.

METHODS AND RESULTS

BeAT-HF was a prospective, multicentre, randomized, two-arm, parallel-group, open-label, non-implanted control trial. New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III subjects, ejection fraction ≤35%, previous heart failure hospitalization or N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) >400 pg/ml, no class I indication for cardiac resynchronization therapy and NT-proBNP <1600 pg/ml were randomized to BAT plus optimal medical management (BAT group) or optimal medical management alone (control). The primary endpoint was cardiovascular mortality and HF morbidity; additional pre-specified endpoints included durability of safety, quality of life (QOL), exercise capacity (6-min hall walk distance [6MHWD]), functional status (NYHA class), hierarchical composite win ratio, freedom from all-cause death, left ventricular assists device (LVAD) implantation, heart transplant. Overall, 323 patients had 332 primary events, median follow-up was 3.6 years/patient. Both primary endpoint (rate ratio 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.57-1.57; p = 0.82) and components of the primary endpoints were not significantly different between BAT and control. The system- and procedure-related major adverse neurological and cardiovascular event-free rate remained 97% throughout the trial. Symptom improvement (QOL, 6MHWD, NYHA class, all nominal p < 0.001) in the BAT group was durable in time, sustainable in extent. Win ratio (1.26, 95% CI 1.02-1.58) and freedom from all-cause death, LVAD implantation, heart transplant (hazard ratio 0.66, 95% CI 0.43-1.01) favoured the BAT group but did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

The BeAT-HF primary endpoint was neutral; however, BAT provided safe, effective, and sustainable improvements in HFrEF patient's functional status, 6MHWD and QOL.

Relationship of Mild to Moderate Impairment of Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction With Fatal Ventricular Arrhythmic Events in Cardiac Sarcoidosis

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend placing an implantable cardiac defibrillator for patients with cardiac sarcoidosis and a severely impaired left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of ≤35%. In this study, we determined the association between mild or moderate LVEF impairment and fatal ventricular arrhythmic event (FVAE).

METHODS AND RESULTS

We retrospectively analyzed 401 patients with cardiac sarcoidosis without sustained ventricular arrhythmia at diagnosis. The primary end point was an FVAE, defined as the combined endpoint of documented ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation and sudden cardiac death. Two cutoff points for LVEF were used: a sex-specific lower threshold of normal range of LVEF (52% for men and 54% for women) and an LVEF of 35%, which is used in the current guidelines. During a median follow-up of 3.2 years, 58 FVAEs were observed, and the 5- and 10-year estimated incidences of FVAEs were 16.8% and 23.0%, respectively. All patients were classified into 3 groups according to LVEF: impaired LVEF group, mild to moderate impairment of LVEF group, and maintained LVEF group. Multivariable competing risk analysis showed that both the impaired LVEF group (hazard ratio [HR], 3.24 [95% CI, 1.49-7.04]) and the mild to moderate impairment of LVEF group (HR, 2.16 [95% CI, 1.04-4.46]) were associated with a higher incidence of FVAEs than the maintained LVEF group after adjustment for covariates.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with cardiac sarcoidosis are at a high risk of FVAEs, regardless of documented ventricular arrhythmia at the time of diagnosis. In patients with cardiac sarcoidosis, mild to moderate impairment of LVEF is associated with FVAEs.

Characteristics and incidence of cardiac events across spectrum of age in cardiac sarcoidosis

Background

Clinical characteristics and the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with cardiac sarcoidosis (CS) according to the age of initial diagnosis are unclear.

Methods

This study is a sub-analysis of the ILLUMINATE-CS registry, which is a retrospective, multicenter registry that enrolled patients with CS between 2001 and 2017. Patients were divided into three groups according to the tertile of age at the time of initial diagnosis of CS. The study compared the clinical background at the time of CS diagnosis and the incidence rate of cardiac events across age categories.

Results

A total of 511 patients were analyzed in this study. In baseline, older patients were more likely to be female. History of hypertension, heart failure admission, and atrioventricular block were more common in patients with older age. There was no significant difference in the history of ventricular arrhythmias and left ventricular ejection fraction among all age groups. During a median follow-up period of 3.2 [IQR: 1.7-4.2] years, 35 deaths, 56 heart failure hospitalization, and 98 fatal ventricular arrhythmias was observed. The incidence rate of all-cause death and heart failure hospitalization was significantly higher in patients with older age (p < 0.001), while there was no significant difference in the incidence rate of ventricular arrhythmia among age groups (p = 0.74).

Conclusions

In patients with CS, the risk of all-cause death and heart failure hospitalization was higher in older patients compared with other age groups; however, the risk of ventricular arrhythmia was comparable across all age groups.

Cardiovascular outcomes between dapagliflozin versus empagliflozin in patients with diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have been demonstrated to decrease cardiovascular adverse events. However, there is little real-world clinical evidence regarding a direct comparison between dapagliflozin and empagliflozin in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM).

HYPOTHESIS

A difference in the cardiovascular efficancy of dapagliflozin versus empagliflozin in DM patients was anticipated, aiming to guide the optimal choice of SGLT2 inhibitors based on cardiovascular outcomes.

METHODS

From 2014 to 2020, a total of 1549 patients with DM who were prescribed SGLT2 inhibitors such as dapagliflozin or empagliflozin were retrospectively enrolled. We categorized the study population into two groups: dapagliflozin (n = 981) and empagliflozin group (n = 568). The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure (HF) over a 3-year period.

RESULTS

Propensity-score matching was performed (537 patients in each group). The mean age and hemoglobin A1c were 58.2 ± 13.0 years and 8.4 ± 1.7%, respectively. There was no significant difference between the dapagliflozin and empagliflozin groups in the risk of MACE (3.7% vs. 4.8%, hazard ratio [HR], 1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-2.35; p = 0.349). Furthermore, there were no differences between the two groups in secondary endpoints including all-cause death, MI, stroke, and hospitalization for HF. Prior MI and history of HF were independent predictors of MACE.

CONCLUSIONS

Dapagliflozin and empagliflozin showed no significant difference of real-world clinical cardiovascular outcomes in patients with DM over a 3-year period. Further large randomized clinical trials will be warranted for better evaluation.

Standardized Definitions for Evaluation of Acute Decompensated Heart Failure Therapies: HF-ARC Expert Panel Paper

Acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) is one of the most common reasons for hospitalizations or urgent care and is associated with poor outcomes. Therapies shown to improve outcomes are limited, however, and innovation in pharmacologic and device-based therapeutics are therefore actively being sought. Standardizing definitions for ADHF and its trajectory is complex, limiting the generalizability and translation of clinical trials to effect clinical care and policy change. The Heart Failure Collaboratory is a multistakeholder organization comprising clinical investigators, clinicians, patients, government representatives (including U.S. Food and Drug Administration and National Institutes of Health participants), payors, and industry collaborators. The following expert consensus document is the product of the Heart Failure Collaboratory convening with the Academic Research Consortium, including members from academia, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and industry, for the purposes of proposing standardized definitions for ADHF and highlighting important endpoint considerations to inform the design and conduct of clinical trials for drugs and devices in this clinical arena.

Clinical characteristics and prognosis of patients with isolated cardiac sarcoidosis: Insights from the ILLUMINATE-CS study

AIM

Data on the clinical features and prognosis of patients with isolated cardiac sarcoidosis (iCS) are limited. This study evaluated the clinical characteristics and prognostic impact of iCS.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This was a secondary analysis of the ILLUMINATE-CS study, a multicentre, retrospective registry investigating the clinical characteristics and prognosis of cardiac sarcoidosis. iCS was diagnosed according to the 2016 Japanese Circulation Society (JCS) guidelines. Clinical characteristics and prognosis were compared between patients with iCS and systemic cardiac sarcoidosis (sCS). The primary outcome was a combined endpoint of all-cause death, hospitalization for heart failure, or fatal ventricular arrhythmia events. Among 475 patients with CS (mean age, 62.0 ± 10.9 years; female ratio, 59%) diagnosed by the JCS guidelines, 119 (25.1%) were diagnosed with iCS. Patients with iCS had a higher prevalence of a history of atrial fibrillation or hospitalization for heart failure, or lower left ventricular ejection fraction than those with sCS. During a median follow-up of 42.3 (interquartile range, 22.8-72.5) months, 141 primary outcomes (29.7%) occurred. Cox proportional hazard analysis revealed that iCS was a significant risk factor for the primary outcome in the unadjusted model (hazard ratio [HR] 1.62; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-2.34; p = 0.011). However, this association was not retained after adjustment for other covariates (adjusted HR 1.27; 95% CI 0.86-1.88; p = 0.226).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with iCS had more impaired cardiovascular function at the time of diagnosis than those with sCS. However, iCS was not independently associated with poor prognosis after adjustment for prognostic factors.

Endpoint adjudication in cardiovascular clinical trials

Endpoint adjudication (EA) is a common feature of contemporary randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in cardiovascular medicine. Endpoint adjudication refers to a process wherein a group of expert reviewers, known as the clinical endpoint committee (CEC), verify potential endpoints identified by site investigators. Events that are determined by the CEC to meet pre-specified trial definitions are then utilized for analysis. The rationale behind the use of EA is that it may lessen the potential misclassification of clinical events, thereby reducing statistical noise and bias. However, it has been questioned whether this is universally true, especially given that EA significantly increases the time, effort, and resources required to conduct a trial. Herein, we compare the summary estimates obtained using adjudicated vs. non-adjudicated site designated endpoints in major cardiovascular RCTs in which both were reported. Based on these data, we lay out a framework to determine which trials may warrant EA and where it may be redundant. The value of EA is likely greater when cardiovascular trials have nuanced primary endpoints, endpoint definitions that align poorly with practice, sub-optimal data completeness, greater operator variability, and lack of blinding. EA may not be needed if the primary endpoint is all-cause death or all-cause hospitalization. In contrast, EA is likely merited for more nuanced endpoints such as myocardial infarction, bleeding, worsening heart failure as an outpatient, unstable angina, or transient ischaemic attack. A risk-based approach to adjudication can potentially allow compromise between costs and accuracy. This would involve adjudication of a small proportion of events, with further adjudication done if inconsistencies are detected.

Standardized Definitions for Cardiogenic Shock Research and Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices: Scientific Expert Panel From the Shock Academic Research Consortium (SHARC)

The Shock Academic Research Consortium is a multi-stakeholder group, including representatives from the US Food and Drug Administration and other government agencies, industry, and payers, convened to develop pragmatic consensus definitions useful for the evaluation of clinical trials enrolling patients with cardiogenic shock, including trials evaluating mechanical circulatory support devices. Several in-person and virtual meetings were convened between 2020 and 2022 to discuss the need for developing the standardized definitions required for evaluation of mechanical circulatory support devices in clinical trials for cardiogenic shock patients. The expert panel identified key concepts and topics by performing literature reviews, including previous clinical trials, while recognizing current challenges and the need to advance evidence-based practice and statistical analysis to support future clinical trials. For each category, a lead (primary) author was assigned to perform a literature search and draft a proposed definition, which was presented to the subgroup. These definitions were further modified after feedback from the expert panel meetings until a consensus was reached. This manuscript summarizes the expert panel recommendations focused on outcome definitions, including efficacy and safety.

Prevalence and prognostic value of atrial fibrillation in patients with cardiac sarcoidosis

Aims

The prognostic value of the presence of atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients at the time of cardiac sarcoidosis (CS) diagnosis is unknown. This study aimed to investigate the association between AF at the time of CS diagnosis and patient prognosis.

Methods and results

This study is a post-hoc analysis of Illustration of the Management and Prognosis of Japanese Patients with CS, a multicentre, retrospective observational study that evaluated the clinical characteristics and prognosis of patients with CS. The primary endpoint was the combined endpoint of all-cause death and hospitalization due to heart failure. After excluding patients with missing data about AF status, 445 patients (62 ± 11 years, 36% males) diagnosed with CS according to the Japanese current diagnostic guideline were analysed. Compared to patients without AF, patients with AF (n = 46, 10%) had higher levels of brain natriuretic peptide and a higher prevalence of heart failure hospitalizations. During a median follow-up period of 3.2 years (interquartile range, 1.7-5.8 years), 80 primary endpoints were observed. Kaplan-Meier curve analysis indicated that concomitant AF at the time of diagnosis was significantly associated with a high incidence of primary endpoints (log-rank P = 0.002). This association was retained after adjusting for known risk factors including log-transformed brain natriuretic peptide levels and left ventricular ejection fractions [hazard ratio, 1.96 (95% confidence interval, 1.05-3.65); P = 0.035].

Conclusion

The presence of AF at the time of CS diagnosis is associated with higher incidence of all-cause death and heart failure hospitalization.

Sex differences in clinical characteristics and prognosis of patients with cardiac sarcoidosis

OBJECTIVE

Owing to the paucity of data, this study aimed to investigate sex differences in clinical features and prognosis of patients with cardiac sarcoidosis (CS).

METHODS

This study was a secondary analysis of the ILLUstration of the Management and prognosIs of JapaNese PATiEnts with Cardiac Sarcoidosis registry-a retrospective multicentre registry that enrolled patients with CS between 2001 and 2017. The primary outcome was potentially fatal ventricular arrhythmia events (pFVAEs)-a composite of sudden cardiac death, sustained ventricular tachycardia lasting >30 s, ventricular fibrillation or the requirement for implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy.

RESULTS

Of the 512 participants (mean age±SD 61.6±11.4 years), 329 (64.2%) were females. Both sexes had peak ages of 60-64 years at diagnosis. Male patients were younger and had a higher prevalence of coronary artery disease and lower left ventricular ejection fraction than female patients. During a median follow-up of 3 years (IQR 1.6-5.6), pFVAEs were observed in 99 patients, with males having a significantly higher risk than females (p=0.002). This association was retained even after adjustment for other risk factors for pFVAEs, including left ventricular ejection fraction (adjusted HR 1.80; 95% CI 1.08 to 3.01, p=0.025).

CONCLUSION

Approximately two-thirds of patients with CS were females, with a peak age of approximately 60 years at clinical diagnosis in both sexes; male patients were younger than female patients. Male patients had a significantly higher risk of pFVAEs than female patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

UMIN000034974.

The Prognostic Value of B-Type Natriuretic Peptide in Patients With Cardiac Sarcoidosis Without Heart Failure: Insights From ILLUMINATE-CS

Background The prognostic role of BNP (B-type natriuretic peptide) in patients with cardiac sarcoidosis without evident heart failure is unknown. Methods and Results This is a post hoc analysis of ILLUMINATE-CS (Illustration of the Management and Prognosis of Japanese Patients With Cardiac Sarcoidosis), a multicenter, retrospective, and observational study that evaluated the clinical characteristics and prognosis of cardiac sarcoidosis. We analyzed patients with cardiac sarcoidosis without evident heart failure at the time of diagnosis. The association between baseline BNP levels and prognosis was investigated. The primary end point was the combined end point of all-cause death, heart failure hospitalization, and fatal ventricular arrhythmia. In total, 238 patients (61.0±11.1 years, 37% men) were analyzed, and 61 primary end points were observed during a median follow-up period of 3.0 (interquartile range, 1.7-5.8) years. Patients with high BNP (BNP above the median value of BNP) were older and had a lower renal function and left ventricular ejection fraction than those with low BNP values. Kaplan-Meier curve analysis indicated that high BNP levels were significantly associated with a high incidence of primary end points (log-rank P=0.004), and this association was retained even in multivariable Cox regression (hazard ratio, 2.06 [95% CI, 1.19-3.55]; P=0.010). Log-transformed BNP as a continuous variable was associated with the primary end point (hazard ratio, 2.12 [95% CI, 1.31-3.43]; P=0.002). Conclusions High baseline BNP level was an independent predictor of future adverse events in patients with cardiac sarcoidosis without heart failure at the time of diagnosis. Registration URL: https://www.umin.ac.jp/english/; Unique Identifier: UMIN-CTR: UMIN000034974.

Heart failure: an update from the last years and a look at the near future

In the last years, major progress occurred in heart failure (HF) management. Quadruple therapy is now mandatory for all the patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction. Whilst verciguat is becoming available across several countries, omecamtiv mecarbil is waiting to be released for clinical use. Concurrent use of potassium-lowering agents may counteract hyperkalaemia and facilitate renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor implementations. The results of the EMPagliflozin outcomE tRial in Patients With chrOnic heaRt Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (EMPEROR-Preserved) trial were confirmed by the Dapagliflozin in Heart Failure with Mildly Reduced or Preserved Ejection Fraction (DELIVER) trial, and we now have, for the first time, evidence for treatment of also patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction. In a pre-specified meta-analysis of major randomized controlled trials, sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors reduced all-cause mortality, cardiovascular (CV) mortality, and HF hospitalization in the patients with HF regardless of left ventricular ejection fraction. Other steps forward have occurred in the treatment of decompensated HF. Acetazolamide in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure with Volume Overload (ADVOR) trial showed that the addition of intravenous acetazolamide to loop diuretics leads to greater decongestion vs. placebo. The addition of hydrochlorothiazide to loop diuretics was evaluated in the CLOROTIC trial. Torasemide did not change outcomes, compared with furosemide, in TRANSFORM-HF. Ferric derisomaltose had an effect on the primary outcome of CV mortality or HF rehospitalizations in IRONMAN (rate ratio 0.82; 95% confidence interval 0.66-1.02; P = 0.070). Further options for the treatment of HF, including device therapies, cardiac contractility modulation, and percutaneous treatment of valvulopathies, are summarized in this article.

Comparisons between biopsy-proven versus clinically diagnosed cardiac sarcoidosis

OBJECTIVES

Diagnosis of cardiac sarcoidosis (CS) without histological evidence remains controversial. This study aimed to compare characteristics and outcomes of histologically proven versus clinically diagnosed cases of CS, which were adjudicated using Heart Rhythm Society or Japanese Circulation Society criteria.

METHODS

A total of 512 patients with CS (age: 62±11 years, female: 64.3%) enrolled in the multicentre registry were studied. Histologically confirmed patients were classified as 'biopsy-proven CS', while those with the presence of strongly suggestive clinical findings of CS without histological evidence were classified as 'clinical CS'. Primary outcome was a composite of all-cause death, heart failure hospitalisation and ventricular arrhythmia event.

RESULTS

In total, 314 patients (61.3%) were classified as biopsy-proven CS, while 198 (38.7%) were classified as clinical CS. Patients classified under clinical CS were associated with higher prevalence of left ventricular dysfunction, septal thinning, and positive findings in fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography or Gallium scintigraphy than those under biopsy-proven CS. During median follow-up of 43.7 (23.3-77.3) months, risk of primary outcome was comparable between the groups (adjusted HR: 1.24, 95% CI: 0.88 to 1.75, p=0.22). Similarly, the risks of primary outcome were comparable between patients with clinical isolated CS who did not have other organ/tissue involvement, and biopsy-proven isolated CS (adjusted HR: 1.23, 95% CI: 0.56 to 2.70, p=0.61).

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial number of patients were diagnosed with clinical CS without confirmatory biopsy. Considering the worse clinical outcomes irrespective of the histological evidence, the diagnosis of clinical CS is justifiable if imaging findings suggestive of CS are observed.

Risk stratification of patients with cardiac sarcoidosis: the ILLUMINATE-CS registry

AIMS

This study evaluated the prognosis and prognostic factors of patients with cardiac sarcoidosis (CS), an underdiagnosed disease.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients from a retrospective multicentre registry, diagnosed with CS between 2001 and 2017 based on the 2016 Japanese Circulation Society or 2014 Heart Rhythm Society criteria, were included. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, hospitalization for heart failure, and documented fatal ventricular arrhythmia events (FVAE), each constituting exploratory endpoints. Among 512 registered patients, 148 combined events (56 heart failure hospitalizations, 99 documented FVAE, and 49 all-cause deaths) were observed during a median follow-up of 1042 (interquartile range: 518-1917) days. The 10-year estimated event rates for the primary endpoint, all-cause death, heart failure hospitalizations, and FVAE were 48.1, 18.0, 21.1, and 31.9%, respectively. On multivariable Cox regression, a history of ventricular tachycardia (VT) or fibrillation [hazard ratio (HR) 2.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.59-4.00, P < 0.001], log-transformed brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels (HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.07-1.53, P = 0.008), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (HR 0.94 per 5% increase, 95% CI 0.88-1.00, P = 0.046), and post-diagnosis radiofrequency ablation for VT (HR 2.65, 95% CI 1.02-6.86, P = 0.045) independently predicted the primary endpoint.

CONCLUSION

Although mortality is relatively low in CS, adverse events are common, mainly due to FVAE. Patients with low LVEF, with high BNP levels, with VT/fibrillation history, and requiring ablation to treat VT are at high risk.

Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing a Multidisciplinary Intervention by a Geriatrician and a Cardiologist to Usual Care after a Heart Failure Hospitalization in Older Patients: The SENECOR Study

Background: The prognosis of older patients after a heart failure (HF) hospitalization is poor. Methods: In this randomized trial, we consecutively assigned 150 patients 75 years old or older with a recent heart failure hospitalization to follow-up by a cardiologist (control) or follow-up by a cardiologist and a geriatrician (intervention). The primary outcome was all-cause hospitalization at a one-year follow-up. Results: All-cause hospitalization occurred in 47 of 75 patients (62.7%) in the intervention group and in 58 of 75 patients (77.3%) in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.46 to 0.99; p = 0.046). The number of patients with at least one HF hospitalization was similar in both groups (34.7% in the intervention group vs. 40% in the control group, p = 0.5). There were a total of 236 hospitalizations during the study period. The main reasons for hospitalization were heart failure (38.1%) and infection (14.8%). Mortality was 24.7%. Heart failure was the leading cause of mortality (54.1% of all deaths), without differences between groups. Conclusions: A follow-up by a cardiologist and geriatrician in older patients after an HF hospitalization was superior to a cardiologist’s follow-up in reducing all-cause hospitalization in older patients. (Funded by Beca Primitivo de la Vega, Fundación MAPFRE. ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03555318).

Outcomes among acute heart failure emergency department patients by preserved vs. reduced ejection fraction

Aims

This study aimed to assess short‐term outcomes among emergency department (ED) patients with acute heart failure (AHF) by preserved (≥50%) vs. reduced (<50%) ejection fraction (EF).

Methods and results

We conducted a retrospective, multicentre study of adult ED patients with AHF from 2017 to 2018 in an integrated healthcare system with 21 hospitals. Among patients with known EF, our primary outcome was 30 day all‐cause mortality, comparing patients with heart failure with preserved EF (HFpEF) and heart failure with reduced EF (HFrEF), adjusted for known risk factors. We ran separate multivariate regression models to compare 30 day mortality between HFpEF and HFrEF patients stratified by ED disposition (admit, observe, and discharge). Our secondary outcomes were adjusted 30 day all‐cause return hospital admission and rates of non‐fatal serious adverse events, including new intra‐aorta balloon pump, endotracheal intubation, renal failure requiring dialysis, myocardial infarction, or coronary revascularization. We conducted a sensitivity analysis among patients with EF ≤ 40% and compared our primary and secondary outcomes among patients with EF ≤ 40% with those with EF ≥ 50%. Among the 26 050 total ED encounters for AHF, 15 275 (58.6%) had known EF and 62.4% had HFpEF. The mean age was 76, 49.6% were women, and 60.5% were white. We found that 62.4% of patients were admitted, 18.3% were observed, and 19.3% were discharged from the ED. The 30 day all‐cause mortality rate was lowest among discharged patients (3.9%), intermediate among observed patients (5.9%), and highest among admitted patients (13.9%). Overall, the adjusted 30 day mortality rate was significantly higher among HFpEF patients compared with HFrEF patients (10.2% vs. 8.4%, P = 0.0004). HFpEF patients had higher mortality regardless of ED disposition, although the difference was only significant among admitted patients. The adjusted 30 day return hospital admission rates were not significantly different between HFpEF and HFrEF patients (17.9% vs. 17.8%, P = 0.89). The adjusted 30 day non‐fatal serious adverse event rates were significantly higher among HFrEF patients compared with HFpEF patients (13.7% vs. 11.1%, P < 0.0001), driven by myocardial infarction and coronary revascularization. We found that 3692 patients had EF ≤ 40%. Patients with EF ≥ 50% had significantly higher adjusted 30 day mortality rates compared with those with EF ≤ 40% (10.2% vs. 8.4%, P < 0.05).

Conclusion

In a contemporary population, almost three quarters of ED patients with AHF and known EF have HFpEF. These patients have higher 30 day adjusted mortality compared with those with HFrEF. Further studies might evaluate the underlying factors associated with this difference and target interventions to improve outcomes.

Association between the nurse-led program with mental health status, quality of life, and heart failure rehospitalization in chronic heart failure patients

The nurse-led program is associated with a short-term improvement of mental health status (MHS) and quality of life (QOL) in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). Nonetheless, the long-term effect of this program is undetermined. The aims of the current study were to evaluate the 1-year effects of the nurse-led program on MHS, QOL, and heart failure (HF) rehospitalization among patients with CHF.CHF patients in the control group received standard care, and patients in the treatment group received standard care plus telehealth intervention including inquiring patients' medical condition, providing feedbacks, counseling and providing positive and emotional talk with the patients. At the third, sixth, and twelfth month's follow-up, patients were called by registered nurses to assess the Mental Health Inventory-5 (MHI-5) and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) scores. HF rehospitalization was also assessed.A total of 300 patients were included and 46% (n = 138) of the patients were in the treatment group. There were no significant between-group differences in the MHI-5 and KCCQ scores at baseline. In the control group, the MHI-5 score was gradually decreased with follow-up and the score was significantly lower than that in the treatment group since the third month's follow-up (63.5 ± 10.6 vs 73.6 ± 10.3). Compared with the treatment group, KCCQ score was lower in the control group from the third month's follow-up (64.3 ± 10.6 vs 73.5 ± 12.3) until the end of the twelfth months' follow-up (45.3 ± 11.2 vs 60.8 ± 11.1). During 12 months' follow-up, the proportion of patients who experienced HF rehospitalization was lower in the treatment group (19.6% vs 24.1%). After adjusting for covariates, the utilization of the nurse-led program, and increase of MHI-5 and KCCQ scores were associated with reduced risk of HF rehospitalization.The nurse-led program is beneficial for the improvement of MHS and QOL for CHF patients, which might contribute to the reduction of HF rehospitalization.

Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Heart Failure Hospitalized With COVID-19

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to evaluate in-hospital outcomes among patients with a history of heart failure (HF) hospitalized with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19).

BACKGROUND

Cardiometabolic comorbidities are common in patients with severe COVID-19. Patients with HF may be particularly susceptible to COVID-19 complications.

METHODS

The Premier Healthcare Database was used to identify patients with at least 1 HF hospitalization or 2 HF outpatient visits between January 1, 2019, and March 31, 2020, who were subsequently hospitalized between April and September 2020. Baseline characteristics, health care resource utilization, and mortality rates were compared between those hospitalized with COVID-19 and those hospitalized with other causes. Predictors of in-hospital mortality were identified in HF patients hospitalized with COVID-19 by using multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among 1,212,153 patients with history of HF, 132,312 patients were hospitalized from April 1, 2020, to September 30, 2020. A total of 23,843 patients (18.0%) were hospitalized with acute HF, 8,383 patients (6.4%) were hospitalized with COVID-19, and 100,068 patients (75.6%) were hospitalized with alternative reasons. Hospitalization with COVID-19 was associated with greater odds of in-hospital mortality as compared with hospitalization with acute HF; 24.2% of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 died in-hospital compared to 2.6% of those hospitalized with acute HF. This association was strongest in April (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 14.48; 95% confidence interval [CI]:12.25 to 17.12) than in subsequent months (adjusted OR: 10.11; 95% CI: 8.95 to 11.42; pinteraction <0.001). Among patients with HF hospitalized with COVID-19, male sex (adjusted OR: 1.26; 95% CI: 1.13 to 1.40) and morbid obesity (adjusted OR: 1.25; 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.46) were associated with greater odds of in-hospital mortality, along with age (adjusted OR: 1.35; 95% CI: 1.29 to 1.42 per 10 years) and admission earlier in the pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with HF hospitalized with COVID-19 are at high risk for complications, with nearly 1 in 4 dying during hospitalization.