NT-proBNP and ICD in Nonischemic Systolic Heart Failure: Extended Follow-Up of the DANISH Trial

Prognosis and Risk Stratification in Dilated Cardiomyopathy With LVEF≤35%: Cardiac MRI Insights for Better Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend implantable cardioverter defibrillators for the primary prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)≤35%. However, its effectiveness is hindered by the inability to reliably discriminate between the risk of SCD and competing death of heart failure deterioration, thereby limiting its clinical utility. We aimed to refine the SCD risk stratification model based on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for patients with dilated cardiomyopathy with LVEF≤35%.

METHODS

A total of 1272 patients with dilated cardiomyopathy with LVEF≤35% who underwent cardiac magnetic resonance imaging were consecutively enrolled in this study. The primary end point is a composite of SCD or aborted SCD and the second end point is a composite of heart failure death and heart transplantation.

RESULTS

Over a median follow-up of 86.3 months, 101 patients reached the primary end point. In the adjusted analysis, age (hazard ratio [HR], 1.02 [95% CI, 1.01-1.04]; P=0.006) years, a family history of SCD (HR, 2.00 [95% CI, 1.01-3.98]; P=0.05), NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide) (HR, 2.02 [95% CI, 1.18-3.44]; P=0.01), LVEF (per 5% HR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.66-0.95]; P=0.01), and late gadolinium enhancement≥7.5% (HR, 4.11[95% CI, 2.72-6.21]; P<0.001) were associated with SCD or aborted SCD. Left atrial volume index≥68.3 mL/m2 was an independent predictor of the secondary end point (adjusted HR, 1.65 [95% CI, 1.13-2.40]; P=0.009). Compared with late gadolinium enhancement<7.5%, patients with late gadolinium enhancement≥7.5% and LVEF≤20% had a 7.12-fold higher risk of experiencing SCD events in competing Cox analysis (annual event rate, 4.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with dilated cardiomyopathy with late gadolinium enhancement≥7.5% were at heightened risk of SCD events, which can be used for risk assessment. Risk stratifications for SCD, combining clinical and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging may potentially guide decision-making for implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy.

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.

Cardiomyopathy and Sudden Cardiac Death: Bridging Clinical Practice with Cutting-Edge Research

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) prevention in cardiomyopathies such as hypertrophic (HCM), dilated (DCM), non-dilated left ventricular (NDLCM), and arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) remains a crucial but complex clinical challenge, especially among younger populations. Accurate risk stratification is hampered by the variability in phenotypic expression and genetic heterogeneity inherent in these conditions. This article explores the multifaceted strategies for preventing SCD across a spectrum of cardiomyopathies and emphasizes the integration of clinical evaluations, genetic insights, and advanced imaging techniques such as cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) in assessing SCD risks. Advanced imaging, particularly CMR, not only enhances our understanding of myocardial architecture but also serves as a cornerstone for identifying at-risk patients. The integration of new research findings with current practices is essential for advancing patient care and improving survival rates among those at the highest risk of SCD. This review calls for ongoing research to refine risk stratification models and enhance the predictive accuracy of both clinical and imaging techniques in the management of cardiomyopathies.

Incidence, risk assessment and prevention of sudden cardiac death in cardiomyopathies

Cardiomyopathies are a significant contributor to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, mainly due to the development of heart failure and increased risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD). Despite improvement in survival with contemporary treatment, SCD remains an important cause of mortality in cardiomyopathies. It occurs at a rate ranging between 0.15% and 0.7% per year (depending on the cardiomyopathy), which significantly surpasses SCD incidence in the age- and sex-matched general population. The risk of SCD is affected by multiple factors including the aetiology, genetic basis, age, sex, physical exertion, the extent of myocardial disease severity, conduction system abnormalities, and electrical instability, as measured by various metrics. Over the past decades, the knowledge on the mechanisms and risk factors for SCD has substantially improved, allowing for a better-informed risk stratification. However, unresolved issues still challenge the guidance of SCD prevention in patients with cardiomyopathies. In this review, we aim to provide an in-depth discussion of the contemporary concepts pertinent to understanding the burden, risk assessment and prevention of SCD in cardiomyopathies (dilated, non-dilated left ventricular, hypertrophic, arrhythmogenic right ventricular, and restrictive). The review first focuses on SCD incidence in cardiomyopathies and then summarizes established and emerging risk factors for life-threatening arrhythmias/SCD. Finally, it discusses validated approaches to the risk assessment and evidence-based measures for SCD prevention in cardiomyopathies, pointing to the gaps in evidence and areas of uncertainties that merit future clarification.

Role of N-terminal pro-B type natriuretic peptide as a predictor of poor outcomes in patients with HFrEF receiving primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Several studies have demonstrated that combining left ventricular ejection fraction and New York Heart Association functional class is insufficient for predicting risk of appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) shock in primary prevention candidates. Hence, our aim was to assess the relationship between N-terminal pro-B type natriuretic peptide (NT-pro BNP) along with appropriate ICD shock and all-cause mortality in order to improve the stratification process of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) being considered for primary preventive ICD therapy.

METHODS

A systematic literature search from several databases was conducted up until 9 June 2022. Studies were eligible if they investigated the relationship of NT-pro BNP with all-cause mortality and appropriate ICD shock.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis comprised nine studies with a total of 5117 participants. Our study revealed that high levels of NT-pro BNP were associated with all-cause mortality (HR=2.12 (95% CI=1.53 to 2.93); p<0.001, I²=78.1%, p<0.001 for heterogeneity) and appropriate ICD shock (HR=1.71 (95% CI=1.18 to 2.49); p<0.001, I²=43.4%, p=0.102 for heterogeneity). The adjusted HR for all-cause mortality and appropriate ICD shock increased by approximately 3% and 5%, respectively per 100 pg/mL increment pursuant to concentration-response model (P_{non-linearity} <0.001). The curves became steeper after NT-pro BNP reached its inflection point (3000 pg/mL).

CONCLUSION

A positive concentration-dependent association between elevated NT-pro BNP levels along with the risk of all-cause mortality and appropriate ICD shock was found in patients with HFrEF with ICD.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022339285.