Guideline-directed therapy at discharge in patients with heart failure and atrial fibrillation

Advancing Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy in Heart Failure: Overcoming Challenges and Maximizing Benefits

The delayed titration of guideline-directed drug therapy (GDMT) is a complex event influenced by multiple factors that often result in poor prognosis for patients with heart failure (HF). Individualized adjustments in GDMT titration may be necessary based on patient characteristics, and every clinician is responsible for promptly initiating GDMT and titrating it appropriately within the patient's tolerance range. This review examines the current challenges in GDMT implementation and scrutinizes titration considerations within distinct subsets of HF patients, with the overarching goal of enhancing the adoption and effectiveness of GDMT. The authors also underscore the significance of establishing a novel management strategy that integrates cardiologists, nurse practitioners, pharmacists, and patients as a unified team that can contribute to the improved promotion and implementation of GDMT.

Korean Society of Heart Failure Guidelines for the Management of Heart Failure: Treatment

The Korean Society of Heart Failure (KSHF) guidelines aim to provide physicians with evidence-based recommendations for the management of patients with heart failure (HF). After the first introduction of the KSHF guidelines in 2016, newer therapies for HF with reduced ejection fraction, HF with mildly reduced ejection fraction, and HF with preserved ejection fraction have since emerged. The current version has been updated based on international guidelines and research data on Korean patients with HF. Herein, we present Part II of these guidelines, which comprises treatment strategies to improve the outcomes of patients with HF.

Korean Society of Heart Failure Guidelines for the Management of Heart Failure: Treatment

The Korean Society of Heart Failure (KSHF) guidelines aim to provide physicians with evidence-based recommendations for the management of patients with heart failure (HF). After the first introduction of the KSHF guidelines in 2016, newer therapies for HF with reduced ejection fraction, HF with mildly reduced ejection fraction, and HF with preserved ejection fraction have since emerged. The current version has been updated based on international guidelines and research data on Korean patients with HF. Herein, we present Part II of these guidelines, which comprises treatment strategies to improve the outcomes of patients with HF.

Association between heart failure quality of care and mortality: a population-based cohort study using nationwide registries

AIMS

To evaluate the quality of heart failure (HF) care using the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) quality indicators (QIs) for HF and to assess whether better quality of care is associated with improved outcomes.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We performed a nationwide cohort study using the Swedish HF registry, consisting of patients with any type of HF at their first outpatient visit or hospitalization. Independent participant data for quality of HF care was evaluated against the ESC QIs for HF, and association with mortality estimated using multivariable Cox regression. In total, 43 704 patients from 80 hospitals across Sweden enrolled between 2013-2019 were included, with median follow-up 23.6 months. Of the 16 QIs for HF, 13 could be measured and 5 were inversely associated with all-cause mortality during follow-up. Higher attainment (≥50% vs. <50% attainment) of the composite opportunity-based score (combination of QIs into a single score) for patients with reduced ejection fraction was associated with lower all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 0.81; 95% confidence interval 0.72-0.91). Attainment of the composite score was less in the outpatient than inpatient setting (adjusted odds ratio 0.85; 95% confidence interval 0.72-0.99). Quality of care varied across hospitals, with assessment of health-related quality of life being the indicator with the widest variation in attainment (interquartile range 61.7%).

CONCLUSION

Quality of HF care may be measured using the ESC HF QIs. In Sweden, attainment of HF care evaluated using the QIs demonstrated between and within hospital variation, and many QIs were inversely associated with mortality.

Evaluation of Adherence to Guideline for Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction and with or without Atrial Fibrillation

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the relationship between guideline adherence for heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) at discharge and relevant clinical outcomes in patients with acute HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) with or without atrial fibrillation (AF).

METHODS

We analyzed Korean Acute Heart Failure Registry data for 707 patients with HFpEF with documented AF and 687 without AF. Guideline adherence was defined as good or poor according to the prescription of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, β-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. Anticoagulation adherence was also incorporated for the AF group.

RESULTS

Among patients with normal sinus rhythm, those with poor guideline adherence had a reduced prevalence of comorbidities and favorable clinical characteristics when compared with those with good guideline adherence. Using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to address the bias of nonrandom treatment assignment, good adherence was associated with a poor 60-day composite endpoint in the multivariable Cox model (weighted hazard ratio [wHR], 1.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-3.00; P = 0.045). For patients with AF, baseline clinical characteristics were similar according to the degree of adherence. The IPTW-adjusted analysis indicated that good adherence was significantly associated with the 60-day composite endpoint (wHR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.27-0.79; P = 0.005). In the analysis excluding warfarin, good adherence was associated with 60-day re-hospitalization (wHR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.37-0.98; P = 0.040), 1-year re-hospitalization (wHR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.48-0.93; P = 0.018), and the composite endpoint (wHR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.59-0.99; P = 0.041).

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that good adherence to guidelines for HFrEF is associated with a better 60-day composite endpoint in patients with HFpEF with AF.

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.

Beta-blocker Therapy at Discharge in Patients with Acute Heart Failure and Atrial Fibrillation

BACKGROUND

β-blockers (BBs) are considered primary therapy in stable heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) without atrial fibrillation (AF); evidence-based benefits of BB on outcome have been documented. However, BBs have not been shown to improve mortality or reduce hospital admissions in HF patients with AF. This study assessed the relationship between BBs at discharge and relevant clinical outcomes in acute heart failure (AHF) patients with AF.

METHODS

From the Korean Acute Heart Failure Registry, 936 HFrEF and 639 HF patients with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and AF were selected. Propensity score (PS) matching accounted for BB selection bias when assessing associations.

RESULTS

BB-untreated patients in the overall cohort of HFrEF and HFpEF had greater deteriorated clinical and laboratory characteristics. In the 670 PS-matched cohort of HFrEF patients, incidences of all clinical events at 60 days and 1 year were not different according to use of BBs. In the 470 PS-matched cohort of HFpEF, rehospitalization and composite outcome at 6 months and 1 year more frequently occurred in non-users of BBs. After adjusting for covariates in the multivariable Cox model of matched cohorts, BB was not associated with clinical outcomes at 60 days and 1 year in HFrEF with AF patients. In HFpEF patients with AF, BB use was associated with reduced 6-month (hazard ratio [HR], 0.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.20-0.74) and 1-year rehospitalization (HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.34-0.82).

CONCLUSION

In the HFrEF with AF PS-matched cohort, the use of BBs at discharge was not associated with clinical outcome. However, in HFpEF with AF, the use of BB was associated with reduced rehospitalization during the 6-month and 1-year follow up.

A Systematic Review on the Use of Sacubitril/Valsartan Initiated Prior to Discharge in Hospitalized Patients With Heart Failure

OBJECTIVE

Systematically review the evidence of sacubitril/valsartan initiated in the hospital setting prior to discharge in patients with acute decompensated heart failure (HF).

DATA SOURCES

A literature search using keywords related to sacubitril/valsartan, HF, and inpatient use was performed using MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Google Scholar from inception through May 8, 2020.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Eligible studies included patients initiated on sacubitril/valsartan while inpatient and reported efficacy and safety outcomes.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A total of 10 articles were included for study review, of which 9 were full text and 1 was a conference poster. Key outcomes of interest were related to tolerability, N-terminal proB-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), functional capacity, target dose attainment, or rehospitalization rates. NT-proBNP levels were improved in 4 trials, and the results of functional capacity were mixed based on 2 studies. Rehospitalization rates were reported as secondary outcomes, and only 1 large study showed numerical and statistical improvement. The most frequent dose initiated prior to discharge was sacubitril/valsartan 24/26 mg twice daily. Hypotension was the most commonly reported adverse drug reaction and was commonly cited as a reason for not tolerating inpatient initiation with sacubitril/valsartan therapy.

RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE

Inpatient initiation of sacubitril/valsartan may improve surrogate and clinical outcomes after hemodynamic stabilization. Clinicians should consider patient-specific factors to ensure that benefits outweigh the risks and monitor for hypotension when initiated prior to hospital discharge.

CONCLUSION

Initiating inpatient treatment with sacubitril/valsartan after hemodynamic stabilization is reasonable based on available evidence.

Paradigm Shifts of Heart Failure Therapy: Do We Need Another Paradigm?

Heart failure (HF) is a progressive condition with intermittent acute decompensation leading to poor prognosis despite established guideline-directed therapy. A paradigm of HF therapy has been shifted over last four decades. Until the early 1970s, HF was empirically managed, then was managed with the hemodynamic concept until the early 1980s. According to the results of large randomized clinical trials, HF therapy has been shifted to the neurohormonal paradigm since the late 1980s until recently. Korean Acute Heart Failure (KorAHF) registry is a multi-center registry that recruited a total of 5625 admitted patients with acute HF from 2011 to 2014 and followed until 2019. Through KorAHF registry, we could obtain invaluable information or messages in various fields such as epidemiology, clinical characteristics, and treatment of acute HF in Korea and also had opportunities to fill the gap between guideline-directed care and real-world practice. Considering significant unmet needs in HF therapy even at this moment, we do need another paradigm shift for HF therapy, such as molecular and regenerative paradigm using gene, stem cells, mechanical support as well as novel pharmacological agents.