Search

Background: Whether transcatheter mitral-valve repair improves outcomes in patients with heart failure and functional mitral regurgitation is uncertain., Methods: We conducted a randomized, controlled trial involving patients with heart failure and moderate to severe functional mitral regurgitation from 30 sites in nine countries. The patients were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either transcatheter mitral-valve repair and guideline-recommended medical therapy (device group) or medical therapy alone (control group). The three primary end points were the rate of the composite of first or recurrent hospitalization for heart failure or cardiovascular death during 24 months; the rate of first or recurrent hospitalization for heart failure during 24 months; and the change from baseline to 12 months in the score on the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-Overall Summary (KCCQ-OS; scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health status)., Results: A total of 505 patients underwent randomization: 250 were assigned to the device group and 255 to the control group. At 24 months, the rate of first or recurrent hospitalization for heart failure or cardiovascular death was 37.0 events per 100 patient-years in the device group and 58.9 events per 100 patient-years in the control group (rate ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48 to 0.85; P = 0.002). The rate of first or recurrent hospitalization for heart failure was 26.9 events per 100 patient-years in the device group and 46.6 events per 100 patient-years in the control group (rate ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.82; P = 0.002). The KCCQ-OS score increased by a mean (±SD) of 21.6±26.9 points in the device group and 8.0±24.5 points in the control group (mean difference, 10.9 points; 95% CI, 6.8 to 15.0; P<0.001). Device-specific safety events occurred in 4 patients (1.6%)., Conclusions: Among patients with heart failure with moderate to severe functional mitral regurgitation who received medical therapy, the addition of transcatheter mitral-valve repair led to a lower rate of first or recurrent hospitalization for heart failure or cardiovascular death and a lower rate of first or recurrent hospitalization for heart failure at 24 months and better health status at 12 months than medical therapy alone. (Funded by Abbott Laboratories; RESHAPE-HF2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02444338.)., (Copyright © 2024 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Background: Functional health status is increasingly being recognized as a viable endpoint in heart failure (HF) trials. We sought to assess its prognostic impact and relationship with traditional clinical outcomes in patients with HF., Methods: MEDLINE and Cochrane central were searched up to January 2021 for post hoc analyses of trials or observational studies that assessed independent association between baseline health/functional status, and mortality and hospitalization in patients with HF across the range of left ventricular ejection fractions to evaluate the prognostic ability of NYHA class [II, III, IV], KCCQ, MLHFQ, and 6MWD. Hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals were pooled., Results: Twenty-two studies were included. Relative to NYHA I, NYHA class II (HR 1.54 [1.16-2.04]; p < 0.01), NYHA class III (HR 2.08 [1.57-2.77]; p < 0.01), and NYHA class IV (HR 2.53 [1.25-5.12]; p = 0.01) were independently associated with increased risk of mortality. 6MWD (per 10 m) was associated with decreased mortality (HR 0.98 [0.98-0.99]; p < 0.01). A 5-point increase in KCCQ-OSS (HR 0.94 [0.91-0.96]; p < 0.01) was associated with decreased mortality. A high MLHFQ score (> 45) was significantly associated with increased mortality (HR 1.30 [1.14-1.47]; p < 0.01). NHYA class, 6MWD (per 10 m), KCCQ-OSS, and MLHFQ all significantly associated with all-cause mortality in patients with HF., Conclusion: Identifying such patients with poor health status using functional health assessment can offer a complementary assessment of disease burden and trajectory which carries a strong prognostic value., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Increased hsCRP (high-sensitivity C-reactive protein), a marker of inflammation, is associated with incident cardiovascular events. We aim to determine whether the baseline or trajectory of hsCRP levels over time predicts incident heart failure (HF) hospitalization., Methods: JHS (Jackson Heart Study) participants' (n=3920 Black adults) hsCRP levels were measured over 3 visits (from 2000 to 2013). We assessed the association of hsCRP at baseline (visit 1) with incident HF hospitalization using Cox proportional hazards models. Furthermore, we assessed the association of the trajectory of hsCRP over repeated measurements (visits 1-3) with incident HF using joint models. Hazard ratios are reflective of an increase in hsCRP by 1 SD on a log2 scale. We also assessed the association of change in hsCRP between visit 1 and visit 3 with Cox proportional hazards models by grouping patients by low (<2 mg/L) and high (≥2 mg/L) hsCRP levels. The 4 groups were low-to-low (referent), low-to-high, high-to-low, and high-to-high., Results: Mean baseline age of participants was 54±13 years, and 63.8% were women. Over a median follow-up of 12 years, 308 (7.9%) participants were hospitalized with incident HF. Baseline hsCRP was not associated with incident HF (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.96-1.22]). However, increasing hsCRP levels over repeated measures were associated with a higher risk of incident HF overall (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.22 [95% CI, 1.03-1.44]) and HF with preserved ejection fraction (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.30 [95% CI, 1.02-1.65]) but not HF with reduced ejection fraction ( P >0.05). Furthermore, changes in hsCRP from low-to-high and high-to-low levels were associated with incident HF ( P <0.05)., Conclusions: While baseline hsCRP was not associated with incident HF, an increasing trajectory of hsCRP over time was associated with increased risk for incident HF (particularly HF with preserved ejection fraction). Temporal change in hsCRP may be an important marker of risk for incident HF with preserved ejection fraction in Black adults., Competing Interests: Dr Mentz received research support and honoraria from Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim/Eli Lilly, Boston Scientific, Cytokinetics, Fast BioMedical, Gilead, Innolife, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Relypsa, Respicardia, Roche, Sanofi, Vifor, Windtree Therapeutics, and Zoll. Dr Shah reports research support not related to this study from Novartis and Philips Ultrasound and consulting fees from Philips Ultrasound. Dr Virani receives research support from the Department of Veterans Affairs, the National Institutes of Health, and Tahir and Jooma Family. Dr Virani also received an honorarium from the American College of Cardiology in his role as an Associate Editor for Innovations, acc.org. Dr Butler reported personal fees from Abbott, Adrenomed, Amgen, Array, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CVRx, G3 Pharmaceutical, Impulse Dynamics, Innolife, Janssen, LivaNova, Luitpold, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Relypsa, Roche, V-Wave Ltd, and Vifor outside the submitted work. The other authors report no conflicts. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the National Institutes of Health, the US Department of Health and Human Services, or the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Given the substantial burden of chronic kidney disease associated with type 2 diabetes, an aggressive approach to treatment is required. Despite the benefits of guideline-directed therapy, there remains a high residual risk of continuing progression of chronic kidney disease and of cardiovascular events. Historically, a linear approach to pharmacologic management of chronic kidney disease has been used, in which drugs are added, then adjusted, optimized, or stopped in a stepwise manner based on their efficacy, toxicity, effects on a patient's quality of life, and cost. However, there are disadvantages to this approach, which may result in missing a window of opportunity to slow chronic kidney disease progression. Instead, a pillar approach has been proposed to enable earlier treatment that simultaneously targets multiple pathways involved in disease progression. Combination therapy in patients with chronic kidney disease associated with type 2 diabetes is being investigated in several clinical trials. In this article, we discuss current treatment options for patients with chronic kidney disease associated with type 2 diabetes and provide a rationale for tailored combinations of therapies with complementary mechanisms of action to optimize therapy using a pillar-based treatment strategy. [This article includes a plain language summary as an additional file]., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Purpose of Review: End stage kidney disease can be a slow process and it may be challenging to achieve required follow-up for sufficient events. Therefore, a surrogate kidney endpoint, such as estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) slope maybe attractive to assess the kidney in cardiovascular trials, especially heart failure (HF)., Recent Findings: eGFR slope can generate informative results in a shorter follow-up period, has decreased risk of type-2 error, and is less sensitive to eGFR shifts compared with other surrogate kidney endpoints (eGFR decline≥40% or doubling creatinine). However, eGFR slope has its limitations with acute effects, heterogeneity in slope calculation/reporting, and deviations from linearity. eGFR slope is a kidney endpoint which may be well-suited for HF trials. Cross-collaborated guideline recommendations are needed to optimize the use of eGFR slope as a kidney endpoint in patients with HF., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: U.S. nationwide estimates of the proportion of patients newly diagnosed with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) eligible for quadruple medical therapy, and the associated benefits of rapid implementation, are not well characterized., Objectives: This study sought to characterize the degree to which patients newly diagnosed with HFrEF are eligible for quadruple medical therapy, and the projected benefits of in-hospital initiation., Methods: Among patients hospitalized for newly diagnosed HFrEF in the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry from 2016 to 2023, eligibility criteria based on regulatory labeling, guidelines, and expert consensus documents were applied for angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, beta-blocker, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor therapies. Of those eligible, the projected effect of quadruple therapy on 12-month mortality was modeled using treatment effects from pivotal clinical trials utilized by the AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure, and compared with observed outcomes among patients treated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker and beta-blockers., Results: Of 33,036 patients newly diagnosed with HFrEF, 27,158 (82%) were eligible for quadruple therapy, and 30,613 (93%) were eligible for ≥3 components. From 2021 to 2023, of patients eligible for quadruple therapy, 15.3% were prescribed quadruple therapy and 41.5% were prescribed triple therapy. Among Medicare beneficiaries eligible for quadruple therapy, 12-month incidence of mortality was 24.7% and HF hospitalization was 22.2%. Applying the relative risk reductions in clinical trials, complete implementation of quadruple therapy by time of discharge was projected to yield absolute risk reductions in 12-month mortality of 10.4% (number needed to treat = 10) compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker and beta-blocker, and 24.8% (number needed to treat = 4) compared with no GDMT., Conclusions: In this nationwide U.S. cohort of patients hospitalized for newly diagnosed HFrEF, >4 of 5 patients were projected as eligible for quadruple therapy at discharge; yet, <1 in 6 were prescribed it. If clinical trial benefits can be fully realized, in-hospital initiation of quadruple medical therapy for newly diagnosed HFrEF would yield large absolute reductions in mortality., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The Get With The Guidelines–Heart Failure (GWTG-HF) program is provided by the American Heart Association and sponsored, in part, by Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Eli Lilly Diabetes Alliance, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, AstraZeneca, and Bayer. Dr Greene has received research support from the Duke University Department of Medicine Chair’s Research Award, American Heart Association, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi; has served on advisory boards or as consultant for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Corteria Pharmaceuticals, CSL Vifor, Cytokinetics, Eli Lilly, Lexicon, Merck, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi, scPharmaceuticals, Tricog Health, and Urovant Pharmaceuticals; and has received speaker fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Lexicon, and Roche Diagnostics. Dr Fonarow has consulted for Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Eli Lilly, Johnson and Johnson, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, and Pfizer. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose of Review: Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) are gaining importance due to their effects on cardiovascular parameters. This review discusses the findings of dedicated cardiovascular outcome trials of GLP-1RAs and summarizes their utility to help clinicians understand their role in cardiovascular disease., Recent Findings: Patients with diabetes mellitus are at an increased risk of cardiovascular disease. Cardiovascular outcome trials have shown GLP-1RAs decrease the primary composite outcome of the first occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients with diabetes. Additionally, select GLP-1RAs have also shown improved cardiovascular outcomes in patients without diabetes who are either overweight (BMI ≥ 27), or obese (BMI ≥ 30). There have also been encouraging results in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. There is increasing evidence showing GLP-1RAs are beneficial across the cardiometabolic spectrum of disease. Implementation of these therapeutics into clinical practice is important to improve cardiovascular risk., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Heart failure (HF) is a leading cause of hospitalization in older adults. Patients are at high risk of readmission and death following hospitalization for HF. There is no standard approach of health care delivery during the hospital-to-home transition period, leaving missed opportunities in care optimization. In this review, we discuss contemporary randomized clinical trials that tested decongestion strategies, disease-modifying therapies, and health care services that inform the care of patients with worsening HF. We provide evidence-informed recommendations for optimizing therapies and improving outcomes during and following hospitalization for HF. These include adequate decongestion with loop diuretics and select sequential nephron blockade strategies based on early evaluation of diuretic response; initiation of disease-modifying pharmacotherapies prior to hospital discharge with close follow-up and optimization after discharge; cardiac rehabilitation; and transitional or palliative care referral post-hospitalization. Evidence-based implementation strategies to facilitate broad uptake include digital health tools and algorithm-driven optimization of pharmacotherapies., Competing Interests: Dr Sauer has received research funding from 10.13039/100000046Abbott, 10.13039/100008497Boston Scientific, and 10.13039/100006520Edwards Lifesciences; and speaking and advising compensation from Acorai, Story Health, Boston Scientific, General Prognostics, Abbott, Impulse Dynamics, Bayer, and Biotronik. Dr Greene has received research support from the 10.13039/100005572Duke University Department of Medicine Chair’s Research Award, American Heart Association (#929502), Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi; has served on advisory boards or as consultant for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim/Lilly, Bristol Myers Squibb, Corteria, CSL Vifor, Cytokinetics, Lexicon, Roche Diagnostics, Merck, PharmaIN, Sanofi, scPharmaceuticals, Tricog Health, and Urovant Pharmaceuticals; and has received speaker fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Lexicon, and Roche Diagnostics. Dr Albert received research funding from 10.13039/100004325AstraZeneca and 10.13039/100008272Novartis within the last 2 years and is a consultant to American Regent, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Merck, and Roche. Dr Spall is funded by the 10.13039/501100000024Canadian Institutes of Health Research and has research support from Medtronic and educational grants from 10.13039/100008272Novartis and 10.13039/100001003Boehringer Ingelheim. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Background: Elevated interleukin (IL)-6 levels have been linked to adverse outcomes in patients with and without baseline cardiovascular disease (CVD)., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to examine the association between circulating IL-6 levels and CVD events without baseline CVD across racial and ethnic groups., Methods: We conducted an observational analysis utilizing the MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis), a multicenter, prospective community-based study of CVD at baseline from four racial and ethnic groups. IL-6 levels were measured at the time of enrollment (visit 1) and were divided into 3 terciles. Patient baseline characteristics and outcomes, including all-cause mortality, CV mortality, heart failure, and non-CV mortality, were included. Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to assess associations between IL-6 levels and study outcomes with IL-6 tercile 1 as reference., Results: Of 6,622 individuals, over half were women (53%) with a median age of 62 (IQR: 53-70) years. Racial and ethnic composition was non-Hispanic White (39%) followed by African American (27%), Hispanic (22%), and Chinese American (12%). Compared to tercile 1, participants with IL-6 tercile 3 had a higher adjusted risk of and all-cause mortality (HR: 1.98 [95% CI: 1.67-2.36]), CV mortality (HR: 1.55 [95% CI: 1.05-2.30]), non-CV mortality (HR: 2.05 [95% CI: 1.65-2.56]), and heart failure (HR: 1.48 [95% CI: 0.99-2.19]). When tested as a continuous variable, higher levels of IL-6 were associated with an increased risk of all individual outcomes. Compared to non-Hispanic White participants, the unadjusted and adjusted risk of all outcomes across all races and ethnicities was similar across all IL-6 terciles., Conclusions: High levels of circulating IL-6 are associated with worse CV outcomes and increased all-cause mortality consistently across all racial and ethnic groups., Competing Interests: Dr Rymer has received research grant support from 10.13039/100007560Chiesi Pharmaceuticals, 10.13039/501100016198Idorsia Pharmaceuticals, and the 10.13039/100000968American Heart Association; and personal fees from Chiesi Pharmaceuticals outside the submitted work. Dr Borlaug has received research support from the 10.13039/100000002National Institutes of Health (R01 HL128526, R01 HL162828, and U01 HL160226) and the 10.13039/100000005United States Department of Defense (W81XWH2210245); has received research grant funding from 10.13039/100004325AstraZeneca, Axon, 10.13039/100004330GlaxoSmithKline, 10.13039/100004374Medtronic, Mesoblast, 10.13039/100015758Novo Nordisk, and 10.13039/100016949Tenax Therapeutics; has served as a consultant for Actelion, Amgen, Aria, BD, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Edwards Lifesciences, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, and Novo Nordisk; and is a named inventor (US Patent no. 10307179) for the tools and approach for a minimally invasive pericardial modification procedure to treat heart failure. Dr Cikes has received research grants and clinical study contracts to institution from 10.13039/100004336Novartis, 10.13039/100000046Abbott, 10.13039/100004319Pfizer, and CorVia; and personal fees and nonfinancial support from 10.13039/100004319Pfizer, 10.13039/100004326Bayer, 10.13039/100001003Boehringer Ingelheim, 10.13039/100004325AstraZeneca, 10.13039/100004336Novartis, Swixx, 10.13039/100020297Abiomed, 10.13039/100015362Amicus, 10.13039/100002429Amgen, 10.13039/100015758Novo Nordisk, 10.13039/100004374Medtronic, 10.13039/100006775GE Healthcare, 10.13039/100006259Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, and Krka Pharma. Dr Docherty reports that his employer, the University of Glasgow, has been remunerated by AstraZeneca for work relating to clinical trials; he has received speaker honoraria from AstraZeneca, Pharmacosmos, and Radcliffe Cardiology; has served on an advisory board for Us2.ai and Bayer AG; has served on a clinical end point committee for Bayer AG; and has received grant support from 10.13039/100001003Boehringer Ingelheim, 10.13039/100016545Roche Diagnostics, and 10.13039/100004325AstraZeneca (paid to his institution). Dr Pandey is supported by the Texas Health Resources Clinical Scholarship, the 10.13039/100005564Gilead Sciences Research Scholars Program, the 10.13039/100000049National Institute on Aging GEMSSTAR Grant (1R03AG067960-01) and Applied Therapeutics; has served on the advisory board for Roche Diagnostics; and has received nonfinancial support from 10.13039/100004319Pfizer and 10.13039/100004334Merck. Dr Kahles has served as a consultant to Bayer and Novo Nordisk and has served as a speaker for Novo Nordisk. Dr Lam is supported by a Clinician Scientist Award from the 10.13039/501100001349National Medical Research Council of Singapore; has received research support from 10.13039/100004326Bayer and 10.13039/100016545Roche Diagnostics; has served as consultant or on the Advisory Board, Steering Committee, or Executive Committee for Actelion, Alleviant Medical, Allysta Pharma, Amgen, AnaCardio AB, Applied Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Cytokinetics, Darma Inc, EchoNous Inc, Eli Lilly, Impulse Dynamics, Ionis Pharmaceutical, Janssen Research & Development LLC, Medscape/WebMD Global LLC, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Prosciento Inc, Radcliffe Group Ltd, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi, Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics and Us2.ai; and has served as cofounder and non–executive director of Us2.ai. The employer of AAV has received consultancy fees and research support from AnaCardio, 10.13039/100004325AstraZeneca, 10.13039/100002491BMS, 10.13039/100004326Bayer, 10.13039/100001003Boehringer Ingelheim, Corteria, EliLilly, 10.13039/100004334Merck, 10.13039/100019533Moderna, 10.13039/100004336Novartis, 10.13039/100015758Novo Nordisk, 10.13039/100016545Roche Diagnostics. Dr Hernandez has received grants from Intellia Therapeutics; compensation from Prolaio for consultant services; grants from 10.13039/100004326Bayer; compensation from Eli Lilly and Company for consultant services; compensation from Novo Nordisk for consultant services; employment by Duke Clinical Research Institute; compensation from Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Inc, for data and safety monitoring services; grants from 10.13039/100001003Boehringer Ingelheim; compensation from CSL Behring for consultant services; compensation from Boehringer Ingelheim for consultant services; compensation from Amgen for consultant services; compensation from Novartis for consultant services; grants from 10.13039/100018044Verily; compensation from Merck for consultant services; grants from 10.13039/100016473American Regent; compensation from AstraZeneca for consultant services; compensation from Eidos for data and safety monitoring services; compensation from Cytokinetics for consultant services; grants from 10.13039/100015758Novo Nordisk Inc, 10.13039/100004336Novartis, AstraZeneca, and 10.13039/100001238Merck; compensation from Bayer for consultant services; and compensation from Boston Scientific Corporation and Intellia Therapeutics for consultant services. Dr Lincoff has received Esperion research funding for this trial; grants from Eli Lilly, 10.13039/100006483AbbVie, 10.13039/100008322CSL, 10.13039/100004325AstraZeneca, and 10.13039/100004336Novartis; and personal fees from Novo Nordisk, Glaxo, Akebia, Endologix, Fibrogen, Provention, and Becton Dickson. Dr Petrie has received grants from 10.13039/100001003Boehringer Ingelheim, 10.13039/100004337Roche, SQ Innovations, Astra Zeneca, 10.13039/100004336Novartis, 10.13039/100015758Novo Nordisk, 10.13039/100004374Medtronic, 10.13039/100008497Boston Scientific, Horizon, Pharmacosmos; consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Novo Nordisk, Abbvie, Bayer, Takeda, Corvia, Cardiorentis, Pharmacosmos, Siemens, and Vifor; lecture fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Astra Zeneca, Novo Nordisk, Abbvie, Bayer, Takeda, Corvia, Cardiorentis, Pharmacosmos, Siemens, and Vifor; board participation for Teikoku and Astra Zeneca; and is the Director of Global Clinical Trial Partners Ltd. Dr Ridker has received institutional research grant support from the 10.13039/100000050NHLBI, 10.13039/100004336Novartis, and 10.13039/100015758Novo Nordisk (to evaluate the role of anti-inflammatory agents including methotrexate, interleukin-1 inhibitors, and interleukin-6 inhibitors) as well as Kowa, Amarin, Pfizer, and Esperion; has served as a consultant to Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Janssen, Flame, Agepha, Ardelyx, Zomagen, Horizon Therapeutics, CSL Behring, and Cardio Therapeutics (entities developing anti-inflammatory therapies including as examples colchicine, interleukin-1 inhibitors, interleukin-6 inhibitors, and agents that potentially target or interact with the NLRP3 inflammasome); has additionally served as a consultant to AstraZeneca, Civi Biopharm, Glaxo Smith Kline, SOCAR, Health Outlook, Montai Health, Eli Lilly, New Amsterdam, Boehringer-Ingelheim, RTI, and Cytokinetics; has minority shareholder equity positions in Uppton, Bitteroot Bio, and Angiowave; and has received compensation for service on the Peter Munk Advisory Board (University of Toronto), the Leducq Foundation, Paris FR, and the Baim Institute (Boston, MA). Dr Fudim was supported by the 10.13039/100000968American Heart Association (20IPA35310955), Doris Duke, 10.13039/100004326Bayer, Bodyport and Verily; has received consulting fees from Abbott, Ajax, Alio Health, Alleviant, Audicor, Axon Therapies, Bayer, BodyGuide, Bodyport, Boston Scientific, Broadview, Cadence, Cardionomics, Coridea, CVRx, Daxor, Deerfield Catalyst, Edwards Lifesciences, EKO, Feldschuh Foundation, FIRE1, Gradient, Hatteras, Impulse Dynamics, InterShunt, Medtronic, NI Medical, NXT Biomedical, Pharmacosmos, PreHealth, ReCor, Shifamed, Splendo, Summacor, SyMap, Verily, Vironix, VisCardia and Zoll outside the submitted work. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Aim: The RESHAPE-HF2 trial is designed to assess the efficacy and safety of the MitraClip device system for the treatment of clinically important functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) in patients with heart failure (HF). This report describes the baseline characteristics of patients enrolled in the RESHAPE-HF2 trial compared to those enrolled in the COAPT and MITRA-FR trials., Methods and Results: The RESHAPE-HF2 study is an investigator-initiated, prospective, randomized, multicentre trial including patients with symptomatic HF, a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) between 20% and 50% with moderate-to-severe or severe FMR, for whom isolated mitral valve surgery was not recommended. Patients were randomized 1:1 to a strategy of delivering or withholding MitraClip. Of 506 patients randomized, the mean age of the patients was 70 ± 10 years, and 99 of them (20%) were women. The median EuroSCORE II was 5.3 (2.8-9.0) and median plasma N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) was 2745 (1407-5385) pg/ml. Most patients were prescribed beta-blockers (96%), diuretics (96%), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (82%) and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (82%). The use of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors was rare (7%). Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices had been previously implanted in 29% of patients. Mean LVEF, left ventricular end-diastolic volume and effective regurgitant orifice area (EROA) were 31 ± 8%, 211 ± 76 ml and 0.25 ± 0.08 cm 2 , respectively, whereas 44% of patients had mitral regurgitation severity of grade 4+. Compared to patients enrolled in COAPT and MITRA-FR, those enrolled in RESHAPE-HF2 were less likely to have mitral regurgitation grade 4+ and, on average, HAD lower EROA, and plasma NT-proBNP and higher estimated glomerular filtration rate, but otherwise had similar age, comorbidities, CRT therapy and LVEF., Conclusion: Patients enrolled in RESHAPE-HF2 represent a third distinct population where MitraClip was tested in, that is one mainly comprising of patients with moderate-to-severe FMR instead of only severe FMR, as enrolled in the COAPT and MITRA-FR trials. The results of RESHAPE-HF2 will provide crucial insights regarding broader application of the transcatheter edge-to-edge repair procedure in clinical practice., (© 2024 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have been studied in patients with heart failure, type 2 diabetes, chronic kidney disease, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, and acute myocardial infarction. Individual trials were powered to study composite outcomes in one disease state. We aimed to evaluate the treatment effect of SGLT2 inhibitors on specific clinical endpoints across multiple demographic and disease subgroups., Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we queried online databases (PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and SCOPUS) up to Feb 10, 2024, for primary and secondary analyses of large trials (n>1000) of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with heart failure, type 2 diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (including acute myocardial infarction). Outcomes studied included composite of first hospitalisation for heart failure or cardiovascular death, first hospitalisation for heart failure, cardiovascular death, total (first and recurrent) hospitalisation for heart failure, and all-cause mortality. Effect sizes were pooled using random-effects models. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42024513836., Findings: We included 15 trials (N=100 952). Compared with placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors reduced the risk of first hospitalisation for heart failure by 29% in patients with heart failure (hazard ratio [HR] 0·71 [95% CI 0·67-0·77]), 28% in patients with type 2 diabetes (0·72 [0·67-0·77]), 32% in patients with chronic kidney disease (0·68 [0·61-0·77]), and 28% in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (0·72 [0·66-0·79]). SGLT2 inhibitors reduced cardiovascular death by 14% in patients with heart failure (HR 0·86 [95% CI 0·79-0·93]), 15% in patients with type 2 diabetes (0·85 [0·79-0·91]), 11% in patients with chronic kidney disease (0·89 [0·82-0·96]), and 13% in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (0·87 [0·78-0·97]). The benefit of SGLT2 inhibitors on both first hospitalisation for heart failure and cardiovascular death was consistent across the majority of the 51 subgroups studied. Notable exceptions included acute myocardial infarction (22% reduction in first hospitalisation for heart failure; no effect on cardiovascular death) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (26% reduction in first hospitalisation for heart failure; no effect on cardiovascular death)., Interpretation: SGLT2 inhibitors reduced heart failure events and cardiovascular death in patients with heart failure, type 2 diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. These effects were consistent across a wide range of subgroups within these populations. This supports the eligibility of a large population with cardiorenal-metabolic diseases for treatment with SGLT2 inhibitors., Funding: None., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests DLB discloses advisory board membership for Angiowave, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology, High Enroll, Janssen, Level Ex, McKinsey, Medscape Cardiology, Merck, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, and Stasys; board of directors membership for American Heart Association New York City, Angiowave (stock options), BristolMyersSquibb (stock), DRS.LINQ (stock options), and High Enroll (stock); consultancy fees for Broadview Ventures, GSK, Hims, SFJ, and Youngene; data monitoring committee membership for Acesion Pharma, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute, for the PORTICO trial, funded by St Jude Medical, now Abbott), Boston Scientific (Chair, PEITHO trial), Cleveland Clinic, Contego Medical (Chair, PERFORMANCE 2), Duke Clinical Research Institute, Mayo Clinic, Mount Sinai School of Medicine (for the ENVISAGE trial, funded by Daiichi Sankyo; for the ABILITY-DM trial, funded by Concept Medical; for ALLAY-HF, funded by Alleviant Medical), Novartis, Population Health Research Institute, and Rutgers University (for the National Institutes of Health-funded MINT Trial); honoraria from American College of Cardiology (Senior Associate Editor, Clinical Trials and News, ACC.org; Chair, ACC Accreditation Oversight Committee), Arnold and Porter law firm (work related to Sanofi/BristolMyersSquibb clopidogrel litigation), Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute; RE-DUAL PCI clinical trial steering committee funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; AEGIS-II executive committee funded by CSL Behring), Belvoir Publications (Editor in Chief, Harvard Heart Letter), Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group (clinical trial steering committees), CSL Behring (AHA lecture), Cowen and Company, Duke Clinical Research Institute (clinical trial steering committees, including for the PRONOUNCE trial, funded by Ferring Pharmaceuticals), HMP Global (Editor in Chief, Journal of Invasive Cardiology), Journal of the American College of Cardiology (Guest Editor; Associate Editor), K2P (Co-Chair, interdisciplinary curriculum), Level Ex, Medtelligence/ReachMD (CME steering committees), MJH Life Sciences, Oakstone CME (Course Director, Comprehensive Review of Interventional Cardiology), Piper Sandler, Population Health Research Institute (for the COMPASS operations committee, publications committee, steering committee, and USA national co-leader, funded by Bayer), WebMD (CME steering committees), and Wiley (steering committee); other fees from Clinical Cardiology (Deputy Editor); a patent from Sotagliflozin (named on a patent for sotagliflozin assigned to Brigham and Women's Hospital who assigned to Lexicon; neither I nor Brigham and Women's Hospital receive any income from this patent); research funding from Abbott, Acesion Pharma, Afimmune, Aker Biomarine, Alnylam, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beren, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, BristolMyersSquibb, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Chiesi, CinCor, Cleerly, CSL Behring, Eisai, Ethicon, Faraday Pharmaceuticals, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Forest Laboratories, Fractyl, Garmin, HLS Therapeutics, Idorsia, Ironwood, Ischemix, Janssen, Javelin, Lexicon, Lilly, Medtronic, Merck, Moderna, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Otsuka, Owkin, Pfizer, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Recardio, Regeneron, Reid Hoffman Foundation, Roche, Sanofi, Stasys, Synaptic, The Medicines Company, Youngene, 89Bio; Royalties: Elsevier (Editor, Braunwald's Heart Disease); is a site co-investigator for Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CSI, Endotronix, St Jude Medical (now Abbott), Philips, SpectraWAVE, Svelte, and Vascular Solutions; is a trustee for American College of Cardiology; and unfunded research from FlowCo. SDA declares grants and personal fees from Vifor and Abbott Vascular, and personal fees for consultancies, trial committee work and/or lectures from Actimed, Amgen, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Brahms, Cardiac Dimensions, Cardior, Cordio, CVRx, Cytokinetics, Edwards, Farraday Pharmaceuticals, GSK, HeartKinetics, Impulse Dynamics, Occlutech, Pfizer, Regeneron, Repairon, Scirent, Sensible Medical, Servier, Vectorious, and V-Wave. He is a named co-inventor of two patent applications regarding MR-proANP (DE 102007010834 & DE 102007022367), but he does not benefit personally from the related issued patents. AYYC declares Advisory board membership for, and consulting fees, and speaking fees from, Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Dexcom, Eli Lilly, GSK, HLS, Therapeutics, Insulet, Janssen, Medtronic, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, and Sanofi. AFH reports being a consultant for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, BristolMyersSquibb, Cytokinetics, Eidos, GSK, Intellia, Intercept, Myokardia, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Prolaio, and TikkunLev, and research funding from American Regent, Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Verily. WSJ reports research grants from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, Novartis, PCORI, and National Institutes of Health. MSK discloses fees from Bayer. MCP discloses research funding from Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, SQ Innovations, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Pharmacosmos; and consultancy and trial committee memberships for Akero, Applied Therapeutics, Amgen, AnaCardio, Biosensors, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Novo Nordisk, Abbvie, Bayer, Horizon Therapeutics, Takeda, Cardiorentis, Pharmacosmos, Siemens, Eli Lilly, Vifor, New Amsterdam, Moderna, Teikoku, LIB Therapeutics, and 3R Lifesciences. JAU discloses advisory board membership for Boehringer Ingelheim, Novavax, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi; speaker honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Eli Lilly; and research funding to his institution from Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Novartis. TF declares personal fees for statistical consultancies (including data monitoring committees) from Actimed, Aslan, Bayer, BiosenseWebster, BMS, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, Enanta, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, IQVIA, Immunic, KyowaKirin, LivaNova, Minoryx, Novartis, PINK! gegen Brustkrebs, PPD, RECARDIO, Recordati, Relaxera, Roche, Servier, Viatris, Vifor, and VICO Therapeutics, all outside of the submitted work. JB serves as a consultant to Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, Applied Therapeutic, AskBio, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, BristolMyersSquibb, Cardiac Dimension, Cardiocell, Cardior, CSL Bearing, CVRx, Cytokinetics, Daxor, Edwards, Element Science, Faraday, Foundry, G3P, Innolife, Impulse Dynamics, Imbria, Inventiva, Ionis, Lexicon, Eli Lilly, LivaNova, Janssen, Medtronics, Merck, Occlutech, Owkin, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Pharmain, Prolaio, Regeneron, Renibus, Roche, Salamandra, Sanofi, SC Pharma, Secretome, Sequana, SQ Innovation, Tenex, Tricog, Ultromics, Vifor, and Zoll. MSU and IH declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

Due to rapid urbanization, there have been continuous environmental threats from different pollutants, especially from microplastics. Plastic products rapidly proliferate significantly contributing to the occurrence of micro-plastics, which poses a significant environmental risk. These microplastics originated from diverse sources and are characterized by their persistent and widespread occurrence; human health and the entire ecosystem are adversely affected by them. The removal of microplastics not only requires innovative technologies but also efficient materials capable of effectively eliminating them from our environment. The progress made so far has highlighted the advantages of utilizing the dimensional and structural properties of nanomaterials to increase the effectiveness of existing methods for micro-plastic treatment, aiming for a more sustainable approach to their removal. In the current review, we demonstrate a thorough overview of the sources, occurrences, and potential harmful effects of microplastics, followed by a further discussion of promising technologies used for their removal. An in-depth examination of both advantages and a few limitations of all these given technologies, including physical, chemical, and biological approaches, has been discussed. Additionally, the review explores the use of nanomaterials as an effective means to overcome obstacles and improve the efficiency of microplastic elimination methods. n conclusion, this review addresses, current challenges in this field and outlines the future perspectives for further research in this domain., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Atrial fibrillation/flutter (AF) is the most common dysrhythmia in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). Unexplained left ventricular hypertrophy and left ventricular outflow tract obstruction are integral components of HCM pathology which can cause increased left atrial pressure and atrial myopathy contributing to the substrate for AF. We aimed to determine the impact of AF on hospital readmissions in patients with HCM. We conducted a retrospective analysis using the 2015 to 2019 Nationwide Readmission Database to analyze the effect of AF on 30-day readmission and causes of 30-day readmission in patients with HCM. We also determined the hospital, patient, and procedure-specific independent predictors of readmission in patients with HCM and AF. Of 191,235 index HCM hospitalizations, 81,390 (42.6%) had a secondary diagnosis of AF. A total of 16.9% of patients with HCM and AF were readmitted within 30 days as compared with 14% of HCM patients without AF. The presence of AF was independently associated with a higher risk of all-cause 30-day readmission (hazard ratio [HR] 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.17 to 1.25, p <0.001). The foremost etiology of 30-day readmission in HCM patients with AF was hypertensive heart and chronic kidney disease with heart failure, whereas the foremost etiology of 30-day readmission in HCM patients without AF was sepsis. Interventions aimed toward AF management (electrical cardioversion: adjusted HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.01. p = 0.074, AF ablation: HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.13, p = 0.409, Watchman procedure: HR 1.50, 95% CI 0.16 to 14.6, p = 0.725) during index admission did not significantly impact the 30-day readmission in HCM patients with AF. Myectomy during index hospitalization (adjusted HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.86, p = 0.010) was most strongly associated with a lower risk of 30-day readmission in HCM patients with AF. In conclusion, in patients hospitalized for HCM, presence of AF was associated with excess risk of 30-day all-cause readmission. Interventions aimed toward HCM management, that is, myectomy rather than interventions aimed toward AF management predicted lower readmission rate in this patient population., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Dr. Fudim has received support from National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute grant K23HL151744, American Heart Association grant 20IPA35310955, the Mario Family Award, the Duke Chair's Award, the Translating Duke Health Award, Bayer, and BTG Specialty Pharmaceuticals; and has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Axon Therapies, CVRx, Daxor, Edwards Lifesciences, Galvani, and NXT Biomedical. Dr. Krasuski is serving as a consultant to Actelion/Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Bayer Pharmaceuticals, Gore Medical, and Medtronic. He receives research funding from the Adult Congenital Heart Association and Actelion. Dr. Khan has taken fees from Bayer. The remaining authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Frailty affects half of all patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and carries a ∼2-fold increased risk of mortality. The relationship between frailty and HFrEF is bidirectional, with one condition exacerbating the other. Paradoxical to their higher clinical risk, frail patients with HFrEF are more often under-treated due to concerns over medication-related adverse clinical events. However, current evidence suggests consistent safety of HF medical therapies among older frail patients with HFrEF. A multidisciplinary effort is necessary for the appropriate management of these high-risk patients which focuses on the optimization of known beneficial therapies with a goal-directed effort toward improving quality of life., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Heart failure (HF) is a heterogeneous clinical syndrome marked by substantial morbidity and mortality. The natural history of HF is well established; however, epidemiological data are continually evolving owing to demographic shifts, advances in treatment and variations in access to health care. Although the incidence of HF has stabilized or declined in high-income countries over the past decade, its prevalence continues to increase, driven by an ageing population, an increase in risk factors, the effectiveness of novel therapies and improved survival. This rise in prevalence is increasingly noted among younger adults and is accompanied by a shift towards HF with preserved ejection fraction. However, disparities exist in our epidemiological understanding of HF burden and progression in low-income and middle-income countries owing to the lack of comprehensive data in these regions. Therefore, the current epidemiological landscape of HF highlights the need for periodic surveillance and resource allocation tailored to geographically vulnerable areas. In this Review, we highlight global trends in the burden of HF, focusing on the variations across the spectrum of left ventricular ejection fraction. We also discuss evolving population-based estimates of HF incidence and prevalence, the risk factors for and aetiologies of this disease, and outcomes in different geographical regions and populations., (© 2024. Springer Nature Limited.)

Background: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) significantly worsens heart failure (HF) prognosis., Objectives: This study sought to investigate the impact of T2DM on outcomes in patients enrolled in VICTORIA and assess the efficacy of vericiguat in patients with and without T2DM., Methods: Patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction were randomized to receive vericiguat or placebo in addition to standard therapy. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death or first heart failure hospitalization (HFH). A Cox proportional hazards model was used to calculate HRs and 95% CIs to assess if the effect of vericiguat differed by history of T2DM., Results: Of 5,050 patients enrolled, 3,683 (72.9%) had glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA 1c ) measured at baseline. Of these, 2,270 (61.6%) had T2DM, 741 (20.1%) had pre-T2DM, 449 (12.2%) did not have T2DM, and 178 (4.8%) had undiagnosed T2DM. The risks of the primary outcome, HFH, and all-cause and cardiovascular mortality were high across all categories. The efficacy of vericiguat on the primary outcome did not differ in patients stratified by T2DM by history (HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.81-1.04), T2DM measured by HbA 1c (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.49-1.20), and pre-T2DM measured by HbA 1c (HR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.68-1.13) and in those with normoglycemia (HR: 1.02: 95% CI: 0.75-1.39; P for interaction = 0.752). No significant differences were observed in subgroups with respect to the efficacy of vericiguat on HFH and all-cause or cardiovascular death., Conclusions: In this post hoc analysis of VICTORIA, vericiguat compared with placebo significantly reduced the risk of cardiovascular death or HFH in patients with worsening HF with reduced ejection fraction regardless of T2DM status. (A Study of Vericiguat in Participants With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction [HFrEF] [Mk-1242-001] [VICTORIA]; NCT02861534)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures VICTORIA was funded by Bayer and Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Inc, Rahway, New Jersey, USA. Dr Khan has served as an Advisory Board Member for Bayer. Dr Butler has received consulting fees from Abbott, Adrenomed, Amgen, Array, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CVRx, G3 Pharmaceutical, Impulse Dynamics, Innolife, Janssen, LivaNova, Luitpold, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Roche, and Vifor. Dr Roessig has been an employee of Bayer AG. Dr Blaustein has been an employee of Merck & Co, Inc. Dr Lam has received research grants from Bayer, National Medical Research Council of Singapore, Boston Scientific, Roche Diagnostic, Medtronic, Vifor Pharma, and AstraZeneca; has received consulting fees from Merck, Bayer, Boston Scientific, Roche Diagnostic, Vifor Pharma, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Amgen, Janssen Research & Development LLC, Menarini, Boehringer Ingelheim, Abbott Diagnostics, Corvia, Stealth BioTherapeutics, Novo Nordisk, JanaCare, Biofourmis, Darma, Applied Therapeutics, MyoKardia, Cytokinetics, WebMD Global LLC, Radcliffe Group Ltd, and Corpus; has patent PCT/SG2016/050217 pending and patent 16/216929 pending; and is cofounder and nonexecutive director of eKo.ai. Dr Voors has received research grants from Boehringer Ingelheim and Roche Diagnostics and consulting fees from Merck, Bayer, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, MyoKardia, Novartis, Servier, and Roche Diagnostics. Dr Ponikowski has received research grants, has received consulting fees, and has served on the Speakers Bureau for Bayer, MSD, Servier, Novartis, Vifor Pharma Ltd, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Respicardia, AstraZeneca, Cibiem, RenalGuardSolution, and Berlin Chemie. Dr Anstrom has received research grants from Merck and the National Institutes of Health. Dr Armstrong has received consulting fees from Merck, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Novo Nordisk and research grants from Merck, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim/Eli Lilly, and CSL Limited. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Obesity is a worsening public health epidemic that remains challenging to manage. Obesity substantially increases the risk of cardiovascular diseases and presents a significant financial burden on the healthcare system. Digital health interventions, specifically telemedicine, may offer an attractive and viable solution for managing obesity. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the need for a safer alternative to in-person visits led to the increased popularity of telemedicine. Multiple studies have tested the efficacy of telemedicine modalities, including digital coaching via videoconferencing sessions, e-health monitoring using wearable devices, and asynchronous forms of communication such as online chatrooms with counselors. In this review, we discuss the available evidence for telemedicine interventions in managing obesity, review current challenges and barriers to using telemedicine, and outline future directions to optimize the management of patients with obesity using telemedicine., (© 2024 World Obesity Federation.)

Background: Patterns and disparities in guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) uptake for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) across rural vs urban regions are not well described., Objectives: This study aims to evaluate patterns, prognostic implications, and rural-urban differences in GDMT use among Medicare beneficiaries following new-onset HFrEF., Methods: Patients with a diagnosis of new-onset HFrEF in a 5% Medicare sample with available data for Part D medication use were identified from January 2015 through December 2020. The primary exposure was residence in rural vs urban zip codes. Optimal triple GDMT was defined as ≥50% of the target daily dose of beta-blockers, ≥50% of the target daily dose of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blocker or any dose of sacubitril/valsartan, and any dose of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist. The association between the achievement of optimal GDMT over time following new-onset HFrEF diagnosis and risk of all-cause mortality and subsequent HF hospitalization was also evaluated using adjusted Cox models. The association between living in rural vs urban location and time to optimal GDMT achievement over a 12-month follow-up was assessed using cumulative incidence curves and adjusted Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard models., Results: A total of 41,296 patients (age: 76.7 years; 15.0% Black; 27.6% rural) were included. Optimal GDMT use over the 12-month follow-up was low, with 22.5% initiated on any dose of triple GDMT and 9.1% on optimal GDMT doses. Optimal GDMT on follow-up was significantly associated with a lower risk of death (HR: 0.89 [95% CI: 0.85-0.94]; P < 0.001) and subsequent HF hospitalization (HR: 0.93 [95% CI: 0.87-0.98]; P = 0.02). Optimal GDMT use at 12 months was significantly lower among patients living in rural (vs urban) areas (8.4% vs 9.3%; P = 0.02). In adjusted analysis, living in rural (vs urban) locations was associated with a significantly lower probability of achieving optimal GDMT (HR: 0.92 [95% CI: 0.86-0.98]; P = 0.01 Differences in optimal GDMT use following HFrEF diagnosis accounted for 16% of excess mortality risk among patients living in rural (vs urban) areas., Conclusions: Use of optimal GDMT following new-onset HFrEF diagnosis is low, with substantially lower use noted among patients living in rural vs urban locations. Suboptimal GDMT use following new-onset HFrEF was associated with an increased risk of mortality and subsequent HF hospitalization., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This study is supported by a National Institute of Minority Health and Disparities R01 grant (R01MD017529) and an American Heart Association grant (23DSG1154425) to Dr Pandey. Dr Keshvani has received grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (5T32HL125247-08) and consulting fees from Heart Test Laboratories and Tricog Health. Dr Khan has received consulting fees from Bayer. Dr Hsich is supported by grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL164405). Dr Fonarow has done consulting for Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Cytokinetics, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, and Pfizer. Dr Pandey has received research funding from the Texas Health Resources Clinical Scholarship, Gilead Sciences Research Scholar Program, Applied Therapeutics (investigator-initiated grant), and National Institute of Aging (GEMSSTAR grant 1R03AG067960-01); serves on the Advisory Board of Roche Diagnostics; has received grants from the National Institute on Aging (1R03AG067960-01), the National Institute on Minority Health and Disparities (R01MD017529), Applied Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences Research, and Myovista Research; has received consultant fees from Roche Diagnostics, Tricog Health, Pieces Technologies, Rivus, Palomarin Inc, Emmi Solutions; has received nonfinancial support from Pfizer and Merck; and has received Advisory Board fees from Lilly Inc, Cytokinetics, Alleviant Medical, Axon Therapies, and Bayer. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Heart failure (HF) affects more than 60 million individuals globally. Empagliflozin is currently approved for type 2 diabetes and chronic HF. Clinical trials have demonstrated that empagliflozin reduces the composite end point of hospitalizations for HF and mortality and improves the quality of life irrespective of left ventricular ejection fraction. Empagliflozin is a once-daily medication with minimal drug-drug interactions and does not require titration. Empagliflozin causes mild weight loss and does not significantly reduce blood pressure. Empagliflozin acts as an enabler for other HF drugs by reducing the risk of hyperkalemia. Empagliflozin is also beneficial for chronic kidney disease which exists commonly with HF. This review outlines the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, safety, and efficacy of empagliflozin in HF across various sub-groups and settings.

Environmental degradation and energy constraint are important risks to long-term sustainability in the modern world. Water splitting is a vital approach for environmentally friendly and sustainable energy storage, providing a clean way to produce hydrogen without pollutants. Preparing a catalyst that is active, bifunctional, and durable for water splitting is a difficult task. We addressed the difficulty by creating a bifunctional heterogeneous catalyst, MoS 2 /rGO, with an ideal weight percentage of 5 wt% by a hydrothermal process. The optimized sample showed exceptional electrocatalytic activity, requiring an overpotential of 242 mV and 120 mV to achieve a current density of 10 mA cm -2 in the Hydrogen Evolution Reaction (HER) and Oxygen Evolution Reaction (OER). Furthermore, our synthesized catalyst was validated for its exceptional water-splitting capacity, with the optimized sample showing low Tafel slope values of 59 mV dec -1 for HER and 171 mV dec -1 for OER. The significant OER and HER activity seen in the 5 wt% MoS 2 /rGO hybrid, compared to other hybrids, is due to the many catalytic active sites that aid in charge and electron transport, as well as the synergistic interaction between MoS 2 and rGO., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal interests that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.)

Background: The prognosis of individuals with and without an established heart failure (HF) diagnosis and similarly elevated N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels is not well-known., Methods and Results: CANVAS (Canagliflozin Cardiovascular Assessment Study) trial participants were stratified according to baseline NT-proBNP quartiles and history of HF at baseline. Adjusted event rates per 1000 patient-years of follow-up for hospitalizations for HF, cardiovascular mortality, and kidney events were assessed, and hazard ratios (HR) were calculated using Cox proportional hazard models. Of the 3507 participants with available NT-proBNP concentrations, 471 (13.4%) had history of HF. The incidence rate per 1000 patient-years for hospitalizations for HF increased across the NT-proBNP quartiles in patients with (0, 2.8, 13.4, and 40.1; P < .001) and without (1.8, 3.1, 6.0, and 19.1; P < .001) HF, with a significantly higher risk in patients with HF compared with those without (with HF, quartile 3 HR 9.28 [interquartile range (IQR) 1.15-75.05]; P = .04; without HF, quartile 4 HR 4.86 [95% CI, 2.08-11.35]; P < .001). A similar higher risk for kidney events was seen in HF patients (with HF, quartile 4 HR 6.94 [95% CI, 2.66-18.08]; P = .001; without HF, quartile 4 HR 4.85 [95% CI, 3.02-7.80]; P = .001). Similar trends were seen for cardiovascular mortality., Conclusions: Among patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular risk, an elevated NT-proBNP level was associated with worse HF and kidney outcomes in general, regardless of history of HF; however, the presence of a clinical diagnosis of HF at baseline was associated with an incrementally higher risk, particularly in higher NT-proBNP quartiles., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Recent evidence suggests that acetazolamide may be beneficial as an adjunctive diuretic therapy in patients with acute decompensated heart failure (HF). We aim to pool all the studies conducted until now and provide updated evidence regarding the role of acetazolamide as adjunctive diuretic in patients with acute decompensated HF., Methods: PubMed/Medline, Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched from inception until July 2023, for randomized and nonrandomized studies evaluating acetazolamide as add-on diuretic in patients with acute decompensated HF. Data about natriuresis, urine output, decongestion, and the clinical signs of congestion were extracted, pooled, and analyzed. Data were pooled using a random effects model. Results were presented as risk ratios (RRs), odds ratios (ORs), or weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). Certainty of evidence was assessed using the grading of recommendation, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach. A P value of < 0.05 was considered significant in all cases., Results: A total of 5 studies (n = 684 patients) were included with a median follow-up time of 3 months. Pooled analysis demonstrated significantly increased natriuresis (MD 55.07, 95% CI 35.1-77.04, P < 0.00001; I 2 = 54%; moderate certainty), urine output (MD 1.04, 95% CI 0.10-1.97, P = 0.03; I 2 = 79%; moderate certainty) and decongestion [odds ratio (OR) 1.62, 95% CI 1.14-2.31, P = 0.007; I 2 = 0%; high certainty] in the acetazolamide group, as compared with controls. There was no significant difference in ascites (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.23-1.36, P = 0.20; I 2 = 0%; low certainty), edema (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.52-2.0, P = 0.95; I 2 = 45%; very low certainty), raised jugular venous pressure (JVP) (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.63-1.17, P = 0.35; I 2 = 0%; low certainty), and pulmonary rales (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.44-1.51, P = 0.52; I 2 = 25%; low certainty) between the two groups., Conclusions: Acetazolamide as an adjunctive diuretic significantly improves global surrogate endpoints for decongestion therapy but not all individual signs and symptoms of volume overload., Systematic Review Registration: This systematic review was prospectively registered on the PROSPERO ( https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ ), registration number CRD498330., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Background: Individuals with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) have a varying response to diuretic therapy. Strategies for the early identification of low diuretic efficiency to inform decongestion therapies are lacking., Objectives: The authors sought to develop and externally validate a machine learning-based phenomapping approach and integer-based diuresis score to identify patients with low diuretic efficiency., Methods: Participants with ADHF from ROSE-AHF, CARRESS-HF, and ATHENA-HF were pooled in the derivation cohort (n = 794). Multivariable finite-mixture model-based phenomapping was performed to identify phenogroups based on diuretic efficiency (urine output over the first 72 hours per total intravenous furosemide equivalent loop diuretic dose). Phenogroups were externally validated in other pooled ADHF trials (DOSE/ESCAPE). An integer-based diuresis score (BAN-ADHF score: blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, natriuretic peptide levels, atrial fibrillation, diastolic blood pressure, hypertension and home diuretic, and heart failure hospitalization) was developed and validated based on predictors of the diuretic efficiency phenogroups to estimate the probability of low diuretic efficiency using the pooled ADHF trials described earlier. The associations of the BAN-ADHF score with markers and symptoms of congestion, length of stay, in-hospital mortality, and global well-being were assessed using adjusted regression models., Results: Clustering identified 3 phenogroups based on diuretic efficiency: phenogroup 1 (n = 370; 47%) had lower diuretic efficiency (median: 13.1 mL/mg; Q1-Q3: 7.7-19.4 mL/mg) than phenogroups 2 (n = 290; 37%) and 3 (n = 134; 17%) (median: 17.8 mL/mg; Q1-Q3: 10.8-26.1 mL/mg and median: 35.3 mL/mg; Q1-Q3: 17.5-49.0 mL/mg, respectively) (P < 0.001). The median urine output difference in response to 80 mg intravenous twice-daily furosemide between the lowest and highest diuretic efficiency group (phenogroup 1 vs 3) was 3,520 mL/d. The BAN-ADHF score demonstrated good model performance for predicting the lowest diuretic efficiency phenogroup membership (C-index: 0.92 in DOSE/ESCAPE validation cohort) that was superior to measures of kidney function (creatinine or blood urea nitrogen), natriuretic peptide levels, or home diuretic dose (DeLong P < 0.001 for all). Net urine output in response to 80 mg intravenous twice-daily furosemide among patients with a low vs high (5 vs 20) BAN-ADHF score was 2,650 vs 660 mL per 24 hours, respectively. Participants with higher BAN-ADHF scores had significantly lower global well-being, higher natriuretic peptide levels on discharge, a longer in-hospital stay, and a higher risk of in-hospital mortality in both derivation and validation cohorts., Conclusions: The authors developed and validated a phenomapping strategy and diuresis score for individuals with ADHF and differential response to diuretic therapy, which was associated with length of stay and mortality., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Pandey has received research support from the National Institute of Health (5R01MD017529, R21HL169708) and grant funding from Applied Therapeutics and Gilead Sciences; has received honoraria outside of the present study as an advisor/consultant for Tricog Health Inc, Lilly USA, Rivus, Cytokinetics, Roche Diagnostics, Axon Therapies, Medtronic, Edward Lifesciences, Science37, Novo Nordisk, Bayer, Merck, Sarfez Pharmaceuticals, and Emmi Solutions; has received nonfinancial support from Pfizer and Merck; and is also a consultant for Palomarin Inc with stock compensation. Dr Segar has received honoraria from Merck. Dr Patel has served as a consultant to Novo Nordisk. Dr Fonarow has done consulting for Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Cytokinetics, Janssen, Medtronic, Merck, and Novartis. Dr Mentz has received research support and honoraria from Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim/Eli Lilly, Boston Scientific, Cytokinetics, Fast BioMedical, Gilead, Innolife, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Relypsa, Respicardia, Roche, Sanofi, Vifor, Windtree Therapeutics, and Zoll. Dr Allen reports grant funding from American Heart Association, National Institutes of Health, and PCORI; and consulting fees from Amgen, Boston Scientific, Cytokinetics, Novartis, and WCG ACI Clinical. Dr Pandey has received grant funding from Applied Therapeutics and Gilead Sciences; has received honoraria outside of the present study as an advisor/consultant for Tricog Health Inc, Lilly USA, Rivus, Cytokinetics, Bayer, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Sarfez Pharmacuticals, Novo Nordisk, and Roche Diagnostics; has received support from Pfizer and Merck; and is a consultant for Palomarin Inc with stock compensation. Dr Khan serves as an advisory board member for Bayer. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Various pharmacotherapies exist for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), but with unclear comparative efficacy. We searched EMBASE, Medline, and Cochrane Library from inception through August 2021 for all randomized clinical trials in HFpEF (EF >40%) that evaluated beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i). Outcomes assessed were cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, and HF hospitalization. A frequentist network meta-analysis was performed with a random-effects model. We included 22 randomized clinical trials (30,673 participants; mean age = 71.7 ± 4.2 years; females = 49.3 ± 7.7%; median follow-up = 24.4 ± 11.1 months). Compared with placebo, there was no statistically significant difference in cardiovascular mortality [beta-blockers; odds ratio (OR) 0.79 (0.46-1.34), MRA; OR 0.90 (0.70-1.14), ACE OR 0.95 (0.59-1.53), ARB; OR 1.02 (0.87-1.19), ARNI; OR 0.97 (0.74-1.26) and SGLT2i; OR 1.00 (0.84-1.18)] or all-cause mortality [beta blockers; OR 0.75 (0.54-1.04), MRA; OR 0.90 (0.75-1.08) ACE; OR 1.05 (0.71-1.54), ARB; OR 1.03 (0.91-1.15), ARNI; OR 0.99 (0.82-1.20) and SGLT2i; OR 1.00 (0.89-1.13)]. The certainty in these estimates was low or very low. There was a significantly reduction in HF hospitalization with the use of SGLT2i [OR 0.71 (0.62-0.82), moderate certainty], ARNI [OR 0.77 (0.63-0.94), low certainty], and MRA [OR 0.81 (0.66-0.98), moderate certainty]; with corresponding P scores of 0.84, 0.68, and 0.58, respectively. In HFpEF, the use of beta-blockers, MRA, ACE/ARB/ARNI, or SGLT2i was not associated with improved cardiovascular or all-cause mortality. SGLT2i, ARNI, and MRA reduced the risk of HF hospitalizations., Competing Interests: Disclosure: Dr S.J.G. has received research support from the Duke University Department of Medicine Chair’s Research Award, American Heart Association, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Merck, Novartis, and Pfizer; has served on advisory boards for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Cytokinetics; and serves as a consultant for Amgen, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, and Vifor. N.R.D. works under contract with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to develop and maintain performance measures used for public reporting and pay for performance programs. He reports research grants and consulting for Amgen, Astra Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, MyoKardia, Novartis, SCPharmaceuticals, and Vifor Pharma. Dr E.D.M. reports Advisory Boards for AstraZeneca, Amarin, Bayer, Esperion, Novartis, and Novo Nordisk. Dr R.J.M. received research support and honoraria from Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim/Eli Lilly, Boston Scientific, Cytokinetics, Fast BioMedical, Gilead, Innolife, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Relypsa, Respicardia, Roche, Sanofi, Vifor, Windtree Therapeutics, and Zoll. All other authors have no conflicts of interests to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Aims: The therapeutic mechanism of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) on left cardiac remodelling in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is not well-established. This study meta-analysed the impact of SGLT2i on left cardiac structure and function in patients with HFrEF., Methods and Results: Online databases were queried up to April 2023 for trials reporting indicators of left cardiac structure and function in patients with HFrEF treated with SGLT2i. Data from studies were pooled using a random-effects model to derive weighted mean differences (WMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Six trials were included (n = 555). Compared with control, SGLT2i significantly improved left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV; WMD: -17.07 ml [-23.84, -10.31]; p < 0.001), LVEDV index (WMD: -5.62 ml/m 2 [-10.28, -0.97]; p = 0.02), left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV; WMD: -15.63 ml [-26.15, -5.12]; p = 0.004), LVESV index (WMD: -6.90 ml/m 2 [-10.68, -3.11]; p = 0.001), left ventricular ejection fraction (WMD: 2.71% [0.70, 4.72]; p = 0.008), and left atrial volume index (WMD: -2.19 ml/m 2 [-4.26, -0.11]; p = 0.04) in patients with HFrEF. SGLT2i use was associated with a non-significant trend towards a reduction in left ventricular mass index (WMD: -6.25 g/m 2 [-12.79, 0.28]; p = 0.06). No significant impact on left ventricular global longitudinal strain was noted (WMD: 0.21% [-0.25, 0.67]; p = 0.38)., Conclusions: Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors improve cardiac structure and function in patients with HFrEF., (© 2024 European Society of Cardiology.)

Achieving optimal cardiovascular health in rural populations can be challenging for several reasons including decreased access to care with limited availability of imaging modalities, specialist physicians, and other important health care team members. Therefore, innovative solutions are needed to optimize health care and address cardiovascular health disparities in rural areas. Mobile examination units can bring imaging technology to underserved or remote communities with limited access to health care services. Mobile examination units can be equipped with a wide array of assessment tools and multiple imaging modalities such as computed tomography scanning and echocardiography. The detailed structural assessment of cardiovascular and lung pathology, as well as the detection of extracardiac pathology afforded by computed tomography imaging combined with the functional and hemodynamic assessments acquired by echocardiography, yield deep phenotyping of heart and lung disease for populations historically underrepresented in epidemiological studies. Moreover, by bringing the mobile examination unit to local communities, innovative approaches are now possible including engagement with local professionals to perform these imaging assessments, thereby augmenting local expertise and experience. However, several challenges exist before mobile examination unit-based examinations can be effectively integrated into the rural health care setting including standardizing acquisition protocols, maintaining consistent image quality, and addressing ethical and privacy considerations. Herein, we discuss the potential importance of cardiac multimodality imaging to improve cardiovascular health in rural regions, outline the emerging experience in this field, highlight important current challenges, and offer solutions based on our experience in the RURAL (Risk Underlying Rural Areas Longitudinal) cohort study., Competing Interests: Disclosures None.

Aims: The relationship between accelerometry data and changes in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-Physical Limitation Score (KCCQ-PLS) or 6 min walk test (6MWT) is not well understood., Methods and Results: VITALITY-HFpEF accelerometry substudy (n = 69) data were assessed at baseline and 24 weeks. Ordinal logistic regression models were used to assess the association between accelerometry activity and deterioration, improved, or unchanged KCCQ-PLS (≥8.33 and ≤ -4.17 points) and 6MWT (≥32 vs. ≤ -32 m). KCCQ-PLS score deteriorated in 16 patients, improved in 34, and was unchanged in 19. 6MWT deteriorated in 8 patients, improved in 21, and was unchanged in 19. Mean accelerometer wear was 21.4 (±2.1) h/day. Changes in hours active from baseline to 24 weeks were not significantly different among patients who exhibited deterioration, improvement, or no change in KCCQ-PLS [odds ratio (OR) 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71-1.18; P = 0.48] or 6MWT (OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.91-1.60; P = 0.18). Similar lack of association was observed for other accelerometry metrics and change in KCCQ and 6MWT. These findings were unaffected when KCCQ and 6MWT were examined as continuous variables., Conclusions: Accelerometer-based activity measures did not correlate with subjective or objective standard measures of health status and functional capacity in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Further investigation of their relationships to clinical outcomes is required., (© 2023 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: The optimal approach to identify individuals with diabetes who are at a high risk for developing heart failure (HF) to inform implementation of preventive therapies is unknown, especially in those without atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD)., Methods: Adults with diabetes and no HF at baseline from 7 community-based cohorts were included. Participants without ASCVD who were at high risk for developing HF were identified using 1-step screening strategies: risk score (WATCH-DM [Weight, Age, Hypertension, Creatinine, HDL-C, Diabetes Control, QRS Duration, MI, and CABG] ≥12), NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide ≥125 pg/mL), hs-cTn (high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T ≥14 ng/L; hs-cTnI ≥31 ng/L), and echocardiography-based diabetic cardiomyopathy (echo-DbCM; left atrial enlargement, left ventricular hypertrophy, or diastolic dysfunction). High-risk participants were also identified using 2-step screening strategies with a second test to identify residual risk among those deemed low risk by the first test: WATCH-DM/NT-proBNP, NT-proBNP/hs-cTn, NT-proBNP/echo-DbCM. Across screening strategies, the proportion of HF events identified, 5-year number needed to treat and number needed to screen to prevent 1 HF event with an SGLT2i (sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor) among high-risk participants, and cost of screening were estimated., Results: The initial study cohort included 6293 participants (48.2% women), of whom 77.7% without prevalent ASCVD were evaluated with different HF screening strategies. At 5-year follow-up, 6.2% of participants without ASCVD developed incident HF. The 5-year number needed to treat to prevent 1 HF event with an SGLT2i among participants without ASCVD was 43 (95% CI, 29-72). In the cohort without ASCVD, high-risk participants identified using 1-step screening strategies had a low 5-year number needed to treat (22 for NT-proBNP to 37 for echo-DbCM). However, a substantial proportion of HF events occurred among participants identified as low risk using 1-step screening approaches (29% for echo-DbCM to 47% for hs-cTn). Two-step screening strategies captured most HF events (75-89%) in the high-risk subgroup with a comparable 5-year number needed to treat as the 1-step screening approaches (30-32). The 5-year number needed to screen to prevent 1 HF event was similar across 2-step screening strategies (45-61). However, the number of tests and associated costs were lowest for WATCH-DM/NT-proBNP ($1061) compared with other 2-step screening strategies (NT-proBNP/hs-cTn: $2894; NT-proBNP/echo-DbCM: $16 358)., Conclusions: Selective NT-proBNP testing based on the WATCH-DM score efficiently identified a high-risk primary prevention population with diabetes expected to derive marked absolute benefits from SGLT2i to prevent HF., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Patel has served as a consultant to Novo Nordisk. Dr Segar has received honoraria from Merck. Dr Klonoff has served as a consultant for Afon, Atropos Health, Better Therapeutics, Glucotrack, Lifecare, Novo, Samsung, and Thirdwayv. Dr Khan has received personal fees from Merck. Dr Lam has received research support from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boston Scientific, and Roche Diagnostics; has served as a consultant or on advisory boards/steering committees/executive committees for Actelion, Alleviant Medical, Allysta, Amgen, ANaCardio AB, Applied Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Cytokinetics, Darma, EchoNous, Impulse Dynamics, Ionis Pharmaceutical, Janssen Research and Development, Medscape, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Radcliffe Group, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi, Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, Us2.ai, and WebMD Global; and has served as cofounder and nonexecutive director of Us2.ai. Dr Verma holds a Tier 1 Canada Research Chair in Cardiovascular Surgery; has received research grants and honoraria from Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, HLS Therapeutics, Janssen, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, and Pfizer; has received honoraria from Sanofi, Sun Pharmaceuticals, and the Toronto Knowledge Translation Working Group; is a member of the scientific excellence committee of the EMPEROR-Reduced trial (Empagliflozin Outcome Trial in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction); has served as a national lead investigator of the DAPA-HF (Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in Heart Failure) and EMPEROR-Reduced trials; and is the president of the Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group, a federally incorporated not-for-profit physician organization. Dr Nasir is on the advisory board of Amgen, Novartis, and Novo Nordisk, and his research is partly supported by the Jerold B. Katz Academy of Translational Research. Dr Butler has served as a consultant for Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, Applied Therapeutic, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardiac Dimension, Cardior, CVRx, Cytokinetics, Daxor Edwards, Element Science, Innolife, Impulse Dynamics, Imbria, Inventiva, Lexicon, Lilly, LivaNova, Janssen, Medtronics, Merck, Occlutech, Owkin, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Pharmain, Prolaio, Roche, Secretome, Sequana, SQ Innovation, Tenex, and Vifor. Dr Vaduganathan is supported by the KL2/Catalyst Medical Research Investigator Training award from Harvard Catalyst (National Institutes of Health/National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences Award UL 1TR002541) and has served on advisory boards or has received research grant support from American Regent, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Baxter Healthcare, Bayer AG, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, and Relypsa. Dr Pandey has received research support from the National Institute on Aging GEMSSTAR Grant (1R03AG067960-01) and the National Institute on Minority Health and Disparities (R01MD017529). Dr Pandey has received grant funding (to the institution) from Applied Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, Ultromics, Myovista, and Roche; has served as a consultant for and/or has received honoraria outside of the present study as an advisor/consultant for Tricog Health Inc, Lilly USA, Rivus, Cytokinetics, Roche Diagnostics, Sarfez Therapeutics, Edwards Lifesciences, Merck, Bayer, Novo Nordisk, Alleviant, Axon Therapies; and has received nonfinancial support from Pfizer and Merck. Dr Pandey is also a consultant for Palomarin Inc with stocks compensation. The other authors report no conflicts.

Preload reserve represents an important concept in the normal physiologic responses of the body to meet the changing metabolic demands. The recruitment of preload in healthy patients leads to an increase in effective circulating blood volume with a concomitant increase in cardiac output. However, in the setting of heart failure (HF), preload augmentation may precipitate HF decompensation. In this review, we focus on the role of splanchnic nerve modulation and pharmacological therapeutic interventions to prevent HF decompensation through preload reduction. Furthermore, we explore the emerging device-based approaches for cardiac preload reduction while reviewing the ongoing clinical trials., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Heart failure (HF) is the leading cause of mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), with incidence ranging from 14% to 36% in patients admitted due to AMI. HF post-MI develops due to complex inter-play between macrovascular obstruction, microvascular dysfunction, myocardial stunning and remodeling, inflammation, and neuro-hormonal activation. Cardiogenic shock is an extreme presentation of HF post-MI and is associated with a high mortality. Early revascularization is the only therapy shown to improve survival in patients with cardiogenic shock. Treatment of HF post-MI requires prompt recognition and timely introduction of guideline-directed therapies to improve mortality and morbidity. This article aims to provide an up-to-date review on the incidence and pathogenesis of HF post-MI, current strategies to prevent and treat onset of HF post-MI, promising therapeutic strategies, and knowledge gaps in the field., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Dr. Baron has received research support from Abiomed and Boston Scientific Corp; and has served as a consultant, on an advisory board, or as a paid speaker for Zoll Medical, Medtronic, Biotronik, Boston Scientific Corp, and Shockwave. Dr. Zieroth has received research grant support, served on advisory boards, or been a speaker for Abbott, Akcea Therapeutics, Inc., AstraZeneca, Amgen, Alnylam, Bayer, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, NovoNordisk, Otsuka, Pfizer, Servier, and Vifor Pharma; and has served on a clinical trial steering committee or as a national lead for studies sponsored by AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, and Novartis. Dr. Estep has served as a consultant for Abbott, and as a medical advisor for Medtronic. Dr. Burkhoff has received institutional support from Abiomed, Alleviant, Axon Therapies, Edwards Lifesciences, and Fire1; and has received consulting fees from Aquapass, Axon Therapies, BackBeat Medical, Corvia, BioMind, Impulse Dynamics, and Therox/Zoll. Dr. Butler has served as a consultant for Abbott, Adrenomed AG, Amgen, American Regent, Applied Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CVRx, G3Pharmaceutical, ImpulseDynamics, Innolife, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, LivaNova, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, NovoNordisk, Pfizer, Roche, and Vifor Pharma. Dr. Fudim is a consultant to Zoll. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The prevalence of heart failure (HF) is increasing among young adults in the United States with pervasive racial and ethnic differences in this population., Objective: To evaluate contemporary associations between race and ethnicity, clinical comorbidities, and outcomes among young to middle-aged adults with HF., Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed using the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. All participants with a self-report of HF aged 20-64 years from 2005 to 2018 were included and stratified by race and ethnicity [non-Hispanic (NH) Whites, NH Blacks, and Hispanics]. Data on baseline characteristics including age, sex, marital status, citizenship, education level, body mass index, insurance, waist circumference, cigarette smoking, marijuana use, and relevant clinical comorbidities were included. Weighted logistic regression was performed to estimate adjusted odds ratios (aOR) to determine the association of race and ethnicity with HF. Cox proportional-hazards models were used to assess the association of race and ethnicity with all-cause and cardiac mortality., Results: A total of 1,940,447 young to middle-aged adults had self-reported HF between 2005 and 2018, of whom 61% were NH White, 40% were NH Black, and 22% were Hispanic. When compared with NH White adults, NH Black adults had higher odds of HF adjusted for age, sex, insurance status, marital status, education level, citizenship status, and clinical comorbidities (adjusted aOR 2.63, 95% CI: 1.71-4.05, p  < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the odds of HF between Hispanic and NH White adults (aOR 1.18, 95% CI: 0.64-2.18, p  = 0.585). NH Black adults had higher mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and a comparable or lower burden of cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular clinical comorbidities compared with NH White and Hispanic adults. No statistical significance was noted by race and ethnicity for all-cause and cardiac mortality during a follow-up of 5 years., Conclusion: NH Black young to middle-aged adults were more likely to have HF which may be related to higher blood pressure given the largely similar burden of clinically relevant comorbidities compared with other racial and ethnic groups.

Despite robust scientific evidence and strong guideline recommendations, there remain significant gaps in initiation and dose titration of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for heart failure (HF) among eligible patients. Reasons surrounding these gaps are multifactorial, and largely attributed to patient, healthcare professionals, and institutional challenges. Concurrently, HF remains a predominant cause of mortality and hospitalization, emphasizing the critical need for improved delivery of therapy to patients in routine clinical practice. To optimize GDMT, various implementation strategies have emerged in the recent decade such as in-hospital rapid initiation of GDMT, improving patient adherence, addressing clinical inertia, improving affordability, engagement in quality improvement registries, multidisciplinary clinics, and EHR-integrated interventions. This review highlights the current use and barriers to optimal utilization of GDMT, and proposes novel strategies aimed at improving GDMT in HF., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background and Aims: Whereas a beneficial effect of intravenous ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) on symptoms and exercise capacity among patients with iron deficiency and heart failure (HF) has been consistently demonstrated, the effects of treatment on clinical events remain the subject of research. This meta-analysis aimed to characterize the effects of FCM therapy on hospitalizations and mortality., Methods: Patient-level data from randomized, placebo-controlled FCM trials including adults with HF and iron deficiency with ≥52 weeks follow-up were analysed. The co-primary efficacy endpoints were (i) composite of total/recurrent cardiovascular hospitalizations and cardiovascular death and (ii) composite of total HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular death, through 52 weeks. Key secondary endpoints included individual composite endpoint components. Event rates were analysed using a negative binomial model. Treatment-emergent adverse events were also examined., Results: Three FCM trials with a total of 4501 patients were included. Ferric carboxymaltose was associated with a significantly reduced risk of co-primary endpoint 1 (rate ratio 0.86; 95% confidence interval 0.75-0.98; P = .029; Cochran Q: 0.008), with a trend towards a reduction of co-primary endpoint 2 (rate ratio 0.87; 95% confidence interval 0.75-1.01; P = .076; Cochran Q: 0.024). Treatment effects appeared to result from reduced hospitalization rates, not improved survival. Treatment appeared to have a good safety profile and was well tolerated., Conclusions: In iron-deficient patients with HF with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, intravenous FCM was associated with significantly reduced risk of hospital admissions for HF and cardiovascular causes, with no apparent effect on mortality., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

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., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have compared the success of antero-lateral vs. antero-posterior electrode position for cardioversion of atrial fibrillation (AF). However, due to small sample size and conflicting results of these RCTs, the optimal electrode positioning for successful cardioversion remains uncertain., Methods: A systematic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE was conducted. Outcomes of interest included overall success of cardioversion with restoration of sinus rhythm, 1 st shock success, 2 nd shock success, mean shock energy required for successful cardioversion, mean number of shocks required for successful cardioversion, success of cardioversion at high energy (> 150 J) and success of cardioversion at low energy (< 150 J). Mantel-Haenszel risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using random-effects model., Results: A total of 14 RCTs comprising 2445 patients were included. There was no statistically significant difference between two cardioversion approaches in the overall success of cardioversion (RR 1.02; 95% CI [0.97-1.06]; p = 0.43), first shock success (RR 1.14; 95% CI [0.99-1.32]), second shock success (RR 1.08; 95% CI [0.94-1.23]), mean shock energy required (mean difference 6.49; 95% CI [-17.33-30.31], success at high energy > 150 J (RR 1.02; 95% CI [0.92-1.14] and success at low energy < 150 J (RR 1.09; 95% CI [0.97-1.22])., Conclusions: This meta-analysis of RCTs shows no significant difference in the success of cardioversion between antero-lateral vs. antero-posterior electrode position for cardioversion of AF. Large well-conducted and adequately powered randomized clinical trials are needed to definitively address this question., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Dr. Greene has received research support from the Duke University Department of Medicine Chair's Research Award, American Heart Association (number 929502), National Heart Lung and Blood Institute, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi; has served on advisory boards for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim/ Lilly, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi, and scPharmaceuticals; serves as a consultant for Amgen, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Corteria Pharmaceuticals, CSL Vifor, Merck, PharmaIN, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi, Tricog Health, and Urovant Pharmaceuticals; and has received speaker fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, cytokinetics, and Roche Diagnostics. The remaining authors have no competing interests to declare.

Background: Polypharmacy is common among patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, its impact on the use of optimal guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) is not well established., Objectives: This study sought to evaluate the association between polypharmacy and odds of receiving optimal GDMT over time among patients with HFrEF., Methods: The authors conducted a post hoc analysis of the GUIDE-IT (Guiding Evidence-Based Therapy Using Biomarker Intensified Treatment) trial. Polypharmacy was defined as receiving ≥5 medications (excluding HFrEF GDMT) at baseline. The outcome of interest was optimal triple therapy GDMT (concurrent administration of a renin-angiotensin-aldosterone blocker and beta-blocker at 50% of the target dose and a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist at any dose) achieved over the 12-month follow-up. Multivariable adjusted mixed-effect logistic regression models with multiplicative interaction terms (time × polypharmacy) were constructed to evaluate how polypharmacy at baseline modified the odds of achieving optimal GDMT on follow-up., Results: The study included 891 participants with HFrEF. The median number of non-GDMT medications at baseline was 4 (IQR: 3-6), with 414 (46.5%) prescribed ≥5 and identified as being on polypharmacy. The proportion of participants who achieved optimal GDMT at the end of the 12-month follow-up was lower with vs without polypharmacy at baseline (15% vs 19%, respectively). In adjusted mixed models, the odds of achieving optimal GDMT over time were modified by baseline polypharmacy status (P for interaction < 0.001). Patients without polypharmacy at baseline had increased odds of achieving GDMT (OR: 1.16 [95% CI: 1.12-1.21] per 1-month increase; P < 0.001) but not patients with polypharmacy (OR: 1.01 [95% CI: 0.96-1.06)] per 1-month increase)., Conclusions: Patients with HFrEF who are on non-GDMT polypharmacy have lower odds of achieving optimal GDMT on follow-up., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Pandey has received research support from the National Institute on Aging GEMSSTAR grant (1R03AG067960-01) and the National Institute on Minority Health and Disparities (R01MD017529); grant funding from Applied Therapeutics and Gilead Sciences; honoraria outside of the present study as an advisor/consultant for Tricog Health Inc, Lilly USA, Rivus, Cytokinetics, and Roche Diagnostics; nonfinancial support from Pfizer and Merck; and is a consultant for Palomarin Inc with stock compensation. Dr Segar has received speaker fees from Merck and Co outside the present study. Dr Butler is a consultant for Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, Applied Therapeutic, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardiac Dimension, Cardior, CVRx, Cytokinetics, Edwards, Element Science, Innolife, Impulse Dynamics, Imbria, Inventiva, Lexicon, Lilly, LivaNova, Janssen, Medtronics, Merck, Occlutech, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Pharmain, Roche, Sequana, SQ Innovation, 3live, and Vifor. Dr Fonarow has done consulting for Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Cytokinetics, Eli Lilly, Johnson & Johnson, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, and Pfizer. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Frailty affects half of all patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and carries a ∼2-fold increased risk of mortality. The relationship between frailty and HFrEF is bidirectional, with one condition exacerbating the other. Paradoxical to their higher clinical risk, frail patients with HFrEF are more often under-treated due to concerns over medication-related adverse clinical events. However, current evidence suggests consistent safety of HF medical therapies among older frail patients with HFrEF. A multidisciplinary effort is necessary for the appropriate management of these high-risk patients which focuses on the optimization of known beneficial therapies with a goal-directed effort toward improving quality of life., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)