Search

Aims: Several mechanisms have been identified in the aetiopathogenesis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Among these, coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) may play a key pathophysiological role. We performed a systematic review and meta‐analysis to investigate the prevalence, echocardiographic correlates, and prognostic implications of CMD in patients with HFpEF. Methods and results: A systematic search for articles up to 1 May 2023 was performed. The primary aim was to assess the prevalence of CMD. Secondary aims were to compare key echocardiographic parameters (E/e′ ratio, left atrial volume index [LAVi], and left ventricular mass index [LVMi]), clinical outcomes [death and hospitalization for heart failure (HF)], and prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF) between patients with and without CMD. Meta‐regressions according to baseline patient characteristics and study features were performed to explore potential heterogeneity sources. We identified 14 observational studies, enrolling 1138 patients with HFpEF. The overall prevalence of CMD was 58%. Compared with patients without CMD, patients with HFpEF and CMD had larger LAVi [mean difference (MD) 3.85 confidence interval (CI) 1.19–6.5, P < 0.01)], higher E/e′ ratio (MD 2.76 CI 1.54–3.97; P < 0.01), higher prevalence of AF (odds ratio 1.61 CI 1.04–2.48, P = 0.03) and higher risk of death or hospitalization for HF [hazard ratio 3.19, CI 1.04–9.57, P = 0.04]. Conclusions: CMD is present in little more than half of the patients with HFpEF and is associated with echocardiographic evidence of more severe diastolic dysfunction and a higher prevalence of AF, doubling the risk of death or HF hospitalization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: In patients with heart failure (HF), we aimed to assess (i) the time trends in N‐terminal pro‐B‐type natriuretic peptide (NT‐proBNP) testing; (ii) patient characteristics associated with NT‐proBNP testing; (iii) distribution of NT‐proBNP levels, focusing on the subgroups with (WHFE) vs. without (NWHFE) a worsening HF event, defined as an HF hospitalization; and (iv) changes of NT‐proBNP levels over time. Methods and results: NT‐proBNP testing and levels were investigated in HF patients enrolled in the Swedish Heart Failure Registry (SwedeHF) linked with the Stockholm CREAtinine Measurements project from January 2011 to December 2018. Index date was the first registration in SwedeHF. Patterns of change in NT‐proBNP levels before (in the previous 6 ± 3 months) and after (in the following 6 ± 3 months) the index date were categorized as follows: (i) <3000 ng/L at both measurements = stable low; (ii) <3000 ng/L at the first measurement and ≥3000 ng/L at the second measurement = increased; (iii) ≥3000 ng/L at the first measurement and <3000 ng/L at the second measurement = decreased; and (iv) ≥3000 ng/L at both measurements = stable high. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models, expressed as odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs), were performed to assess the associations between (i) clinical characteristics and NT‐proBNP testing and (ii) changes in NT‐proBNP from 6 months prior to the index date and the index date and a WHFE. Consistency analyses were performed in HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) alone. A total of 4424 HF patients were included (median age 74 years, women 34%, HFrEF 53%), 33% with a WHFE. NT‐proBNP testing increased over time, up to 55% in 2018, and was almost two‐fold as frequent, and time to testing was less than half, in patients with WHFE vs. NWHFE. Independent predictors of testing were WHFE, higher heart rate, diuretic use, and preserved ejection fraction. Median NT‐proBNP was 3070 ng/L (Q1–Q3: 1220–7395), approximately three‐fold higher in WHFE vs. NWHFE. Compared with stable low NT‐proBNP levels, increased (OR 4.27, 95% CI 2.47–7.37) and stable high levels (OR 2.48, 95% CI 1.58–3.88) were independently associated with a higher risk of WHFE. Results were consistent in the HFrEF population. Conclusions: NT‐proBNP testing increased over time but still was only performed in half of the patients. Testing was associated with a WHFE, with features of more severe HF and for differential diagnosis purposes. Increased and stable high levels were associated with a WHFE. Overall, our data highlight the potential benefits of carrying further implementation of NT‐proBNP testing in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Acyl ghrelin increases cardiac output (CO) in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). This could impair the right ventricular‐pulmonary arterial coupling (RVPAC), both through an increased venous return and right ventricular afterload. We aim to investigate if acyl ghrelin increases CO with or without worsening the right‐sided haemodynamics in HFrEF assessed by RVPAC. Methods and results: The Karolinska Acyl ghrelin Trial was a randomized double‐blind placebo‐controlled trial of acyl ghrelin versus placebo (120‐min intravenous infusion) in HFrEF. RVPAC was assessed echocardiographically at baseline and 120 min. ANOVA was used for difference in change between acyl ghrelin versus placebo, adjusted for baseline values. Of the 30 randomized patients, 22 had available RVPAC (acyl ghrelin n = 12, placebo n = 10). Despite a 15% increase in CO in the acyl ghrelin group (from 4.0 (3.5–4.6) to 4.6 (3.9–6.1) L/min, P = 0.003), RVPAC remained unchanged; 5.9 (5.3–7.6) to 6.3 (4.8–7.5) mm·(m/s)−1, P = 0.372, while RVPAC was reduced in the placebo group, 5.2 (4.3–6.4) to 4.8 (4.2–5.8) mm·(m/s)−1, P = 0.035. Comparing change between groups, CO increased in the acyl ghrelin group versus placebo (P = 0.036) while RVPAC and the right ventricular pressure gradient remained unchanged. Conclusion: Treatment with acyl ghrelin increases CO while preserving or even improving RVPAC in HFrEF, possibly due to increased contractility, reduced PVR and/or reduced left sided filling pressures. These potential effects strengthen the role of acyl ghrelin therapy in HFrEF with right ventricular failure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: ARIADNE aimed to assess the association between effects of sacubitril/valsartan and no sacubitril/valsartan treatment and clinical characteristics, functional capacity, and clinical outcomes (cause‐specific mortality and hospitalizations) in outpatients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Methods: ARIADNE was a prospective European registry of 9069 patients with HFrEF treated by office‐based cardiologists or selected primary care physicians. Of the 8787 eligible for analysis, 4173 patients were on conventional HF treatment (non‐S/V group), whereas 4614 patients were either on sacubitril/valsartan treatment at enrolment or started sacubitril/valsartan within 1 month of enrolment (S/V group). We also generated a restricted analysis set (rS/V) including only those 2108 patients who started sacubitril/valsartan treatment within the month prior to or after enrolment. Results: At the baseline, average age of patients enrolled in the study was 68 years, and 23.9% (2099/8787) were female. At the baseline, the proportions of patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class III symptoms were 30.9 (1288/4173), 42.8 (1974/4614), and 48.2% (1015/2108), in non‐S/V, S/V, and rS/V groups, respectively. After 12 months of treatment, the proportion of patients with NYHA Class III at baseline who improved to Class II was 32.0% (290/907) in the non‐S/V group vs. 46.3% (648/1399) in S/V group and 48.7% (349/717) in rS/V group. The overall mortality rate was 5.0 per 100 patient‐years. Rates of HF hospitalizations were high (20.9, 20.3, and 21.2 per 100 patient‐years in the non‐S/V, S/V, and rS/V groups, respectively). Emergency room visits without hospitalization occurred in 3.9, 3.2, and 3.9% of patients in the non‐S/V, S/V, and rS/V groups, respectively. Conclusions: This large HFrEF European registry provides a contemporary outcome profile of outpatients with HFrEF treated with or without sacubitril/valsartan. In a real‐world setting, sacubitril/valsartan was associated with an improvement of symptoms in patients with HFrEF compared with the conventional HFrEF treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The efficacy of patient empowerment has been emphasized recently by the EPIC-HF trial.40 Patient education can reinforce the partnership between health professionals and patients (i.e. patient-care partner approach). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have established the efficacy of several therapies to improve both symptoms and outcomes for patients with heart failure and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF). More recently, the OFICA Study,7 which included >1600 patients hospitalized with HF in 170 French centres on a single day, found that discharge medications were rarely at optimal dosage and remained largely unchanged following discharge.8 The result is that a large proportion of patients with HFrEF does not receive cardinal HF treatments or is prescribed suboptimal doses.9-11 Recently, the CHAMP-HF registry showed that only 1% of patients with HFrEF was treated, simultaneously, with target dose of ACE-I/ARB/ARNI, beta-blocker, and MRA.9 Reasons for not prescribing, or not up-titrating guideline-recommended medications might be many, but when audited, they are commonly not reported or clearly stated. They may furthermore operate through ambulatory IV diuretics infusion.34 Despite their usefulness, the use of HF clinics is suboptimal, possibly due to lack of capacity, geographical considerations, and funding issues.35 Ambulatory disease management programmes DMP, usually providing care outside of hospitals, have been shown to reduce the risk of both all-cause mortality and HF-related hospital readmission by approximately 30%36 and are now formally recommended in 2021 ESC guidelines on HF. [Extracted from the article]

Aim: We present the baseline characteristics of the PREFERS Stockholm epidemiological study on the natural history and course of new onset heart failure (HF) aiming to improve phenotyping focusing on HF with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (HFpEF) pathophysiology. Methods and results: New onset HF patients diagnosed in hospital or at outpatient HF clinics were included at five Stockholm hospitals 2015–2018 and characterized by N‐terminal pro brain natriuretic peptide (NT‐proBNP), biomarkers, echocardiography, and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (subset). HFpEF [left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥ 50%] was compared with HF with mildly reduced LVEF (HFmrEF; LVEF 41–49%) and with HF with reduced LVEF (HFrEF; LVEF ≤ 40%). We included 547 patients whereof HFpEF (n = 137; 25%), HFmrEF (n = 61; 11%), and HFrEF (n = 349; 64%). HFpEF patients were older (76; 70–81 years; median; interquartile range) than HFrEF (67; 58–74; P < 0.001), more often women (49% vs. 30%; P < 0.001), and had significantly higher comorbidity burden. They more often had atrial fibrillation, hypertension, and renal dysfunction. NT‐proBNP was lower in HFpEF (896; 462–1645 ng/L) than in HFrEF (1160; 563–2370; P = 0.005). In HFpEF, left ventricular (LV) diameters and volumes were smaller (P < 0.001) and septal and posterior wall thickness and relative wall thickness higher (P < 0.001). E/é ≥ 14 was present in 26% of HFpEF vs. 32% of HFrEF (P = 0.017) and left atrial volume index > 34 mL/m2 in 57% vs. 61% (P = 0.040). HFmrEF patients were intermediary between HFpEF and HFrEF for LV mass, LV volumes, and RV volumes but had the highest proportion of left ventricular hypertrophy and the lowest proportion of elevated E/é. Conclusions: Phenotype data in new onset HF patients recruited in a broad clinical setting showed that 25% had HFpEF, were older, more often women, and had greater comorbidity burden. PREFERS is well suited to further explore biomarker and imaging components of HFpEF pathophysiology and may contribute to the emerging knowledge of HF epidemiology. Clinical trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03671122. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: In the heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) PARAGON‐HF trial, sacubitril/valsartan vs. valsartan improved mortality/morbidity in patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) below median (57%). We assessed eligibility for sacubitril/valsartan based on four scenarios. Methods and results: Eligibility was assessed in the Karolinska‐Rennes study (acute HFpEF, LVEF ≥ 45%, and N‐terminal pro‐B‐type natriuretic peptide ≥300 pg/mL subsequently assessed as outpatients including echocardiography) in (i) a trial scenario (all trial criteria); (ii) a pragmatic scenario (selected trial criteria); (iii) LVEF below lower limit of normal range (<54% in women and <52% in men); and (iv) LVEF below mean of normal range (<64% in women and <62% in men). Among 425 patients [age 78 (72–83) years, 57% women, 28% LVEF ≤ 57% (median in PARAGON‐HF), the trial scenario, identified 34% as eligible. Left atrial enlargement and/or left ventricular hypertrophy were present in 99%. Inclusion criteria not met were diuretic treatment and New York Heart Association class. Important exclusion criteria were estimated glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min/1.73 m2, haemoglobin <10 g/day, and cancer. In the pragmatic scenario, 63% were eligible. In LVEF below lower limit of normal range, 5.4% were eligible, and in LVEF below mean of normal range, 41% were eligible. In patients with LVEF ≤ 57%, eligibility was 42%, 69%, 21%, and 91% according to the trial scenario, pragmatic scenario, LVEF below lower limit of normal range, and LVEF below mean of normal range, respectively. Conclusions: In real‐world HFpEF (LVEF ≥ 45%) with N‐terminal pro‐B‐type natriuretic peptide and cardiac structure/function assessed, eligibility for sacubitril/valsartan was according to PARAGON‐HF complete criteria 34%, pragmatic criteria 63%, LVEF below lower limit of normal range 5.4%, and LVEF below mean of normal range 41%. Cardiac structural impairment was almost ubiquitous. Ineligibility was more due to exclusion criteria than failing to meet inclusion criteria. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Echocardiographic predictors of outcomes in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) have not been systematically or independently validated. We aimed at identifying echocardiographic predictors of cardiovascular events in a large cohort of patients with HFpEF and to validate these in an independent large cohort. Methods and results: We assessed the association between echocardiographic parameters and cardiovascular outcomes in 515 patients with heart failure with preserved left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (>50%) in the MEtabolic Road to DIAstolic Heart Failure (MEDIA) multicentre study. We validated out findings in 286 patients from the Karolinska‐Rennes Prospective Study of HFpEF (KaRen). After multiple adjustments including N‐terminal pro‐brain natriuretic peptide (NT‐proBNP), the significant predictors of death or cardiovascular hospitalization were pulmonary arterial systolic pressure > 40 mmHg, respiratory variation in inferior vena cava diameter > 0.5, E/e' > 9, and lateral mitral annular s' < 7 cm/s. The combination of these four variables differentiated patients with <10% vs. >35% 1 year risk. Adding these four echocardiographic variables on top of clinical variables and NT‐proBNP yielded significant net reclassification improvement (33.8%, P < 0.0001) and increase in C‐index (5.3%, a change from 72.2% to 77.5%, P = 0.015) of similar magnitude as the addition of NT‐proBNP on top of clinical variables alone. In the KaRen cohort, these four variables yielded a similar improvement in net reclassification improvement (22.3%, P = 0.014) and C‐index (4.0%, P = 0.029). Conclusions: Use of four simple echocardiographic parameters (within the MEDIA echo score), indicative of pulmonary hypertension, elevated central venous pressure, LV diastolic dysfunction, and LV long‐axis systolic dysfunction, independently predicted prognosis and improved risk stratification additionally to clinical variables and NT‐proBNP in HFpEF. This finding was validated in an independent cohort. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: In hospitalized patients with a clinical diagnosis of acute heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), the aims of this study were (i) to assess the proportion meeting the 2016 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) HFpEF criteria and (ii) to compare patients with restrictive/pseudonormal mitral inflow pattern (MIP) vs. patients with MIP other than restrictive/pseudonormal. Methods and results: We included hospitalized participants of the ESC‐Heart Failure Association (HFA) EURObservational Research Programme (EORP) HF Long‐Term Registry who had echocardiogram with ejection fraction (EF) ≥ 50% during index hospitalization. As no data on e', E/e' and left ventricular (LV) mass index were gathered in the registry, the 2016 ESC HFpEF definition was modified as follows: elevated B‐type natriuretic peptide (BNP) (≥100 pg/mL for acute HF) and/or N‐terminal pro‐BNP (≥300 pg/mL) and at least one of the echocardiographic criteria: (i) presence of LV hypertrophy (yes/no), (ii) left atrial volume index (LAVI) of >34 mL/m2), or (iii) restrictive/pseudonormal MIP. Next, all patients were divided into four groups: (i) patients with restrictive/pseudonormal MIP on echocardiography [i.e. with presumably elevated left atrial (LA) pressure], (ii) patients with MIP other than restrictive/pseudonormal (i.e. with presumably normal LA pressure), (iii) atrial fibrillation (AF) group, and (iv) 'grey area' (no consistent description of MIP despite no report of AF). Of 6365 hospitalized patients, 1848 (29%) had EF ≥ 50%. Natriuretic peptides were assessed in 28%, LV hypertrophy in 92%, LAVI in 13%, and MIP in 67%. The 2016 ESC HFpEF criteria could be assessed in 27% of the 1848 patients and, if assessed, were met in 52%. Of the 1848 patients, 19% had restrictive/pseudonormal MIP, 43% had MIP other than restrictive/pseudonormal, 18% had AF and 20% were grey area. There were no differences in long‐term all‐cause or cardiovascular mortality, or all‐cause hospitalizations or HF rehospitalizations between the four groups. Despite fewer non‐cardiac comorbidities reported at baseline, patients with MIP other than restrictive/pseudonormal (i.e. with presumably normal LA pressure) had more non‐cardiovascular (14.0 vs. 6.7 per 100 patient‐years, P < 0.001) and cardiovascular non‐HF (13.2 vs. 8.0 per 100 patient‐years, P = 0.016) hospitalizations in long‐term follow‐up than patients with restrictive/pseudonormal MIP. Conclusions: Acute HFpEF diagnosis could be assessed (based on the 2016 ESC criteria) in only a quarter of patients and confirmed in half of these. When assessed, only one in three patients had restrictive/pseudonormal MIP suggestive of elevated LA pressure. Patients with MIP other than restrictive/pseudonormal (suggestive of normal LA pressure) could have been misdiagnosed with acute HFpEF or had echocardiography performed after normalization of LA pressure. They were more often hospitalized for non‐HF reasons during follow‐up. Symptoms suggestive of acute HFpEF may in some patients represent non‐HF comorbidities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The detailed sub-categories of death and hospitalization, and the impact of comorbidities on cause-specific outcomes, remain poorly understood in heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). We sought to evaluate rates and predictors of cardiovascular (CV) and non-CV outcomes in HFpEF., Methods: The Karolinska-Rennes study was a bi-national prospective observational study designed to characterize HFpEF (ejection fraction ≥45%). Patients were followed for cause-specific death and hospitalization. Baseline characteristics were pre-selected based on clinical relevance and potential eligibility criteria for HFpEF trials. The associations between characteristics and cause-specific outcomes were assessed with univariable and multivariable Cox regressions., Results: Five hundred thirty-nine patients [56% females; median (inter-quartile range) age 79 (72-84) years; NT-proBNP/BNP 2448 (1290-4790)/429 (229-805) ng/L] were included. Over 1196 patient-years follow-up [median (min, max) 744 days (13-1959)], there were 159 (29%) deaths (13 per 100 patient-years: CV 5.1 per 100, dominated by HF 3.9 per 100; and non-CV 5.8 per 100, dominated by cancer, 2.3 per 100). There were 723 hospitalizations in 338 patients (63%; 60 per 100 patient-years: CV 33 per 100, dominated by HF 17 per 100; and non-CV 27 per 100, dominated by lung disease 5 per 100). Higher age and natriuretic peptides, lower serum natraemia and NYHA class III-IV were independent predictors of CV death; lower serum natraemia, anaemia and stroke of non-CV death; and anaemia and lower serum natraemia of non-CV death or hospitalizations. There were no apparent predictors of CV death or hospitalization., Conclusions: In a clinical cohort hospitalized and diagnosed with HFpEF, death and hospitalization rates were roughly similar for CV and non-CV causes. CV deaths were predicted primarily by severity of HF; non-CV deaths primarily by anaemia and prior stroke. Lower serum sodium predicted both. Hospitalizations were difficult to predict., (© 2024 The Author(s). ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Use of left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) in older patients has increased, and assessing outcomes in older LVAD recipients is important. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate associations between age and outcomes after continuous-flow LVAD (cf-LVAD) implantation., Methods and Results: Cf-LVAD patients from the multicentre European PCHF-VAD registry were included and categorized into those <50, 50-64, and ≥65 years old. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. Among secondary outcomes were heart failure (HF) hospitalizations, right ventricular (RV) failure, haemocompatibility score, bleeding events, non-fatal thromboembolic events, and device-related infections. Of 562 patients, 184 (32.7%) were <50, 305 (54.3%) were aged 50-64, whereas 73 (13.0%) were ≥65 years old. Median follow-up was 1.1 years. Patients in the oldest age group were significantly more often designated as destination therapy (DT) candidates (61%). A 10 year increase in age was associated with a significantly higher risk of mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 1.34, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.15-1.57]), intracranial bleeding (HR 1.49, 95% CI [1.10-2.02]), and non-intracranial bleeding (HR 1.30, 95% CI [1.09-1.56]), which was confirmed by a higher mean haemocompatibility score (1.37 vs. 0.77, oldest vs. youngest groups, respectively, P = 0.033). Older patients suffered from less device-related infections requiring systemic antibiotics. No age-related differences were observed in HF-related hospitalizations, ventricular arrhythmias, pump thrombosis, non-fatal thromboembolic events, or RV failure., Conclusions: In the PCHF-VAD registry, higher age was associated with increased risk of mortality, and especially with increased risk of major bleeding, which is particularly relevant for the DT population. The risks of HF hospitalizations, pump thrombosis, ventricular arrhythmia, or RV failure were comparable. Strikingly, older patients had less device-related infections., (© 2022 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Data on sex and left ventricular assist device (LVAD) utilization and outcomes have been conflicting and mostly confined to US studies incorporating older devices. This study aimed to investigate sex-related differences in LVAD utilization and outcomes in a contemporary European LVAD cohort., Methods and Results: This analysis is part of the multicentre PCHF-VAD registry studying continuous-flow LVAD patients. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included ventricular arrhythmias, right ventricular failure, bleeding, thromboembolism, and the haemocompatibility score. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to assess associations between sex and outcomes. Overall, 457 men (81%) and 105 women (19%) were analysed. At LVAD implant, women were more often in Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) profile 1 or 2 (55% vs. 41%, P = 0.009) and more often required temporary mechanical circulatory support (39% vs. 23%, P = 0.001). Mean age was comparable (52.1 vs. 53.4 years, P = 0.33), and median follow-up duration was 344 [range 147-823] days for women and 435 [range 190-816] days for men (P = 0.40). No significant sex-related differences were found in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0.79 for female vs. male sex, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.50-1.27]). Female LVAD patients had a lower risk of ventricular arrhythmias (HR 0.56, 95% CI [0.33-0.95]) but more often experienced right ventricular failure. No significant sex-related differences were found in other outcomes., Conclusions: In this contemporary European cohort of LVAD patients, far fewer women than men underwent LVAD implantation despite similar clinical outcomes. This is important as the proportion of female LVAD patients (19%) was lower than the proportion of females with advanced HF as reported in previous studies, suggesting underutilization. Also, female patients were remarkably more often in INTERMACS profile 1 or 2, suggesting later referral for LVAD therapy. Additional research in female patients is warranted., (© 2022 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: In atrial fibrillation, stroke risk is assessed by the CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score. Heart failure is included in CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc, but the rationale is uncertain. Our objective was to test if heart failure is a risk factor for stroke, independent of other risk factors in CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc., Methods and Results: We studied 300 839 patients with atrial fibrillation in the Swedish Patient Register 2005-11. Three definitions of heart failure were used in order to assess the robustness of the results. In the main analysis, heart failure was defined by a hospital discharge diagnosis of heart failure as first or second diagnosis and a filled prescription of a diuretic within 3 months before index + 30 days. The second definition counted first or second discharge diagnoses <1 year before index + 30 days and the third definition any heart failure diagnosis in open or hospital care before index + 30 days. Associations with outcomes were assessed with multivariable Cox analyses. Patients with heart failure were older (80.5 vs. 74.0 years, P < 0.001) and had higher CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score (4.4 vs. 2.7, P < 0.001). The 1 year incidence of ischaemic stroke without warfarin was 4.4% with heart failure and 3.1% without. Adjustment for the cofactors in CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc eradicated the difference in stroke risk between patients with and without heart failure (hazard ratio 1.01 with 95% confidence interval 0.96-1.05). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc was not improved by points for heart failure., Conclusions: A clinical diagnosis of heart failure was not an independent risk factor for stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation, which may have implications for anticoagulation management., (© 2018 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)