Search

AimsTo assess heart failure (HF) in-hospital quality of care and outcomes before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.Methods and resultsPatients hospitalized for HF with ejection fraction (EF)

The oblique random survival forest (RSF) is an ensemble supervised learning method for right-censored outcomes. Trees in the oblique RSF are grown using linear combinations of predictors to create branches, whereas in the standard RSF, a single predictor is used. Oblique RSF ensembles often have higher prediction accuracy than standard RSF ensembles. However, assessing all possible linear combinations of predictors induces significant computational overhead that limits applications to large-scale data sets. In addition, few methods have been developed for interpretation of oblique RSF ensembles, and they remain more difficult to interpret compared to their axis-based counterparts. We introduce a method to increase computational efficiency of the oblique RSF and a method to estimate importance of individual predictor variables with the oblique RSF. Our strategy to reduce computational overhead makes use of Newton-Raphson scoring, a classical optimization technique that we apply to the Cox partial likelihood function within each non-leaf node of decision trees. We estimate the importance of individual predictors for the oblique RSF by negating each coefficient used for the given predictor in linear combinations, and then computing the reduction in out-of-bag accuracy. In general benchmarking experiments, we find that our implementation of the oblique RSF is approximately 450 times faster with equivalent discrimination and superior Brier score compared to existing software for oblique RSFs. We find in simulation studies that 'negation importance' discriminates between relevant and irrelevant predictors more reliably than permutation importance, Shapley additive explanations, and a previously introduced technique to measure variable importance with oblique RSFs based on analysis of variance. Methods introduced in the current study are available in the aorsf R package., Comment: 40 pages, 6 figures

Exercise intolerance (EI) is the primary manifestation of chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), the most common form of heart failure among older individuals. The recent recognition that HFpEF is likely a systemic, multiorgan disorder that shares characteristics with other common, difficult-to-treat, aging-related disorders suggests that novel insights may be gained from combining knowledge and concepts from aging and cardiovascular disease disciplines. This state-of-the-art review is based on the outcomes of a National Institute of Aging-sponsored working group meeting on aging and EI in HFpEF. We discuss aging-related and extracardiac contributors to EI in HFpEF and provide the rationale for a transdisciplinary, "gero-centric" approach to advance our understanding of EI in HFpEF and identify promising new therapeutic targets. We also provide a framework for prioritizing future research, including developing a uniform, comprehensive approach to phenotypic characterization of HFpEF, elucidating key geroscience targets for treatment, and conducting proof-of-concept trials to modify these targets.

BackgroundThe Affordable Care Act expanded Medicaid eligibility allowing low-income individuals greater access to health care. However, the uptake of state Medicaid expansion has been variable. It remains unclear how the Medicaid expansion was associated with the temporal trends in use of evidence-based cardiovascular drugs.MethodsWe used the publicly available Medicaid Drug Utilization and Current Population Survey to extract filled prescription rates per 1000 Medicaid beneficiaries of statins, antihypertensives, P2Y12 inhibitors, and direct oral anticoagulants. We defined expander states as those who expanded Medicaid on or before January 1, 2014, and nonexpander states as those who had not expanded by December 31, 2018. Difference-in-differences (DID) analyses were performed to compare the association of the Medicaid expansion with per-capita cardiovascular drug prescription rates in expander versus nonexpander states.ResultsBetween 2011 and 2018, the total number of prescriptions among all Medicaid beneficiaries increased, with gains of 89.7% in statins (11.0 to 20.8 million), 76% in antihypertensives (35.3 to 62.2 million), and 37% in P2Y12 inhibitors (1.7 to 2.3 million). Medicaid expansion was associated with significantly greater increases in quarterly prescriptions (per 1000 Medicaid beneficiaries) of statins (DID estimate [95% CI]: 22.5 [16.5-28.6], P75% of the expander states had increases in prescription rates of both statins and antihypertensives. In contrast, 44% of nonexpander states saw declines in statins and antihypertensives. The Medicaid expansion was not associated with higher direct oral anticoagulants prescription rates (DID estimate [95% CI] 0.9 [-0.3 to 2.1], P=0.142).ConclusionsThe 2014 Medicaid expansion was associated with a significant increase in per-capita utilization of cardiovascular prescription drugs among Medicaid beneficiaries. These gains in utilization may contribute to long-term cardiovascular benefits to lower-income and previously underinsured populations.

Additional file 1: Table S1. Multivariable-Adjusted Associations between VAT, SAT, and LBF with Left Ventricular Peak Systolic Strain, with Adjustment for ALM and ALM index. Figure S1. Bland-Altman Plot (A) and Line Regression (B) of Peak Circumferential Strain Measurements. The Bland Altman plot displays the mean difference between the 2 measurements for each participant plotted on the Y axis. The mean of the 2 measurements is plotted on the X axis. The linear regression displays the first strain measurement on the X-axis and the second strain measurement on the Y-axis.

BackgroundThe burden of amyloidosis among hospitalized patients is increasing over time. However, amyloidosis remains an underdiagnosed cause of heart failure (HF) hospitalization among older adults.ObjectivesWe investigated the prevalence and prognostic implications of amyloidosis among patients hospitalized with HF.MethodsAll hospitalizations for primary diagnosis of HF between January 1, 2010, and August 31, 2015, identified in the Nationwide Readmissions Database were categorized into those with and without a secondary diagnosis of amyloidosis. HF hospitalizations with amyloidosis were then matched in a 3:1 fashion to HF hospitalizations without amyloidosis using the year of admission, discharge quarter, age, sex, and Charlson comorbidity index. Primary outcomes were inpatient mortality and 30-day readmission. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the association between HF with amyloidosis and clinical outcomes.ResultsOf 1,593,360 HF hospitalizations that met inclusion criteria, 2,846 (0.18%) had HF with a secondary diagnosis of amyloidosis and were matched to 8,515 hospitalizations for HF without amyloidosis. Hospitalizations for HF with amyloidosis were associated with higher prevalence of kidney disease (56% vs. 45%), malignancy (20% vs. 4%), and higher inpatient mortality (6% vs. 3%) as compared with HF without amyloidosis. In adjusted analyses, HF with amyloidosis was associated with higher odds of in-hospital mortality (odds ratio: 1.46; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.17 to 1.82), 30-day readmission (odds ratio: 1.17; 95% CI: 1.05 to 1.31), and longer mean length of stay (least-squares mean difference: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.12 to 1.80).ConclusionsIn patients hospitalized with decompensated HF, presence of amyloidosis was associated with higher risk of inpatient mortality and 30-day readmission.

BackgroundCoronary artery calcium (CAC) predicts atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) events, inclusive of coronary heart disease (CHD) and stroke, and is a decision-making aid for primary prevention. The predictive value of CAC categories for CHD and stroke separately and across sex and race groups of an asymptomatic population is unclear.MethodsWhite, Black, and Hispanic participants of MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) and DHS (Dallas Heart Study) underwent CAC measurement at enrollment and were followed for incident ASCVD events. Ten-year CHD-to-stroke incidence ratios across CAC score categories 0, 1 to 99, and ≥100 were assessed. Associations of CAC with incident CHD and stroke events were evaluated using multivariable-adjusted Cox models and multiplicative interactions of CAC with sex/race were tested.ResultsAmong 7042 participants (mean age, 57 years, 54% women, 36% Black, 23% Hispanic, 49% CAC=0, 19% CAC ≥100), 574 incident ASCVD events (333 CHD and 241 stroke) were observed over 12.3-year follow-up. Ten-year CHD-to-stroke incidence ratio increased significantly across CAC categories in men, women, Whites, Blacks, and Hispanics (all P

This study sought to compare the cross-sectional associations between fitness and echocardiographic measures of cardiac structure and function.Cardiorespiratory fitness is inversely associated with heart failure risk. However, the mechanism through which fitness lowers heart failure risk is not fully understood.We included 1,678 men and 1,247 women from the Cooper Center Longitudinal Study who received an echocardiogram from 1999 to 2011. Fitness was estimated by Balke protocol (in metabolic equivalents) and also categorized into age-specific quartiles, with quartile 1 representing low fitness. Cross-sectional associations between fitness (in metabolic equivalents) and relative wall thickness, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter indexed to body surface area, left atrial volume indexed to body surface area, left ventricular systolic function, and E/e' ratio were determined using multivariable linear regression analysis.Higher levels of mid-life fitness (metabolic equivalents) were associated with larger indexed left atrial volume (men: beta = 0.769, p0.0001; women: beta = 0.879, p value ≤0.0001) and indexed left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (men: beta = 0.231, p0.001; women: beta = 0.264, p0.0001). Similarly, a higher level of fitness was associated with a smaller relative wall thickness (men: beta = -0.002, p = 0.04; women: beta = -0.005, p0.0001) and E/e' ratio (men: beta = -0.11, p = 0.003; women: beta = -0.13, p = 0.01). However, there was no association between low fitness and left ventricular systolic function (p = NS).Low fitness is associated with a higher prevalence of concentric remodeling and diastolic dysfunction, suggesting that exercise may lower heart failure risk through its effect on favorable cardiac remodeling and improved diastolic function.

BACKGROUND: Thrombosis and inflammation may contribute to the risk of death and complications among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). We hypothesized that therapeutic-dose anticoagulation may improve outcomes in noncritically ill patients who are hospitalized with Covid-19. METHODS: In this open-label, adaptive, multiplatform, controlled trial, we randomly assigned patients who were hospitalized with Covid-19 and who were not critically ill (which was defined as an absence of critical care-level organ support at enrollment) to receive pragmatically defined regimens of either therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin or usual-care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. The primary outcome was organ support-free days, evaluated on an ordinal scale that combined in-hospital death (assigned a value of -1) and the number of days free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support up to day 21 among patients who survived to hospital discharge. This outcome was evaluated with the use of a Bayesian statistical model for all patients and according to the baseline d-dimer level. RESULTS: The trial was stopped when prespecified criteria for the superiority of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation were met. Among 2219 patients in the final analysis, the probability that therapeutic-dose anticoagulation increased organ support-free days as compared with usual-care thromboprophylaxis was 98.6% (adjusted odds ratio, 1.27; 95% credible interval, 1.03 to 1.58). The adjusted absolute between-group difference in survival until hospital discharge without organ support favoring therapeutic-dose anticoagulation was 4.0 percentage points (95% credible interval, 0.5 to 7.2). The final probability of the superiority of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation over usual-care thromboprophylaxis was 97.3% in the high d-dimer cohort, 92.9% in the low d-dimer cohort, and 97.3% in the unknown d-dimer cohort. Major bleeding occurred in 1.9% of the patients receiving therapeutic-dose anticoagulation and in 0.9% of those receiving thromboprophylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: In noncritically ill patients with Covid-19, an initial strategy of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin increased the probability of survival to hospital discharge with reduced use of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support as compared with usual-care thromboprophylaxis. (ATTACC, ACTIV-4a, and REMAP-CAP ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT04372589, NCT04505774, NCT04359277, and NCT02735707.).

BACKGROUND Thrombosis and inflammation may contribute to the risk of death and complications among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). We hypothesized that therapeutic-dose anticoagulation may improve outcomes in noncritically ill patients who are hospitalized with Covid-19. METHODS In this open-label, adaptive, multiplatform, controlled trial, we randomly assigned patients who were hospitalized with Covid-19 and who were not critically ill (which was defined as an absence of critical care-level organ support at enrollment) to receive pragmatically defined regimens of either therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin or usual-care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. The primary outcome was organ support-free days, evaluated on an ordinal scale that combined in-hospital death (assigned a value of -1) and the number of days free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support up to day 21 among patients who survived to hospital discharge. This outcome was evaluated with the use of a Bayesian statistical model for all patients and according to the baseline d-dimer level. RESULTS The trial was stopped when prespecified criteria for the superiority of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation were met. Among 2219 patients in the final analysis, the probability that therapeutic-dose anticoagulation increased organ support-free days as compared with usual-care thromboprophylaxis was 98.6% (adjusted odds ratio, 1.27; 95% credible interval, 1.03 to 1.58). The adjusted absolute between-group difference in survival until hospital discharge without organ support favoring therapeutic-dose anticoagulation was 4.0 percentage points (95% credible interval, 0.5 to 7.2). The final probability of the superiority of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation over usual-care thromboprophylaxis was 97.3% in the high d-dimer cohort, 92.9% in the low d-dimer cohort, and 97.3% in the unknown d-dimer cohort. Major bleeding occurred in 1.9% of the patients receiving therapeutic-dose anticoagulation and in 0.9% of those receiving thromboprophylaxis. CONCLUSIONS In noncritically ill patients with Covid-19, an initial strategy of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin increased the probability of survival to hospital discharge with reduced use of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support as compared with usual-care thromboprophylaxis. (ATTACC, ACTIV-4a, and REMAP-CAP ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT04372589, NCT04505774, NCT04359277, and NCT02735707.).