Search

Objectives: This study investigated 1-year incidence and predictors of dyskalemia (dysK) and its outcome associations in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), HF with mid-range EF (HFmrEF), and HF with reduced EF (HFrEF)., Background: DysK in real-world HF is insufficiently characterized. Fear of dyskalemia may lead to underuse or underdosing of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors., Methods: Patients enrolled in the SwedeHF (Swedish Heart Failure) Registry from 2006 to 2011 in Stockholm, Sweden were included in the analyses. Multivariate Cox regression analysis identified independent predictors of dysK within 1 year. Time-dependent Cox models assessed outcomes associated with incident dysK (all-cause death, HF, and other cardiovascular disease [CVD] hospitalizations) within 1 year from baseline., Results: Of 5,848 patients, 24.4% experienced hyperkalemia (hyperK [K >5.0 mmol/l]) at least once, and 10.2% had moderate or severe hyperK (K >5.5 mmol/l). Adjusted risk of moderate or severe hyperK was highest in HFpEF and HFmrEF. Similarly, 20.3% of patients had at least one episode of hypokalemia (hypoK [<3.5 mmol/l]), and 3.7% had severe hypoK (<3.0 mmol/l). Adjusted risk of any hypoK was highest in HFpEF. Independent predictors of both hyperK and hypoK were sex, baseline potassium and estimated glomerular filtration rate, low hemoglobin, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), inpatient status, and higher New York Heart Association functional class. Incident dysK was associated with increased risk of mortality. Furthermore, hypoK was associated with increased CVD hospitalizations (HF-related excluded). There was no association between dysK and HF hospitalization risk, regardless of EF., Conclusions: DysK is common in HF and is associated with increased mortality. Risk of moderate or severe hyperK was highest in HFpEF and HFmrEF, whereas risk of hypoK was highest in HFpEF. HF severity, low hemoglobin, COPD, baseline high and low potassium, and low eGFR were relevant predictors of dysK occurrence., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: To determine the influence of baseline beta-blocker use on long-term prognosis of myocardial infarction (MI) survivors complicated with heart failure (HF) or with left ventricular dysfunction and with history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)., Methods and Results: Among the 28 771 patients from the High-Risk MI Database Initiative we identified 1573 patients with a baseline history of COPD. We evaluated the association between beta-blocker use at baseline (822 with beta-blocker and 751 without) on the rates of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. On univariable Cox analysis, beta-blocker use was found to be associated with lower rates of both all-cause [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51-0.75, P < 0.0001] and cardiovascular mortality (HR = 0.63, 95% CI 0.51-0.78, P < 0.0001). After extensive adjustment for confounding, including 24 baseline covariates, COPD patients still benefited from beta-blocker usage (HR = 0.73, 95% CI 0.60-0.90, P = 0.002 for all-cause mortality; HR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.61-0.97, P = 0.025 for cardiovascular mortality). Adjusting for propensity scores (PS) constructed from the 24 aforementioned baseline characteristics provided similar results. In a cohort of 561 pairs of patients taking or not taking beta-blocker matched on PS using a 1:1 nearest-neighbour matching method, patients treated with beta-blocker experienced fewer all-cause deaths (HR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.56-0.89, P = 0.003) and cardiovascular deaths (HR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.59-0.97, P = 0.032)., Conclusions: In the specific setting of a well-treated cohort of high-risk MI survivors, beta-blockers were associated with better outcomes in patients with COPD., (© 2016 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure © 2016 European Society of Cardiology.)

The epidemiological, clinical, and societal implications of the heart failure (HF) epidemic cannot be overemphasized. Approximately half of all HF patients have HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). HFpEF is largely a syndrome of the elderly, and with aging of the population, the proportion of patients with HFpEF is expected to grow. Currently, there is no drug known to improve mortality or hospitalization risk for these patients. Besides mortality and hospitalization, it is imperative to realize that patients with HFpEF have significant impairment in their functional capacity and their quality of life on a daily basis, underscoring the need for these parameters to ideally be incorporated within a regulatory pathway for drug approval. Although attempts should continue to explore therapies to reduce the risk of mortality or hospitalization for these patients, efforts should also be directed to improve other patient-centric concerns, such as functional capacity and quality of life. To initiate a dialogue about the compelling need for and the challenges in developing such alternative endpoints for patients with HFpEF, the US Food and Drug Administration on November 12, 2015, facilitated a meeting represented by clinicians, academia, industry, and regulatory agencies. This document summarizes the discussion from this meeting., (© 2016 American Heart Association, Inc.)

BACKGROUND: The deleterious effects of discontinuation of digoxin on outcomes in ambulatory patients with chronic heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) receiving angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors are well-documented. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to determine the relationship between digoxin discontinuation and outcomes in hospitalized patients with HFrEF receiving more contemporary guideline-directed medical therapies including beta-blockers and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. METHODS: Of the 11,900 hospitalized patients with HFrEF (EF ≤45%) in the Medicare-linked OPTIMIZE-HF (Organized Program to Initiate Lifesaving Treatment in Hospitalized Patients with Heart Failure) registry, 3,499 received pre-admission digoxin, which was discontinued in 721 patients. Using propensity scores for digoxin discontinuation, estimated for each of the 3,499 patients, a matched cohort of 698 pairs of patients, balanced on 50 baseline characteristics (mean age 76 years; mean EF 28%; 41% women; 13% African American; 65% on beta-blockers) was assembled. RESULTS: Four-year post-discharge, digoxin discontinuation was associated with significantly higher risks of HF readmission (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05 to 1.39; p = 0.007), all-cause readmission (HR: 1.16; 95% CI: 1.04 to 1.31; p = 0.010), and the combined endpoint of HF readmission or all-cause mortality (HR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.34; p = 0.002), but not all-cause mortality (HR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.97 to 1.24; p = 0.163). Discontinuation of digoxin was associated with a significantly higher risk of all 4 outcomes at 6 months and 1 year post-discharge. At 30 days, digoxin discontinuation was associated with higher risks of all-cause mortality (HR: 1.80; 95% CI: 1.26 to 2.57; p = 0.001) and the combined endpoint (HR: 1.36; 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.71; p = 0.007), but not of HF readmission (HR: 1.19; 95% CI: 0.90 to 1.59; p = 0.226) or all-cause readmission (HR: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.84 to 1.26; p = 0.778). CONCLUSIONS: Among hospitalized older patients with HFrEF on more contemporary guideline-directed medical therapies, discontinuation of pre-admission digoxin therapy was associated with poor outcomes.

BackgroundThe efficacy of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists or aldosterone antagonists in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is well known. Less is known about their effectiveness in real-world older patients with HFrEF.MethodsOf the 8206 patients with heart failure and ejection fraction ≤35% without prior spironolactone use in the Medicare-linked OPTIMIZE-HF registry, 6986 were eligible for spironolactone therapy based on serum creatinine criteria (men ≤2.5 mg/dL, women ≤2.0 mg/dL) and 865 received a discharge prescription for spironolactone. Using propensity scores for spironolactone use, we assembled a matched cohort of 1724 (862 pairs) patients receiving and not receiving spironolactone, balanced on 58 baseline characteristics (Creatinine Cohort: mean age, 75 years, 42% women, 17% African American). We repeated the above process to assemble a secondary matched cohort of 1638 (819 pairs) patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥30 mL/min/1.73 m2 (eGFR Cohort: mean age, 75 years, 42% women, 17% African American).ResultsIn the matched Creatinine Cohort, spironolactone-associated hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for all-cause mortality, heart failure readmission, and combined endpoint of heart failure readmission or all-cause mortality were 0.92 (0.81-1.03), 0.87 (0.77-0.99), and 0.87 (0.79-0.97), respectively. Respective hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) in the matched eGFR Cohort were 0.87 (0.77-0.98), 0.92 (0.80-1.05), and 0.91 (0.82-1.02).ConclusionsThese findings provide evidence of consistent, albeit modest, clinical effectiveness of spironolactone in older patients with HFrEF regardless of renal eligibility criteria used. Additional strategies are needed to improve the effectiveness of aldosterone antagonists in clinical practice.

Aim: The TRANSFORM‐HF trial demonstrated no significant outcome differences between torsemide and furosemide following hospitalization for heart failure (HF), but may have been impacted by non‐adherence to the randomized diuretic. The current study sought to determine the treatment effect of torsemide versus furosemide using an on‐treatment analysis inclusive of all randomized patients except those confirmed non‐adherent to study diuretic. Methods and results: TRANSFORM‐HF was an open‐label, pragmatic randomized trial of 2859 patients hospitalized for HF from June 2018 through March 2022. Patients were randomized to a loop diuretic strategy of torsemide versus furosemide with investigator‐selected dosage. This post‐hoc on‐treatment analysis included all patients alive with either known or unknown diuretic status, and excluded patients confirmed to be non‐adherent to study diuretic. This modified on‐treatment definition was applied separately at time of hospital discharge and 30‐day follow‐up. All‐cause mortality and hospitalization outcomes were assessed over 12 months. Overall, 2570 (89.9%) and 2374 (83.0%) patients were included in on‐treatment analyses at discharge and 30‐day follow‐up, respectively. There was no significant difference in all‐cause mortality between torsemide and furosemide in patients on‐treatment at discharge (17.5% vs. 17.8%; hazard ratio [HR] 1.01 [95% confidence interval [CI] 0.83–1.22], p = 0.96) and at 30‐day follow‐up (14.5% vs. 15.0%; HR 1.02 [95% CI 0.81–1.27], p = 0.90). All‐cause mortality or all‐cause hospitalization was similar between torsemide and furosemide in patients who were on‐treatment at discharge (58.3% vs. 61.3%; HR 0.92 [95% CI 0.82–1.03]) and 30‐day follow‐up (60.9% vs. 64.4%; HR 0.93 [95% CI 0.82–1.05]). In patients who were on‐treatment at 30‐day follow‐up, there were 677 total hospitalizations in the torsemide group and 686 total hospitalizations in the furosemide group (rate ratio 0.99 [95% CI 0.86–1.14], p = 0.87). Conclusions: In TRANSFORM‐HF, a post‐hoc on‐treatment analysis did not meaningfully differ from the original trial results. Among those deemed compliant with the assigned diuretic, there remained no significant difference in mortality or hospitalization after HF hospitalization with a strategy of torsemide versus furosemide. Clinical Trail Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03296813. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key Points: Question: Does torsemide reduce all-cause mortality compared with furosemide in patients with heart failure following hospitalization? Findings: In this randomized clinical trial of 2859 patients, 26.1% of patients randomized to torsemide and 26.2% randomized to furosemide died over a median follow-up of 17.4 months without a significant difference between groups. Meaning: Among patients discharged after hospitalization for heart failure, torsemide compared with furosemide did not result in a significant difference in all-cause mortality over 12 months; however, interpretation of these findings is limited by loss to follow-up and participant crossover and nonadherence. Importance: Although furosemide is the most commonly used loop diuretic in patients with heart failure, some studies suggest a potential benefit for torsemide. Objective: To determine whether torsemide results in decreased mortality compared with furosemide among patients hospitalized for heart failure. Design, Setting, and Participants: TRANSFORM-HF was an open-label, pragmatic randomized trial that recruited 2859 participants hospitalized with heart failure (regardless of ejection fraction) at 60 hospitals in the United States. Recruitment occurred from June 2018 through March 2022, with follow-up through 30 months for death and 12 months for hospitalizations. The final date for follow-up data collection was July 2022. Interventions: Loop diuretic strategy of torsemide (n = 1431) or furosemide (n = 1428) with investigator-selected dosage. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was all-cause mortality in a time-to-event analysis. There were 5 secondary outcomes with all-cause mortality or all-cause hospitalization and total hospitalizations assessed over 12 months being highest in the hierarchy. The prespecified primary hypothesis was that torsemide would reduce all-cause mortality by 20% compared with furosemide. Results: TRANSFORM-HF randomized 2859 participants with a median age of 65 years (IQR, 56-75), 36.9% were women, and 33.9% were Black. Over a median follow-up of 17.4 months, a total of 113 patients (53 [3.7%] in the torsemide group and 60 [4.2%] in the furosemide group) withdrew consent from the trial prior to completion. Death occurred in 373 of 1431 patients (26.1%) in the torsemide group and 374 of 1428 patients (26.2%) in the furosemide group (hazard ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.89-1.18]). Over 12 months following randomization, all-cause mortality or all-cause hospitalization occurred in 677 patients (47.3%) in the torsemide group and 704 patients (49.3%) in the furosemide group (hazard ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.83-1.02]). There were 940 total hospitalizations among 536 participants in the torsemide group and 987 total hospitalizations among 577 participants in the furosemide group (rate ratio, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.84-1.07]). Results were similar across prespecified subgroups, including among patients with reduced, mildly reduced, or preserved ejection fraction. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients discharged after hospitalization for heart failure, torsemide compared with furosemide did not result in a significant difference in all-cause mortality over 12 months. However, interpretation of these findings is limited by loss to follow-up and participant crossover and nonadherence. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03296813 This clinical trial compares the efficacy of torsemide vs furosemide in decreasing the risk of death from any cause among patients hospitalized for heart failure (regardless of ejection fraction). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients with heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction are commonly admitted to the hospital for both cardiovascular (CV) and noncardiovascular (non-CV) reasons. The prognostic implications of non-CV hospitalizations in this population are not well understood. In this study, we aimed to examine the prognostic implications of hospitalizations owing to CV and non-CV reasons in a HF with preserved ejection fraction population.Methods and Results: The Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure with an Aldosterone Antagonist trial (TOPCAT) randomized 3445 stable outpatients with chronic HF with a left ventricular ejection fraction of 45% or greater and either prior hospitalization for HF or elevated natriuretic peptides to treatment with spironolactone or placebo. Hospitalizations for any cause were reported by investigators during study follow-up and characterized according to prespecified category causes. This analysis focused on the subset of TOPCAT participants enrolled in the Americas (n = 1767), in which 2973 hospitalizations were observed in 1062 subjects (60%) over a mean follow-up of 3.3 years of study follow-up, of which 1474 (49%) were ascribed to CV causes. Among 1056 first hospitalizations, 478 (45%) were for CV reasons and 578 (55%) for non-CV reasons. Mortality rates were lowest for participants not hospitalized during the trial (3.2 per 100 patient-years [PY]), but similarly elevated after first hospitalization for CV and non-CV reasons (11.0 per 100 PY vs 12.6 per 100 PY, respectively; P = .24). Among those hospitalized for CV reasons, mortality rates were similar after hospitalization for HF and non-CV related reasons (15.2 per 100 PY vs 12.6 per 100 PY; P = .23). Recurrent hospitalization, whether owing to CV or non-CV causes, was associated with a heightened risk for subsequent mortality, with similar death rates after hospitalization twice for CV reasons (18.5 per 100 PY), twice for non-CV reasons (21.6 per 100 PY), or once each for CV and non-CV reasons (18.4 per 100 PY).Conclusions: Among patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction, hospitalization for any cause is associated with a heightened risk for postdischarge mortality, with an even higher risk associated with recurrent hospitalization. Given the high burden of non-CV hospitalizations in this population, the targeted management of comorbid medical illness may be critical to decreasing morbidity and mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Outpatient treatment for the worsening of signs and symptoms of heart failure (HF) is usually not incorporated in the main outcomes of HF trials. Patients with HF and a preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) may experience frequent episodes of outpatient worsening HF. The aim of this study was to evaluate the frequency, prognostic impact, and the effect of spironolactone on outpatient diuretic intensification (ODI), among 1767 patients enrolled in TOPCAT‐Americas. Methods and results: Time‐updated Cox models and win ratio analysis. ODI was defined by a post‐randomization loop diuretic dose increase or new initiation. The median follow‐up was 2.9 years. At baseline, 1362 (77%) patients were taking loop diuretics. During the follow‐up, 685 (38.8%) patients experienced ODI, which was associated with a higher risk of subsequent cardiovascular events and death [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death 1.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.36–2.04; HR for cardiovascular death 2.17, 95% CI 1.64–2.87); and HR for all‐cause mortality 1.75, 95% CI 1.41–2.16] (p < 0.001 for all outcomes). Adding ODI to the composite of HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death increased the event rate by three‐fold in the placebo group (from 10.4 to 29.9 events per 100 person‐years). Spironolactone treatment led to a 26% relative reduction of the extended composite of ODI or HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.65–0.85; p < 0.001) compared with a 16% relative reduction of HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70–0.99; p = 0.044). Using win ratio provided similar estimates. Conclusion: In HFpEF, ODI was frequent and independently associated with subsequent cardiovascular events. Spironolactone significantly reduced an extended composite outcome incorporating ODI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: The TRANSFORM-HF trial (Torsemide Comparison With Furosemide for Management of Heart Failure) found no significant difference in all-cause mortality or hospitalization among patients randomized to a strategy of torsemide versus furosemide following a heart failure (HF) hospitalization. However, outcomes and responses to some therapies differ by left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Thus, we sought to explore the effect of torsemide versus furosemide by baseline LVEF and to assess outcomes across LVEF groups. METHODS: We compared baseline patient characteristics and randomized treatment effects for various end points in TRANSFORM-HF stratified by LVEF: HF with reduced LVEF, ≤40% versus HF with mildly reduced LVEF, 41% to 49% versus HF with preserved LVEF, ≥50%. We also evaluated associations between LVEF and clinical outcomes. Study end points were all-cause mortality or hospitalization at 30 days and 12 months, total hospitalizations at 12 months, and change from baseline in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire clinical summary score. RESULTS: Overall, 2635 patients (median 64 years, 36% female, 34% Black) had LVEF data. Compared with HF with reduced LVEF, patients with HF with mildly reduced LVEF and HF with preserved LVEF had a higher prevalence of comorbidities. After adjusting for covariates, there was no significant difference in risk of clinical outcomes across the LVEF groups (adjusted hazard ratio for 12-month all-cause mortality, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.59–1.39] for HF with mildly reduced LVEF versus HF with reduced LVEF and 0.91 [95% CI, 0.70–1.17] for HF with preserved LVEF versus HF with reduced LVEF; P =0.73). In addition, there was no significant difference between torsemide and furosemide (1) for mortality and hospitalization outcomes, irrespective of LVEF group and (2) in changes in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire clinical summary score in any LVEF subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: Despite baseline demographic and clinical differences between LVEF cohorts in TRANSFORM-HF, there were no significant differences in the clinical end points with torsemide versus furosemide across the LVEF spectrum. There was a substantial risk for all-cause mortality and subsequent hospitalization independent of baseline LVEF. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03296813. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Current cardiovascular pharmacotherapy targets maladaptive overactivation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS), which occurs throughout the continuum of cardiovascular disease spanning from hypertension to heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Over the past 16 years, 4 prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials using candesartan, perindopril, irbesartan, and spironolactone in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) failed to demonstrate increased efficacy of RAAS blockade added to guideline-directed medical therapy. We reappraise these trials and their weaknesses, which precluded statistically significant findings. Recently, dual-acting RAAS blockade with sacubitril-valsartan relative to stand-alone valsartan failed to improve outcome in the PARAGON-HF trial (Efficacy and Safety of LCZ696 Compared with Valsartan, on Morbidity and Mortality in Heart Failure Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction). The majority of patients with HFpEF experience hypertension, frequently with subclinical left ventricular dysfunction, contributed to by comorbidities such as coronary disease, diabetes mellitus, overweight, and atrial fibrillation. Contrasting the findings in HFpEF, trials evaluating RAAS blockade on either side of HFpEF on the cardiovascular continuum in patients with high-risk hypertension and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, respectively, showed positive outcomes. We do not have a biologically plausible explanation for such divergent efficacy of RAAS blockade. Based on considerations of well-established clinical efficacy in hypertension and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and the shortcomings of aforementioned clinical trials in HFpEF, we argue that RAAS blockers including MRAs (mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists; aldosterone antagonists) should be used in the treatment of patients with HFpEF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Black patients have been shown to have different baseline characteristics and outcomes compared with nonblack patients in cohort studies. However, few studies have focused on heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) patients. We aimed to determine the difference in cardiovascular outcomes in black and nonblack patients with HFpEF and to determine the relative efficacy and safety of spironolactone in black and nonblack patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with HFpEF, randomized to spironolactone versus placebo in the TOPCAT trial (Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure With an Aldosterone Antagonist) in North and South America, were grouped according to self-described black and nonblack race. Black HFpEF patients (n=302) were younger and were more likely to have diabetes mellitus and hypertension than nonblack patients but had similar HFpEF severity. Black patients had higher risk for the primary outcome (hazard ratio [HR], 1.34; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-1.71; P=0.02) and first HF hospitalization (HR, 1.51; 95% confidence interval, 1.167-1.97; P=0.002)], but no significant difference in cardiovascular mortality risk (HR, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-1.20; P=0.326). In black and nonblack patients, randomization to spironolactone conferred similar efficacy in the primary outcome (HR, 0.83 versus 0.79; P for interaction=0.49), HF hospitalization (HR, 0.67 versus 0.82; P for interaction=0.76), and cardiovascular mortality (P for interaction=0.19). The risk of hyperkalemia and worsening renal function with spironolactone and study drug adherence were also similar. CONCLUSIONS: Black patients with HFpEF have a higher HF hospitalization risk than nonblack patients, but spironolactone is similarly effective and safe in both groups. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00094302. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The relationship between serum potassium, mortality, and conditions commonly associated with dyskalemias, such as heart failure (HF), chronic kidney disease (CKD), and/or diabetes mellitus (DM) is largely unknown.Methods: We reviewed electronic medical record data from a geographically diverse population (n = 911,698) receiving medical care, determined the distribution of serum potassium, and the relationship between an index potassium value and mortality over an 18-month period in those with and without HF, CKD, and/or DM. We examined the association between all-cause mortality and potassium using a cubic spline regression analysis in the total population, a control group, and in HF, CKD, DM, and a combined cohort.Results: 27.6% had a potassium <4.0 mEq/L, and 5.7% had a value ≥5.0 mEq/L. A U-shaped association was noted between serum potassium and mortality in all groups, with lowest all-cause mortality in controls with potassium values between 4.0 and <5.0 mEq/L. All-cause mortality rates per index potassium between 2.5 and 8.0 mEq/L were consistently greater with HF 22%, CKD 16.6%, and DM 6.6% vs. controls 1.2%, and highest in the combined cohort 29.7%. Higher mortality rates were noted in those aged ≥65 vs. 50-64 years. In an adjusted model, all-cause mortality was significantly elevated for every 0.1 mEq/L change in potassium <4.0 mEq/L and ≥5.0 mEq/L. Diuretics and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors were related to hypokalemia and hyperkalemia respectively.Conclusion: Mortality risk progressively increased with dyskalemia and was differentially greater in those with HF, CKD, or DM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Serum uric acid (SUA) levels are associated with poorer outcomes in healthy cohorts and patients with stable and unstable coronary heart disease. We investigated the relationship between SUA and clinical outcomes in subjects with acute myocardial infarction (MI) complicated by reduced left ventricular (LV) function, heart failure (HF), or both.Methods and Results: Univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards modelling was performed to study the association of baseline SUA and all-cause mortality, cardiovascular (CV) mortality, and HF hospitalization in an individual patient meta-analysis of four merged large randomized trials (CAPRICORN, EPHESUS, OPTIMAAL, and VALIANT). Three trials (excluding VALIANT) reported SUA, which was available in a total of 12 677 subjects. The ranges of SUA for quartiles I-IV were 45-280, 281-344, 345-420, and 420-1640 mmol/L, respectively. While almost 90% of patients in the lowest SUA quartile were alive after a mean follow-up of 23 ± 11 months, <70% were alive in the highest SUA quartile. Compared with the lowest SUA quartile as reference, hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of SUA quartiles III and IV showed an increase in all-cause mortality [HR 1.18, 95% CI 0.95-1.46, and HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.11-1.67) and CV mortality (HR 1.27, 95% 1.01-1.61, and HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.17-1.83). SUA quartiles III and IV also exhibited increased HF hospitalization (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.09-1.36, and HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.14-1.43; P < 0.001 for all comparisons) in multivariable analyses. The addition of SUA was associated with a significant improvement in reclassification to predict CV mortality (net reclassification improvement 17.6%, 95% CI 14.9-20.5%, P < 0.001).Conclusions: Elevated SUA is associated with poor outcomes in patients after MI complicated by reduced LV function, HF, or both. The quantification of SUA, a low-cost routinely available biomarker, could improve risk stratification of patients with complicated MI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims We examined the relationship between different degrees of QRS prolongation and different QRS morphologies and clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure, reduced ejection fraction (HF-REF), and mild symptoms in the Eplerenone in Mild Patients Hospitalization and SurvIval Study in Heart Failure trial (EMPHASIS-HF). We also evaluated the effect of eplerenone in these patients according to QRS duration/morphology. Methods and results Patients were categorized as: QRS duration (ms) (i) <120 (n = 1375); (ii) 120-149 (n = 517); and (iii) ≥150 (n = 383), and QRS morphology (i) normal (n = 1252); (ii) left bundle branch block (BBB) (n = 608); and (iii) right BBB/intraventricular conduction defect (IVCD) (n = 415). The outcomes examined were the composite of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization and all-cause mortality. Both abnormal QRS duration and QRS morphology were associated with higher risk, e.g. the rates of the composite outcome were: 10.2, 17.6, and 15.5 per 100 patient-years in the <120, 120-149, and ≥150 ms groups, respectively. Eplerenone reduced the risk of the primary outcome and mortality, compared with placebo, consistently across the QRS duration/morphology subgroups. Conclusion We found that even moderate prolongation of QRS duration and right BBB/IVCD were associated with a high risk of adverse outcomes in HF-REF. Eplerenone was similarly effective, irrespective of QRS duration/morphology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses issues related to undertaking cardiovascular outcome trials in patients with advanced stages of chronic kidney diseases and those who are on dialysis. Topics discussed include ways to define cardiovascular events such as acute coronary syndrome and heart failure in patients with later stages of chronic kidney diseases, baseline troponin concentrations in patients with chronic kidney disease and rates of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients.

Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors improve outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, less is known about their effectiveness in patients with HFrEF and advanced kidney disease. In the Medicare-linked Organized Program to Initiate Lifesaving Treatment in Hospitalized Patients with Heart Failure (OPTIMIZE-HF), 1582 patients with HFrEF (ejection fraction ≤40%) had advanced kidney disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min/1.73 m2). Of these, 829 were not receiving angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) prior to admission, of whom 214 were initiated on these drugs prior to discharge. We calculated propensity scores for receipt of these drugs for each of the 829 patients and assembled a matched cohort of 388 patients, balanced on 47 baseline characteristics (mean age 78 years; 52% women; 10% African American; 73% receiving beta-blockers). Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated comparing 2-year outcomes in 194 patients initiated on ACE inhibitors or ARBs to 194 patients not initiated on those drugs. The combined endpoint of heart failure readmission or all-cause mortality occurred in 79% and 84% of patients initiated and not initiated on ACE inhibitors or ARBs, respectively (HR associated with initiation, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.63-0.98). Respective HRs (95% CI) for the individual endpoints of - Respective HRs (95% CI) for the individual endpoints of all-cause mortality and heart failure readmission were 0.81 (0.63–1.03) and 0.63 (0.47–0.85). The findings from our study add new information to the body of cumulative evidence that suggest that renin-angiotensin system inhibitors may improve clinical outcomes in patients with HFrEF and advanced kidney disease. These hypothesis-generating findings need to be replicated in contemporary patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Graphical abstract Abstract Aim To evaluate canrenone effects compared to other therapies on cardiovascular mortality in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) and preserved systolic function after 10 years of evaluation. Methods We enrolled 532 patients with CHF and preserved systolic function. Patients were followed with a mean follow-up of 10 years: 166 patients were in therapy with canrenone, while 336 patients were in conventional therapy. We re-evaluated these data after 10 years, together with the rate of death and survival. Results Systolic and diastolic blood pressure were lower with canrenone compared to the group not treated with canrenone, both in supine and orthostatism. In the group treated with canrenone we recorded a lower value of fasting plasma glucose and glycated hemoglobin. Uric acid was lower in the group treated with canrenone, no differences were observed regarding creatinine, sodium, potassium, brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), pro-BNP or plasma renin activity (PRA), while aldosterone levels were reduced in canrenone group compared to control. After 10 years, left ventricular mass was lower in canrenone group. We recorded a more pronounced progression of NYHA class in controls compared to patients treated with canrenone, with also a higher number of deaths. A higher number of deaths was recorded in control group in the 68–83 years range compared to canrenone. A higher incidence of death was reported among patients without hypercholesterolemia in control group; this was not significant in patients treated with canrenone. A longer survival was observed in patients treated with canrenone. Conclusion Administered to patients with CHF and preserved systolic fraction, reduced mortality and extended the life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Physical activity (PA) is inversely associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes in healthy populations, but the impact of physical activity in patients with heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction is less well characterized.Methods: The baseline self-reported PA of 1751 subjects enrolled in the Americas region of the TOPCAT trial (Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure With an Aldosterone Antagonist) was categorized as poor, intermediate, or ideal PA with American Heart Association criteria. PA was related to the primary composite outcome (HF hospitalization, cardiovascular mortality, or aborted cardiac arrest), its components, and all-cause mortality with the use of multivariable Cox models.Results: The mean age at enrollment was 68.6±9.6 years. Few patients met American Heart Association criteria for ideal activity (11% ideal, 14% intermediate, 75% poor). Over a median follow-up of 2.4 years, the primary composite outcome occurred in 519 patients (397 HF hospitalizations, 222 cardiovascular deaths, and 6 aborted cardiac arrests). Compared with those with ideal baseline PA, poor and intermediate baseline PA was associated with a greater risk of the primary outcome (hazard ratio [HR], 2.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.28-3.28; HR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.15-3.33, respectively), HF hospitalization (HR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.16-3.22; HR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.02-3.31), cardiovascular mortality (HR, 4.36; 95% CI, 1.37-13.83; HR, 4.05; 95% CI, 1.17-14.04), and all-cause mortality (HR, 2.95; 95% CI, 1.44-6.02; HR, 2.05; 95% CI, 0.90-4.67) after multivariable adjustment for potential confounders.Conclusions: In patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction, both poor and intermediate self-reported PA were associated with higher risk of HF hospitalization and mortality.Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00094302. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The risk of sudden death has changed over time among patients with symptomatic heart failure and reduced ejection fraction with the sequential introduction of medications including angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers, beta-blockers, and mineralocorticoid-receptor antagonists. We sought to examine this trend in detail.Methods: We analyzed data from 40,195 patients who had heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and were enrolled in any of 12 clinical trials spanning the period from 1995 through 2014. Patients who had an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator at the time of trial enrollment were excluded. Weighted multivariable regression was used to examine trends in rates of sudden death over time. Adjusted hazard ratios for sudden death in each trial group were calculated with the use of Cox regression models. The cumulative incidence rates of sudden death were assessed at different time points after randomization and according to the length of time between the diagnosis of heart failure and randomization.Results: Sudden death was reported in 3583 patients. Such patients were older and were more often male, with an ischemic cause of heart failure and worse cardiac function, than those in whom sudden death did not occur. There was a 44% decline in the rate of sudden death across the trials (P=0.03). The cumulative incidence of sudden death at 90 days after randomization was 2.4% in the earliest trial and 1.0% in the most recent trial. The rate of sudden death was not higher among patients with a recent diagnosis of heart failure than among those with a longer-standing diagnosis.Conclusions: Rates of sudden death declined substantially over time among ambulatory patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction who were enrolled in clinical trials, a finding that is consistent with a cumulative benefit of evidence-based medications on this cause of death. (Funded by the China Scholarship Council and the University of Glasgow.). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) predicts worse outcomes in heart failure (HF). The impact of milder pulmonary disease not requiring oral steroids or home O2 on outcomes in HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is less well characterized. Objectives: We quantified the prognostic relevance of obstructive pulmonary disease for cardiovascular outcomes, and determined alterations in cardiac structure and function associated with pulmonary disease, in HFpEF. Methods: Among 1765 patients enrolled in TOPCAT in the Americas, pulmonary disease (COPD or asthma; patients using oral steroids or home O2 excluded from enrollment) was reported in 416 at baseline. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to compare outcomes in patients with and without (n=1349) pulmonary disease. Cardiac structure and function were also quantified in 653 patients in an echocardiography sub-study. Results: Patients with pulmonary disease were more likely to be non-white, current smokers, with prior PCI, lower beta-blocker use, higher heart rate, BMI and NYHA class. During a median follow up of 2.4 years, pulmonary disease was independently associated with a higher risk for the composite outcome (cardiovascular mortality, HF hospitalization and aborted cardiac arrest), HF hospitalization alone, and all-cause hospitalization alone, but not for mortality in multivariable analysis (TABLE). In the echo cohort, pulmonary disease was associated with higher LVEF (61±6% with vs. 59±8% without pulmonary disease; p<0.01) and smaller LA volume index (28±10 vs. 32±14 mL/m2; p<0.01), without differences in RV fractional area change (49±8 vs. 49±9%, p=0.77) or pulmonary pressure (RV-RA gradient 32±11 vs. 33±11mmHg, p=0.93). Conclusion: In TOPCAT, pulmonary disease was independently associated with greater risk of HF hospitalization and all-cause hospitalization, but not mortality. Pulmonary disease was not associated with prominent differences in cardiac structure and function, suggesting an important role for extracardiac factors in mediating observed risks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]