Search

BackgroundFor patients with acute heart failure (AHF), substantial diuresis after administration of loop diuretics is generally associated with better clinical outcomes but may cause creatinine to rise, suggesting renal function decline. We investigated the interaction between diuretic response and worsening renal function (WRF) on clinical outcomes in patients with AHF.Methods and resultsIn two AHF cohorts (PROTECT, n = 1698 and RELAX-AHF-2, n = 5586 in current analysis), the prognostic impact of WRF (creatinine ≥0.3 mg/dl increase baseline-day 4; sensitivity analyses incorporated baseline renal function) by diuretic response (kg weight loss/40 mg furosemide equivalent baseline-day 4) was investigated with regard to (cardiovascular) death or cardiovascular/renal hospitalization using subpopulation treatment effect pattern plots (STEPP) and survival analyses. WRF occurred in 286 (16.8%) and 1031 (18.5%) patients in PROTECT and RELAX-AHF-2, respectively. Patients with WRF had higher left ventricular ejection fraction and lower estimated glomerular filtration rate at baseline (p

AimsStroke is often a devastating event among patients with heart failure with reduced ejection (HFrEF). In COMMANDER HF, rivaroxaban 2.5 mg b.i.d. did not reduce the composite of first occurrence of death, stroke, or myocardial infarction compared with placebo in patients with HFrEF, coronary artery disease (CAD), and sinus rhythm. We now examine the incidence, timing, type, severity, and predictors of stroke or a transient ischaemic attack (TIA), and seek to establish the net clinical benefit of treatment with low-dose rivaroxaban.Methods and resultsIn this double-blind, randomized trial, 5022 patients who had HFrEF(≤40%), elevated natriuretic peptides, CAD, and who were in sinus rhythm were treated with rivaroxaban 2.5 mg b.i.d. or placebo in addition to antiplatelet therapy, after an episode of worsening HF. The primary neurological outcome for this post hoc analysis was time to first event of any stroke or TIA. Over a median follow-up of 20.5 (25th-75th percentiles 20.0-20.9) months, 150 all-cause stroke (127) or TIA (23) events occurred (ischaemic stroke in 82% and haemorrhagic stroke in 11% of stroke events). Overall, 47.5% of first-time strokes were either disabling (16.5%) or fatal (31%). Prior stroke, low body mass index, geographic region, and the CHA2DS2-VASc score were predictors of stroke/TIA. Rivaroxaban significantly reduced the primary neurological endpoint of all-cause stroke or TIA compared with placebo by 32% (1.29 events vs. 1.90 events per 100 patient-years), adjusted for the time from index HF event to randomization and stratified by geographic region (adjusted hazard ratio 0.68, 95% confidence interval 0.49-0.94), with a number needed to treat of 164 patients per year to prevent one stroke/TIA event. The principal safety endpoint of fatal bleeding or bleeding into a critical space, occurred at a similar rate on rivaroxaban and placebo (0.44 events vs. 0.55 events per 100 patient-years).ConclusionsPatients with HFrEF and CAD are at risk for stroke or TIA in the period following an episode of worsening heart failure in the absence of atrial fibrillation. Most strokes are of ischaemic origin and nearly half are either disabling or fatal. Rivaroxaban at a dose of 2.5 mg b.i.d. reduced rates of stroke or TIA compared with placebo in this population.Trial registrationCOMMANDER HF (A Study to Assess the Effectiveness and Safety of Rivaroxaban in Reducing the Risk of Death, Myocardial Infarction, or Stroke in Participants with Heart Failure and Coronary Artery Disease Following an Episode of Decompensated Heart Failure); ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01877915.

BackgroundOver the last 50 years, clinical trials of novel interventions for acute heart failure (AHF) have, with few exceptions, been neutral or shown harm. We hypothesize that this might be related to a differential response to pharmacological therapy.MethodsWe studied the magnitude of treatment effect of rolofylline across clinical characteristics and plasma biomarkers in 2033 AHF patients and derived a biomarker-based responder sum score model. Treatment response was survival from all-cause mortality through day 180.ResultsIn the overall study population, rolofylline had no effect on mortality (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.82-1.28, p = 0.808). We found no treatment interaction across clinical characteristics, but we found interactions between several biomarkers and rolofylline. The biomarker-based sum score model included TNF-R1α, ST2, WAP four-disulfide core domain protein HE4 (WAP-4C), and total cholesterol, and the score ranged between 0 and 4. In patients with score 4 (those with increased TNF-R1α, ST2, WAP-4C, and low total cholesterol), treatment with rolofylline was beneficial (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.40-0.92, p = 0.019). In patients with score 0, treatment with rolofylline was harmful (HR 5.52, 95% CI 1.68-18.13, p = 0.005; treatment by score interaction p

AimsThrombin is a critical element of crosstalk between pathways contributing to worsening of established heart failure (HF). The aim of this study is to explore the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban 2.5 mg bid compared with placebo (with standard care) after an exacerbation of HF in patients with reduced ejection fraction (HF-rEF) and documented coronary artery disease.MethodsThis is an international prospective, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, event-driven study of approximately 5000 patients for a targeted 984 events. Patients must have a recent symptomatic exacerbation of HF, increased plasma concentrations of natriuretic peptides (B-type natriuretic peptide ≥200 pg/mL or N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide ≥800 pg/mL), with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40% and coronary artery disease. Patients requiring anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation or other conditions will be excluded. After an index event (overnight hospitalization, emergency department or observation unit admission, or unscheduled outpatient parenteral treatment for worsening HF), patients will be randomized 1:1 to rivaroxaban or placebo (with standard of care). The primary efficacy outcome event is a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction or stroke. The principal safety outcome events are the composite of fatal bleeding or bleeding into a critical space with potential permanent disability, bleeding events requiring hospitalization and major bleeding events according to International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis bleeding criteria.ConclusionCOMMANDER HF is the first prospective study of a target-specific oral antithrombotic agent in HF. It will provide important information regarding rivaroxaban use following an HF event in an HF-rEF patient population with coronary artery disease.

BackgroundWorsening heart failure (WHF) symptoms despite initial therapy during admission for acute heart failure (AHF) is associated with worse outcomes. The association between the time of the WHF event and the intensity of WHF therapy with outcomes is unknown.Methods and resultsIn the PROTECT trial of 2033 AHF patients, we investigated the association between time of occurrence of WHF and intensity of therapy, with subsequent outcomes. WHF was defined by standardized, physician-determined assessment. Early WHF was defined as occurring on days 2-3 and late on days 4-7. Low intensity included restarting/increasing diuretics or vasodilators and high intensity included initiation of inotropes, vasopressors, inodilators, or mechanical support. Outcomes were death or cardiovascular/renal hospitalization over 60 days and death over 180 days. Of the 1879 patients with complete follow-up after day 7, 12.7% (n = 238) experienced WHF: 47.9% early and 52.1% late. Treatment intensity was low in 72.3% and high in 24.8% (2.9% missing). After adjusting for baseline predictors of outcome, WHF was associated with a trend toward increased 60-day death or cardiovascular/renal hospitalization [hazard ratio (HR) 1.26; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.99-1.60; P = 0.063] and increased 180-day death (HR 1.77; 95% CI 1.33-2.34; P

Heart failure is a syndrome with a pathophysiological basis that can be traced to dysfunction in several interconnected molecular pathways. Identification of biomarkers of heart failure that allow measurement of the disease on a molecular level has resulted in enthusiasm for their use in prognostication and selection of appropriate therapies. However, despite considerable amounts of information available on numerous biomarkers, inconsistent research methodologies and lack of clinical correlations have made bench-to-bedside translations rare and left the literature with countless publications of varied quality. There is a need for a systematic and collaborative approach aimed at definitively studying the clinical benefits of novel biomarkers. In this review, on the basis of input from academia, industry, and governmental agencies, we propose a systematized approach based on adherence to specific quality measures for studies looking to augment current prediction model or use biomarkers to tailor therapeutics. We suggest that study quality, rather than results, should determine publication and propose a system for grading biomarker studies. We outline the need for collaboration between clinical investigators and statisticians to introduce more advanced statistical methodologies into the field of biomarkers that would allow for data from a large number of variables to be distilled into clinically actionable information. Lastly, we propose the creation of a heart failure biomarker consortium that would allow for a comprehensive list of biomarkers to be concomitantly analyzed in a pooled sample of randomized clinical trials and hypotheses to be generated for testing in biomarker-guided trials. Such a consortium could collaborate in sharing samples to identify biomarkers, undertake meta-analyses on completed trials, and spearhead clinical trials to test the clinical utility of new biomarkers.

AimsThe implications of geographical variation are unknown following adjustment for hospital length of stay (LOS) in heart failure (HF) trials that included patients whether or not they had systolic dysfunction. We investigated regional differences in an international acute HF trial.Methods and resultsThe PROTECT trial investigated 2033 patients with acute HF and renal dysfunction hospitalized at 173 sites in 17 countries with randomization to rolofylline or placebo. We grouped enrolling countries into six regions. Baseline characteristics, in-hospital management, and outcomes were explored by region. The primary study outcome was 60-day mortality or cardiovascular/renal hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included 180-day mortality. Of 2033 patients, 33% were from Eastern Europe, 19% from Western Europe, 16% from Israel, 15% from North America, 14% from Russia, and 3% from Argentina. Marked differences in baseline characteristics, HF phenotype, in-hospital diuretic and vasodilator strategies, and LOS were observed by region. LOS was shortest in North America and Israel (median 5 days) and longest in Russia (median 15 days). Regional event rates varied significantly. Following multivariable adjustment, region was an independent predictor of the risk of mortality/hospitalization at 60 days, with the lowest risk in Russia (hazard ratio 0.39, 95% confidence interval 0.23-0.64 vs. Western Europe) due to lower rehospitalization; mortality differences were attenuated by 180 days.ConclusionsIn an international HF trial, there were differences in baseline characteristics, treatments, LOS, and rehospitalization amongst regions, but little difference in longer term mortality. Rehospitalization differences exist independent of LOS. This analysis may help inform future trial design and should be externally validated.

The burden of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is considerable and is projected to worsen. To date, there are no approved therapies available for reducing mortality or hospitalizations for these patients. The pathophysiology of HFpEF is complex and includes alterations in cardiac structure and function, systemic and pulmonary vascular abnormalities, end-organ involvement, and comorbidities. There remain major gaps in our understanding of HFpEF pathophysiology. To facilitate a discussion of how to proceed effectively in future with development of therapies for HFpEF, a meeting was facilitated by the Food and Drug Administration and included representatives from academia, industry, and regulatory agencies. This document summarizes the proceedings from this meeting.

There are over 1 million hospitalizations for heart failure (HF) annually in the United States alone, and a similar number has been reported in Europe. Recent clinical trials investigating novel therapies in patients with hospitalized HF (HHF) have been negative, and the post-discharge event rate remains unacceptably high. The lack of success with HHF trials stem from problems with understanding the study drug, matching the drug to the appropriate HF subgroup, and study execution. Related to the concept of study execution is the importance of including appropriate study sites in HHF trials. Often overlooked issues include consideration of the geographic region and the number of patients enrolled at each study center. Marked differences in baseline patient co-morbidities, serum biomarkers, treatment utilization and outcomes have been demonstrated across geographic regions. Furthermore, patients from sites with low recruitment may have worse outcomes compared to sites with higher enrollment patterns. Consequently, sites with poor trial enrollment may influence key patient end points and likely do not justify the costs of site training and maintenance. Accordingly, there is an unmet need to develop strategies to identify the right study sites that have acceptable patient quantity and quality. Potential approaches include, but are not limited to, establishing a pre-trial registry, developing site performance metrics, identifying a local regionally involved leader and bolstering recruitment incentives. This manuscript summarizes the roundtable discussion hosted by the Food and Drug Administration between members of academia, the National Institutes of Health, industry partners, contract research organizations and academic research organizations on the importance of selecting optimal sites for successful trials in HHF.

Abstract Background Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) with late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) can provide unique data on the transmural extent of scar/viability. We assessed the prevalence of dysfunctional myocardium, including partial thickness scar, which could contribute to left ventricular contractile dysfunction in patients with heart failure and ischaemic heart disease who denied angina symptoms. Methods We invited patients with ischaemic heart disease and a left ventricular ejection fraction < 50% by echocardiography to have LGE CMR. Myocardial contractility and transmural extent of scar were assessed using a 17-segment model. Results The median age of the 193 patients enrolled was 70 (interquartile range: 63-76) years and 167 (87%) were men. Of 3281 myocardial segments assessed, 1759 (54%) were dysfunctional, of which 581 (33%) showed no scar, 623 (35%) had scar affecting ≤50% of wall thickness and 555 (32%) had scar affecting > 50% of wall thickness. Of 1522 segments with normal contractile function, only 98 (6%) had evidence of scar on CMR. Overall, 182 (94%) patients had ≥1 and 107 (55%) patients had ≥5 segments with contractile dysfunction that had no scar or ≤50% transmural scar suggesting viability. Conclusions In this cohort of patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction and ischaemic heart disease, about half of all segments had contractile dysfunction but only one third of these had > 50% of the wall thickness affected by scar, suggesting that most dysfunctional segments could improve in response to an appropriate intervention.

Background: Stem cell therapy (SCT) has been proposed as an alternative treatment for dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), nonetheless its effectiveness remains debatable., Objectives: To assess the effectiveness and safety of SCT in adults with non-ischaemic DCM., Search Methods: We searched CENTRAL in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and Embase for relevant trials in November 2020. We also searched two clinical trials registers in May 2020., Selection Criteria: Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing stem/progenitor cells with no cells in adults with non-ischaemic DCM. We included co-interventions such as the administration of stem cell mobilizing agents. Studies were classified and analysed into three categories according to the comparison intervention, which consisted of no intervention/placebo, cell mobilization with cytokines, or a different mode of SCT. The first two comparisons (no cells in the control group) served to assess the efficacy of SCT while the third (different mode of SCT) served to complement the review with information about safety and other information of potential utility for a better understanding of the effects of SCT., Data Collection and Analysis: Two review authors independently screened all references for eligibility, assessed trial quality, and extracted data. We undertook a quantitative evaluation of data using random-effects meta-analyses. We evaluated heterogeneity using the I² statistic. We could not explore potential effect modifiers through subgroup analyses as they were deemed uninformative due to the scarce number of trials available. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We created summary of findings tables using GRADEpro GDT. We focused our summary of findings on all-cause mortality, safety, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), performance status, and major adverse cardiovascular events., Main Results: We included 13 RCTs involving 762 participants (452 cell therapy and 310 controls). Only one study was at low risk of bias in all domains. There were many shortcomings in the publications that did not allow a precise assessment of the risk of bias in many domains. Due to the nature of the intervention, the main source of potential bias was lack of blinding of participants (performance bias). Frequently, the format of the continuous data available was not ideal for use in the meta-analysis and forced us to seek strategies for transforming data in a usable format. We are uncertain whether SCT reduces all-cause mortality in people with DCM compared to no intervention/placebo (mean follow-up 12 months) (risk ratio (RR) 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54 to 1.31; I² = 0%; studies = 7, participants = 361; very low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether SCT increases the risk of procedural complications associated with cells injection in people with DCM (data could not be pooled; studies = 7; participants = 361; very low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether SCT improves HRQoL (standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.62, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.23; I² = 72%; studies = 5, participants = 272; very low-certainty evidence) and functional capacity (6-minute walk test) (mean difference (MD) 70.12 m, 95% CI -5.28 to 145.51; I² = 87%; studies = 5, participants = 230; very low-certainty evidence). SCT may result in a slight functional class (New York Heart Association) improvement (data could not be pooled; studies = 6, participants = 398; low-certainty evidence). None of the included studies reported major adverse cardiovascular events as defined in our protocol. SCT may not increase the risk of ventricular arrhythmia (data could not be pooled; studies = 8, participants = 504; low-certainty evidence). When comparing SCT to cell mobilization with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF), we are uncertain whether SCT reduces all-cause mortality (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.31; I² = 39%; studies = 3, participants = 195; very low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether SCT increases the risk of procedural complications associated with cells injection (studies = 1, participants = 60; very low-certainty evidence). SCT may not improve HRQoL (MD 4.61 points, 95% CI -5.62 to 14.83; studies = 1, participants = 22; low-certainty evidence). SCT may improve functional capacity (6-minute walk test) (MD 140.14 m, 95% CI 119.51 to 160.77; I² = 0%; studies = 2, participants = 155; low-certainty evidence). None of the included studies reported MACE as defined in our protocol or ventricular arrhythmia. The most commonly reported outcomes across studies were based on physiological measures of cardiac function where there were some beneficial effects suggesting potential benefits of SCT in people with non-ischaemic DCM. However, it is unclear if this intermediate effects translates into clinical benefits for these patients. With regard to specific aspects related to the modality of cell therapy and its delivery, uncertainties remain as subgroup analyses could not be performed as planned, making it necessary to wait for the publication of several studies that are currently in progress before any firm conclusion can be reached., Authors' Conclusions: We are uncertain whether SCT in people with DCM reduces the risk of all-cause mortality and procedural complications, improves HRQoL, and performance status (exercise capacity). SCT may improve functional class (NYHA), compared to usual care (no cells). Similarly, when compared to G-CSF, we are also uncertain whether SCT in people with DCM reduces the risk of all-cause mortality although some studies within this comparison observed a favourable effect that should be interpreted with caution. SCT may not improve HRQoL but may improve to some extent performance status (exercise capacity). Very low-quality evidence reflects uncertainty regarding procedural complications. These suggested beneficial effects of SCT, although uncertain due to the very low certainty of the evidence, are accompanied by favourable effects on some physiological measures of cardiac function. Presently, the most effective mode of administration of SCT and the population that could benefit the most is unclear. Therefore, it seems reasonable that use of SCT in people with DCM is limited to clinical research settings. Results of ongoing studies are likely to modify these conclusions., (Copyright © 2021 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Background: A small minority of people with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) develop a severe illness, characterised by inflammation, microvascular damage and coagulopathy, potentially leading to myocardial injury, venous thromboembolism (VTE) and arterial occlusive events. People with risk factors for or pre-existing cardiovascular disease may be at greater risk., Objectives: To assess the prevalence of pre-existing cardiovascular comorbidities associated with suspected or confirmed cases of COVID-19 in a variety of settings, including the community, care homes and hospitals. We also assessed the nature and rate of subsequent cardiovascular complications and clinical events in people with suspected or confirmed COVID-19., Search Methods: We conducted an electronic search from December 2019 to 24 July 2020 in the following databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, covid-19.cochrane.org, ClinicalTrials.gov and EU Clinical Trial Register., Selection Criteria: We included prospective and retrospective cohort studies, controlled before-and-after, case-control and cross-sectional studies, and randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We analysed controlled trials as cohorts, disregarding treatment allocation. We only included peer-reviewed studies with 100 or more participants, and excluded articles not written in English or only published in pre-print servers., Data Collection and Analysis: Two review authors independently screened the search results and extracted data. Given substantial variation in study designs, reported outcomes and outcome metrics, we undertook a narrative synthesis of data, without conducting a meta-analysis. We critically appraised all included studies using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist for prevalence studies and the JBI checklist for case series., Main Results: We included 220 studies. Most of the studies originated from China (47.7%) or the USA (20.9%); 9.5% were from Italy. A large proportion of the studies were retrospective (89.5%), but three (1.4%) were RCTs and 20 (9.1%) were prospective. Using JBI's critical appraisal checklist tool for prevalence studies, 75 studies attained a full score of 9, 57 studies a score of 8, 31 studies a score of 7, 5 studies a score of 6, three studies a score of 5 and one a score of 3; using JBI's checklist tool for case series, 30 studies received a full score of 10, six studies a score of 9, 11 studies a score of 8, and one study a score of 5 We found that hypertension (189 studies, n = 174,414, weighted mean prevalence (WMP): 36.1%), diabetes (197 studies, n = 569,188, WMP: 22.1%) and ischaemic heart disease (94 studies, n = 100,765, WMP: 10.5%)  are highly prevalent in people hospitalised with COVID-19, and are associated with an increased risk of death. In those admitted to hospital, biomarkers of cardiac stress or injury are often abnormal, and the incidence of a wide range of cardiovascular complications is substantial, particularly arrhythmias (22 studies, n = 13,115, weighted mean incidence (WMI) 9.3%), heart failure (20 studies, n = 29,317, WMI: 6.8%) and thrombotic complications (VTE: 16 studies, n = 7700, WMI: 7.4%)., Authors' Conclusions: This systematic literature review indicates that cardiometabolic comorbidities are common in people who are hospitalised with a COVID-19 infection, and cardiovascular complications are frequent. We plan to update this review and to conduct a formal meta-analysis of outcomes based on a more homogeneous selected subsample of high-certainty studies., (Copyright © 2021 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Background: Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is a common cause of heart failure (HF), which can develop soon after AMI and may persist or resolve or develop late. HF after an MI is a major source of mortality. The cumulative incidence, prevalence and resolution of HF after MI in different age groups are poorly described. This study describes the natural history of HF after AMI according to age., Methods: Patients with AMI during 1998 were identified from hospital records. HF was defined as treatment of symptoms and signs of HF with loop diuretics and was considered to have resolved if loop diuretic therapy could be stopped without recurrence of symptoms. Patients were categorised into those aged < 65 years, 65-75 years, and > 75 years., Results: Of 896 patients, 311, 297 and 288 were aged < 65, 65-75 and >75 years and of whom 24%, 57% and 82% had died respectively by December 2005. Of these deaths, 24 (8%), 68 (23%) and 107 (37%) occurred during the index admission, many associated with acute HF. A further 37 (12%), 63 (21%) and 82 (29%) developed HF that persisted until discharge, of whom 15, 44 and 62 subsequently died. After discharge, 53 (24%), 55 (40%) and 37 (47%) patients developed HF for the first time, of whom 26%, 62% and 76% subsequently died. Death was preceded by the development of HF in 35 (70%), 93 (91%) and 107 (85%) in aged < 65 years, 65-75 years and >75 years, respectively., Conclusions: The risk of developing HF and of dying after an MI increases progressively with age. Regardless of age, most deaths after a MI are preceded by the development of HF.

Background: Specialised disease management programmes for chronic heart failure (CHF) improve survival, quality of life and reduce healthcare utilisation. The overall efficacy of structured telephone support or telemonitoring as an individual component of a CHF disease management strategy remains inconclusive., Objectives: To review randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of structured telephone support or telemonitoring compared to standard practice for patients with CHF in order to quantify the effects of these interventions over and above usual care for these patients., Search Strategy: Databases (the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) and Health Technology Assessment Database (HTA) on The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED and Science Citation Index Expanded and Conference Citation Index on ISI Web of Knowledge) and various search engines were searched from 2006 to November 2008 to update a previously published non-Cochrane review. Bibliographies of relevant studies and systematic reviews and abstract conference proceedings were handsearched. No language limits were applied., Selection Criteria: Only peer reviewed, published RCTs comparing structured telephone support or telemonitoring to usual care of CHF patients were included. Unpublished abstract data was included in sensitivity analyses. The intervention or usual care could not include a home visit or more than the usual (four to six weeks) clinic follow-up., Data Collection and Analysis: Data were presented as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Primary outcomes included all-cause mortality, all-cause and CHF-related hospitalisations which were meta-analysed using fixed effects models. Other outcomes included length of stay, quality of life, acceptability and cost and these were described and tabulated., Main Results: Twenty-five studies and five published abstracts were included. Of the 25 full peer-reviewed studies meta-analysed, 16 evaluated structured telephone support (5613 participants), 11 evaluated telemonitoring (2710 participants), and two tested both interventions (included in counts). Telemonitoring reduced all-cause mortality (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.81, P < 0.0001) with structured telephone support demonstrating a non-significant positive effect (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.01, P = 0.08). Both structured telephone support (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.87, P < 0.0001) and telemonitoring (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.94, P = 0.008) reduced CHF-related hospitalisations. For both interventions, several studies improved quality of life, reduced healthcare costs and were acceptable to patients. Improvements in prescribing, patient knowledge and self-care, and New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class were observed., Authors' Conclusions: Structured telephone support and telemonitoring are effective in reducing the risk of all-cause mortality and CHF-related hospitalisations in patients with CHF; they improve quality of life, reduce costs, and evidence-based prescribing.

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: Our objective is to appraise the effectiveness of beta blockers in patients with heart failure. Our protocol defined main outcome is all cause mortality. The specific a priori defined aims are to examine: the effectiveness of beta blockers in all trials of patients with heart failure, and examine the importance of the presence or absence of ischaemic cardiomyopathy in patients included in trials and vasodilator properties of beta blocking agents used. We will also examine the predictive value of left ventricular function, age, use of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and New York Heart Association Class (NYHA), and the rate of discontinuation of therapy due to treatment. There are a number of important ongoing trials for which data will become available in the next few years. Thus a systematic review which may be updated regularly is required to provide an up to date synthesis of the available data in this increasingly important area.