Search

Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) improve clinical outcomes in persons with heart failure (HF). This class of agents has been consistently associated with an increased risk of mycotic genital infections (MGIs), and in some, but not all trials, urinary tract infections (UTIs). Other medications widely used for cardiac conditions do not cause MGIs and UTIs, so cardiologists and their supporting teams will be encountering clinical questions that they previously did not have to address. This review provides clinicians with practical recommendations about SGLT2i use in individuals with HF as related to the associated MGI and possible UTI risks. Overall, given the benefit of SGLT2is in clinical outcomes, the threshold for not initiating or discontinuing SGLT2is due to concerns for MGIs or UTIs should be high for persons with HF. Likewise, when SGLT2is are discontinued for such concerns, the threshold for reinitiation should be low., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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

There is waning interest among cardiology trainees in pursuing an Advanced Heart Failure/Transplant Cardiology (AHFTC) fellowship as evidenced by fewer applicants in the National Resident Matching Program match to this specialty. This trend has generated considerable attention across the heart failure community. In response, the Heart Failure Society of America convened the AHFTC Fellowship Task Force with a charge to develop strategies to increase the value proposition of an AHFTC fellowship. Subsequently, the HFSA sponsored the AHFTC Fellowship Consensus Conference April 26-27, 2023. Before the conference, interviews of 44 expert stakeholders diverse across geography, site of practice (traditional academic medical center or other centers), specialty/area of expertise, sex, and stage of career were conducted virtually. Based on these interviews, potential solutions to address the declining interest in AHFTC fellowship were categorized into five themes: (1) alternative training pathways, (2) regulatory and compensation, (3) educational improvements, (4) exposure and marketing for pipeline development, and (5) quality of life and mental health. These themes provided structure to the deliberations of the AHFTC Fellowship Consensus Conference. The recommendations from the Consensus Conference were subsequently presented to the HFSA Board of Directors to inform strategic plans and interventions. The HFSA Board of Directors later reviewed and approved submission of this document. The purpose of this communication is to provide the HF community with an update summarizing the processes used and concepts that emerged from the work of the HFSA AHFTC Fellowship Task Force and Consensus Conference., Competing Interests: Disclosures The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The prognostic utility of the oxygen uptake efficiency slope (OUES) in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction is uncertain. In this post hoc analysis of the HF-ACTION (Heart Failure: A Controlled Trial Investigating Outcomes of Exercise Training) trial (n = 2,074), we tested for associations of OUES and peak oxygen uptake (VO 2 ) with heart failure hospitalization or cardiovascular death in multivariable Cox regression models, adjusting for minute ventilation/carbon dioxide production (VE/VCO 2 ) slope and other important confounders. Harrell's C-statistics assessed the discriminatory performance of OUES and peak VO 2 . Lower OUES was associated with increased risk of the outcome (quartile 1 vs 4: hazard ratio 2.1 [1.5 to 2.9, p <0.001]). Peak VO 2 had greater discrimination than OUES in comparable models (e.g., C-statistic = 0.73 vs 0.70, p <0.001, respectively). In the subgroup with respiratory exchange ratio <1 (n = 358), peak VO 2 was associated with the outcome (p <0.001) but OUES was not (p = 0.96). In conclusion, whereas OUES was associated with clinical outcomes independently of VE/VCO 2 slope, its prognostic utility was inferior to that of peak VO 2 , even when measured at submaximal effort., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Disclosures JT served on the task force for the 2020 ACC/AHA Clinical Performance and Quality Measures for Adults with Heart Failure. The other authors have no competing interests to report.

Natriuretic peptides, brain (B-type) natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) are globally and most often used for the diagnosis of heart failure (HF). In addition, they can have an important complementary role in the risk stratification of its prognosis. Since the development of angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs), the use of natriuretic peptides as therapeutic agents has grown in importance. The present document is the result of the Trilateral Cooperation Project among the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology, the Heart Failure Society of America and the Japanese Heart Failure Society. It represents an expert consensus that aims to provide a comprehensive, up-to-date perspective on natriuretic peptides in the diagnosis and management of HF, with a focus on the following main issues: (1) history and basic research: discovery, production and cardiovascular protection; (2) diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers: acute HF, chronic HF, inclusion/endpoint in clinical trials, and natriuretic peptides-guided therapy; (3) therapeutic use: nesiritide (BNP), carperitide (ANP) and ARNIs; and (4) gaps in knowledge and future directions., Competing Interests: Disclosures HT receives consultancy fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer Yakuhin, Novartis Pharma, Ono Pharmaceutical, Astra-Zeneca; remuneration from MSD, Astellas Pharma, Pfizer Japan, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Otsuka Pharmaceutical, Daiichi Sankyo, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma, Boehringer Ingelheim, Takeda Pharmaceutical, Bayer Yakuhin, Novartis Pharma, Kowa Pharmaceutical, Teijin Pharma; manuscript fees from Medical View, Nippon Rinsho; research funding from Actelion Pharmaceuticals Japan, Japan Tobacco, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Nippon Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, IQVIA Services Japan, Omron Healthcare; scholarship funds from Astellas Pharma, Novartis Pharma, Daiichi Sankyo, Takeda Pharmaceutical, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma, Teijin Pharma, MSD. AJSC declares having received honoraria and/or lecture fees from Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Menarini, Novartis, Servier, Vifor, Abbott, Actimed, Arena, Cardiac Dimensions, Corvia, CVRx, Enopace, ESN Cleer, Faraday, Impulse Dynamics, Respicardia, and Viatris. SDA has received grants from Abbott Vascular and Vifor International and received personal fees from Amgen, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bioventrix, Brahms, Cardiac Dimensions, Cardior, Cordio, CVRx, Edwards, Impulse Dynamics, Janssen, Novartis, Occlutech, Respicardia, Servier, Vectorious and V-Wave, all outside the submitted work; and was named coinventor of 2 patent applications regarding MR-proANP (DE 102007010834, DE 102007022367) but did not benefit personally from the related issued patents. AB-G has received honoraria for lecturing from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Novartis, Roche Diagnostics, and Vifor. JB was a consultant to Abbott, Adrenomed, American Regent, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CVRx, Edwards Lifesciences, Faraday, G3 Pharmaceuticals, Impulse Dynamics, Innolife, Janssen, LivaNova, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Sequanna, Roche, and Vifor. OC was a consultant for Boehringer Ingelheim. CRD was a consultant for Abbott Diagnostics, FujiRebio, Ortho/Quidel, Roche Diagnostics, and Siemens Healthineers. GMF has received research grants from NHLBI, American Heart Association, Amgen, Bayer, BMS, Merck, Cytokinetics, and CSL-Behring; has acted as a consultant to Novartis, Amgen, BMS, Cytokinetics, Medtronic, Cardionomic, Boehringer-Ingelheim, American Regent, Abbott, Astra-Zeneca, Reprieve, Myovant, Sequana, Windtree Therapeutics, and Whiteswell and has served on clinical endpoint committees/data-safety monitoring boards for Amgen, Merck, Medtronic, EBR Systems, V-Wave, LivaNova, Siemens, and Rocket Pharma. GF reports lecture fees and/or committee membership in trials sponsored by Bayer, Vifor, Medtronic, Novartis, Servier, Boehringer Ingelheim, and research support from the European Union. TI has received research funds from SBI Pharma and Pfizer. JLJ is a trustee of the American College of Cardiology, and a board member of Imbria Pharmaceuticals and has received research support from Abbott, Applied Therapeutics, Innolife, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, and Roche Diagnostics, has received consulting income from Abbott, Beckman, Bristol Myers, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Merck, Roche Diagnostics and Siemens, and participates in clinical endpoint committees/data-safety monitoring boards for Abbott, AbbVie, Bayer, CVRx, Intercept, Janssen, and Takeda. KK declares no conflicts of interest relevant to the present manuscript and has received grants and personal lecture fees from Astra Zeneca, grants and personal lecture fees from Otsuka Pharmaceutical, Ono Pharmaceutical, Eli Lilly Japan, and Daiichi-Sankyo, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer Yakuhin, Novartis Pharma, Pfizer Japan, EP-CRSU, Takeda Pharmaceutical, Medtronic Japan, Fukuda Denshi, and Taisho Pharmaceutical, all outside the submitted work. Matsue received an honorarium from Otsuka Pharmaceutical, Novartis Pharma, Bayer, and AstraZeneca, and collaborative research grant from Pfizer Japan, Otsuka Pharmaceutical, EN Otsuka Pharmaceutical, and Nippon Boehringer Ingelheim. YM has received research support and honoraria from Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Cytokinetics, Fast BioMedical, Gilead, Innolife, Eli Lilly, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Pharmacosmos, Relypsa, Respicardia, Roche, Sanofi, Vifor, Windtree Therapeutics, and Zoll. MM has received fees from Actelion, Amgen, Livanova, Servier, and Vifor Pharma as member of Executive or Data Monitoring Committees of sponsored clinical trials; from Astra-Zeneca, Abbott Vascular, Bayer, Boheringer Ingelhelm, and Edwards Therapeutics for participation in advisory boards and/or speeches at sponsored meetings. AP has received research support from the National Institute on Aging GEMSSTAR Grant (1R03AG067960-01) and the National Institute on Minority Health and Disparities (R01MD017529), grant funding from Applied Therapeutics and Gilead Sciences, honoraria outside of the present study as an advisor/consultant for Tricog Health, Lilly USA, Rivus, Cytokinetics, and Roche Diagnostics, and nonfinancial support from Pfizer and Merck and is also a consultant for Palomarin with stocks as compensation. Saito received research funds from Novartis Pharma, and Roche Diagnostics, and speaker's honoraria from Novartis Pharma, Daiichi Sankyo, and Otsuka Pharmaceutical. YS has received research funds from Roche Diagnostics and speaker's honoraria from Novartis Pharma, Daiichi Sankyo, and Otsuka Pharmaceutical. NS has received speaker's honoraria or consultation fees from Otsuka, Novartis Pharma, Daiichi Sankyo, Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Ono, AstraZeneca, Kowa, Taisho, and Terumo. KY has received research funds from Otsuka Pharmaceutical and speaker's honoraria from Otsuka Pharmaceutical, Novartis Pharma and Daiichi Sankyo. MY has received research funds from Teijin Pharma, Shionogi, Otsuka Pharmaceutical, and Mochida Pharmaceutical, and speaker's honoraria from Daiichi Sankyo, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corporation, Pfizer Japan, AstraZeneca, Otsuka Pharmaceutical, Astellas Pharma, Bayer Yakuhin, and Mochida Pharmaceutical. All other authors have nothing to declare that is related to the submitted work., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc., European Society of Cardiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Disclosures No disclosures.

Decreased exercise capacity portends a poor prognosis in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). The hemodynamic gain index (HGI) is an integrated marker of hemodynamic reserve measured during exercise stress testing and is associated with survival. The goal of this study was to establish the association of HGI with exercise capacity, serum biomarkers, and echocardiography features in subjects with HFpEF. In 209 subjects with HFpEF enrolled in the RELAX (Phosphodiesterase-5 Inhibition to Improve Clinical Status and Exercise Capacity in Diastolic Heart Failure) trial who underwent cardiopulmonary exercise testing, we calculated the HGI ([peak heart rate [HR] × peak systolic blood pressure [SBP]-[HR at rest × SBP at rest])/(HR at rest × SBP at rest) and tested associations with outcomes of interest. The median (interquartile range) HGI was 0.94 (0.5 to 1.3) beats per min/mm Hg. In multivariable-adjusted linear regression, higher HGI was associated with greater peak oxygen consumption (VO 2 ), VO 2 at anaerobic threshold, peak minute ventilation, and 6-minute walk distance (all p <0.001). Higher HGI was associated with lower serum high-sensitivity troponin I, pro-collagen III, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, and creatinine (all p <0.05) and with longer deceleration time, lower E/A ratio, and lower left atrial volume index by echocardiography (all p <0.05). In conclusion, higher HGI in stable HFpEF was associated with greater exercise capacity, a biomarker profile indicating less myocardial injury and fibrosis and less kidney dysfunction, and with less severe diastolic dysfunction. These results suggest that HGI, an easily calculated metric from routine exercise testing, is a marker of functional capacity and disease severity in HFpEF and may serve as a surrogate for VO 2 parameters for use in treadmill testing without gas exchange capability., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr. Grodin reports personal fees from Pfizer, Alnylam, Eidos, and Sarepta. Dr. Tang reports personal fees from Sequana Medical AG, Cardiol Therapeutics Inc, Genomics plc, Springer Nature, and the American Board of Internal Medicine for exam writing committee participation - all unrelated to the subject and contents of this study. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: There are varied opinions in the United States regarding many aspects of care related to COVID-19. The purpose of this study was to examine the opinions of health care personnel and the policies of heart transplant centers concerning practices for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 in donors and recipients of heart transplants., Methods: Two anonymous, electronic web-based surveys were developed: 1 was administered to health care personnel through a mailing list maintained by the Heart Failure Society of America (HFSA); another was administered to U.S. medical adult and pediatric heart transplant (HT) program directors. Individual and group e-mails were sent with an embedded link to the respective surveys in February 2022., Results: A total of 176 individuals (8.6%) responded to the survey administered through the HFSA. Of medical directors of transplant programs, 78 (54% response rate) completed a separate survey on their centers' policies. Although 95% (n = 167) of individuals indicated vaccination against COVID-19 should be required prior to HT, only 67% (n = 52) of centers mandated that practice. Similarly, 61% of individuals thought vaccination should be required prior to HT for caregivers, but only 13% of transplant centers mandated caregiver vaccination. Of the centers, 63% reported considering donors despite histories of recent COVID-19 infection (within 3 months), and 47% considered donors with current positive polymerase chain reaction tests. Regarding post-transplant care, only 22% of programs routinely measured antibodies to COVID-19, and 71% used tixagevimab/cilgavimab (Evusheld) for pre-exposure prophylaxis., Conclusions: There were significant differences between individual preferences and centers' practices with respect to COVID-19 management of candidates for and recipients of HT. Additionally, there was wide variation in policies among centers, reflecting the need for further study to inform consistent guidance and recommendations across centers to optimize equitable care for this high-risk patient population., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Supranormal ejection fraction by echocardiography in clinically referred patient populations has been associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). The prognostic implication of supranormal left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)-assessed by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR)-in healthy, community-dwelling individuals is unknown., Objectives: The purpose of this study is to investigate the prognostic implication of supranormal LVEF as assessed by CMR and its inter-relationship with stroke volume among community-dwelling adults without CVD., Methods: Participants from the MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) and DHS (Dallas Heart Study) cohorts free of CVD who underwent CMR with LVEF above the normal CMR cutoff (≥57%) were included. The association between cohort-specific LVEF categories and risk of clinically adjudicated major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) was assessed using adjusted Cox models. Subgroup analysis was also performed to evaluate the association of LVEF and risk of MACE among individuals stratified by left ventricular stroke volume index., Results: The study included 4,703 participants from MESA and 2,287 from DHS with 727 and 151 MACE events, respectively. In adjusted Cox models, the risk of MACE was highest among individuals in LVEF Q4 (vs Q1) in both cohorts after accounting for potential confounders (MESA: HR = 1.27 [95% CI: 1.01-1.60], P = 0.04; DHS: HR = 1.72 [95% CI: 1.05-2.79], P = 0.03). A significant interaction was found between the continuous measures of LVEF and left ventricular stroke volume index (P interaction = 0.02) such that higher LVEF was significantly associated with an increased risk of MACE among individuals with low but not high stroke volume., Conclusions: Among community-dwelling adults without CVD, LVEF in the supranormal range is associated with a higher risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes, particularly in those with lower stroke volume., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The MESA study was supported by contracts 75N92020D00001, HHSN268201500003I, N01-HC-95159, 75N92020D00005, N01-HC-95160, 75N92020D00002, N01-HC-95161, 75N92020D00003, N01-HC-95162, 75N92020D00006, N01-HC-95163, 75N92020D00004, N01-HC-95164, 75N92020D00007, N01-HC-95165, N01-HC-95166, N01-HC-95167, N01-HC-95168, and N01-HC-95169 from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; and by grants UL1-TR-000040, UL1-TR-001079, and UL1-TR-001420 from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS). The Dallas Heart Study was supported by a grant from the Donald W. Reynolds Foundation and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (UL1TR001105). Dr Segar has received nonfinancial support from Pfizer and Merck. Dr Pandey has received research support from the Texas Health Resources Clinical Scholarship, the Gilead Sciences Research Scholar Program, the National Institute of Aging GEMSSTAR Grant (1R03AG067960-01), and Applied Therapeutics; has served on the advisory board of Roche Diagnostics; serves as a consultant to Tricog Health, Rivus, and Lilly USA; and has received nonfinancial support from Pfizer and Merck. The views expressed in this manuscript are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; the National Institutes of Health; or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: The "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" replaces the "2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" and the "2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure." The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose, and manage patients with heart failure., Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2020 to December 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant clinical trials and research studies, published through September 2021, were also considered. This guideline was harmonized with other American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines published through December 2021., Structure: Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The 2022 heart failure guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with heart failure, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests. Many recommendations from the earlier heart failure guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data. Value statements are provided for certain treatments with high-quality published economic analyses., (Copyright © 2022 American Heart Association, Inc., the American College of Cardiology Foundation, and the Heart Failure Society of America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: The "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" replaces the "2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" and the "2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure." The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose, and manage patients with heart failure., Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2020 to December 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant clinical trials and research studies, published through September 2021, were also considered. This guideline was harmonized with other American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines published through December 2021. Structure: Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The 2022 heart failure guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with heart failure, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests. Many recommendations from the earlier heart failure guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data. Value statements are provided for certain treatments with high-quality published economic analyses.

Background: The 2022 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Heart Failure Society of America (AHA/ACC/HFSA) Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure replaces the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure and the 2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure. The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose and manage patients with heart failure., Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2020 to December 2020, encompassing studies, reviews and other evidence conducted in human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant clinical trials and research studies published through September 2021 were also considered. This guideline was harmonized with other American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines published through December 2021., Results and Conclusions: Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The 2022 heart failure guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with heart failure, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests. Many recommendations from the earlier heart failure guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data. Value statements are provided for certain treatments that have high-quality published economic analyses., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Clinical congestion is associated with adverse outcomes in patients with heart failure. The pathophysiological mediators of this association remain uncertain., Methods and Results: We prospectively enrolled a cohort of patients with heart failure and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction and performed a detailed clinical examination followed on the same day by an invasive right heart catheterization and blood sampling for biomarkers. High-sensitivity troponin T and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels were measured. A clinical congestion score was calculated based on jugular venous pressure (cm H 2 0 <10 = 0, 10-14 = 1, >14 = 2 points), bendopnea (0 vs 1), a third heart sound (0 vs 1), or peripheral edema (0-2). Congestion was categorized into tiers as absent (0 points), mild (1 point), or moderate to severe (≥ 2 points). We tested for associations of high-sensitivity troponin T, NT-proBNP, and elevated ventricular filling pressures with clinical congestion in both univariate and multivariable analyses. Of 153 participants, 65 (42%) had absent, 35 mild (23%), and 53 (35%) had moderate to severe clinical congestion. Congestion tier was associated with higher NT-proBNP and hs-troponin levels, and the right atrial pressure and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (P < .001 for each). Increased congestion tier was also associated with the coexistent presence of elevated troponin T (≥52 ng/L), NT-proBNP (≥1000 pg/mL), and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (≥22 mm Hg). Specifically, 78% of those with absent clinical congestion had 0 to 1 of these findings, whereas 75% of those with moderate-severe congestion had 2 or all 3 of these abnormalities (P < .001). An elevated hs-troponin was associated with mild or greater clinical congestion (odds ratio 3, 95% confidence interval 1.2-7.5, P = .02) in multivariable analysis adjusting for potential confounders including the right atrial pressure, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, and NT-proBNP levels., Conclusions: Clinical congestion is a phenotype in which there is a high coexistent presence of elevated ventricular filling pressures, elevated natriuretic peptide levels, and subclinical myocardial injury. An elevated troponin was associated with clinical congestion in multivariable models that adjusted for ventricular filling pressures and natriuretic peptide levels. These data strengthen the evidence base for an association of elevated troponin with clinical congestion, suggesting that subclinical myocardial injury may be an important contributor to the pathophysiology of the congested state., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The V122I variant in transthyretin (TTR) is the most common amyloidogenic mutation worldwide. The aim of this study is to describe the cardiac phenotype and risk for adverse cardiovascular outcomes of young V122I TTR carriers in the general population., Methods and Results: TTR genotypes were extracted from whole-exome sequence data in participants of the Dallas Heart Study. Participants with African ancestry, available V122I TTR genotypes (N = 1818) and either cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (n = 1364) or long-term follow-up (n = 1532) were included. The prevalence of V122I TTR carriers (45 ± 10 years) was 3.2% (n/N = 59/1818). The V122I TTR carriers had higher baseline left ventricular wall thickness (8.52 ± 1.82 vs 8.21 ± 1.62 mm, adjusted P = .038) than noncarriers, but no differences in other cardiac magnetic resonance imaging measures (P > .05 for all). Although carrier status was not associated with amino terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) at baseline (P = .79), V122I TTR carriers had a greater increase in NT-proBNP on follow-up than noncarriers (median 28.5 pg/mL, interquartile range 11.4-104.1 pg/mL vs median 15.9 pg/mL, interquartile range 0.0-43.0 pg/mL, adjusted P = .018). V122I TTR carriers were at a higher adjusted risk of heart failure (hazard ratio 3.82, 95% confidence interval 1.80-8.13, P < .001), cardiovascular death (hazard ratio 2.65, 95% confidence interval 1.14-6.15, P = .023), and all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 1.95, 95% confidence interval 1.08-3.51, P = .026) in comparison with noncarriers., Conclusions: V122I TTR carrier status was associated with a greater increase in NT-proBNP, slightly greater left ventricular wall thickness, and a higher risk for heart failure, cardiovascular death, and all-cause mortality. These findings suggest the need to develop amyloidosis screening strategies for V122I TTR carriers., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Patients with continuous flow destination therapy (DT) left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) comprise a heterogeneous population. We hypothesized that phenotypic clustering of individuals with DT LVADs by their implantation characteristics will be associated with different long-term risk profiles. We analyzed 5,999 patients with continuous flow DT LVADs in Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support using 18 continuous variable baseline characteristics. We Z-transformed the variables and applied a Gaussian finite mixture model to perform unsupervised clustering resulting in identification of 4 phenogroups. Survival analyses considered the competing risk for cumulative incidence of transplant or the composite end point of death or heart transplant where appropriate. Phenogroup 1 (n = 1,163, 19%) was older (71 years) and primarily white (81%). Phenogroups 2 (n = 648, 11%) and 3 (n = 3,671, 61%) were of intermediate age (70 and 62 years), weight (85 and 87 kg), and ventricular size. Phenogroup 4 (n = 517, 9%) was younger (40 years), heavier (108 kg), and more racially diverse. The cumulative incidence of death, heart transplant, bleeding, LVAD malfunction, and LVAD thrombosis differed among phenogroups. The highest incidence of death and the lowest rate of heart transplant was seen in phenogroup 1 (p <0.001). For adverse outcomes, phenogroup 4 had the lowest incidence of bleeding, whereas LVAD device thrombosis and malfunction were lowest in phenogroup 1 (p <0.001 for all). Finally, the incidence of stroke, infection, and renal dysfunction were not statistically different. In conclusion, the present unsupervised machine learning analysis identified 4 phenogroups with different rates of adverse outcomes and these findings underscore the influence of phenotypic heterogeneity on post-LVAD implantation outcomes., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr. Grodin receives grant support from Texas Health Resources. Dr. Grodin reports relations with Pfizer Inc that includes consulting or advisory. Dr. Grodin reports relations with Alnylam Pharmaceuticals Inc that includes consulting or advisory. Dr. Grodin reports relations with Eidos Therapeutics that includes consulting or advisory and funding grants. Dr. Grodin reports relations with Sarepta Therapeutics Inc that includes consulting or advisory. Dr. Pandey receives a grant support from Texas Health Resources. Dr. Drazner receives grant support from James M. Wooten Chair in Cardiology. Dr. Grodin reports consulting fees from Pfizer, Eidos, Alnylam, and Sarepta. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study evaluated the association of transthyretin (TTR) gene variant, in which isoleucine substitutes for valine at position 122 (V142I), with cardiac structure, function, and heart failure (HF) risk among middle-aged Black adults., Background: The valine-to-isoleucine substitution in the TTR protein is prevalent in Black individuals and causes cardiac amyloidosis., Methods: Jackson Heart Study participants without HF at baseline who had available data on the TTR V142I variant were included. The association of the TTR V142I variant with baseline echocardiographic parameters and repeated measures of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin-I (hs-cTnI) was assessed using adjusted linear regression models and linear mixed models, respectively. Adjusted Cox models, restricted mean survival time analysis, and Anderson-Gill models were constructed to determine the association of TTR V142I variant with the risk of incident HF, survival free of HF, and total HF hospitalizations., Results: A total of 119 of 2,960 participants (4%) were heterozygous carriers of the TTR V142I variant. The TTR V142I variant was not associated with measures of cardiac parameters at baseline but was associated with a greater increase in high-sensitivity troponin I (hs-TnI) levels over time. In adjusted Cox models, TTR V142I variant carriers had significantly higher risk of incident HF (HR: 1.80; 95% CI: 1.07-3.05; P = 0.03), lower survival free of HF (mean difference: 4.0 year; 95% CI: 0.6-6.2 years); P = 0.02), and higher risk of overall HF hospitalizations (HR: 2.12; 95% CI: 1.23-3.63; P = 0.007)., Conclusions: The TTR V142I variant in middle-aged Black adults is not associated with adverse cardiac remodeling but was associated with a significantly higher burden of chronic myocardial injury, and greater risk of incident HF and overall HF hospitalizations., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The Jackson Heart Study was supported and conducted in collaboration with Jackson State University (HHSN268201800013I), Tougaloo College (HHSN268201800014I), the Mississippi State Department of Health (HHSN268201800015I), and the University of Mississippi Medical Center (HHSN268201800010I, HHSN268201800011I and HHSN268201800012I) contracts from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the National Institute for Minority Health and Health Disparities. Dr Hall has received support from the National Institutes of Health (NIH)/National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) grant 1K08DK099415- 01A1, NIH/National Institute of General Medical Sciences grant P20GM104357, and NIH/National Institute of General Medical Sciences grant 5U54GM115428. This study was supported by research support from the Texas Health Resources Clinical Scholarship, the Gilead Sciences Research Scholar Program, National Institute of Aging GEMSSTAR grant (1R03AG067960-01), and Applied Therapeutics to Dr Pandey. Disclosures: Dr Grodin is a consultant for Pfizer, Eidos Therapeutics, and Alynlam Pharmaceuticals; and has received research funding from the Texas Health Resources Clinical Scholars fund. Dr De Lemos has received financial support from Roche Diagnostics and Abbott Diagnostics; and is a consultant for Ortho Clinical Diagnostics, Quidel, and Regeneron. Dr Berry has received financial support from Roche Diagnostics, Abbott Diagnostics, and the National Institutes of Health; is a consultant for Abbott and the Cooper Institute. Dr Butler is a consultant for Abbott, Adrenomed, Arena Pharma, Array, Amgen, Applied Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardior, CVRx, Eli Lilly, G3 Pharma, Imbria, Impulse Dynamics, Innolife, Janssen, LivaNova, Luitpold, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Relypsa, Roche, Sequana Medical, V-Wave Limited, and Vifor. Dr Mentz has received financial support and honoraria from Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim/Eli Lilly, Boston Scientific, Cytokinetics, Fast BioMedical, Gilead, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, and Vifor. Dr Sanjiv Shah has received financial support from Actelion, AstraZeneca, Corvia, Novartis, and Pfizer; and is a consultant for Abbott, Actelion, AstraZeneca, Amgen, Aria, Axon Therapeutics, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardiora, CVRx, Cyclerion, Cytokinetics, Eisai, GlaxoSmithKline, Imara, Ionis, Ironwood, Keyto, Lilly, Merck, MyoKardia, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Shifamed, Tenax, and United Therapeutics. Dr Amil Shah has received financial support from Novartis through Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and Philips Ultrasound through Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and personal fees from Philips Ultrasound Advisory Board outside the submitted work. Dr Pandey has served on the advisory board of Roche Diagnostics; and has received nonfinancial support from Pfizer and Merck. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; the National Institutes of Health; or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In ≈25% of patients with heart failure and reduced left-ventricular ejection fraction, right-ventricular (RV), and left-ventricular (LV) filling pressures are discordant (ie, one is elevated while the other is not). Whether clinical assessment allows detection of this discordance is unknown. We sought to determine the agreement of clinically versus invasively determined patterns of ventricular congestion., Methods: In 156 heart failure and reduced LV ejection fraction subjects undergoing invasive hemodynamic assessment, we categorized patterns of ventricular congestion (no congestion, RV only, LV only, or both) based on clinical findings of RV (jugular venous distention) or LV (hepatojugular reflux, orthopnea, or bendopnea) congestion. Agreement between clinically and invasively determined (RV congestion if right atrial pressure [RAP] ≥10 mm Hg and LV congestion if pulmonary capillary wedge pressure [PCWP] ≥22 mm Hg) categorizations was the primary end point., Results: The frequency of clinical patterns of congestion was: 51% no congestion, 24% both RV and LV, 21% LV only, and 4% RV only. Jugular venous distention had excellent discrimination for elevated RAP (C=0.88). However, agreement between clinical and invasive congestion patterns was poor, к=0.44 (95% CI, 0.34-0.55). While those with no clinical congestion usually had low RAP and PCWP (67/79, 85%), over one-half (24/38, 64%) with isolated LV clinical congestion had PCWP <22 mm Hg, most (5/7, 71%) with isolated RV clinical congestion had PCWP ≥22 mm Hg, and ≈one-third (10/32, 31%) with both RV and LV clinical congestion had elevated RAP but PCWP <22 mm Hg., Conclusions: While clinical examination allows accurate detection of elevated RAP, it does not allow accurate detection of discordant RV and LV filling pressures.

Aim: N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) associate with structural heart disease and heart failure risk in individuals without known cardiovascular disease (CVD). However, few data are available regarding whether factors influencing levels of these two biomarkers are similar or distinct. We performed serial measurement of NT-proBNP and hs-cTnT in a contemporary multiethnic cohort with extensive phenotyping, with the goal of identifying their respective biological determinants in a population without known or suspected CVD. Methods: We evaluated 1877 participants of the Dallas Heart Study who had NT-proBNP and hs-cTnT measured and were free from clinical CVD at the each of its two examinations (2000-2002 and 2007-2009). Variables collected included demographic and risk factors, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, body composition via dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, coronary artery calcium by computed tomography, and cardiac dimensions and function by cardiac MRI. Linear regression was used to identify associations of these factors with each biomarker at baseline and with changes in biomarkers over follow-up. Results: NT-proBNP and hs-cTnT were poorly correlated at baseline (Spearman rho 0.083, p = 0.015), with only moderate correlation between change values (rho 0.18, p < 0.001). hs-cTnT positively associated and NT-proBNP inversely associated with male gender and black race. At baseline, both NT-proBNP and hs-cTnT associated with left ventricular end-diastolic volume and wall thickness, but only NT-proBNP associated with left atrial size. Changes in cardiac dimensions between phases were more strongly associated with changes in NT-proBNP than hs-cTnT. NT-proBNP was more strongly associated with high-sensitivity C-reactive protein and measures of body composition than hs-cTnT. Conclusion: Among individuals without CVD in the general population, NT-proBNP and hs-cTnT are nonredundant biomarkers that are differentially associated with demographic and cardiac factors. These findings indicate that hs-cTnT and NT-proBNP may reflect different pathophysiological pathways.

Among the estimated 6.2 million Americans living with heart failure (HF), ≈5%/y may progress to advanced, or stage D, disease. Advanced HF has a high morbidity and mortality, such that early recognition of this condition is important to optimize care. Delayed referral or lack of referral in patients who are likely to derive benefit from an advanced HF evaluation can have important adverse consequences for patients and their families. A 2-step process can be used by practitioners when considering referral of a patient with advanced HF for consideration of advanced therapies, focused on recognizing the clinical clues associated with stage D HF and assessing potential benefits of referral to an advanced HF center. Although patients are often referred to an advanced HF center to undergo evaluation for advanced therapies such as heart transplantation or implantation of a left ventricular assist device, there are other reasons to refer, including access to the infrastructure and multidisciplinary team of the advanced HF center that offers a broad range of expertise. The intent of this statement is to provide a framework for practitioners and health systems to help identify and refer patients with HF who are most likely to derive benefit from referral to an advanced HF center.

Background Patient-reported outcomes may be discordant to severity of illness as assessed by objective parameters. The frequency of this discordance and its influence on clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure is unknown. Methods and Results In HF-ACTION (Heart Failure: A Controlled Trial Investigating Outcomes of Exercise Training), participants (N=2062) had baseline assessment of health-related quality of life via the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Clinical Summary score (KCCQ-CS) and objective severity by cardiopulmonary stress testing (minute ventilation [V E ]/carbon dioxide production [VCO 2 ] slope). We defined 4 groups by median values: 2 concordant (lower severity: high KCCQ-CS and low V E /VCO 2 slope; higher severity: low KCCQ-CS and high V E /VCO 2 slope) and 2 discordant (symptom minimizer: high KCCQ-CS and high V E /VCO 2 slope; symptom magnifier: low KCCQ-CS and low V E /VCO 2 slope). The association of group assignment with mortality was assessed in adjusted Cox models. Symptom magnification (23%) and symptom minimization (23%) were common. Despite comparable KCCQ-CS scores, the risk of all-cause mortality in symptom minimizers versus concordant-lower severity participants was increased significantly (hazard ratio [HR], 1.79; 95% CI, 1.27-2.50; P <0.001). Furthermore, despite symptom magnifiers having a KCCQ-CS score 28 points lower (poorer QOL) than symptom minimizers, their risk of mortality was not increased (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.57-1.1; P =0.18, respectively). Conclusions Severity of illness by patient report versus cardiopulmonary exercise testing was frequently discordant. Mortality tracked more closely with the objective data, highlighting the importance of relying not only on patient report, but also objective data when risk stratifying patients with heart failure.

Bendopnea, or dyspnoea with bending forward, is a recently described symptom of heart failure that is associated with elevated ventricular filling pressures. Here, we describe a case of superior vena cava (SVC) stenosis that presented with bendopnea and resolved with SVC recanalisation. We suggest that SVC stenosis be considered in the differential diagnosis of patients who experience bendopnea., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© BMJ Publishing Group Limited 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

In this document, we propose a universal definition of heart failure (HF) as a clinical syndrome with symptoms and/or signs caused by a structural and/or functional cardiac abnormality and corroborated by elevated natriuretic peptide levels and/or objective evidence of pulmonary or systemic congestion. We also propose revised stages of HF as: At risk for HF (Stage A), Pre-HF (Stage B), Symptomatic HF (Stage C) and Advanced HF (Stage D). Finally, we propose a new and revised classification of HF according to left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). This includes HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF): symptomatic HF with LVEF ≤40%; HF with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF): symptomatic HF with LVEF 41-49%; HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF): symptomatic HF with LVEF ≥50%; and HF with improved ejection fraction (HFimpEF): symptomatic HF with a baseline LVEF ≤40%, a ≥10 point increase from baseline LVEF, and a second measurement of LVEF > 40%., (© 2021 European Society of Cardiology and Elsevier, Inc.)

Background Physical inactivity and low cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) are associated with higher risk of heart failure. However, the independent contributions of objectively measured sedentary time, physical activity, and CRF toward left ventricular (LV) structure and function are not well established. Methods and Results We included 1368 participants from the DHS (Dallas Heart Study) (age, 49 years; 40% men) free of cardiovascular disease who had physical activity and sedentary time measured by accelerometer, CRF estimated from submaximal treadmill test, and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging performed using 3-T magnetic resonance imaging. A series of linear regression models were constructed to evaluate the associations of sedentary time, moderate physical activity, vigorous physical activity, and CRF with LV parameters after adjustment for established cardiovascular risk factors. We observed a modest correlation between CRF levels and objectively measured moderate (correlation coefficient, 0.17; P <0.001) and vigorous physical activity (correlation coefficient, 0.25; P <0.001) levels. In contrast, sedentary time was not associated with CRF. In adjusted analysis, both vigorous physical activity and higher CRF were significantly associated with greater stroke volume, LV mass, LV end-diastolic volume, and lower arterial elastance, independent of other confounders. Sedentary time and moderate physical activity levels were not associated with LV parameters. Conclusions Vigorous physical activity and CRF are significantly associated with cardiac structure and function parameters. Future studies are needed to determine if interventions aimed at improving CRF levels may favorably modify cardiac structure and function.

Background: Many patients with amyloid cardiomyopathy (ACM) develop advanced heart failure, and durable mechanical circulatory support (MCS) may be a consideration. However, data describing clinical outcomes after MCS in this population are limited., Methods: Adult patients in the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM, n=19 921), nonamyloid restrictive cardiomyopathy (RCM, n=248), or ACM (n=46) between 2005 and 2017 were included. Patient and device characteristics were compared between cardiomyopathy groups. The primary end point was the cumulative incidence of death with heart transplantation as a competing risk., Results: Patients with ACM (n=46) were older (61 years [interquartile range, 55-69 years] versus 58 years [interquartile range, 49-66 years] for DCM and 55 years [interquartile range, 46-62 years] for nonamyloid RCM, P <0.001) and were more commonly Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support profile 1 (30.4% versus 17.9% for DCM and 21.0% for nonamyloid RCM, P =0.04) at device implantation. Use of biventricular support (biventricular assist device or total artificial heart) was the highest for patients with ACM (41.3% versus 6.7% and 19.4% for patients with DCM and nonamyloid RCM, respectively, P =0.014). The cumulative incidence of death was highest for patients with ACM relative to those with DCM or nonamyloid RCM ( P <0.001) but did not differ significantly between groups for those who required biventricular MCS., Conclusions: Compared with patients with DCM or nonamyloid RCM who received durable MCS, those with ACM experienced the highest use of biventricular support and the worst survival. These data highlight concerns with the use of durable MCS for patients with ACM.

Background Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) improve outcomes in patients with end-stage heart failure and are increasingly implanted for destination therapy. We describe dynamic estimates of event-free survival with conditional survival probabilities in a destination therapy LVAD population. Methods and Results We studied 8245 adult patients in INTERMACS (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support) implanted with a continuous-flow destination therapy LVAD. The composite primary end point was death, device exchange or removal, or heart transplantation. Conditional survival probabilities were calculated and stratified by implantation characteristics and nonfatal adverse events experienced within the first year after implant. Probabilities of surviving an additional 1 to 3 years were numerically higher after longer prior event-free survival. INTERMACS profile 1, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support, prior or concomitant surgery, and dialysis within 48 hours of implantation were associated with significantly lower event-free survival in the first year but did not impact event-free survival beyond then. For patients who experienced a nonfatal adverse event within the first year, subsequent 1-year conditional survival was lower than in the absence of that event for stroke (65% [95% CI, 57%-73%] versus 75% [95% CI, 73%-77%]; P <0.001), device-related infection (64% [95% CI 57%-71%] versus 76% [95% CI, 74%-78%]; P <0.001), and pump thrombosis or malfunction (64% [95% CI, 57%-70%] versus 76% [95% CI, 74%-78%]; P <0.001). Conclusions Conditional survival in patients with destination therapy LVADs improves over time, even for patients with unfavorable implantation characteristics. However, LVAD-related complications including stroke, device-related infection, and pump thrombosis or malfunction have an enduring negative influence on dynamic estimates of long-term prognosis.