Search

Background: Gender and racial disparities exist after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. Compared with older devices, the HeartMate 3 (HM3) (Abbott Cardiovascular) has demonstrated improved survival. Whether HM3 differentially improves outcomes by gender or race and ethnic groups is unknown., Objectives: The purpose of this study is to examine differences by gender and race in the use of HM3 among patients listed for heart transplantation (HT) and associated waitlist and post-transplant outcomes., Methods: The authors examined all patients (20% women, 33% Black) who received LVADs as bridge to transplantation (BTT) between January 2018 and June 2020, in the OPTN (Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network) database. Trends in use of HM3 were evaluated by gender and race. Competing events of death/delisting and transplantation were evaluated using subdistribution hazard models. Post-transplant outcomes were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression adjusted for demographic, clinical, and donor characteristics., Results: Of 11,524 patients listed for HT during the study period, 955 (8.3%) had HM3 implanted as BTT. Use of HM3 increased for all patients, with no difference in use by gender (P = 0.4) or by race (P = 0.2). Competing risk analysis did not demonstrate differences in transplantation or death/delisting in men compared with women (HT: adjusted HR [aHR]: 0.92 [95% CI: 0.70-1.21]; death/delisting: aHR: 0.91 [95% CI: 0.59-1.42]), although Black patients were transplanted fewer times than White patients (HT: aHR: 0.72 [95% CI: 0.57-0.91], death/delisting: aHR: 1.36 [95% CI: 0.98-1.89]). One-year post-transplant survival was comparable by gender (aHR: 0.52 [95% CI: 0.21-1.70]) and race (aHR: 0.76 [95% CI: 0.34-1.70]), with no differences in rates of stroke, acute rejection, or graft failure., Conclusions: Use of HM3 among patients listed for HT has increased over time and by gender and race. Black patients with HM3 were less likely to be transplanted compared with White patients, but there were no differences in post-transplant outcomes between these groups or between men and women., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosure Dr Morris is supported by the American Heart Association, AHRQ (HS026081), the Woodruff Foundation, and the Association of Black Cardiologists; and has received consulting fees from Abbott, Acorai, BI Lilly, Cytokinetics, Edwards Lifesciences, Ionis, and Merck. Dr Patel is supported by the Stimulating Access to Research in Residency of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R38AI140299. Dr Wang is supported by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health under award number 5T32HL007745. Dr Okoh is supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number T32HL130025. 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.)

Although pregnancy is generally contraindicated in advanced heart failure (AHF), successful pregnancies have been observed in patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs). The number of pregnancies in patients with LVADs is increasing, yet optimal management strategies remain undefined. Additionally, no successful pregnancies have been reported with the HeartMate 3 (HM3) (Abbott) LVAD. A systematic review of pregnancy in patients with LVADs was prepared utilizing 3 major scientific databases. We also present the first reported case of successful pregnancy and delivery in a patient supported by an HM3 LVAD. The systematic search yielded 95 results. After filtering to include only relevant citations, eight unique cases were identified. Cases were compared on the basis of several clinical factors. Although pregnancies supported by LVADs are medically complex, several cases of successful deliveries have been observed. Clinical management between cases, however, did vary significantly. Several areas requiring further study were identified., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: The use of sacubitril/valsartan is not endorsed by practice guidelines for use in patients with New York Heart Association class IV heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction because of limited clinical experience in this population., Objective: To compare treatment with sacubitril/valsartan treatment with valsartan in patients with advanced heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction and recent New York Heart Association class IV symptoms., Design, Setting, and Participants: A double-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted; a total of 335 patients with advanced heart failure were included. The trial began on March 2, 2017, and was stopped early on March 23, 2020, owing to COVID-19 risk., Intervention: Patients were randomized to receive sacubitril/valsartan (target dose, 200 mg twice daily) or valsartan (target dose, 160 mg twice daily) in addition to recommended therapy., Main Outcomes and Measures: The area under the curve (AUC) for the ratio of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) compared with baseline measured through 24 weeks of therapy., Results: Of the 335 patients included in the analysis, 245 were men (73%); mean (SD) age was 59.4 (13.5) years. Seventy-two eligible patients (18%) were not able to tolerate sacubitril/valsartan, 100 mg/d, during the short run-in period, and 49 patients (29%) discontinued sacubitril/valsartan during the 24 weeks of the trial. The median NT-proBNP AUC for the valsartan treatment arm (n = 168) was 1.19 (IQR, 0.91-1.64), whereas the AUC for the sacubitril/valsartan treatment arm (n = 167) was 1.08 (IQR, 0.75-1.60). The estimated ratio of change in the NT-proBNP AUC was 0.95 (95% CI 0.84-1.08; P = .45). Compared with valsartan, treatment with sacubitril/valsartan did not improve the clinical composite of number of days alive, out of hospital, and free from heart failure events. Aside from a statistically significant increase in non-life-threatening hyperkalemia in the sacubitril/valsartan arm (28 [17%] vs 15 [9%]; P = .04), there were no observed safety concerns., Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this trial showed that, in patients with chronic advanced heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction, there was no statistically significant difference between sacubitril/valsartan and valsartan with respect to reducing NT-proBNP levels., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02816736.

Background: Caregiver support is considered necessary after heart transplant (HT) and left ventricular assist device (LVAD) for patients with end-stage heart failure (HF). Few studies have demonstrated how caregivers differ by gender and race, and whether that impacts therapy eligibility., Methods: We examined caregiver relationships among 674 patients (32% women, 55% Black) evaluated at Emory University from 2011 to 2017. Therapy readiness was assessed using the Stanford Integrated Assessment for Transplant (SIPAT). Evaluation outcome according to caregiver relationship was compared using χ 2 analysis. Multivariable logistic regression determined the association between caregiver and eligibility according to gender and race., Results: Women and Black patients were less likely to have spouses as their support person (P < .001). Women were less likely to be considered eligible for advanced therapies (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] .64, 95% confidence interval [CI] .46-.89; P = .008), with Black women having lower eligibility than White women (aOR .28, 95% CI .11-.72; P = .008). Social support and SIPAT scores did not significantly influence eligibility by gender or race., Conclusion: Lack of caregiver support is considered a relative contraindication to advanced therapies. Type of caregiver in our cohort varied according to race and gender but did not explain differences in eligibility for advanced therapies., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The PARADIGM-HF (Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin II Receptor Blocker Neprilysin Inhibitor With Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure) trial reported that sacubitril/valsartan (S/V), an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, significantly reduced mortality and heart failure (HF) hospitalization in HF patients with a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, fewer than 1% of patients in the PARADIGM-HF study had New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class IV symptoms. Accordingly, data that informed the use of S/V among patients with advanced HF were limited. The LIFE (LCZ696 in Hospitalized Advanced Heart Failure) study was a 24-week prospective, multicenter, double-blinded, double-dummy, active comparator trial that compared the safety, efficacy, and tolerability of S/V with those of valsartan in patients with advanced HFrEF. The trial planned to randomize 400 patients ≥18 years of age with advanced HF, defined as an EF ≤35%, New York Heart Association functional class IV symptoms, elevated natriuretic peptide concentration (B-type natriuretic peptide [BNP] ≥250 pg/ml or N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide [NT-proBNP] ≥800 pg/ml), and ≥1 objective finding of advanced HF. Following a 3- to 7-day open label run-in period with S/V (24 mg/26 mg twice daily), patients were randomized 1:1 to S/V titrated to 97 mg/103 mg twice daily versus 160 mg of V twice daily. The primary endpoint was the proportional change from baseline in the area under the curve for NT-proBNP levels measured through week 24. Secondary and tertiary endpoints included clinical outcomes and safety and tolerability. Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, enrollment in the LIFE trial was stopped prematurely to ensure patient safety and data integrity. The primary analysis consists of the first 335 randomized patients whose clinical follow-up examination results were not severely impacted by COVID-19. (Entresto [LCZ696] in Advanced Heart Failure [LIFE STUDY] [HFN-LIFE]; NCT02816736)., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: We investigated sex-based differences in eligibility for and outcomes after receipt of advanced heart failure (HF) therapies., Background: Although women are more likely to die from HF than men, registry data suggest that women are less likely to receive heart transplant (HT) or left ventricular assist device (LVAD) for largely unknown reasons., Methods: We performed a single-center retrospective cohort study of patients evaluated for advanced HF therapies from 2012 to 2016. Logistic regression was used to determine the association of sex with eligibility for HT/LVAD. Competing risks and Kaplan-Meier analysis were used to examine survival., Results: Of 569 patients (31% women) evaluated, 223 (39.2%) were listed for HT and 81 (14.2%) received destination (DT) LVAD. Women were less likely to be listed for HT (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21-0.61; P < .0001), based on allosensitization (P < .0001) and obesity (P = .02). Women were more likely to receive DT LVAD (adjusted OR 2.29, 95% CI 1.23-4.29; P = .01). Survival was similar between men and women regardless of whether they received HT and DT LVAD or were ineligible for therapy., Conclusion: Women are less likely to be HT candidates, but more likely to receive DT LVAD., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The objective of this study was to investigate decisional regret among left ventricular assist device (LVAD) patients and their caregivers., Methods: This study was a single center, cross-sectional survey of patients after LVAD implantation and their caregivers. Subjects were recruited at their outpatient heart failure appointments. Patients and caregivers at least three months from LVAD implantation completed a 5-item, validated decisional regret scale. Summative scores on a 0-100 point scale were determined for patient and caregivers (0 = no regret). Subgroup analysis included gender, LVAD indication (bridge to transplant (BTT) or destination therapy (DT)), time from LVAD implantation, and caregiver relationship. Dyad discordance was defined as a patient-caregiver difference of ≥2 points on any regret scale question., Results: Fifty patients were approached for participation. Thirty-three LVAD patient-caregiver dyads were enrolled in the study (19 male, 14 female patients; 8 male, 25 female caregivers). Patients had a mean age of approximately 50 years. Caregivers had a mean age of approximately 54 years. Patients had a median regret score of 10 (Interquartile range (IQR): 0-30), while caregivers had a median regret score of 20 (IQR: 0-25). Median regret scores of female patients were significantly higher than that of male patients (27.5 vs 0, p = 0.0038). BTT patients had numerically lower regret than DT patients, but this was not statistically significant. Patients who had been implanted for greater than three years had the highest regret scores. Discordance in at least one domain of the regret scale was present in 19 out of 33 (57.6%) dyads., Conclusions: While decisional regret was reasonably low in this population, comparatively, there was significantly increased decisional regret among female patients and patients further from LVAD implantation. Differences between patients and caregivers were also observed. These findings highlight the need for robust support and continual attention to expectations before and after LVAD implantation., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Poor response to loop diuretic therapy is a marker of risk during heart failure hospitalization. We sought to describe baseline determinants of diuretic response and to further explore the relationship between this response and clinical outcomes., Methods and Results: Patient data from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Heart Failure Network ROSE-AHF and CARRESS-HF clinical trials were analyzed to determine baseline determinants of diuretic response. Diuretic efficiency (DE) was defined as total 72-hour fluid output per total equivalent loop diuretic dose. Data from DOSE-AHF was then used to determine if these predictors of DE correlated with response to a high- versus low-dose diuretic strategy. At 72 hours, the high-DE group had median fluid output of 9071 ml (interquartile range: 7240-11775) with median furosemide dose of 320 mg (220-480) compared with 8030 ml (6300-9915) and 840 mg (600-1215) respectively for the low DE group. Cystatin C was independently associated with DE (odds ratio 0.36 per 1mg/L increase; 95% confidence interval: 0.24-0.56; P < 0.001). Independently from baseline characteristics, reduced fluid output, weight loss and DE were each associated with increased 60 day mortality. Among patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate below the median, those randomized to a high-dose strategy had improved symptoms compared with those randomized to a low-dose strategy., Conclusions: Elevated baseline cystatin C, as a biomarker of renal dysfunction, is associated with reduced diuretic response during heart failure hospitalization. Higher loop diuretic doses are required for therapeutic decongestion in patients with renal insufficiency. Poor response identifies a high-risk population., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In patients with acute heart failure (AHF), dyspnea relief is the most immediate goal. Renal dysfunction, diuretic resistance, and hyponatremia represent treatment impediments., Objectives: It was hypothesized that the addition of tolvaptan to a background diuretic improved dyspnea early in patients selected for an enhanced vasopressin antagonism response., Methods: In a double-blind trial, patients were randomized to tolvaptan 30 mg/day or placebo. Study entry required hospitalization within the previous 36 h, active dyspnea, and any of the following: 1) estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 ml/min/1.73 m 2 ; 2) hyponatremia; or 3) diuretic resistance (urine output ≤125 ml/h following intravenous furosemide ≥40 mg). The primary endpoint was a 7-point change in self-assessed dyspnea at 8 and 16 h, using a novel standardized approach., Results: We randomized 250 patients. There was no difference in the primary endpoint of day 1 dyspnea reduction, despite significantly greater weight reduction with tolvaptan (-2.4 ± 2.1 kg vs. -0.9 ± 1.8 kg; p < 0.001). At day 3, dyspnea reduction was greater with tolvaptan (p = 0.01). There were 2 significant treatment-by-subgroup interactions: patients without elevated jugular venous pressure and those without ascites showed directional favorability of tolvaptan over placebo for the primary endpoint compared with patients with these findings., Conclusions: Despite rapid and persistent weight loss with tolvaptan compared with placebo, in patients with AHF who were selected for greater potential benefit from vasopressin receptor inhibition, tolvaptan was not associated with greater early improvement in dyspnea. Apparent subsequent differences in dyspnea warrant further exploration of the temporal relationship between diuresis and dyspnea relief and a possible clinical role for tolvaptan. (Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo Controlled Study of the Short Term Clinical Effects of Tolvaptan in Patients Hospitalized for Worsening Heart Failure With Challenging Volume Management [SECRET of CHF]; NCT01584557)., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The oral vasopressin-2 receptor antagonist tolvaptan causes aquaresis in patients with volume overload, potentially facilitating decongestion and improving the clinical course of patients with acute heart failure (AHF)., Objectives: The TACTICS-HF (Targeting Acute Congestion with Tolvaptan in Congestive Heart Failure) study was conducted to address the acute use of tolvaptan to improve congestion in AHF., Methods: The TACTICS-HF study randomized patients (n = 257) within 24 h of AHF presentation in a prospective, double blind, placebo-controlled trial. Patients were eligible regardless of ejection fraction, and were randomized to either 30 mg of tolvaptan or placebo given at 0, 24, and 48 h, with a fixed-dose furosemide regimen as background therapy. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients considered responders at 24 h. Secondary endpoints included symptom improvement, changes in renal function, and clinical events., Results: Dyspnea relief by Likert scale was similar between groups at 8 h (25% moderately or markedly improved with tolvaptan vs. 28% placebo; p = 0.59) and at 24 h (50% tolvaptan vs. 47% placebo; p = 0.80). Need for rescue therapy was also similar at 24 h (21% tolvaptan, 18% placebo; p = 0.57). The proportion defined as responders at 24 h (primary study endpoint) was 16% for tolvaptan and 20% for placebo (p = 0.32). Tolvaptan resulted in greater weight loss and net fluid loss compared with placebo, but tolvaptan-treated patients were more likely to experience worsening renal function during treatment. There were no differences in in-hospital or post-discharge clinical outcomes., Conclusions: In patients hospitalized with AHF, dyspnea, and congestion, the addition of tolvaptan to a standardized furosemide regimen did not improve the number of responders at 24 h, despite greater weight loss and fluid loss. (Targeting Acute Congestion With Tolvaptan in Congestive Heart Failure [TACTICS-HF]; NCT01644331)., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Significant improvements in the morbidity and mortality associated with chronic heart failure have been gained with the use ACE inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and diuretics. However, the use of these agents is often limited by their propensity to precipitate worsening renal function and hyperkalemia, particularly in patients with chronic kidney disease. Several pharmacologic agents have been developed in recent years that utilize the gastrointestinal tract as an alternate route for drug absorption, electrolyte exchange, and drug and electrolyte elimination. The existing data establishing the safety and efficacy of these novel agents will be the focus of this review.

The origins of the hydralazine/isosorbide dinitrate (H+ISDN) combination therapy are rooted in the first large-scale clinical trial in heart failure: V-HeFT I. Initially utilized for the balanced vasodilatory properties of each drug, we now know there is "more to the story." In fact, the maintenance of the nitroso-redox balance may be the true mechanism of benefit. Since the publication of V-HeFT I 30 years ago, H+ISDN has been the subject of much discussion and debate. Regardless of the many controversies surrounding H+ISDN, one thing is clear: therapy is underutilized and many patients who could benefit never receive the drugs. Ongoing physician and patient education are mandatory to improve the rates of H+ISDN use., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Combination therapy with hydralazine and nitrates can improve outcomes in patients with heart failure and low ejection fraction. However, this combination is underused in clinical practice for several reasons, including side effects related to hydralazine and polypharmacy. Some of the benefits seen with hydralazine, including afterload reduction and attenuation of nitrate tolerance, have also been observed with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. Demonstrating similar clinical benefits with nitrates plus angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor therapy alone, in the absence of hydralazine, may represent an opportunity to improve heart failure care by increasing the use of nitrates. In this paper, we summarize data that support studying such an approach., (Copyright © 2013 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Heart failure is a growing epidemic that currently affects nearly 6 million people in the USA. Despite the well-documented hemodynamic abnormalities associated with the disease (e.g., elevated systemic vascular resistance), therapies that directly target these derangements have consistently failed to improve important clinical outcomes, unless they also act on the underlying pathophysiology of the disease (e.g., angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors). Numerous clinical trials of vasodilators in the treatment of heart failure have resulted in either neutral or negative outcomes suggesting that systemic vascular resistance may be an inappropriate target of therapy. The reasons for failure in these studies are manifold, including a poor understanding of vasodilator agents and their secondary effects, poorly designed studies that include a markedly heterogeneous patient population and a paucity of objective end points that may be used as targets of therapy, to name a few. Future studies of vasodilators will need to consider these issues in trial design.

Understanding estimated survival times in discrete groups according to race-ethnicity and age might allow for more accurate patient counseling, to set appropriate expectations for patients who are being considered for HT. Racial disparities in long-term survival after heart transplantation: What should we be telling patients? Black heart transplant (HT) recipients continue to have inferior outcomes compared to other race-ethnic groups, including a higher risk of rejection and allograft failure contributing to lower rates of long-term survival in this population.1-4 It is important for clinicians to understand race-ethnic differences in post-HT survival, so that patients can be counseled accurately. [Extracted from the article]

Background There is increasing recognition that the risk of stroke after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation varies based on gender, with a higher risk in female patients. We reviewed our own data to determine gender differences in the risk of stroke. Methods Frequency of stroke, including intracranial hemorrhage and ischemic stroke, was retrospectively evaluated in 110 heart failure patients (mean age 49.6 ± 13.6 years, 32% women) discharged from the hospital after implantation of a HeartMate II ( N = 74) or HeartWare ( N = 36) LVAD. Competing outcomes analysis was used to determine which clinical risk factors were associated with the risk of stroke and death, with the primary end-point being time to first stroke event. Results During a median follow-up of 1.3 years, 26 patients had a stroke (23.6%, 0.14 case per person-year). The median time to first stroke was 0.7 (interquartile range 0.3 to 1.4) years. After adjusting for covariates, risk of stroke was higher for women than for men (hazard ratio 3.1, 95% confidence interval 1.4 to 6.9; p = 0.007). There was no difference in overall survival between men and women. Conclusion The risk of stroke after LVAD varies based on gender, with a higher risk in female patients. More research is needed to fully understand these differences, and whether device management strategies should be tailored based on gender. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The oral vasopressin-2 receptor antagonist tolvaptan causes aquaresis in patients with volume overload, potentially facilitating decongestion and improving the clinical course of patients with acute heart failure (AHF).Objectives: The TACTICS-HF (Targeting Acute Congestion with Tolvaptan in Congestive Heart Failure) study was conducted to address the acute use of tolvaptan to improve congestion in AHF.Methods: The TACTICS-HF study randomized patients (n = 257) within 24 h of AHF presentation in a prospective, double blind, placebo-controlled trial. Patients were eligible regardless of ejection fraction, and were randomized to either 30 mg of tolvaptan or placebo given at 0, 24, and 48 h, with a fixed-dose furosemide regimen as background therapy. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients considered responders at 24 h. Secondary endpoints included symptom improvement, changes in renal function, and clinical events.Results: Dyspnea relief by Likert scale was similar between groups at 8 h (25% moderately or markedly improved with tolvaptan vs. 28% placebo; p = 0.59) and at 24 h (50% tolvaptan vs. 47% placebo; p = 0.80). Need for rescue therapy was also similar at 24 h (21% tolvaptan, 18% placebo; p = 0.57). The proportion defined as responders at 24 h (primary study endpoint) was 16% for tolvaptan and 20% for placebo (p = 0.32). Tolvaptan resulted in greater weight loss and net fluid loss compared with placebo, but tolvaptan-treated patients were more likely to experience worsening renal function during treatment. There were no differences in in-hospital or post-discharge clinical outcomes.Conclusions: In patients hospitalized with AHF, dyspnea, and congestion, the addition of tolvaptan to a standardized furosemide regimen did not improve the number of responders at 24 h, despite greater weight loss and fluid loss. (Targeting Acute Congestion With Tolvaptan in Congestive Heart Failure [TACTICS-HF]; NCT01644331). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]