Search

[Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients with chronic diseases are at higher risk of requiring domiciliary and nursing home care, but how different chronic diseases compare in terms of risk is not known. We examined initiation of domiciliary care and nursing home admission among patients with heart failure (HF), stroke, COPD and cancer. Methods: Patients with a first-time hospitalization for HF, stroke, COPD or cancer from 2008–2016 were identified. Patients were matched on age and sex and followed for five years. Results: 111,144 patients, 27,786 with each disease, were identified. The median age was 69 years and two thirds of the patients were men. The 5-year risk of receiving domiciliary care was; HF 20.9%, stroke 25.2%, COPD 24.6% and cancer 19.3%. The corresponding adjusted hazard ratios (HRs), with HF patients used as reference, were: stroke 1.35[1.30–1.40]; COPD 1.29[1.25–1.34]; and cancer 1.19[1.14–1.23]. The five-year incidence of nursing home admission was 6.6% for stroke, and substantially lower in patients with HF(2.6%), COPD(2.6%) and cancer (1.5%). The adjusted HRs were (HF reference): stroke, 2.44 [2.23–2.68]; COPD 1.01 [0.91–1.13] and cancer 0.76 [0.67–0.86]. Living alone, older age, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, depression and dementia predicted a higher likelihood of both types of care. Conclusions: In patients with HF, stroke, COPD or cancer 5-year risk of domiciliary care and nursing home admission, ranged from 19–25% and 1–7%, respectively. Patients with stroke had the highest rate of domiciliary care and were more than twice as likely to be admitted to a nursing home, compared to patients with the other conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The role of microvascular complications in the risk conferred by diabetes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is unknown.Methods and Results: We studied 2707 HFrEF patients in the Beta-blocker Evaluation of Survival Trial (BEST), stratified into three groups: no diabetes and diabetes without or with microvascular complications (neuropathy, nephropathy, or retinopathy). The risks of the composite of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization, and all-cause death, were studied using Cox regression analyses adjusted for other prognostic variables. Overall, 964 (36%) patients had diabetes, of which 313 (32%) had microvascular complications. Patients with microvascular complications had more severe symptoms (New York Heart Association class IV 12% vs. 9% diabetes with no complications and 7% no diabetes), and worse quality of life (Minnesota Living with Heart Failure median score 60 vs. 54 and 51 points). In patients with diabetes and complications, the rate of the composite outcome was 50 per 100 person-years of follow-up (compared with 34 and 29 in those with diabetes and no microvascular complications and participants without diabetes, respectively). Compared to patients without diabetes, the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for the composite outcome was 1.44 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.22-1.70] and 1.18 (95% CI 1.03-1.35) for patients with diabetes with and without complications, respectively. The risk of all-cause mortality was similarly elevated: adjusted HR 1.42 (95% CI 1.16-1.74) and 1.20 (95% CI 1.01-1.42), respectively.Conclusion: In HFrEF, diabetes with microvascular complications is associated with worse symptoms and outcomes than diabetes without microvascular complications. Prevention of microvascular complications has the potential to improve HFrEF outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Heart failure (HF) has a major impact on a patient's quality of life and functional status. This impact may be sufficiently profound to prevent independent living although how often this is the case is unknown. We examined the need for domiciliary assistance and admission to a nursing home following first HF hospitalization. Methods: In nationwide Danish registries, we identified a cohort of patients discharged alive after a first-time HF hospitalization in the period 2008–2014 who were matched 1:5 with comparison subjects based on age and sex and followed for 5 years. Results: We included 37,547 patients (69% men) discharged after a first-time HF-hospitalization and 187,735 comparison subjects. The 5-year incidence of initiation of domiciliary care was 24.1% [23.7%–24.6%] among HF patients and 9.2% [9.1%–9.4%] among the comparison cohort and yielded a corresponding adjusted HR of 2.02 [1.96–2.09]. Covariates associated with initiation of domiciliary support included older age (HR 1.08 [1.07–1.08] per 1 year increase in age), living alone (HR 2.09 [2.04–2.15]) and comorbidities. The 5-year incidence of nursing home admission was 3.9% [3.7%–4.0%] among HF patients and 1.7% [1.7%–1.8%] among the comparison cohort and this resulted in an adjusted HR of 1.91 [1.77–2.06]. Covariates associated with nursing home admission included older age (HR 1.10 [1.10–1.11]), living alone (HR 2.15 [2.02–2.28]) and history of stroke (HR 2.71 [2.53–2.90]). Conclusion: Hospitalization for HF is associated with increased need for domiciliary support and nursing home admissions. Older age, living alone, and comorbidities were associated with higher risk of both outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Employment status at time of first heart failure (HF) hospitalization may be an indicator of both self-perceived and objective health status. In this study, we examined the association between employment status and the risk of all-cause mortality and recurrent HF hospitalization in a nationwide cohort of patients with HF.Methods and Results: We identified all patients of working age (18-60 years) with a first HF hospitalization in the period 1997-2015 in Denmark, categorized according to whether or not they were part of the workforce at time of the index admission. The primary outcome was death from any cause and the secondary outcome was readmission for HF. Cumulative incidence curves, binomial regression and Cox regression models were used to assess outcomes. Of 25 571 patients with a first hospitalization for HF, 15 428 (60%) were part of the workforce at baseline. Patients in the workforce were significantly younger (53 vs. 55 years) more likely to be male (75% vs 64%) and less likely to have diabetes (13% vs 22%) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (5% vs 10%) (all P < 0.0001). Not being part of the workforce was associated with a significantly higher risk of death [hazard ratio (HR) 1.59; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.50-1.68] and rehospitalization for HF (HR 1.09; 95% CI 1.05-1.14), in analyses adjusted for age, sex, co-morbidities, education level, calendar time, and duration of first HF hospitalization.Conclusion: Not being part of the workforce at time of first HF hospitalization was independently associated with increased mortality and recurrent HF hospitalization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims To investigate the prognostic significance of hospitalization for worsening heart failure ( WHF), myocardial infarction ( MI), and stroke in patients with chronic heart failure ( HF). Methods and results We studied 5011 patients with HF and reduced EF ( HF-REF) in the CORONA trial and 4128 patients with HF and preserved EF ( HF-PEF) in the I-Preserve trial. Adjusted hazard ratios ( HRs) for death were estimated for 0-30 days and ≥31 days after first post-randomization WHF, MI, or stroke used as a time-dependent variable, compared with patients with none of these events. In CORONA, 1616 patients (32%) had post-randomization first events (1223 WHF, 216 MI, 177 stroke), and the adjusted HR for mortality ≤30 days after an event was: WHF 7.21 [95% confidence interval ( CI) 2.05-25.40], MI 23.08 (95% CI 6.44-82.71), and stroke 32.15 (95% CI 8.93-115.83). The HR for mortality at >30 days was: WHF 3.62 (95% CI 3.11-4.21), MI 4.41 (95% CI 3.23-6.02), and stroke 3.19 (95% CI 2.21-4.61). In I-Preserve, 896 patients (22%) experienced a post-randomization event (638 WHF, 111 MI, 147 stroke). The HR for mortality ≤30 days was WHF 31.77 (95% CI 7.60-132.81), MI 154.77 (95% CI 34.21-700.17), and stroke 223.30 (95% CI 51.42-969.78); for >30 days it was WHF 3.36 (95% CI 2.79-4.05), MI 3.29 (95% CI 2.14-5.06), and stroke 5.13 (95% CI 3.61-7.29). Conclusions In patients with both HF-REF and HF-PEF, hospitalization for WHF was associated with high early and late mortality. The early relative risk of death was not as great as following MI or stroke, but the longer term relative risk of death was similar following all three types of event. Numerically, more deaths occurred following WHF because it was a much more common event. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims Methods and results Conclusion Although body mass index (BMI) is the most commonly used anthropometric measure to assess adiposity, alternative indices such as the waist‐to‐height ratio may better reflect the location and amount of ectopic fat as well as the weight of the skeleton.The prognostic value of several alternative anthropometric measures was compared with that of BMI in 1116 patients with non‐ischaemic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) enrolled in DANISH. The association between anthropometric measures and all‐cause death was adjusted for prognostic variables, including natriuretic peptides. Median follow‐up was 9.5 years (25th–75th percentile, 7.9–10.9). Compared to patients with a BMI 18.5–24.9 kg/m2 (n = 363), those with a BMI ≥25 kg/m2 had a higher risk of all‐cause and cardiovascular death, although this association was only statistically significant for a BMI ≥35 kg/m2 (n = 91) (all‐cause death: hazard ratio [HR] 1.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28–2.48; cardiovascular death: HR 2.46, 95% CI 1.69–3.58). Compared to a BMI 18.5–24.9 kg/m2, a BMI <18.5 kg/m2 (n = 24) was associated with a numerically, but not a significantly, higher risk of all‐cause and cardiovascular death. Greater waist‐to‐height ratio (as an exemplar of indices not incorporating weight) was also associated with a higher risk of all‐cause and cardiovascular death (HR for the highest vs. the lowest quintile: all‐cause death: HR 2.11, 95% CI 1.53–2.92; cardiovascular death: HR 2.17, 95% CI 1.49–3.15).In patients with non‐ischaemic HFrEF, there was a clear association between greater adiposity and higher long‐term mortality.Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00542945. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To examine the association between health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and mortality in patients with heart failure (HF). The potential association of HRQoL and mortality in patients with HF is unclear. We investigated this association in The Danish Study to Assess the Efficacy of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators (ICD) in Patients with Non-ischemic Systolic Heart Failure on Mortality (DANISH). In DANISH, a total of 1116 patients with non-ischemic systolic HF on guideline-recommended therapy were randomized to ICD therapy or usual clinical care. HRQoL was assessed at randomization using the disease-specific Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ, 0–105, high score indicating worse HRQoL). Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were used to compare hazard ratios (HR) for all-cause mortality according to MLHFQ above or below 45, as recommended by a recent meta-analysis, to identify patients with poor HRQoL. HRQoL was completed by 935 (84%) patients at baseline with a median follow-up of 67 months (IQR 47–83). Patients with poor HRQoL (MLHFQ score > 45, median 60 (IQR 53–71) , n = 350) had a higher incidence of all-cause mortality than patients with moderate/good HRQoL (MLHFQ ≤45, median 23 (IQR 13–33), n = 585), respectively 26% vs. 18% with an unadjusted HR of 1.57 (95% CI 1.19–2.08, p =.002), and an adjusted HR of 1.39 (95% CI 1.01–1.91, p =.04). Poor HRQoL was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality after adjustment for traditional risk factors. https: // clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00542945 (DANISH). • Poor quality of life is associated with mortality in patients with nonischemic heart failure • The association was obtained following adjustment for multiple traditional risk factors • Cardiovascular mortality was likewise associated to poor quality of life in crude models • Patients who experienced deteriorating quality of life within 8 months had a higher rate of mortality [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of atrial fibrillation (AF) and antithrombotic treatment on the prognosis in patients with heart failure (HF) as well as vascular disease. Background: HF, vascular disease, and AF are pathophysiologically related, and understanding antithrombotic treatment for these conditions is crucial. Methods: In hospitalized patients with HF and coexisting vascular disease (coronary artery disease or peripheral arterial disease) followed from 1997 to 2009, AF status was categorized as prevalent AF, incident AF, or no AF. Risk of thromboembolism (TE), myocardial infarction (MI), and serious bleeding was assessed by Cox regression models (hazard ratio [HR] with 95% confidence interval [CI]) with antithrombotic therapy and AF as time-dependent variables. Results: A total of 37,464 patients were included (age, 74.5 ± 10.7 years; 36.3% females) with a mean follow-up of 3 years during which 20.7% were categorized as prevalent AF and 17.2% as incident AF. Compared with vitamin K antagonist (VKA) in prevalent AF, VKA plus antiplatelet was not associated with a decreased risk of TE (HR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.73 to 1.12) or MI (HR: 1.11; 95% CI: 0.96 to 1.28), whereas bleeding risk was significantly increased (HR: 1.31; 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.57). Corresponding estimates for incident AF were HRs of 0.77 (95% CI: 0.56 to 1.06), 1.07 (95% CI: 0.89 to 1.28), and 2.71 (95% CI: 1.33 to 2.21) for TE, MI, and bleeding, respectively. In no AF patients, no statistical differences were seen between antithrombotic therapies in TE or MI risk, whereas bleeding risk was significantly increased for VKA with and without single-antiplatelet therapy. Conclusions: In AF patients with coexisting HF and vascular disease, adding single-antiplatelet therapy to VKA therapy is not associated with additional benefit in thromboembolic or coronary risk, but notably increased bleeding risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]