Search

Clinical practice guidelines support sustained use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone-system (RAAS) inhibitors over time in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, yet few data are available regarding the frequency, timing or predictors of early treatment discontinuation in clinical practice.Among prevalent or new users of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis)/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs), and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) in the CHAMP-HF (Change the Management of Patients with Heart Failure) registry, we estimated the frequency and independent predictors of treatment discontinuation during follow-up. Among sites with5 users of a given RAAS inhibitor, we evaluated practice variation in the proportion of patients with treatment discontinuation.Over median follow-up of 18 months, frequency of drug discontinuation of ACEis/ARBs, ARNIs and MRAs was 12.7% (444 of 3509 users), 10.4% (140 of 1352 users), and 20.4% (435 of 2129 users), respectively. An additional, 149 (11.0%) of ARNI users were switched to ACEis/ARBs, and 447 (12.7%) of ACEi/ARB users were switched to ARNIs during follow-up. Across sites, the median proportion of discontinuation of ACEis/ARBs, ARNIs and MRAs was 12.5% (25th-75th percentiles 6.9%-18.9%), 18.8% (25th-75th percentiles 12.5%-28.6%), and 19.6% (25th-75th percentiles 10.7%-27.0%), respectively. Chronic kidney disease was the only independent predictor of increased risk of discontinuation of each of the RAAS inhibitor classes (P0.02 for all). Higher Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary scores independently predicted lower risk of discontinuation of ACEis/ARBs and ARNIs (both P0.001) but not of MRAs. Investigator clinical experience was predictive of lower risks of discontinuation of ACEis/ARBs and MRAs (P0.02) but not of ARNIs. All other independent predictors of discontinuation were unique to individual therapeutic classes.One in 10 patients discontinue ACEis/ARBs or ARNIs, and 1 in 5 discontinue MRAs in routine clinical practice of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Unique patient-level and clinician/practice-level factors are associated with premature discontinuation of individual RAAS inhibitors, which may help to guide structured efforts to promote treatment persistence in clinical care.

PURPOSE: Clinical models to identify patients at high risk of primary graft dysfunction (PGD) after heart transplantation (HT) are limited, and the underlying pathophysiology of this common post-transplant complication remains poorly understood. We sought to identify whether pre-transplant levels of circulating proteins reporting on immune activation and inflammation are associated with incident PGD. METHODS: The study population consisted of 219 adult heart transplant recipients identified between 2016 and 2020 at Duke University Medical Center, randomly divided into derivation (n = 131) and validation (n = 88) sets. PGD was defined using modified ISHLT criteria. Proteomic profiling was performed using Olink panels (n = 354 proteins) with serum samples collected immediately prior to transplantation. Association between normalized relative protein expression and PGD was tested using univariate and multivariable (recipient age, creatinine, mechanical circulatory support, and sex; donor age; ischemic time) models. Significant proteins identified in the derivation set (p < 0.05 in univariate models), were then tested in the validation set. Pathway enrichment analysis was used to test candidate biological processes. The predictive performance of proteins was compared to that of the RADIAL score. RESULTS: Nine proteins were associated with PGD in univariate models in the derivation set. Of these, only CLEC4C remained associated with PGD in the validation set after Bonferroni correction (OR [95% CI] = 3.04 [1.74,5.82], p = 2.8×10(−4)). Patterns of association were consistent for CLEC4C in analyses stratified by biventricular/left ventricular and isolated right ventricular PGD. Pathway analysis identified interferon-alpha response and C-type lectin signaling as significantly enriched biologic processes. The RADIAL score was a poor predictor of PGD (AUC = 0.55). CLEC4C alone (AUC = 0.66, p = 0.048) and in combination with the clinical covariates from the multivariable model (AUC = 0.69, p = 0.018) improved discrimination for the primary outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-transplantation circulating levels of CLEC4C, a protein marker of plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDCs), may identify HT recipients at risk for PGD. Further studies are needed to better understand the potential role pDCs and the innate immune response in PGD.

Aims We aimed to develop a risk prediction tool that incorporated both clinical events and worsening health status for patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Identifying patients with HFrEF at increased risk of a poor outcome may enable proactive interventions that improve outcomes. Methods and results We used data from a longitudinal HF registry, CHAMP‐HF, to develop a risk prediction tool for poor outcomes over the next 6 months. A poor outcome was defined as death, an HF hospitalization, or a ≥20‐point decrease (or decrease below 25) in 12‐item Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ‐12) overall summary score. Among 4546 patients in CHAMP‐HF, 1066 (23%) experienced a poor outcome within 6 months (1.3% death, 11% HF hospitalization, and 11% change in KCCQ‐12). The model demonstrated moderate discrimination (c‐index = 0.65) and excellent calibration with observed data. The following variables were associated with a poor outcome: age, race, education, New York Heart Association class, baseline KCCQ‐12, atrial fibrillation, coronary disease, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, smoking, prior HF hospitalization, and systolic blood pressure. We also created a simplified model with a 0–10 score using six variables (New York Heart Association class, KCCQ‐12, coronary disease, chronic kidney disease, prior HF hospitalization, and systolic blood pressure) with similar discrimination (c‐index = 0.63). Patients scoring 0–3 were considered low risk (event rate 40%). Conclusions The PROMPT‐HF risk model can identify outpatients with HFrEF at increased risk of poor outcomes, including clinical events and health status deterioration. With further validation, this model may help inform therapeutic decision making.

Aims Associations between growth differentiation factor‐15 (GDF‐15), cardiovascular outcomes, and exercise capacity among patients with a recent hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) are unknown. We utilized data from the ‘Functional Impact of GLP‐1 for Heart Failure Treatment’ (FIGHT) study to address these knowledge gaps. Methods and results FIGHT was a randomized clinical trial testing the effect of liraglutide (vs. placebo) among 300 participants with HFrEF and a recent HHF. Multivariable regression models evaluated associations between baseline GDF‐15 and change in GDF‐15 (per 1000 pg/mL increase from baseline to 30 days) with clinical outcomes (at 180 days) and declines in exercise capacity (6 min walk distance ≥ 45 m). At baseline (n = 249), median GDF‐15 value was 3221 pg/mL (interquartile range 1938–5511 pg/mL). Participants in the highest tertile of baseline GDF‐15 were more likely to be male and have more co‐morbidities. After adjustment, an increase in GDF‐15 over 30 days was associated with higher risk of death or HHF [hazard ratio 1.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11–1.64]. In addition, higher baseline GDF‐15 (per 1000 pg/mL until 6000 pg/mL) and an increase in GDF‐15 over 30 days were associated with declining 6 min walk distance (odds ratio 1.26, 95% CI 1.02–1.55 and odds ratio 1.37, 95% CI 1.12–1.69, respectively). GDF‐15 levels remained stable among participants randomized to liraglutide. Conclusions An increase in GDF‐15 over 30 days among patients in HFrEF was independently associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events and declining exercise capacity. These results support the value of longitudinal GDF‐15 trajectory in informing risk of heart failure disease progression.

OBJECTIVES: The authors estimated changes of stressed blood volume (SBV) induced by splanchnic nerve block (SNB) in patients with either decompensated or ambulatory heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). BACKGROUND: The splanchnic vascular capacity is a major determinant of the SBV, which in turn determines cardiac filling pressures and may be modifiable through SNB. METHODS: We analyzed data from 2 prospective, single-arm clinical studies in decompensated HFrEF (splanchnic HF-1; resting hemodynamics) and ambulatory heart failure (splanchnic HF-2; exercise hemodynamics). Patients underwent invasive hemodynamics and short-term SNB with local anesthetics. SBV was simulated using heart rate, cardiac output, central venous pressure, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, systolic and diastolic systemic arterial and pulmonary artery pressures, and left ventricular ejection fraction. SBV is presented as ml/70 kg body weight. RESULTS: Mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 21 ± 11%. In patients with decompensated HFrEF (n = 11), the mean estimated SBV was 3,073 ±251 ml/70 kg. At 30 min post-SNB, the estimated SBV decreased by 10% to 2,754 ± 386 ml/70 kg (p = 0.003). In ambulatory HFrEF (n = 14) patients, the mean estimated SBV was 2,664 ± 488 ml/70 kg and increased to 3,243 ± 444 ml/70 kg (p < 0.001) at peak exercise. The resting estimated SBV was lower in ambulatory patients with HFrEF than in decompensated HFrEF (p = 0.019). In ambulatory patients with HFrEF, post-SNB, the resting estimated SBV decreased by 532 ± 264 ml/70 kg (p < 0.001). Post-SNB, with exercise, there was no decrease of estimated SBV out of proportion to baseline effects (p = 0.661). CONCLUSIONS: The estimated SBV is higher in decompensated than in ambulatory heart failure. SNB reduced the estimated SBV in decompensated and ambulatory heart failure. The reduction in estimated SBV was maintained throughout exercise. (Splanchnic Nerve Anesthesia in Heart Failure, NCT02669407; Abdominal Nerve Blockade in Chronic Heart Failure, NCT03453151) (J Am Coll Cardiol HF 2021;9:293–300) © 2021 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

Objectives The authors sought to evaluate the association of heart failure hospitalization (HFH) with guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) prescribing patterns among patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Background HFH represents an important opportunity to titrate GDMT among patients with HFrEF. Methods The CHAMP-HF (Change the Management of Patients With Heart Failure) registry is a prospective registry of adults with HFrEF (ejection fraction ≤40%). Using data from the CHAMP-HF registry (N = 4,365), adjusted time-to-event models were created to study the association of HFH with GDMT prescribing patterns. Results HFH (compared with no HFH) was positively associated with initiation of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, beta-blocker, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA). HFH positively associated with dose escalation of ACE inhibitor/ARB (probability ratio: 1.71, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.36 to 2.16) and MRA (probability ratio: 8.71, 95% CI: 4.19 to 18.10). In those on prior therapy, HFH was associated with discontinuation and de-escalation of all classes of GDMT. ACE inhibitor/ARB, angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, beta-blocker, and MRA de-escalation/discontinuation after HFH was associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality with hazard ratios of 3.82 (95% CI: 2.42 to 6.03), 4.76 (95% CI: 2.06 to 11.03), 2.94 (95% CI: 2.04 to 4.25), and 4.81 (95% CI: 2.61 to 8.87), respectively. Conclusions HFH positively associated with changes in GDMT, including initiation, dose escalation, discontinuation, and dose de-escalation. De-escalation/discontinuation of GDMT after HFH associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality. Educational endeavors are needed to ensure GDMT is not inappropriately held in the setting of HFH. For those in whom GDMT must be held/decreased, improvement tools at discharge and post-discharge titration clinics may help ensure lifesaving GDMT regimens remain optimized.

Objectives This study compared the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan to enalapril in Black and non-Black Americans with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). Background Black patients have a different response to treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors compared with other racial and ethnic groups. How Black patients with ADHF respond to sacubitril/valsartan, an angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitor, is unclear. PIONEER-HF was a double-blind randomized clinical trial of sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril in hospitalized patients with ADHF following hemodynamic stabilization. Methods In a pre-specified subgroup analysis, we examined changes in N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide, clinical outcomes, and safety according to race. Results The study population, all enrolled in the United States, included 316 (36%) Black participants, 515 (58%) White participants, and 50 (5.7%) participants of other racial groups. The reduction in N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide concentration at weeks 4 and 8 was significantly greater with sacubitril/valsartan than enalapril in both Black (ratio of change with sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril: 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.58 to 0.88) and non-Black patients (ratio of change: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.61 to 0.83; interaction p = 1.00). Compared with enalapril, sacubitril/valsartan also reduced the pre-specified exploratory composite of cardiovascular death or HF rehospitalization in both Black (hazard ratio: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.24 to 0.93) and non-Black patients (hazard ratio: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.40 to 1.06; interaction p = 0.44). Conclusions Among Black patients admitted with ADHF in the United States, the in-hospital initiation of sacubitril/valsartan was more effective than enalapril in reducing natriuretic peptide levels and the composite of cardiovascular death or HF rehospitalization. The effect of sacubitril/valsartan did not differ by race. (Comparison of Sacubitril/Valsartan Versus Enalapril on Effect on NT-proBNP in Patients Stabilized From an Acute Heart Failure Episode [PIONEER-HF]; NCT02554890)

The PARADIGM-HF (Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin II Receptor Blocker Neprilysin Inhibitor With Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Mor...

Objectives This study sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan according to dose level achieved in the PIONEER-HF (Comparison of Sacubitril/Valsartan Versus Enalapril on Effect on NT-proBNP in Patients Stabilized From an Acute Heart Failure Episode) trial. Background In patients hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF), in-hospital initiation and continuation of sacubitril/valsartan as compared with enalapril is well tolerated, achieves a greater reduction in N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), and reduces the risk of cardiovascular death or rehospitalization for HF through 8 weeks. However, not all patients achieve the target dose of sacubitril/valsartan, and its efficacy and safety in such patients are of interest. Methods PIONEER-HF was a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled trial of sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril in 881 patients stabilized during hospitalization for ADHF. Blinded study medication was administered for 8 weeks, with initial dosing selected based on the systolic blood pressure at randomization and titrated toward a target of sacubitril/valsartan 97/103 mg twice daily, or enalapril 10 mg twice daily, with an algorithm based on systolic blood pressure and the investigator’s assessment of tolerability. Results At 4 weeks, 199 (55%) patients allocated to sacubitril/valsartan and 211 (60%) patients allocated to enalapril were dispensed the target dose. Baseline characteristics were similar in the 2 treatment groups within each dose level. There was no heterogeneity across dose levels in the effect of sacubitril/valsartan on the reduction in NT-proBNP (pinteraction = 0.69), the reduction in cardiovascular death or rehospitalization for heart failure (pinteraction = 0.42), or the pre-specified adverse events of special interest through 8 weeks. Conclusions In hemodynamically stabilized patients with ADHF, the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan are generally consistent across dose levels. (Comparison of Sacubitril/Valsartan Versus Enalapril on Effect on NT-proBNP in Patients Stabilized From an Acute Heart Failure Episode [PIONEER-HF]; NCT02554890)

The PIONEER-HF (comParIson Of sacubitril/valsartaN versus Enalapril on Effect on nt-pRo-bnp in patients stabilized from an acute Heart Failure episode) trial demonstrated the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan (S/V) in stabilized patients with acute decompensated heart failure (HF) and reduced ejection fraction.The study sought to determine whether and how prior HF history and treatment with an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) affected the results.The PIONEER-HF trial was a prospective, multicenter, double-blind, randomized clinical trial enrolling 881 patients with an ejection fraction ≤40%. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to in-hospital initiation of S/V (n = 440) versus enalapril (n = 441). Pre-specified subgroup analyses were performed based on prior HF history (i.e., de novo HF vs. worsening chronic HF) and treatment with an ACE inhibitor or ARB (i.e., ACE inhibitor or ARB-yes vs. ACE inhibitor or ARB-no) at admission.At enrollment, 303 (34%) patients presented with de novo HF and 576 (66%) patients with worsening chronic HF. A total of 421 (48%) patients had been treated with an ACE inhibitor or ARB, while 458 (52%) had not been treated with an ACE inhibitor or ARB. N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide declined significantly in all 4 subgroups (p 0.001), with greater decreases in the S/V versus the enalapril arm (p 0.001). There was no interaction between prior HF history (p = 0.350) or ACE inhibitor or ARB treatment (p = 0.880) and the effect of S/V versus enalapril on cardiovascular death or rehospitalization for HF. The incidences of adverse events were comparable between S/V and enalapril across all 4 subgroups.Among patients admitted for acute decompensated HF, S/V was safe and well tolerated, led to a significantly greater reduction in N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, and improved clinical outcomes compared with enalapril irrespective of previous HF history or ACE inhibitor or ARB treatment. (Comparison of Sacubitril/Valsartan Versus Enalapril on Effect of NT-proBNP in Patients Stabilized From an Acute Heart Failure Episode [PIONEER-HF]; NCT02554890).

We hypothesized that splanchnic nerve blockade (SNB) would attenuate increased exercise-induced cardiac filling pressures in patients with chronic HF.Chronic heart failure (HF) is characterized by limited exercise capacity driven in part by an excessive elevation of cardiac filling pressures.This is a prospective, open-label, single-arm interventional study in chronic HF patients. Eligible patients had a wedge pressure ≥15 mm Hg at rest or ≥25 mm Hg with exercise on baseline right heart catheterization. Patients underwent cardiopulmonary exercise testing with invasive hemodynamic assessment, followed by percutaneous SNB with ropivacaine.Nineteen patients were enrolled, 15 of whom underwent SNB. The average age was 58 ± 13 years, 7 (47%) patients were women and 6 (40%) were black. Left ventricular ejection fraction was ≤35% in 14 (93%) patients. No procedural complications were encountered. SNB reduced mean pulmonary arterial pressure at peak exercise from 54.1 ± 14.4 (pre-SNB) to 45.8 ± 17.7 mm Hg (p 0.001) (post-SNB). Similarly, SNB reduced exercise-induced wedge pressure from 34.8 ± 10.0 (pre-SNB) to 25.1 ± 10.7 mm Hg (p 0.001) (post-SNB). The cardiac index changed with peak exercise from 3.4 ± 1.2 (pre-SNB) to 3.8 ± 1.1 l/min/mSNB reduced resting and exercise-induced pulmonary arterial and wedge pressure with favorable effects on cardiac output and exercise capacity. Continued efforts to investigate short- and long-term effects of SNB in chronic HF are warranted. Clinical Trials Registration (Abdominal Nerve Blockade in Chronic Heart Failure; NCT03453151).

Objectives The purpose of this study was to characterize the clinical profile, treatment patterns, and clinical outcomes of patients with comorbid diabetes mellitus (DM) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in a contemporary, real-world U.S. outpatient registry in the context of evolving treatment strategies. Background Specific antihyperglycemic classes have differential risks and benefits with respect to HF. Limited data are available evaluating contemporary treatment patterns and outcomes of patients with comorbid DM and HFrEF. Methods Among 4,970 patients with chronic HFrEF (≤40%) across 152 U.S. sites in the CHAMP-HF prospective, observational registry (2015 to 2017), we examined therapies and clinical outcomes by DM status. Results Median age was 68 (58 to 75) years of age; 29% were women; 73.5% were white; and 64% had coronary artery disease. Overall, 42% (n = 2,085) had comorbid DM with a median hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) level of 7.2% (interquartile range [IQR]: 6.4% to 8.3%). One-fourth of DM patients (24%) were not treated with an antihyperglycemic therapy. Most patients with DM were taking 1 (46%) or 2 (23%) antihyperglycemic therapies: metformin (40%), insulin (33%); sulfonylureas (24%); dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (10%); glucagon-like peptide (GLP)-1 receptor agonists (4%); sodium-glucose cotransporter (SGLT)-2 inhibitors (2%); and thiazolidinediones (2%). Among patients with DM, 62%, 16%, 80%, and 33.5% were receiving any angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), β-blockers, or mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) at baseline, respectively. Among patients without DM, corresponding baseline rates were 65%, 15%, 80%, and 37%, respectively. Patients with or without DM were infrequently treated with guideline-directed HFrEF therapies at target doses (≤27% across classes). During median 15-month follow-up, patients with DM experienced higher rates of all-cause mortality or HF hospitalization (30% vs. 23%, respectively), independent of 11 pre-specified covariates (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.35 (95% confidence interval: 1.21 to 1.52); p Conclusions Despite higher risk-adjusted clinical event rates in patients with comorbid HFrEF and DM, guideline-directed medical therapies for both disease states are incomplete and represent an important target for quality improvement through multidisciplinary care pathways.

The TOPCAT trial investigated spironolactone vs placebo in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Although the primary endpoint was not statistically significant, treatment with spironolactone did reduce heart failure hospitalizations compared with placebo. TOPCAT's impact on prescribing patterns in the United States is not well-characterized. We performed a retrospective analysis of discharge prescribing data in the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure Registry among patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50% discharged between January 2009 and December 2016 to assess prescribing trends upon dissemination of TOPCAT results. Of 142,201 patients included in the study, 18,581 (13.1%) were prescribed mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) at discharge. Compared with those not prescribed MRAs, patients discharged on MRAs were generally younger (75 vs 78 years), and report white race (76.7% vs 72.0%), more likely to have had prior heart failure hospitalizations (75.5% vs 65.7%), lower brain natriuretic peptide levels (492 vs 545 pg/mL), but similar serum creatinine levels (1.2 vs 1.2 mg/dL) upon admission. MRA prescribing modestly increased over time (p

Background Ivabradine is guideline-recommended to reduce heart failure (HF) hospitalization in patients with stable chronic HF with reduced ejection fraction (EF). Ivabradine initiation following acute HF has had limited evaluation, and there are few randomized data in US patients. The PredischaRge initiation of Ivabradine in the ManagEment of Heart Failure (PRIME-HF) study was conducted to address predischarge ivabradine initiation in stabilized acute HF patients. Methods PRIME-HF was an investigator-initiated, randomized, open-label study of predischarge initiation of ivabradine versus usual care. Eligible patients were hospitalized for acute HF but stabilized, with EF ≤35%, on maximally tolerated β-blocker and in sinus rhythm with heart rate ≥70 beats/min. Ivabradine was acquired per routine care. The primary end point was the proportion of patients on ivabradine at 180 days. Additional end points included heart rate change, patient-reported outcomes, β-blocker use/dose, and safety events (symptomatic bradycardia and hypotension). Results Overall, 104 patients (36% women, 64% African American) were randomized, and the study was terminated early because of funding limitations. At 180 days, 21 of 52 (40.4%) of patients randomized to predischarge initiation were treated with ivabradine compared with 6 of 52 (11.5%) randomized to usual care (odds ratio 5.19, 95% CI 1.88-14.33, P = .002). The predischarge initiation group experienced greater reduction in heart rate through 180 days (mean −10.0 beats/min, 95% CI −15.7 to −4.3 vs 0.7 beats/min, 95% CI −5.4 to 6.7, P = .011). Patient-reported outcomes, β-blocker use/dose, and safety events were similar (all P > .05). Conclusions Ivabradine initiation prior to discharge among stabilized HF patients increased ivabradine use at 180 days and lowered heart rates without reducing β-blockers or increasing adverse events. As the trial did not achieve the planned enrollment, additional studies are needed.

A 77-year-old man with history of ischemic cardiomyopathy and left ventricular assist device (LVAD) presented with abdominal pain after a lawn mower accident. Examination and imaging revealed a displaced LVAD driveline and a pericardial hematoma secondary to traumatic coronary artery injury. The patient was treated with coronary artery coil embolization. (Level of Difficulty: Advanced.), Graphical abstract, A 77-year-old man with history of ischemic cardiomyopathy and left ventricular assist device (LVAD) presented with abdominal pain after a lawn mower…

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: Diuretics are a mainstay therapy for the symptomatic treatment of heart failure. However, in contemporary US outpatient practice, the degree to which diuretic dosing changes over time and the associations with clinical outcomes and health care resource utilization are unknown. Methods: Among 3426 US outpatients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in the Change the Management of Patients with Heart Failure registry with complete medication data and who were prescribed a loop diuretic, diuretic dose increase was defined as: (1) change to a total daily dose higher than their previous total daily dose, (2) addition of metolazone to the regimen, (3) change from furosemide to either bumetanide or torsemide, and the change persists for at least 7 days. Adjusted hazard ratios or rate ratios along with 95% CIs were reported for clinical outcomes among patients with an increase in oral diuretic dose versus no increase in diuretic dose. Results: Overall, 796 (23%) had a diuretic dose increase (18 episodes per 100 patient-years). The proportion of patients with dyspnea at rest (38% versus 26%), dyspnea at exertion (79% versus 67%), orthopnea (32% versus 21%), edema (60% versus 43%), and weight gain (40% versus 23%) were significantly (all P Conclusions: In this contemporary US registry, 1 in 4 patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction had outpatient escalation of diuretic therapy over longitudinal follow-up, and these patients were more likely to have sign/symptoms of congestion. Outpatient diuretic dose escalation of any magnitude was associated with heart failure hospitalizations and resource utilization, but not all-cause mortality.

Background Contemporary trials of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) required a recent worsening heart failure (WHF) event for inclusion. We aimed to describe characteristics and outcomes of patients with HFrEF and a recent WHF event at a large tertiary referral center. Methods and Results We identified adult patients with chronic symptomatic HFrEF (ejection fraction ≤35%) treated at Duke University between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2018, and applied a set of exclusion criteria to generate a cohort similar to those enrolled in contemporary heart failure trials. Patients were stratified by presence or absence of a recent WHF event, defined as an emergency department visit for heart failure or hospitalization for heart failure in the prior 12 months. Characteristics and outcomes including death and hospitalization were assessed. Of 3867 patients with HFrEF meeting study criteria, 2823 (73.0%) had a WHF event in the prior 12 months. Compared with patients without a WHF event, those with a WHF event were more likely to be under‐represented racial and ethnic groups and had lower ejection fraction, a greater burden of comorbidities, and more echocardiographic evidence of cardiac dysfunction. Despite higher use of guideline‐directed therapies, patients with a WHF event had higher rates of death (hazard ratio, 2.30; 95% CI, 2.01–2.63), all‐cause hospitalization (hazard ratio, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.42–1.71), and heart failure hospitalization (hazard ratio, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.44–1.75) through 5 years compared with those without a recent WHF event. Conclusions WHF events are common in patients with HFrEF and are associated with more advanced disease. Patients with recent WHF have high rates of death and hospitalization, underscoring the need for novel therapies in this large subgroup of patients with HFrEF.

The sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors form the latest pillar in the management of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and appear to be effective across a range of patient profiles. There is increasing interest in initiating SGLT-2 inhibitors during hospitalization, yet little is known about the putative benefits of this implementation strategy.We evaluated Medicare beneficiaries with HFrEF (≤ 40%) hospitalized at 228 sites in the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure (GWTG-HF) registry in 2016 who had linked claims data for ≥ 1 year postdischarge. We identified those eligible for dapagliflozin under the latest U.S. Food and Drug Administration label (excluding estimated glomerular filtration rates25 mL/min per 1.73 mAmong 7523 patients hospitalized for HFrEF, 6576 (87%) would be candidates for dapagliflozin (mean age 79 ± 8 years, 39% women, 11% Black). Among eligible candidates, discharge use of β-blockers, ACEi/ARB, MRA, ARNI, and triple therapy (ACEi/ARB/ARNI+β-blocker+MRA) was recorded in 88%, 64%, 29%, 3%, and 20%, respectively. Among treatment-eligible patients, the 1-year incidence (95% CI) of mortality was 37% (36-38%) and of HF readmission was 33% (32-34%), and each exceeded 25% across all key subgroups. Among 1333 beneficiaries eligible for dapagliflozin who were already on triple therapy, the 1-year incidence of mortality was 26% (24%-29%) and the 1-year readmission due to HF was 30% (27%-32%). Applying the relative risk reductions observed in DAPA-HF, absolute risk reductions with complete implementation of dapagliflozin among treatment-eligible Medicare beneficiaries are projected to be 5% (1%-9%) for mortality and 9% (5%-12%) for HF readmission by 1 year. The projected number of Medicare beneficiaries who would need to be treated for 1 year to prevent 1 death is 19 (11-114), and 12 (8-21) would need to be treated to prevent 1 readmission due to HF.Medicare beneficiaries with HFrEF who are eligible for dapagliflozin after hospitalization due to HF, including those well-treated with other disease-modifying therapies, face high risks of mortality and HF readmission by 1 year. If the benefits of reductions in death and hospitalizations due to HF observed in clinical trials can be fully realized, the absolute benefits of implementation of SGLT-2 inhibitors among treatment-eligible candidates are anticipated to be substantial in this high-risk postdischarge setting.

Digital, Background Guidelines recommend nonstatin lipid-lowering agents in patients at very high risk for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) if low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) remains ≥70 mg/dL on maximum tolerated statin treatment. It is uncertain if this approach benefits patients with LDL-C near 70 mg/dL. Lipoprotein(a) levels may influence residual risk. Objectives In a post hoc analysis of the ODYSSEY Outcomes (Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcomes After an Acute Coronary Syndrome During Treatment With Alirocumab) trial, the authors evaluated the benefit of adding the proprotein subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitor alirocumab to optimized statin treatment in patients with LDL-C levels near 70 mg/dL. Effects were evaluated according to concurrent lipoprotein(a) levels. Methods ODYSSEY Outcomes compared alirocumab with placebo in 18,924 patients with recent acute coronary syndromes receiving optimized statin treatment. In 4,351 patients (23.0%), screening or randomization LDL-C was 13.7 mg/dL or ≤13.7 mg/dL; corresponding adjusted treatment hazard ratios were 0.82 (95% CI: 0.72-0.92) and 0.89 (95% CI: 0.75-1.06), with Pinteraction = 0.43. Conclusions In patients with recent acute coronary syndromes and LDL-C near 70 mg/dL on optimized statin therapy, proprotein subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibition provides incremental clinical benefit only when lipoprotein(a) concentration is at least mildly elevated. (ODYSSEY Outcomes: Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcomes After an Acute Coronary Syndrome During Treatment With Alirocumab; NCT01663402), Ciencias Médicas y de la Salud

Stroke remains a significant complication of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) therapy. We performed a single-center retrospective study evaluating patients undergoing first-time HeartWare HVAD (Medtronic Inc) or HeartMate 3 (Abbott Inc) implantation from September 2009-February 2018.Exclusion criteria were age18 and preoperative ECMO. The primary endpoint was stroke-free survival. Stroke was defined as new neurological deficits persisting24 hours with corresponding radiographic evidence. Risk factors evaluated included demographics, medical comorbidities, heart failure etiology, LVAD indication, INTERMACS profile, and device type. Univariate predictors (P .15) and variables clinically suspected to raise stroke risk were entered in a multivariate hazard regression model, specified using backward selection of covariates and accounting for competing risks of transplant/LVAD exchange.A total of 163 HVAD and 84 HM3 patients were analyzed. Median follow up (until death, censoring for transplant/LVAD removal, or end of follow up) was 1.2 years in HVAD patients and 1.4 years in HM3 patients. Stroke occurred in 24 HVAD patients (15 ischemic, 9 hemorrhagic) and 6 HM3 patients (4 ischemic, 2 hemorrhagic). One-year stroke-free survival was 76.8% for HVAD and 84.3% for HM3. Thirty-day mortality following stroke was 41.7% for HVAD and 66.7% for HM3; 54.2% of HVAD strokes were disabling compared to 83.3% of HM3 strokes. Age, LVAD indication, and device type were associated (P .15) with stroke on univariate analysis. On multivariate analysis, the HVAD was associated with significantly higher stroke risk (hazard ratio, 2.57; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-6.44; P = .045).Different LVAD models appear to be associated with significantly different stroke risks.

Transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy (ATTR-CM) has emerged as an increasingly identified etiology of heart failure. Fortunately, the disease now has an approved therapy, with many others under development. Assessment of prognosis in ATTR-CM is critical to inform patients about the disease course and guide clinical decisions. This review discusses the evidence behind clinical, biomarker, and imaging findings that inform prognosis in patients with ATTR-CM and can assist providers in the shared decision-making process during management of this disease., Central Illustration, Highlights • Prognostic factors for ATTR-CM can guide patient expectations and inform clinical decisions. • Clinical features, blood biomarkers, and imaging obtained during workup for ATTR-CM convey prognostic information. • Further studies in determining the incremental value of prognostic factors are warranted.

We describe a case of inherited restrictive cardiomyopathy in a patient presenting with severe biatrial enlargement. We review the evaluation and management of restrictive cardiomyopathy with a focus on genetic etiologies. (Level of Difficulty: Intermediate.), Graphical abstract, We describe a case of inherited restrictive cardiomyopathy in a patient presenting with severe biatrial enlargement. We review the evaluation and…

Underuse of hydralazine/nitrate (HYD/NIT) in black patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has been previously described, but whether this important treatment gap persists in contemporary practice is unknown. Sacubitril/valsartan has become a part of guideline-directed medical therapy for HFrEF but data on utilization of this therapy in black patients is lacking. This study addressed these issues by assessing the frequency of HYD/NIT and sacubitril/valsartan use in black patients with HFrEF in the Change the Management of Patients with Heart Failure Registry, a multicenter cohort study. The association of race with utilization rates of these agents was also evaluated. Clinical and medication data at baseline and during 12 months of follow-up from black and nonblack registry patients without documented contraindications or intolerance to the medications of interest were analyzed. Data were available from December 2015 to October 2017, in 4,848 HFrEF patients, of whom 853 were black (18%) and 3995 were nonblack. Black patients were younger, more likely to be female, and had lower ejection fractions compared with nonblacks. Only 11% of black patients were receiving HYD/NIT therapy at baseline and 13% at 1 year. The percentage of black patients treated at baseline with sacubitril/valsartan was also low at 18% and remained unchanged at 1 year. After adjustment for covariates, race was independently associated with HYD/NIT use (odds ratio 8.32; 95% confidence interval 6.12 to 11.3; p0.0001), but not for sacubitril/valsartan. In conclusion, study findings demonstrate a marked persistent treatment gap for HYD/NIT and similar poor utilization of sacubitril/valsartan in black patients with HFrEF despite current guideline recommendations.

This study sought to describe the short-term health status benefits of angiotensin-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) therapy in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).Although therapy with sacubitril/valsartan, a neprilysin inhibitor, improved patients' health status (compared with enalapril) at 8 months in the PARADIGM-HF (Prospective Comparison of ARNI with ACE inhibitor to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure) study, the early impact of ARNI on patients' symptoms, functions, and quality of life is unknown.Health status was assessed by using the 12-item Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) in 3,918 outpatients with HFrEF and left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40% across 140 U.S. centers in the CHAMP-HF (Change the Management of Patients with Heart Failure) registry. ARNI therapy was initiated in 508 patients who were matched 1:2 to 1,016 patients who were not initiated on ARNI (no-ARNI), using a nonparsimonious time-dependent propensity score (6 sociodemographic factors, 23 clinical characteristics), prior KCCQ overall summary (KCCQ-OS) score, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker status.Multivariate linear regression demonstrated a greater mean improvement in KCCQ-OS in patients initiated on ARNI therapy (5.3 ± 19 vs. 2.5 ± 17.4, respectively; p 0.001) over a median (interquartile range [IQR]) of 57 (32 to 104) days. The proportions of ARNI versus no-ARNI groups with ≥10-point (large) and ≥20-point (very large) improvements in KCCQ-OS were 32.7% versus 26.9%, respectively, and 20.5% versus 12.1%, respectively, consistent with numbers needed to treat of 18 and 12, respectively.In routine clinical care, ARNI therapy was associated with early improvements in health status, with 20% experiencing a very large health status benefit compared with 12% who were not started on ARNI therapy. These findings support the use of ARNI to improve patients' symptoms, functions, and quality of life.

Objectives This study sought to determine the degree to which U.S. patients enrolled in a heart failure (HF) trial represent patients in routine U.S. clinical practice according to race and sex. Background Black patients and women are frequently under-represented in HF clinical trials. However, the degree to which black patients and women enrolled in trials represent such patients in routine practice is unclear. Methods The ASCEND-HF (Acute Study of Clinical Effectiveness of Nesiritide in Decompensated Heart Failure) trial randomized patients hospitalized for HF to receive nesiritide or placebo from May 2007 to August 2010 and was neutral for clinical endpoints. This analysis compared non-Hispanic white (n = 1,494) and black (n = 1,012) patients enrolled in ASCEND-HF from the U.S. versus non-Hispanic white and black patients included in a U.S. hospitalized HF registry (i.e., Get With The Guidelines–Heart Failure [GWTG-HF]) during the ASCEND-HF enrollment period and meeting trial eligibility criteria. Results Among 79,291 white and black registry patients, 49,063 (62%) met trial eligibility criteria (white, n = 37,883 [77.2%]; black, n = 11,180 [22.8%]). Women represented 35% and 49% of the ASCEND-HF and trial-eligible GWTG-HF cohorts, respectively. Compared with trial-enrolled patients, trial-eligible GWTG-HF patients tended to be older with higher blood pressure and higher ejection fraction. Trial-eligible patients had higher in-hospital mortality (2.3% vs. 1.3%), 30-day readmission (20.2% vs. 16.8%), and 180-day mortality (21.2% vs. 18.6%) than those enrolled in the trial (all p Conclusions Patients with HF seen in U.S. practice and eligible for the ASCEND-HF trial had worse clinical outcomes than those enrolled in the trial. After accounting for clinical characteristics, trial-eligible real-world patients continued to have higher rates of 30-day readmission, driven by differences among black patients and women. Social, behavioral, and other unmeasured factors may impair representativeness of patients enrolled in HF trials, particularly among racial/ethnic minorities and women. (Acute Study of Clinical Effectiveness of Nesiritide in Decompensated Heart Failure [ASCEND-HF]; NCT00475852)

Author(s): Sharma, Abhinav; Wu, Jingjing; Ezekowitz, Justin A; Felker, Gary Michael; Udell, Jacob A; Heidenreich, Paul A; Fonarow, Gregg C; Mahaffey, Kenneth W; Hernandez, Adrian F; DeVore, Adam D | Abstract: AimsSodium-glucose co-transporter (SGLT)-2 inhibitors have been shown to reduce the risk of cardiovascular death and heart failure (HF) hospitalization in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) and high cardiovascular risk in two large clinical outcome trials: empagliflozin in EMPA-REG OUTCOME and canagliflozin in CANVAS. The scope of eligibility for SGLT-2 inhibitors (empagliflozin and canagliflozin) among patients with type 2 DM and HF, based on clinical trial criteria and current US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) labelling criteria, remains unknown.Methods and resultsUsing data from the US Get With The Guidelines (GWTG)-Heart Failure registry, we evaluated the proportion of patients with DM and HF eligible for SGLT-2 inhibitor therapy based on the clinical trial criteria and the US FDA labelling criteria. The GWTG-HF registry is a quality improvement registry of patients admitted in hospital with HF in the USA. We included GWTG-HF registry participants meeting eligibility criteria hospitalized between August 2014 and 30 June 2017 from sites fully participating in the registry. The initial inclusion time point reflects when both drugs had FDA approval. Among the 139 317 patients (out of 407 317) with DM hospitalized with HF (in 460 hospitals; 2014 to 2017), the median age was 71 years, 47% (n = 65 685) were female, and 43% (n = 59 973) had HF with reduced ejection fraction. Overall, 43% (n = 59 943) were eligible for the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial, 45% (n = 62 818) were eligible for the CANVAS trial, and 34% (n = 47 747) of patients were eligible for either SGLT-2 inhibitors based on the FDA labelling criteria. Among the FDA-eligible patients, 91.5% (n = 43 708) were eligible for either the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial or the CANVAS trial. Patients who were FDA eligible, compared with those who were not, were younger (70.0 vs. 72.0 years of age), more likely to be male (57.7 vs. 50.3%), and had less burden of co-morbidities.ConclusionsThe majority of patients with DM who are hospitalized with HF are not eligible for SGLT-2 inhibitor therapies. Ongoing studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of SGLT-2 inhibitors among patients with HF may potentially broaden the population that may benefit from these therapies.

Mortality rates for patients with heart failure (HF) remain unacceptably high. The mortality rate among patients with incident HF in Olmstead County, Minnesota, was 20.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 18.7% to 21.8%) within 1 year of establishing the diagnosis of HF and 52.6% (95% CI: 50.6% to 54.

Aims We sought to better understand the role of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) and moderate or severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Methods and results Using data from the Duke Databank for Cardiovascular Disease, we analysed patients who underwent coronary angiography at Duke University Medical Center (1995–2012) that had stable CAD amenable to PCI and left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35%. Patients with acute coronary syndrome or Canadian Cardiovascular Society class III or IV angina were excluded. We used propensity‐matched Cox proportional hazards to evaluate the association of PCI with mortality and hospitalizations. Of 901 patients, 259 were treated with PCI and 642 with medical therapy. PCI propensity scores created from 24 variables were used to assemble a matched cohort of 444 patients (222 pairs) receiving PCI or medical therapy alone. Over a median follow‐up of 7 years, 128 (58%) PCI and 125 (56%) medical therapy alone patients died [hazard ratio 0.87 (95% confidence interval 0.68, 1.10)]; there was also no difference in the rate of a composite endpoint of all‐cause mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization [hazard ratio 1.18 (95% confidence interval 0.96, 1.44)] between the two groups. Conclusions In this well‐profiled, propensity‐matched cohort of patients with stable CAD amenable to PCI and moderate or severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction, the addition of PCI to medical therapy did not improve long‐term mortality, or the composite of mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization. The impact of PCI on other outcomes in these high‐risk patients requires further study.

Objectives The aim of this study was to use a multicenter, observational outpatient registry of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) to describe the association between changes in patients’ medications with changes in health status. Background Alleviating symptoms and improving function and quality of life for patients with HFrEF are primary treatment goals and potential indicators of quality. Whether titrating medications in routine clinical care improves patients’ health status is unknown. Methods The association of any change in HFrEF medications with 3-month change in health status, as measured using the 12-item Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary Scale, was determined in unadjusted and multivariate-adjusted (25 clinical characteristics, baseline health status) models using hierarchical linear regression. Results Among 3,313 outpatients with HFrEF from 140 centers, 21.9% had medication changes. Three months later, 23.7% and 46.4% had clinically meaningfully worse (≥5-point decrease) and improved (≥5-point increase) Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary Scale scores. The 3-month median change in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary Scale score for patients whose HFrEF medications were changed was significantly larger (7.3 points; interquartile range: −3.1 to 20.8 points) than in patients whose medications were not changed (3.1 points; interquartile range: −4.7 to 12.5 points) (adjusted difference 3.0 points; 95% confidence interval: 1.4 to 4.6 points; p Conclusions In routine care of patients with HFrEF, changes in HFrEF medications were associated with significant improvements in patients’ health status, suggesting that health status–based performance measures can quantify the benefits of titrating medicines in patients with HFrEF.

Background Heart failure (HF) outcomes are especially poor in high-risk patients with certain comorbidities including diabetes mellitus (DM), chronic kidney disease (CKD), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Whether early specialty or primary care provider (PCP) follow-up after HF discharge affects outcomes in high-risk patients is unknown. Methods We analyzed patients discharged from a Get With The Guidelines HF-participating hospital from 2007–2012 with linked Medicare claims to investigate the association of medical specialist visit within 14 days of discharge stratified by comorbidity with the primary outcome of 90-day HF readmission. Secondary outcomes included 90-day and 1-year all-cause mortality. Results Out of 33,243 patients, 39.4% had DM, 19.8% had CKD, 30.0% had COPD, and 36.3% had no key comorbidity. Nephrologist visit in patients with CKD was associated with a 35% reduction in 90-day HF readmission (hazard ratio [HR] 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49–0.85). Pulmonologist visit in patients with COPD was associated with a 29% reduction in 90-day HF readmission (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.55–0.91). In patients with no key comorbidity, PCP and Cardiologist visits were associated with decreased 90-day mortality (HR for PCP 0.79, 95% CI 0.66–0.94; HR for Cardiologist 0.78, 95% CI 0.63–0.96). In patients with DM, Endocrinologist visit was associated with a 42% reduction of 90-day mortality (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.34–0.99). Conclusions Specialist and PCP visit in the immediate post-discharge period may improve 90-day HF readmission and mortality in certain high-risk groups of patients with HF.

Heart failure and atrial fibrillation are 2 common cardiovascular disorders that frequently complicate one another and exert a significant detrimental effect on cardiovascular health and well-being. Both heart failure and atrial fibrillation continue to increase in prevalence as the risk factors underlying each condition become more common. This review encompasses what is currently known about the epidemiology and pathophysiology of these comorbidities along with incorporation of landmark trials that have contributed to current guidelines. The focus is on clinically relevant considerations, including the contribution of inflammation in the pathophysiology of atrial fibrillation and heart failure. We explore the emerging role of catheter ablation relative to medical therapy in the management of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, along with indications for biventricular pacing modalities in cardiac resynchronization therapy. We discuss current guideline-directed therapies and how practice models and national recommendations will likely change based on the most recent randomized controlled trials.

Aims Circulating high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hsTn) and soluble ST2 (sST2) reflect myocardial stress in patients with heart failure (HF). Production of cyclic guanosine 3′5′ monophosphate (cGMP) in response to activation of natriuretic peptide receptors reduces cardiac afterload and preload. We assessed the effects of sacubitril/valsartan on these biomarkers in patients with reduced ejection fraction and acute decompensated HF (ADHF). Methods and results PIONEER-HF was a randomized, double-blind trial of sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril in hospitalized patients with ADHF following haemodynamic stabilization. We measured circulating hsTnT, sST2, and urinary cGMP at baseline, 1, 2 (sST2, cGMP), 4, and 8 weeks (n = 694 with all baseline biomarkers). Ratios of geometric means (timepoint/baseline) were determined and compared as a ratio for sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril. Compared with enalapril, sacubitril/valsartan led to a significantly greater decline in hsTnT and sST2. This effect emerged as early as 1 week for sST2 and was significant for both at 4 weeks with a 16% greater reduction in hsTnT (P Conclusion Biomarkers of myocardial stress are elevated in patients with ADHF and associated with outcome. Compared with enalapril, sacubitril/valsartan reduces myocardial injury and haemodynamic stress as reflected by biomarkers, with an onset that is apparent within 1–4 weeks. Clinical trials registration NCT 02554890 clinical.trials.gov

BackgroundGuidelines recommend that patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) have medical therapy titrated to target doses derived from clinical trials, as tolerated. The degree to which titration occurs in contemporary U.S. practice is unknown.ObjectivesThis study sought to characterize longitudinal titration of HFrEF medical therapy in clinical practice and to identify associated factors and reasons for medication changes.MethodsAmong 2,588 U.S. outpatients with chronic HFrEF in the CHAMP-HF (Change the Management of Patients with Heart Failure) registry with complete medication data and no contraindications to medical therapy, use and dose of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI)/angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB), angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), beta-blocker, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) were examined at baseline and at 12-month follow-up.ResultsAt baseline, 658 (25%), 525 (20%), 287 (11%), and 45 (2%) patients were receiving target doses of MRA, beta-blocker, ACEI/ARB, and ARNI therapy, respectively. At 12months, proportions of patients with medication initiation or dose increase were 6% for MRA, 10% for beta-blocker, 7% for ACEI/ARB, and 10% for ARNI; corresponding proportions with discontinuation or dose decrease were 4%, 7%, 11%, and 3%, respectively. Over 12months,&nbsp

Objectives This study sought to determine the rate of use of target doses of foundational guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) in a contemporary cohort of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) across systolic blood pressure (SBP) categories. Background Patients with HFrEF are infrequently titrated to recommended doses of GDMT. The relationship between SBP and achieving GDMT target doses is not well studied. Methods Patients enrolled in the CHAMP-HF (Change the Management of Patients With Heart Failure) registry without documented intolerance to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs), and beta blockers (BBs) were assessed at enrollment. We estimated the proportion receiving target doses (% of target dose [95% confidence interval (CI)]) based on the most recent American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Heart Failure Society of America heart failure guidelines at baseline in all patients, and by SBP category (≥110 vs. Results Of the 3,095 patients eligible for analysis, 2,421 (78.2%) had SBP ≥110 mm Hg. The proportion of patients receiving target doses were 18.7% (95% CI: 17.3% to 20.0%; BB), 10.8% (95% CI: 9.7% to 11.9%; ACEI/ARB), and 2.0% (95% CI: 1.5% to 2.5%; ARNI). Among those with SBP Conclusions In a large, contemporary registry of outpatients with chronic HFrEF eligible for treatment with BBs and ACEI/ARB/ARNI

Acute decompensated heart failure accounts for more than 1 million hospitalizations in the United States annually. Whether the initiation of sacubitril-valsartan therapy is safe and effective among patients who are hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure is unknown.We enrolled patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction who were hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure at 129 sites in the United States. After hemodynamic stabilization, patients were randomly assigned to receive sacubitril-valsartan (target dose, 97 mg of sacubitril with 103 mg of valsartan twice daily) or enalapril (target dose, 10 mg twice daily). The primary efficacy outcome was the time-averaged proportional change in the N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) concentration from baseline through weeks 4 and 8. Key safety outcomes were the rates of worsening renal function, hyperkalemia, symptomatic hypotension, and angioedema.Of the 881 patients who underwent randomization, 440 were assigned to receive sacubitril-valsartan and 441 to receive enalapril. The time-averaged reduction in the NT-proBNP concentration was significantly greater in the sacubitril-valsartan group than in the enalapril group; the ratio of the geometric mean of values obtained at weeks 4 and 8 to the baseline value was 0.53 in the sacubitril-valsartan group as compared with 0.75 in the enalapril group (percent change, -46.7% vs. -25.3%; ratio of change with sacubitril-valsartan vs. enalapril, 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63 to 0.81; P0.001). The greater reduction in the NT-proBNP concentration with sacubitril-valsartan than with enalapril was evident as early as week 1 (ratio of change, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.85). The rates of worsening renal function, hyperkalemia, symptomatic hypotension, and angioedema did not differ significantly between the two groups.Among patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction who were hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure, the initiation of sacubitril-valsartan therapy led to a greater reduction in the NT-proBNP concentration than enalapril therapy. Rates of worsening renal function, hyperkalemia, symptomatic hypotension, and angioedema did not differ significantly between the two groups. (Funded by Novartis; PIONEER-HF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02554890 .).

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is now the most common form of HF, affecting over 3 million adults in the United States alone. HFpEF is a heterogenous syndrome. One important phenotype may be related to comorbid conditions, including diabetes mellitus (DM). DM has a prevalence of approximately 45% in HFpEF, but characteristics and outcomes of this population are poorly understood. In this review, the authors summarize data from several clinical trials of HFpEF therapeutics and provide original data from a large cohort using the Get With The Guidelines-HF registry, which together suggest that DM is associated with increased morbidity and long-term mortality in HFpEF. The authors then discuss several common pathological mechanisms in HFpEF and DM, including sodium retention, metabolic derangements, impaired skeletal muscle function, and potential therapeutic targets. As the understanding of comorbid HFpEF and DM improves, it is hoped clinicians will be better equipped to offer effective, patient-centered treatments.

The comparative effectiveness of differing dosages of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) on clinical and patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice in the United States is unknown. This study sought to characterize associations between the dosing of GDMT and outcomes for patients with HFrEF in U.S. clinical practice.This analysis included 4832 outpatients who had chronic HFrEF across 150 practices in the U.S. in the Change the Management of Patients with Heart Failure (CHAMP-HF) registry with no contraindication and available dosing data for at least 1 GDMT at baseline. Baseline dosing of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACEI)/angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB)/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), beta-blocker, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) therapies were examined. For each medication class, multivariable models assessed associations between medication dosing and clinical outcomes over 24 months (all-cause mortality, HF hospitalization) and patient-reported outcomes at 12 months (change in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary score [KCCQ-OS]).After adjustment, compared with target dosing, lower dosing was associated with higher all-cause mortality for ACEIs/ARBs/ARNIs (50% to100% target dosage, HR 1.16 [95% CI 0.87-1.55];50% target dosage, HR 1.37 [95% CI 1.05-1.79]; none, HR 1.75 [95% CI 1.32-2.34; overall P0.001) and beta-blockers (50% to100% target dosage, HR 1.30 [95% CI 1.00-1.69];50% target dosage, HR 1.41 [95% CI 1.11-1.79; none, HR 1.24 [95% CI 0.92-1.67]; overall P= 0.042). Lower dosing of ACEIs/ARBs/ARNIs was independently associated with higher risk of HF hospitalization (50% to100% target dosage, HR 1.08 [95% CI 0.90-1.30];50% target dosage, HR 1.23 [1.04-1.47]; none, HR 1.29 [1.04-1.60]; overall P= 0.046), but beta-blocker dosing was not (overall P= 0.085). Target dosing of MRAs was not associated with risk of mortality or HF hospitalization. For each GDMT, compared with target dosing, lower dosing was not associated with change in the KCCQ-OS at 12 months, with the potential exception of worsening KCCQ-OS scores with lower dosing of ACEIs/ARBs/ARNIs.In this contemporary U.S. outpatient HFrEF registry, target dosing of ACEI/ARB/ARNI and beta-blocker therapy was associated with reduced mortality and was variably associated with HF hospitalization and patient-reported outcomes. MRA dosing was not associated with outcomes. The totality of these findings support the benefits of target dosing of GDMT in routine practice, as tolerated, with unmeasured differences among patients receiving differing dosages potentially explaining the differing results seen here compared with randomized clinical trials.

Background Peripheral artery disease (PAD) and heart failure (HF) are each independently associated with poor outcomes. Risk factors associated with new‐onset HF in patients with primary PAD are unknown. Furthermore, how the presence of HF is associated with outcomes in patients with PAD is unknown. Methods and Results This analysis examined risk relationships of HF on outcomes in patients with symptomatic PAD randomized to ticagrelor or clopidogrel as part of the EUCLID (Examining Use of Ticagrelor in Peripheral Arterial Disease) trial. Patients were stratified based on presence of HF at enrollment. Cox models were used to determine the association of HF with outcomes. A separate Cox model was used to identify risk factors associated with development of HF during follow‐up. Patients with PAD and HF had over twice the rate of concomitant coronary artery disease as those without HF. Patients with PAD and HF had significantly increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (hazard ratio [HR], 1.31; 95% CI, 1.13–1.51) and all‐cause mortality (HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.19–1.63). In patients with PAD, the presence of HF was associated with significantly less bleeding (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.45–0.96). Characteristics associated with HF development included age ≥66 (HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.18–1.40 per 5 years), diabetes mellitus (HR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.41–2.43), and weight (bidirectionally associated, ≥76 kg, HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.64–0.93; Conclusions Patients with PAD and HF have a high rate of coronary artery disease with a high risk for major adverse cardiovascular events and death. These data support the possible need for aggressive treatment of (recurrent) atherosclerotic disease in PAD, especially patients with HF.

Background Few contemporary data exist evaluating care patterns and outcomes in heart failure (HF) across the spectrum of kidney function. Objectives This study sought to characterize differences in quality of care and outcomes in patients hospitalized for HF by degree of kidney dysfunction. Methods Guideline-directed medical therapies were evaluated among patients hospitalized with HF at 418 sites in the GWTG-HF (Get With The Guidelines–Heart Failure) registry from 2014 to 2019 by discharge CKD-EPI (Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration)-derived estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). We additionally evaluated the risk-adjusted association of admission eGFR with in-hospital mortality. Results Among 365,494 hospitalizations (age 72 ± 15 years, left ventricular ejection fraction [EF]: 43 ± 17%), median discharge eGFR was 51 ml/min/1.73 m2 (interquartile range: 34 to 72 ml/min/1.73 m2), 234,332 (64%) had eGFR Conclusions Despite facing elevated risks of mortality, patients with comorbid HF with reduced EF and kidney disease are not optimally treated with evidence-based medical therapies, even at levels of eGFR where such therapies would not be contraindicated by kidney dysfunction. Further efforts are required to mitigate risk in comorbid HF and kidney disease.

Importance It is unclear how New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class compares with patient-reported outcomes among patients with heart failure (HF) in contemporary US clinical practice. Objective To characterize longitudinal changes and concordance between NYHA class and the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary Score (KCCQ-OS), and their associations with clinical outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants This cohort study included 2872 US outpatients with chronic HF with reduced ejection fraction across 145 practices enrolled in the CHAMP-HF registry between December 2015 and October 2017. All patients had complete NYHA class and KCCQ-OS data at baseline and 12 months. Longitudinal changes and correlations between the 2 measure were examined. Multivariable models landmarked at 12 months evaluated associations between improvement in NYHA and KCCQ-OS from baseline to 12 months with clinical outcomes occurring from months 12 through 24. Statistical analyses were performed from March to August 2020. Exposure Change in health status, as defined by 12-month change in NYHA class or KCCQ-OS. Main Outcomes and Measures All-cause mortality, HF hospitalization, and mortality or HF hospitalization. Results In total, 2872 patients were included in this analysis (median [interquartile range] age, 68 [59-75] years; 872 [30.4%] were women; and 2156 [75.1%] were of White race). At baseline, 312 patients (10.9%) were NYHA class I, 1710 patients (59.5%) were class II, 804 patients (28.0%) were class III, and 46 patients (1.6%) were class IV. For KCCQ-OS, 1131 patients (39.4%) scored 75 to 100 (best health status), 967 patients (33.7%) scored 50 to 74, 612 patients (21.3%) scored 25 to 49, and 162 patients (5.6%) scored 0 to 24 (worst health status). At 12 months, 1002 patients (34.9%) had a change in NYHA class (599 [20.9%] with improvement; 403 [14.0%] with worsening) and 2158 patients (75.1%) had a change of 5 or more points in KCCQ-OS (1388 [48.3%] with improvement; 770 [26.8%] with worsening). The most common trajectory for NYHA class was no change (1870 [65.1%]), and the most common trajectory for KCCQ-OS was an improvement of at least 10 points (1047 [36.5%]). After adjustment, improvement in NYHA class was not associated with subsequent clinical outcomes, whereas an improvement of 5 or more points in KCCQ-OS was independently associated with decreased mortality (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.44-0.80;P Conclusions and Relevance Findings of this cohort study suggest that, in contemporary US clinical practice, compared with NYHA class, KCCQ-OS is more sensitive to clinically meaningful changes in health status over time. Changes in KCCQ-OS may have more prognostic value than changes in NYHA class.

Author(s): Thomas, Merrill; Khariton, Yevgeniy; Fonarow, Gregg C; Arnold, Suzanne V; Hill, Larry; Nassif, Michael E; Chan, Paul S; Butler, Javed; Thomas, Laine; DeVore, Adam D; Hernandez, Adrian F; Albert, Nancy M; Patterson, J Herbert; Williams, Fredonia B; Spertus, John A | Abstract: AimsImproving the health status (symptoms, function, and quality of life) of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is a primary treatment goal. Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI) improve short-term health status in clinical practice, but the sustainability of these improvements is unknown.Methods and resultsIn CHAMP-HF, a multicentre observational study of outpatients with HFrEF, patients initiated on ARNI were propensity score matched 1:2 to patients not using ARNI with Cox regression modelling time to ARNI initiation, adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical variables, medical history, medications, and baseline Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) scores. Repeated measures models for the overall KCCQ score and each domain compared the health status trajectories of patients initiated on ARNI vs. not. Among 3930 participants, 746 (19.0%) began ARNI, of whom 576 were matched to 1152 non-ARNI patients. Prior to matching, participants initiated on ARNI were younger, non-Hispanic, had lower EFs, more commonly had a history of ventricular arrhythmia, were less likely to be taking an ACEI/ARB, and more likely to be treated with beta-blockers and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. There were no differences after matching. In the matched cohort, participants initiated on ARNI experienced improved health status by 3nmonths that persisted through 12nmonths [KCCQ Overall Summary Score (OSS)n=n73.4 vs. 70.8; Pnln0.001], with the largest benefit observed in the KCCQ Quality of Life domain (68.7 vs. 64.7; Pnln0.001). Similar health status benefits were noted through 18nmonths (KCCQ-OSSn=n73.9 vs. 71.3; Pnln0.001). A responder analysis showed that 12 patients would need to be initiated on ARNI for one to experience at least a large improvement (≥10 points) in health status benefit at 12nmonths.ConclusionsIn outpatient practice, ARNI therapy was associated with improved health status by 3nmonths and continued to 18nmonths after initiating therapy.

Background: In patients stabilized during hospitalization for acute decompensated heart failure (HF), initiation of sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril decreased the risk of cardiovascular death or rehospitalization for HF without increasing the risk of adverse events. It is unknown whether potentially high-risk subpopulations have a similar risk-benefit profile. Methods: PIONEER-HF (Comparison of Sacubitril/Valsartan Versus Enalapril on Effect on NT-proBNP [N-terminal pro-B type natriuretic peptide] in Patients Stabilized From an Acute HF Episode) was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial of in-hospital initiation of sacubitril/valsartan (n=440) versus enalapril (n=441) in patients stabilized during hospitalization for acute decompensated HF. The composite of cardiovascular death or rehospitalization for HF was adjudicated. Safety outcomes included worsening renal function, symptomatic hypotension, and hyperkalemia. We evaluated heterogeneity in the effect of sacubitril/valsartan on these efficacy and safety outcomes in selected subgroups of clinical concern: patients with baseline systolic blood pressure ≤118 mm Hg (median; n=448), baseline NT-proBNP >2701 pg/mL (median; n=395), estimated glomerular filtration rate 2 (n=455), ≥1 additional hospitalization for HF within the prior year (n=343), admission to the ICU during the index hospitalization (n=96), inotrope use during the index hospitalization (n=68), and severe congestion (n=219). Results: The relative risk reduction in cardiovascular death or rehospitalization for HF with sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril was consistent across all high-risk subgroups ( P interaction=non-significant [NS] for each). The risks of worsening renal function, symptomatic hypotension, and hyperkalemia with sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril were also consistent in each high- versus low-risk subgroup ( P interaction=NS for each). Conclusions: In high-risk subpopulations admitted for acute decompensated HF, treatment with sacubitril/valsartan after initial stabilization conferred a consistent reduction in cardiovascular death or rehospitalization for HF and was well tolerated.

Background Postdischarge mortality following hospitalization for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has remained high and unchanged over the past 2 decades, despite effective therapies for HFrEF. We aimed to explore whether these patterns could in part be explained by changes in longitudinal risk profile and HF severity over time. Methods Among patients hospitalized for HF in the GWTG-HF registry from January 2005 to December 2018 with available data, we evaluated GWTG-HF and ADHERE risk scores, observing in-hospital mortality per-year. The risk profiles and outcomes were described overall and by subgroups based on ejection fraction (EF), diabetes mellitus (DM), sex, and age. Results Overall, 335,735 patients were included (50% HFrEF, 46% DM, 48% female, mean age 74 years). In-hospital mortality increased by 2.0% per year from 2005 to 2018. There was no significant change in mean GWTG-HF risk score overall or when stratified by EF groups (P = 0.46 HFrEF, p = 0.26 HF mid-range EF [HFmrEF], and P = 0.72 HF preserved EF [HFpEF]), age, sex, or presence of DM. The observed/expected ratio based on the GWTG-HF risk score was 0.93 (0.91-0.96), 0.83 (0.77-0.90), 0.92 (0.89-95) for HFrEF, HFmrEF, and HFpEF, respectively. Similar findings were seen when risk was assessed using ADHERE risk score. Conclusions There were no significant changes in average risk profiles among hospitalized HF patients over the study duration. These data do not support the notion that worsening risk profile explains the lack of improved outcomes despite therapeutic advances, underscoring the importance of aggressive implementation of guideline-recommended therapies and investigation of novel treatments.

Background: Randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction may improve survival and other cardiovascular outcomes. Methods: We constructed a decision-analytic Markov model to estimate the costs and benefits of catheter ablation and medical management in patients with symptomatic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35%) and atrial fibrillation over a lifetime horizon. Evidence from the published literature informed the model inputs, including clinical effectiveness data from meta-analyses. Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed. A 3% discount rate was applied to both future costs and benefits. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio assessed from the US health care sector perspective. Results: Catheter ablation was associated with 6.47 (95% CI, 5.89–6.93) quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and a total cost of $105 657 (95% CI, $55 311–$191 934; 2018 US dollars), compared with 5.30 (95% CI, 5.20–5.39) QALYs and $63 040 (95% CI, $37 624–$102 260) for medical management. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for catheter ablation compared with medical management was $38 496 (95% CI, $5583–$117 510) per QALY gained. Model inputs with the greatest variation on incremental cost-effectiveness ratio estimates were the cost of ablation and the effect of catheter ablation on mortality reduction. When assuming a more conservative estimate of the treatment effect of catheter ablation on mortality (hazard ratio of 0.86), the estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $74 403 per QALY gained. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY gained, atrial fibrillation ablation was found to be economically favorable compared with medical management in 95% of simulations. Conclusions: Catheter ablation in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction patients and atrial fibrillation may be considered economically attractive at current benchmarks for societal willingness-to-pay in the United States.

Importance Although kidney dysfunction and abnormalities in serum electrolyte levels are associated with poor clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), the association of visit-to-visit variability in such laboratory measures with long-term outcomes is unclear. Objective To evaluate the associations of visit-to-visit variability in indexes of kidney function (creatinine and blood urea nitrogen [BUN] levels) and serum electrolyte (sodium, chloride, and potassium) with the risk of adverse clinical outcomes among patients with chronic, stable HFpEF. Design, setting, and participants This cohort analysis used data from the Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure with an Aldosterone Antagonist (TOPCAT) trial. All participants with 3 or more serial laboratory measurements who were event free within the first 4 months of enrollment were included. Data were analyzed from March 1, 2019, to January 31, 2020. Main outcomes and measures Adjusted associations between indexes of variability in serum laboratory measurements during the first 4 months of follow-up and risk of the primary composite outcome (a composite of aborted cardiac arrest, hospitalization for heart failure, or cardiovascular death) and all-cause mortality were assessed using Cox proportional hazards regression models. Results Of the 3445 patients enrolled in the TOPCAT trial (mean [SD] age, 68-69 [10] years; 49.7%-51.5% female), 2479 (BUN) to 3195 (potassium) were analyzed, depending on availability of serial measurements. Participants with higher laboratory variability in kidney function parameters were older, had more comorbidities, and had more severe symptoms of HFpEF. Higher visit-to-visit variability in BUN (hazard ratio [HR] per 1-SD higher average successive variability [ASV], 1.21; 95% CI, 1.10-1.33) and creatinine (HR per 1-SD higher ASV, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.04-1.22) were independently associated with a higher risk of the primary composite outcome as well as mortality independent of other baseline confounders, changes in kidney function, changes in medication dosages, and variability in other cardiometabolic parameters (systolic blood pressure and body mass index). The higher risk associated with greater variability in kidney function was consistent across subgroups of patients stratified by the presence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) at baseline (CKD: HR per 1-SD higher ASV, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.16-1.67 and no CKD: HR per 1-SD higher ASV, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.01-1.27), among placebo and spironolactone treatment arms separately (spironolactone arm: 1.30; 95% CI, 1.03-1.65 and placebo arm: HR per 1-SD higher ASV, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.04-1.56). Among serum electrolytes, variability in sodium and potassium measures were also significantly associated with a higher risk of primary composite events (sodium: HR per 1-SD higher ASV, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.01-1.30 and potassium: HR per 1-SD higher ASV, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.02-1.44). Conclusions and relevance In HFpEF, visit-to-visit variability in laboratory indexes of kidney function and serum electrolytes is common and independently associated with worse long-term clinical outcomes.