Search

Aims: In heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), regional heterogeneity of clinical phenotypes is increasingly recognized, with coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) potentially being a common shared feature. We sought to determine the regional differences in clinical characteristics and prevalence of CMD in HFpEF. Methods and results: We analysed clinical characteristics and CMD in 202 patients with stable HFpEF (left ventricular ejection fraction ≥40%) in Finland, Singapore, Sweden, and United States in the multicentre PROMIS‐HFpEF study. Patients with unrevascularized macrovascular coronary artery disease were excluded. CMD was assessed using Doppler echocardiography and defined as coronary flow reserve (adenosine‐induced vs. resting flow) < 2.5. Patients from Singapore had the lowest body mass index yet highest prevalence of hypertension, dyslipidaemia, and diabetes; patients from Finland and Sweden were oldest, with the most atrial fibrillation, chronic kidney disease, and high smoking rates; and those from United States were youngest and most obese. The prevalence of CMD was 88% in Finland, 80% in Singapore, 77% in Sweden, and 59% in the United States; however, non‐significant after adjustment for age, sex, N‐terminal pro‐brain natriuretic peptide, smoking, left atrial reservoir strain, and atrial fibrillation. Associations between CMD and clinical characteristics did not differ based on region (interaction analysis). Conclusions: Despite regional differences in clinical characteristics, CMD was present in the majority of patients with HFpEF across different regions of the world with the lowest prevalence in the United States. This difference was explained by differences in patient characteristics. CMD could be a common therapeutic target across regions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Iron deficiency (ID) is comorbid in up to 50% patients with heart failure (HF) and exacerbates disease burden. Ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) reduced HF hospitalizations and improved quality of life when used to treat ID at discharge in patients hospitalized for acute HF with left ventricular ejection fraction <50% in the AFFIRM‐AHF trial. We quantified the effect of FCM on burden of disease and the wider pharmacoeconomic implications in France, Germany, Poland, Spain and Sweden. Methods and results: The per country eligible population was calculated, aligning with the 2021 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) HF guidelines and the AFFIRM‐AHF trial. Changes in burden of disease with FCM versus standard of care (SoC) were represented by disability‐adjusted life years (DALYs), hospitalization episodes and bed days, using AFFIRM‐AHF data. A Markov model was adapted to each country to estimate cost‐effectiveness and combined with epidemiology data to calculate the impact on healthcare budgets. Between 335 (Sweden) and 13 237 (Germany) DALYs were predicted to be avoided with FCM use annually. Fewer hospitalizations and shorter lengths of stay associated with FCM compared to SoC were projected to result in substantial annual savings in bed days, from 5215 in Sweden to 205 630 in Germany. In all countries, FCM was predicted to be dominant (cost saving with gains in quality‐adjusted life years), resulting in net savings to healthcare budgets within 1 year. Conclusions: This comprehensive evaluation of FCM therapy highlights the potential benefits that could be realized through implementation of the ESC HF guideline recommendations regarding ID treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To evaluate the quality of heart failure (HF) care using the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) quality indicators (QIs) for HF and to assess whether better quality of care is associated with improved outcomes. Methods and results: We performed a nationwide cohort study using the Swedish HF registry, consisting of patients with any type of HF at their first outpatient visit or hospitalization. Independent participant data for quality of HF care was evaluated against the ESC QIs for HF, and association with mortality estimated using multivariable Cox regression. In total, 43 704 patients from 80 hospitals across Sweden enrolled between 2013–2019 were included, with median follow‐up 23.6 months. Of the 16 QIs for HF, 13 could be measured and 5 were inversely associated with all‐cause mortality during follow‐up. Higher attainment (≥50% vs. <50% attainment) of the composite opportunity‐based score (combination of QIs into a single score) for patients with reduced ejection fraction was associated with lower all‐cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 0.81; 95% confidence interval 0.72–0.91). Attainment of the composite score was less in the outpatient than inpatient setting (adjusted odds ratio 0.85; 95% confidence interval 0.72–0.99). Quality of care varied across hospitals, with assessment of health‐related quality of life being the indicator with the widest variation in attainment (interquartile range 61.7%). Conclusion: Quality of HF care may be measured using the ESC HF QIs. In Sweden, attainment of HF care evaluated using the QIs demonstrated between and within hospital variation, and many QIs were inversely associated with mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To investigate the association between catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) and mortality as well as hospitalization for heart failure (HF) in patients with HF across the ejection fraction (EF) spectrum.Methods and Results: Patients with first-time catheter ablation for AF (ablation group) compared to only medical treated AF patients (no ablation group) were identified from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry between 2005 and 2019. The primary outcome (all-cause mortality/first HF hospitalization) was assessed by Cox regression models in a 1:2 propensity score (PS) matched cohort and pre-specified EF subgroups (preserved EF [≥50%], mildly reduced EF [40-49%], reduced EF [<40%]) of this cohort. A total of 452 patients in the ablation group and 43 766 patients in the no ablation group were identified. After PS matching, 434 patients in the ablation group were compared to 868 patients in the no ablation group. Over a median follow-up of 2.6 years (0.0-14.1 years), catheter ablation was associated with a lower risk of the primary outcome (all-cause mortality/first HF hospitalization) (hazard ratio [HR] 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65-0.94). Results were consistent across all EF subgroups. In HF with preserved EF (HFpEF), catheter ablation was also associated with a lower risk of recurrent HF hospitalization (incidence rate ratio 0.17, 95% CI 0.07-0.42).Conclusion: In HF patients across the EF spectrum, catheter ablation for AF was associated with lower risk of the primary outcome (all-cause mortality/first HF hospitalization). This study supports catheter ablation as a treatment option for AF in HF patients, including those with HFpEF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASi) improve outcomes in cardiorenal disease but concerns have been raised over increased risk of incident hospitalization and death from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). We investigated the association between use of angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) or mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) and COVID‐19 hospitalization/death in a large nationwide population. Methods and results: Patients with hypertension, heart failure, diabetes, kidney disease, or ischaemic heart disease registered in the Swedish National Patient Registry until 1 February 2020 were included and followed until 31 May 2020. COVID‐19 cases were defined based on hospitalization/death for COVID‐19. Multivariable logistic and Cox regressions were fitted to investigate the association between ACEi/ARB and MRA and risk of hospitalization/death for COVID‐19 in the overall population, and of all‐cause mortality in COVID‐19 cases. We performed consistency analysis to quantify the impact of potential unmeasured confounding. Of 1 387 746 patients (60% receiving ACEi/ARB and 5.8% MRA), 7146 (0.51%) had incident hospitalization/death from COVID‐19. After adjustment for 45 variables, ACEi/ARB use was associated with a reduced risk of hospitalization/death for COVID‐19 (odds ratio 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.81–0.91) in the overall population, and with reduced mortality in COVID‐19 cases (hazard ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.82–0.96). MRA use was not associated with risk of any outcome. Consistency analysis showed that unmeasured confounding would need to be large for there to be harmful signals associated with RAASi use. Conclusions: In a 1.4 million nationwide cohort, use of RAASi was not associated with increased risk of hospitalization for or death from COVID‐19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Hyperkalaemia and hypokalaemia are common in heart failure and associated with worse outcomes. However, the optimal potassium range is unknown. We sought to determine the optimal range of potassium in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (< 40%) by exploring the relationship between baseline potassium level and short- and long-term outcomes using the Swedish Heart Failure Registry from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2012.Methods and Results: We assessed the association between baseline potassium level and all-cause mortality at 30 days, 12 months, and maximal follow-up, in uni- and multivariable stratified and restricted cubic spline Cox regressions. Of 13 015 patients, 93.3% had potassium 3.5-5.0 mmol/L, 3.7% had potassium <3.5 mmol/L, and 3.0% had potassium >5.0 mmol/L. Potassium <3.5 mmol/L and >5.0 mmol/L were more common with lower estimated glomerular filtration rate and heart failure of longer duration and greater severity. The potassium level associated with the lowest hazard risk for mortality at 30 days, 12 months, and maximal follow-up was 4.2 mmol/L, and there was a steep increase in risk with both higher and lower potassium levels. In adjusted strata analyses, lower potassium was independently associated with all-cause mortality at 12 months and maximal follow-up, while higher potassium levels only increased risk at 30 days.Conclusion: In this nationwide registry, the relationship between potassium and mortality was U-shaped, with an optimal potassium value of 4.2 mmol/L. After multivariable adjustment, hypokalaemia was associated with increased long-term mortality but hyperkalaemia was associated with increased short-term mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Patients with advanced heart failure (AdHF) who are ineligible for heart transplantation (HTx) can become candidates for treatment with a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) in some countries, but not others. This reflects the lack of a systematic analysis of the usefulness of LVAD systems in this context, and of their benefits, limitations and cost-effectiveness. The SWEdish evaluation of left Ventricular Assist Device (SweVAD) study is a Phase IV, prospective, 1:1 randomized, non-blinded, multicentre trial that will examine the impact of assignment to mechanical circulatory support with guideline-directed LVAD destination therapy (GD-LVAD-DT) using the HeartMate 3 (HM3) continuous flow pump vs. guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) on survival in a population of AdHF patients ineligible for HTx.Methods: A total of 80 patients will be recruited to SweVAD at the seven university hospitals in Sweden. The study population will comprise patients with AdHF (New York Heart Association class IIIB-IV, INTERMACS profile 2-6) who display signs of poor prognosis despite GDMT and who are not considered eligible for HTx. Participants will be followed for 2 years or until death occurs. Other endpoints will be determined by blinded adjudication. Patients who remain on study-assigned interventions beyond 2 years will be asked to continue follow-up for outcomes and adverse events for up to 5 years.Conclusion: The SweVAD study will compare survival, medium-term benefits, costs and potential hazards between GD-LVAD-DT and GDMT and will provide a valuable reference point to guide destination therapy strategies for patients with AdHF ineligible for HTx. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) improve outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), but are underutilized. Hyperkalaemia may be one reason, but the underlying reasons for underuse are unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the independent predictors of MRA underuse in a large and unselected HFrEF cohort.Methods and Results: We included patients with HFrEF (ejection fraction <40%), New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II-IV and heart failure (HF) duration ≥6 months from the Swedish HF Registry. Logistic regression analysis identified independent associations between 39 demographic, clinical, co-treatment, and socioeconomic predictors and MRA non-use. Of 11 215 patients, 27% were women; mean age was 75 ± 11 years; only 4443 (40%) patients received MRA. Selected characteristics independently associated with MRA non-use were in descending order of magnitude: lower creatinine clearance (<60 mL/min), no need for diuretics, no cardiac resynchronization therapy/implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, higher blood pressure, no digoxin use, higher ejection fraction, outpatient setting, older age, lower income, ischaemic heart disease, male sex, follow-up in primary vs. specialty care, lower NYHA class, and absence of hypertension diagnosis. Plasma potassium and N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide levels were not associated with MRA non-use.Conclusion: Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists remain underused in HFrEF. Their use does not decrease with elevated potassium but does with impaired renal function, even in the creatinine clearance 30-59.9 mL/min range where MRAs are not contraindicated. MRA underuse may be further related to non-specialist care, milder HF and no use of other HF therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Concerns for hyperkalaemia limit the use of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs). The frequency of MRA-associated hyperkalaemia in real-world settings and the extent of subsequent MRA discontinuation are poorly quantified.Methods and Results: Observational study including all Stockholm citizens initiating MRA therapy during 2007-2010. Hyperkalaemias were identified from all potassium (K+ ) measurements in healthcare. MRA treatment lengths and dosages were obtained from complete collection of pharmacy dispensations. We assessed the 1-year incidence and clinical hyperkalaemia predictors, and quantified drug prescription changes after an episode of hyperkalaemia. Overall, 13 726 new users of MRA were included, with median age of 73 years, 53% women and median plasma K+ of 3.9 mmol/L. Within a year, 18.5% experienced at least one detected hyperkalaemia (K+  > 5.0 mmol/L), the majority within the first 3 monthsnthsnthsnthsnths of therapy. As a comparison, hyperkalaemia was detected in 6.4% of propensity-matched new beta-blocker users. Chronic kidney disease (CKD), older age, male sex, heart failure, peripheral vascular disease, diabetes and concomitant use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, beta-blockers and diuretics were associated with increased hyperkalaemia risk. After hyperkalaemia, 47% discontinued MRA and only 10% reduced the prescribed dose. Discontinuation rates were higher after moderate/severe (K+  > 5.5 mmol/L) and early in therapy (<3 months from initiation) hyperkalaemias. CKD participants carried the highest risk of MRA discontinuation in adjusted analyses. When MRA was discontinued, most patients (76%) were not reintroduced to therapy during the subsequent year.Conclusion: Among real-world adults initiating MRA therapy, hyperkalaemia was very common and frequently followed by therapy interruption, especially among participants with CKD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To assess the prevalence of indication for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced ejection fraction (EF) when recommendations from evolving European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines are considered.Methods and Results: Unique patients (n=17 193) with EF ≤39% and key data available for evaluation of CRT indication from the Swedish HF Registry were included. Indication for CRT was defined as either CRT implanted or CRT device absent but fulfilling criteria for class I-IIa recommendations in ESC guidelines published between 2005/2007 and 2016. Prevalence was calculated as the ratio of patients with CRT indication to the study population. The prevalence of CRT indication increased from 24.5% when the 2005/2007 ESC guidelines were considered to a peak of 30.0% when the 2013 ESC guidelines were considered (P<0.001, 22.4% relative increase). Compared to the 2013 ESC guidelines, the prevalence declined significantly when the 2016 ESC guidelines were used as determinant for CRT indication (26.8%, 10.7% relative reduction, P<0.001). Actual CRT utilization was 6.8%.Conclusion: Among patients with HF and reduced EF, the prevalence of CRT indication increased significantly comparing recommendations from ESC guidelines published between 2005/2007 and 2013, but then declined when the 2016 ESC guidelines were considered. The 2005-2013 increase may reflect the expansion of documented CRT efficacy to New York Heart Association class II, whereas the subsequent drop likely results from the more stringent criteria for QRS duration in the 2016 ESC guidelines. Actual CRT utilization is lower than indicated, regardless of which guidelines are considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: As the role of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in different types of heart failure (HF) is poorly understood, our aim was to compare CKD in HF with preserved (HFpEF), mid-range (HFmrEF), and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) with regard to prevalence, associations and prognostic role.Methods and Results: Patients in the Swedish Heart Failure Registry were divided into three groups based on EF (≥50%, 40-49% and <40%). CKD was defined as an estimated glomerular filtration rate ≤60 mL/min.1.73 m2 . Associations between covariates and CKD and between CKD and mortality were assessed with multivariable regressions. Of 40 230 patients, 8875 (22%) had HFpEF, 8374 (21%) had HFmrEF, and 22 981 (57%) had HFrEF, with a CKD prevalence of 56%, 48%, and 45%, respectively. Associations between covariates and CKD were similar in all EF groups. One-year mortality with vs. without CKD was 23% vs. 13% in HFpEF, 22% vs. 8% in HFmrEF, and 23% vs. 8% in HFrEF (P < 0.001 for all). After adjustment, CKD was more strongly associated with death in HFrEF and HFmrEF than in HFpEF [hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI); 1.49 (1.42-1.56) and 1.51 (1.40-1.63) vs. 1.32 (1.24-1.42); P for interaction <0.001]. In receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses, CKD was also a stronger predictor of death in HFrEF and HFmrEF than in HFpEF [area under the curve (AUC) 0.699 (0.689-0.709) and 0.700 (0.683-0.716) vs. 0.629 (0.613-0.645)].Conclusion: CKD was associated with similar covariates regardless of EF. Although CKD was more common in HFpEF than in HFmrEF and HFrEF, it may have more of a 'bystander' role in HFpEF, being less associated with mortality and with lower prognostic discrimination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Clinical features and outcomes in the novel phenotype heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction [HFmrEF, ejection fraction (EF) 40-49%] were compared with heart failure with reduced EF (HFrEF, EF <40%) and preserved EF (HFpEF, EF ≥50%).Methods and Results: In the Swedish Heart Failure Registry, we assessed the association between baseline characteristics and EF group using multivariable logistic regressions, and the association between EF group and all-cause mortality using multivariable Cox regressions. Of 42 061 patients, 56% had HFrEF, 21% had HFmrEF, and 23% had HFpEF. Characteristics were continuous for age (72 ± 12 vs. 74 ± 12 vs. 77 ± 11 years), proportion of women (29% vs. 39% vs. 55%), and 13 other characteristics. Coronary artery disease (CAD) was distinctly more common in HFrEF (54%) and HFmrEF (53%) vs. HFpEF (42%); adjusted odds ratio for CAD in HFmrEF vs. HFpEF was 1.52 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.41-1.63]. For six additional characteristics HFmrEF resembled HFrEF, for seven characteristics HFmrEF resembled HFpEF, and for 10 characteristics there was no pattern. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for mortality in HFrEF vs. HFpEF was 1.35 (95% CI 1.14-1.60) at 30 days, 1.26 (95% CI 1.17-1.35) at 1 year, and 1.20 (95% CI 1.14-1.26) at 3 years. In contrast, HFmrEF and HFpEF had a similar prognosis (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.86-1.30 at 30 days; HR 1.08, 95% CI 1.00-1.18 at 1 year; and HR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00-1.12 at 3 years). Three-year mortality was higher in HFmrEF than in HFpEF in the presence of CAD (HR 1.11, 95% CI 1.02-1.21), but not in the absence of CAD (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.94-1.12; P for interaction <0.001).Conclusions: HFmrEF was an intermediate phenotype, except that CAD was more common in HFmrEF and HFrEF vs. HFpEF, crude all-cause mortality was lower in HFmrEF and HFrEF, adjusted all-cause mortality was lower in HFmrEF and HFpEF, and CAD portended a higher adjusted risk of death in HFmrEF and HFrEF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves outcomes in heart failure (HF) but may be underutilized. The reasons are unknown.Methods and Results: We linked the Swedish Heart Failure Registry to national registries with ICD-10 (International Classification of Diseases-10th Revision) co-morbidity diagnoses and demographic and socio-economic data. In patients with EF ≤39% and NYHA II-IV, we assessed prevalence of CRT indication and CRT use. In those with CRT indication, we assessed the association between 37 potential baseline covariates and CRT non-use using multivariable generalized estimating equation (GEE) models. Of 12 807 patients (mean age 71 ± 12 years, 28% female), 841 (7%) had CRT, 3094 (24%) had an indication for but non-use of CRT, and 8872 (69%) had no indication. Important variables independently associated with CRT non-use were: HF duration <6 months [risk ratio (RR) 1.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.17-1.24]; non-cardiology planned follow-up (RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.09-1.18); age >75 years (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.09-1.18); non-cardiology care at baseline (RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.07-1.14); small-town non-university centre (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.05-1.12); female sex (RR 1.07 95% CI 1.03-1.10) (all P < 0.05); as was absence of AF, living alone; psychiatric diagnosis; smoking; and non-use of HF drugs. Education, income, cancer, or HF characteristics were not independently associated with CRT non-use.Conclusion: In this population-wide HF registry, CRT was underutilized. Non-use was associated mostly with demographic and organizational, but not clinical or socio-economic factors. This calls for programmes to raise awareness of CRT indications and improve access and referrals to cardiology specialists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Heart failure (HF) quality registries report quality of care but it is unknown whether they improve outcomes. The aims were to assess predictors of enrolment in a HF registry, test the hypothesis that enrolment in a HF registry is associated with reduced mortality, and assess potential explanatory factors for this reduction in mortality, if present.Methods and Results: We conducted a nationwide prospective cohort study of patients with new-onset HF registered in the Swedish National Patient Registry (NPR, a mandatory registry of ICD-code diagnoses) with or without concurrent registration in the Swedish Heart Failure Registry (SwedeHF, a voluntary quality reporting registry) 2006-2013. The association between demographics, co-morbidities and medications, and enrolment in the SwedeHF, was assessed using multivariable logistic regression. The association between enrolment in the SwedeHF and all-cause mortality was assessed using multivariable Cox regression, with adjustment for demographics, co-morbidities and medications. A total of 231 437 patients were included, of which 21 888 (9.5%) were in the SwedeHF [age (mean ± standard deviation) 74 ± 13 years; 41% women; 68% inpatients] and 209 549 (90.5%) were not (age 78 ± 12 years, 50% women; 79% inpatients). Selected variables independently associated with enrolment in the SwedeHF were male sex, younger age, higher education, absent co-morbidities and co-morbidity-related medications, and use of HF and cardiovascular medications. Over a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 874 (247-1667) days, there were 13.0 vs. 20.8 deaths per 100 patient-years (P < 0.001). The hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for death for the SwedeHF yes vs. no was 0.65 (0.63-0.66) crude, and increased to 0.80 (0.78-0.81) after adding demographics, to 0.82 (0.80-0.84) after adding co-morbidities and co-morbidity-related medications, to 0.95 (0.93-0.97) after adding cardiovascular medications, and to 1.04 (1.02-1.07) after adding HF-specific medications.Conclusion: Heart failure patients of male sex, younger age, and higher education were more likely to be enrolled in a HF quality registry. Enrolment was associated with reduced all-cause mortality that was explained by demographic differences and better utilization of cardiovascular and HF medications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims Symptom severity assessed by NYHA functional class and QRS duration are essential criteria for selection of heart failure (HF) patients for CRT. This study assessed the relationship between NYHA class, QRS duration, and survival in a nationwide HF registry. Methods and results We studied 13 423 patients with HF in NYHA class II-IV and LVEF <40% in the Swedish Heart Failure Registry. Survival was followed via the Swedish Population Registry. Of 12 534 patients without CRT (age 71±12 years, 29% women), 51% and 49% were in NYHA class II and III-IV, respectively. Patients in NYHA class II compared with class III-IV were younger (69 vs. 73 years), and had a better systolic function (49% vs. 58% with LVEF <30%), P <0.001 for all, and a favourable co-morbidity profile. QRS duration was 116±29 ms in NYHA class II and 119±29 ms in NYHA class III-IV with QRS ≥120 ms found in 37% vs. 44%, and an LBBB in 23% vs. 28% (P < 0.001 for all). Upon multivariable Cox regression adjusting for 40 clinically relevant variables, mortality risk was higher in NYHA class III-IV vs. class II, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.23-1.40. Mortality was also higher with QRS prolongation ≥120 ms vs. narrow QRS. The HR in NYHA class II patients with non-LBBB was 1.19 (95% CI 1.05-1.36) and in those with LBBB it was 1.16 (95% CI 1.03-1.41). The corresponding HRs in NYHA class III-IV were 1.33 (95% CI 1.21-1.47) and 1.12 (95% CI 1.02-1.22). There was no significant interaction between the effects of NYHA class and QRS duration or morphology on mortality. Applying different scenarios to estimate guideline adherence, fewer patients with NYHA class II (range 14.4-42.6%) compared with NYHA class III-IV (18.0-45.4%) had received a CRT device when indicated. Conclusions In HF with reduced LVEF, QRS prolongation is common and independently linked to worse survival. The increase in mortality risk associated with QRS prolongation of both LBBB and non-LBBB morphology is similar in NYHA class II and III-IV. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: QRS duration (QRSd) criteria for device therapy in heart failure (HF) were derived from predominantly white populations and ethnic differences are poorly understood.Methods: We compared the association of QRSd with ejection fraction (EF) and outcomes between 839 Singaporean Asian and 11 221 Swedish white patients with HF having preserved EF (HFPEF)and HF having reduced EF (HFREF) were followed in prospective population-based HF studies.Results: Compared with whites, Asian patients with HF were younger (62 vs 74 years, p<0.001), had smaller body size (height 163 vs 171 cm, weight 70 vs 80 kg, both p<0.001) and had more severely impaired EF (EF was <30% in 47% of Asians vs 28% of whites). Overall, unadjusted QRSd was shorter in Asians than whites (101 vs 104 ms, p<0.001). Lower EF was associated with longer QRSd (p<0.001), with a steeper association among Asians than whites (pinteraction<0.001), independent of age, sex and clinical covariates (including body size). Excluding patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) and adjusting for clinical covariates, QRSd was similar in Asians and whites with HFPEF, but longer in Asians compared with whites with HFREF (p=0.001). Longer QRSd was associated with increased risk of HF hospitalisation or death (absolute 2-year event rate for ≤120 ms was 40% and for >120 ms it was 52%; HR for 10 ms increase of QRSd was 1.04 (1.03 to 1.06), p<0.001), with no interaction by ethnicity.Conclusion: We found ethnic differences in the association between EF and QRSd among patients with HF. QRS prolongation was similarly associated with increased risk, but the implications for ethnicity-specific QRSd cut-offs in clinical decision-making require further study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: In heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, drug and device therapy improve survival. We studied contemporary trends in utilization of evidence-based therapy and associated survival.Methods and Results: We studied 5908 patients with NYHA class II-IV heart failure, EF <30%, and duration of heart failure ≥6 months registered in the Swedish Heart Failure Registry between 2003 and 2012. Regression using generalized estimation equations was used to examine temporal trends in crude and risk-adjusted rates of utilization of evidence-based heart failure therapy and 30-day, 1-year, and 3-year survival. In 2003 vs. 2012, the risk-adjusted use of therapy and P-values for trends were as follows: renin-angiotensin system antagonists, 88% vs. 86% (P = 0.091); beta-blockers, 85% vs. 93% (P = 0.008); mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, 53% vs. 42% (P < 0.001); CRT, 2.4% vs. 8.2% (P = 0.074); and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, 4.0% vs. 10.7% (P = 0.004). During the same period, the risk-adjusted 30-day, 1-year, and 3-year survival was 92% vs. 94% (P = 0.532), 81% vs. 77% (P = 0.260), and 58% vs. 54% (P = 0.425), respectively.Conclusions: In this large nationwide registry, over the last decade the use of evidence-based drug therapy was high and remained stable over time, but, despite an increased use of device therapy, the absolute use was poor. This was associated with an absence of improvement in survival. The improvements in therapy and prognosis over the last generation may be levelling off, and efforts should be directed at improving implementation of evidence-based therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cardiovascular diseases are leading causes of death and patients with dementia are often affected by them.Objective: Investigate associations of cardiovascular diseases with different dementia disorders and determine their impact on mortality.Methods: This study included 29,630 patients from the Swedish Dementia Registry (mean age 79 years, 59% women) diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease (AD), mixed dementia, vascular dementia, dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), Parkinson's disease dementia (PDD), frontotemporal dementia (FTD), or unspecified dementia. Records of cardiovascular diseases come from the Swedish National Patient Register. Multinomial logistic regression and cox proportional hazard models were applied.Results: Compared to AD, we found a higher burden of all cardiovascular diseases in mixed and vascular dementia. Cerebrovascular diseases were more associated with DLB than with AD. Diabetes mellitus was less associated with PDD and DLB than with AD. Ischemic heart disease was less associated with PDD and FTD than AD. All cardiovascular diseases predicted death in patients with AD, mixed, and vascular dementia. Only ischemic heart disease significantly predicted death in DLB patients (HR = 1.72; 95% CI = 1.16-2.55). In PDD patients, heart failure and diabetes mellitus were associated with a higher risk of death (HR = 3.06; 95% CI = 1.74-5.41 and HR = 3.44; 95% CI = 1.31-9.03). In FTD patients, ischemic heart disease and atrial fibrillation or flutter significantly predicted death (HR = 2.11; 95% CI = 1.08-4.14 and HR = 3.15; 95% CI = 1.60-6.22, respectively).Conclusion: Our study highlights differences in the occurrence and prognostic significance of cardiovascular diseases in several dementia disorders. This has implications for the care and treatment of the different dementia disorders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Heart failure (HF) is a heterogeneous syndrome, and the specific sub-category HF with mildly reduced ejection fraction (EF) range (HFmrEF; 41–49% EF) is only recently recognised as a distinct entity. Cluster analysis can characterise heterogeneous patient populations and could serve as a stratification tool in clinical trials and for prognostication. The aim of this study was to identify clusters in HFmrEF and compare cluster prognosis. Latent class analysis to cluster HFmrEF patients based on their characteristics was performed in the Swedish HF registry (n = 7316). Identified clusters were validated in a Dutch cross-sectional HF registry-based dataset CHECK-HF (n = 1536). In Sweden, mortality and hospitalisation across the clusters were compared using a Cox proportional hazard model, with a Fine-Gray sub-distribution for competing risks and adjustment for age and sex. Six clusters were discovered with the following prevalence and hazard ratio with 95% confidence intervals (HR [95%CI]) vs. cluster 1: 1) low-comorbidity (17%, reference), 2) ischaemic-male (13%, HR 0.9 [95% CI 0.7–1.1]), 3) atrial fibrillation (20%, HR 1.5 [95% CI 1.2–1.9]), 4) device/wide QRS (9%, HR 2.7 [95% CI 2.2–3.4]), 5) metabolic (19%, HR 3.1 [95% CI 2.5–3.7]) and 6) cardio-renal phenotype (22%, HR 2.8 [95% CI 2.2–3.6]). The cluster model was robust between both datasets. We found robust clusters with potential clinical meaning and differences in mortality and hospitalisation. Our clustering model could be valuable as a clinical differentiation support and prognostic tool in clinical trial design. [Display omitted] • Six distinct clusters: young-low comorbidity burden, ischaemic-male, atrial fibrillation, wide-QRS, metabolic, cardio-renal. • The cluster model was robust, clusters could be replicated in an external validation cohort of 1536 Dutch HFmrEF patients. • A pragmatic approach was used in defining the cluster model with 10 variables, we found overlap with other cluster studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of a recently developed risk score for mortality in heart failure by external validation in a national heart failure registry. Methods and results From 13 routinely available patient characteristics, the Meta-analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure ( MAGGIC) constructed a risk score for prediction of mortality in heart failure. We included 51 043 patients from the national Swedish Heart Failure Registry and calculated the MAGGIC risk score for each patient. The outcome measure was 3-year mortality. The predicted probability of death obtained from the calculated risk score was compared with the observed 3-year mortality, and model discrimination and calibration were assessed by formal tests and graphical means. The overall 3-year mortality in the study population was 39.4% and the MAGGIC project heart failure risk score predicted mortality was 36.4% (observed to expected ratio: 1.08). Discrimination was excellent overall (C index = 0.741). The difference between the model-predicted and the observed 3-year mortality in the six risk groups varied between 5% and −12%. Calibration plots demonstrated slight overprediction for the lowest risk patients, and underprediction in high risk patients. Conclusion The MAGGIC project heart failure risk score demonstrated an excellent ability to categorize patients in separate risk strata. Although the predicted 3-year mortality risk was higher in low risk groups and lower in high risk groups compared with the observed 3-year mortality in the Swedish Heart Failure Registry, the MAGGIC project heart failure risk score performed well in a large nationwide contemporary external validation cohort. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: It is unknown whether the increased risk of heart failure (HF) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is independent of ischemic heart disease (IHD).Objectives: This study sought to investigate the relative risk of HF overall and by subtype (ischemic and nonischemic HF) in patients with RA and to assess the impact of RA disease factors.Methods: Two contemporary cohorts of RA subjects were identified from Swedish patient and rheumatology registries and matched 1:10 to general population comparator subjects. A first-ever HF diagnosis (classified as ischemic HF or nonischemic HF based on the presence of IHD) was assessed through registry linkages. Relative risks for a history of HF before RA onset were calculated through odds ratios. Relative risks of incident HF in RA were calculated as hazard ratios (HRs).Results: By the time of RA onset, a history of HF was not more common in RA. In the new-onset RA cohort, the overall HRs for subsequent HF (any type), ischemic HF, and nonischemic HF were between 1.22 and 1.27. The risk of nonischemic HF increased rapidly after RA onset, in contrast to the risk of ischemic HF. High disease activity was associated with all HF types but was most pronounced for nonischemic HF. In the cohort of patients with RA of any duration, the HRs were between 1.71 and 1.88 for the different HF subtypes.Conclusions: Patients with RA are at increased risk of HF that cannot be explained by their increased risk of IHD. The increased risk of nonischemic HF occurred early and was associated with RA severity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Heart failure (HF) in developing countries is poorly described. We compare characteristics and prognosis of HF in Tanzania vs. Sweden. Methods A prospective cohort study was conducted from the Tanzania HF study (TaHeF) and the Swedish HF Registry (SwedeHF). Patients were compared overall (n 427 vs. 51,060) and after matching 1:3 by gender and age ± 5 years (n 411 vs. 1232). The association between cohort and all-cause mortality was assessed with multivariable Cox regression. Results In the unmatched cohorts, TaHeF (as compared to SwedeHF) patients were younger (median age [interquartile range] 55 [40–68] vs. 77 [64–84] years, p < 0.001) and more commonly women (51% vs. 40%, p < 0.001). The three-year survival was 61% in both cohorts. In the matched cohorts, TaHeF patients had more hypertension (47% vs. 37%, p < 0.001), more anemia (57% vs. 9%), more preserved EF, more advanced HF, longer duration of HF, and less use of beta-blockers. Crude mortality was worse in TaHeF (HR 2.25 [95% CI 1.78–2.85], p < 0.001), with three-year survival 61% vs. 83%. However, covariate-adjusted risk was similar (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.69–1.66; p = 0.760). In both cohorts, preserved EF was associated with higher mortality in crude but not adjusted analysis. Conclusions Compared to in Sweden, HF patients in Tanzania were younger and more commonly female, and after age and gender matching, had more frequent hypertension and anemia, more severe HF despite higher EF, and worse crude but similar adjusted prognosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background/objectives: Levosimendan is used in acute heart failure (HF) and increasingly as planned repetitive infusions in stable chronic HF, but the extent of this practice is unknown. The aim was to assess the use of levosimendan vs. conventional inotropes and the use as planned repetitive vs. acute treatment, in Sweden. Methods: We performed a descriptive study with individual patient validation assessing the use of levosimendan and conventional intravenous inotropes, indications for levosimendan, clinical characteristics and survival in the Swedish Heart Failure Registry between 2000 and 2011. For repetitive levosimendan, we assessed potential indications for alternative interventions. Results: Of 53,548 total registrations, there were 655 confirmed with inotrope use (597 levosimendan, 37 conventional, 21 both) from 22 hospitals responding to validation, and 6069 in-patient controls with New York Heart Association III–IV and ejection fraction <40%. The indications for levosimendan were acute HF in 384 registrations (306 patients), and planned repetitive in 234 registrations (87 patients). Planned repetitive as a proportion of total levosimendan registrations ranged 0–65% and of total levosimendan patients ranged 0–54% in different hospitals. Of planned repetitive patients without existing cardiac resynchronization therapy, implantable cardioverter defibrillator, transplant and/or assist device, 46–98% were potential candidates for such interventions. Conclusion: In HF in cardiology and internal medicine in Sweden, levosimendan was the overwhelming inotrope of choice, and the use of planned repetitive levosimendan was extensive, highly variable between hospitals and may have pre-empted other interventions. Potential effects of and indications for planned repetitive levosimendan need to be evaluated in prospective studies. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Aims: To assess the use and associations with outcomes of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) in a real-world population with heart failure (HF) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM)., Methods and Results: The Swedish HF Registry was linked with the National Diabetes Registry and other national registries. Independent predictors of GLP-1 RA use were assessed by multivariable logistic regressions and associations with outcomes were assessed by Cox regressions in a 1:1 propensity score-matched cohort. Of 8188 patients enrolled in 2017-21, 9% received a GLP-1 RA. Independent predictors of GLP-1 RA use were age <75 years, worse glycaemic control, impaired renal function, obesity, and reduced ejection fraction (EF). GLP-1 RA use was not significantly associated with a composite of HF hospitalization (HHF) or cardiovascular (CV) death regardless of EF, but was associated with a lower risk of major adverse CV events (CV death, non-fatal stroke/transient ischaemic attack, or myocardial infarction), and CV and all-cause death. In patients with body mass index ≥30 kg/m2, GLP-1 RA use was also associated with a lower risk of HHF/CV death and HHF alone., Conclusions: In patients with HF and T2DM, GLP-1 RA use was independently associated with more severe T2DM, reduced EF, and obesity and was not associated with a higher risk of HHF/CV death but with longer survival and less major CV adverse events. An association with lower HHF/CV death and HHF was observed in obese patients. Our findings provide new insights into GLP-1 RA use and its safety in HF and T2DM., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: We assessed eligibility for omecamtiv mecarbil (OM) in a real-world cohort with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) according to the selection criteria of the GALACTIC-HF trial (trial scenario) and selected trial´s criteria more likely to impact real-world use (pragmatic scenario)., Methods and Results: We included 31,015 patients with HFrEF lasting ≥3 months and registered in the Swedish HF registry between 2000-2021. Trial eligibility was calculated by applying all the GALACTIC-HF selection criteria. The pragmatic scenario considered only the New York Heart Association class, history of worsening HF, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptides (NT-proBNP), blood pressure and renal failure criteria defined as in the trial. Eligibility for OM in chronic HFrEF was 21% and 36% in the trial and pragmatic scenarios, respectively. Eligibility was higher in those with EF<30% (trial: 27%, pragmatic: 44%), in-patients (trial:30%, pragmatic:57%), severe HF (trial: 35%, pragmatic: 60%), NYHA class III-IV (trial: 26%, pragmatic: 45%), and NT-proBNP≥5,000pg/mL (trial: 30%, pragmatic: 51%). The criteria that most limited eligibility were history of a recent worsening HF event (60% eligible in chronic HFrEF), elevated NT-proBNP (82% eligible), and deviating blood pressure (82% eligible). Overall, eligible patients were characterized by more severe HF and higher CV event-rates in both scenarios, and higher comorbidity burden in the pragmatic scenario., Conclusion: Approximately 21% of real-world chronic HFrEF patients would be eligible for OM according to the GALACTIC-HF selection criteria, and 36% according to the criteria more likely to affect OM use in clinical practice. Criteria in both scenarios identified a patient-group with severe HF and high CV event-rates., Competing Interests: FL has no conflicts of interest to declare. NØ has no conflicts of interest to declare. MM reports grants and other from Amgen, Abbott Vascular, Edwards Therapeutics, Servier, WindTree Therapeutics, Actelion, Livanova, Vifor Pharma. GR reports no conflicts of interest. UD reports research grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer, Vifor, Boston Scientific, Roche Diagnostics and honoraria/consultancies from Amgen, Pfizer and AstraZeneca all outside the present manuscript. PM has no conflicts of interest to declare. CH none related to the present work; unrelated to the present work: consulting fees from Novartis, Roche Diagnostics, and AnaCardio; speaker fees from Novartis and Merck Sharp & Dohme. LHL none related to the present work; unrelated to the present work: grants, consulting, honoraria: Abbot, Alleviant, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biopeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Edwards, FineHeart, MedScape/WebMD, Merck/MSD, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, OrionPharma, Pharmacosmos, Radcliffe Cardiology, Roche, Sanofi, Servier, Translational Medicines Academy, Vifor; Stock ownership: AnaCardio. GS received financial support from Cytokinetics for performing this investigator-initiated study. GS reports grants and personal fees from Vifor, personal fees and grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Roche, grants and personal fees from Servier, grants and personal fees from Novartis, grants and personal fees from Cytokinetics, personal fees from Medtronic, grants from Boston Scientific, grants and personal fees from Pharmacosmos, grants from Merck, grants from Bayer, personal fees from INTAS, personal fees from Abbott, outside the submitted work. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials, (Copyright: © 2024 Lindberg et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Aims: Guidelines recommend target doses (TD) of heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) medications regardless of sex. Differences in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics may explain heterogeneity in treatment response, adverse reactions, and tolerability issues across sexes. The aim of this study was to explore sex-based differences in the association between TD achievement and mortality/morbidity in HFrEF., Methods and Results: Patients with HFrEF and HF duration ≥6 months registered in the Swedish HF Registry between May 2000 and December 2020 (follow-up until December 2021) were analysed. Treatments of interest were renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASI) or angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI), and beta-blockers. Multivariable Cox regression models were performed to explore the risk of cardiovascular mortality or hospitalization for HF across dose categories in females versus males. A total of 17 912 patients were analysed (median age 77.0 years, interquartile range [IQR] 70.0-83.0), 29% were female. Over a median follow-up of 1.33 years (IQR 0.29-3.22), for RASI/ARNI there was no significant difference in outcome for females achieving 50-99% versus 100% of TD (hazard ratio 0.92, 95% confidence interval 0.83-1.03), whereas males showed a gradual lowering in risk together with the achievement of higher % of TD (p-interaction = 0.030). For beta-blockers the achievement of TD was associated with the lowest risk of outcome regardless of sex., Conclusions: Our findings suggest that females and males might differently benefit from the same dose of RASI/ARNI, and do represent a general call for randomized controlled trials to consider sex-specific up-titration schemes when testing HFrEF treatments in need of up-titration., (© 2024 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aim: To assess cause-specific death in patients with heart failure with preserved, mildly reduced, and reduced ejection fraction (HFpEF, HFmrEF, and HFrEF)., Methods and Results: Data were analysed from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry (SwedeHF) and the National Patient Register of patients enrolled in SwedeHF 2000-2021. Cox proportional hazards regression models were performed and adjusted for age, sex and time period. Among 100 584 patients (23% HFpEF, 23% HFmrEF, 53% HFrEF), median age (interquartile range) was 75 (66-82) and 36% were female. Of those who died within 5 years, most deaths were ascribed to cardiovascular (CV) causes across all ejection fraction (EF) categories. Within 5 years, HFpEF had higher adjusted risk of non-CV death (hazard ratio [HR] 1.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28-1.38, p < 0.001) and lower adjusted risk of CV death (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.82-0.88, p < 0.001) compared to HFrEF. Ischaemic heart disease (IHD) and cancer were the most common causes of CV and non-CV death regardless of EF category. The incidence rate of CV death due to IHD was highest in HFrEF while incidence rates of CV death due to pulmonary vascular disease, stroke, valvular heart disease and atrial fibrillation increased with increasing EF. The incidence rates of non-CV deaths due to cancer, respiratory disease, and infections increased with increasing EF., Conclusion: Cardiovascular death was more common than non-CV death across all EF categories although the risk of non-CV death within 5 years was higher with increasing EF. IHD and cancer were the most common causes of CV and non-CV deaths, respectively, regardless of EF category., (© 2024 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: The aim of this analysis was to provide data on the overall comorbidity burden, both cardiovascular (CV) and non-CV, in a large real-world heart failure (HF) population across the ejection fraction (EF)., Methods and Results: Patients with HF from the Swedish HF Registry between 2000 and 2021 were included. Of 91 463 patients (median age 76 years [interquartile range 67-82]), 98% had at least one among the 17 explored comorbidities (94% at least one CV and 85% at least one non-CV comorbidity). All comorbidities, except for coronary artery disease (CAD), were more frequent in HF with preserved EF (HFpEF). Patients with multiple comorbidities were older, more likely female, inpatients, with HFpEF, worse New York Heart Association class and higher N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels. In a multivariable Cox model, 12 comorbidities were independently associated with a higher risk of death from any cause. The highest risk was associated with dementia (hazard ratio [HR] 1.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.45-1.65), chronic kidney disease (HR 1.37, 95% CI 1.34-1.41), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR 1.32, 95% CI 1.28-1.35). Obesity was associated with a lower risk of all-cause death (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.79-0.84). CAD and valvular heart disease were associated with a higher risk of all-cause and CV mortality, but not non-CV mortality, whereas cancer and musculo-skeletal disease increased the risk of non-CV mortality. A significant interaction with EF was observed for several comorbidities. Occurrence of CV and non-CV outcomes was related to the number of CV and non-CV comorbidities, respectively., Conclusion: The burden of both CV and non-CV comorbidities was high in HF regardless of EF, but overall higher in HFpEF. Multimorbidity was associated with a high risk of death with a different burden on CV or non-CV outcomes., (© 2024 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Heart failure (HF) is a growing, global public health issue. Despite advances in HF care, many challenges remain and HF outcomes are poor. Some of the major reasons for this are the lack of understanding and treatment for certain HF sub-types as well as the lack of implementation of treatment in areas where effective treatment exists. HF registries provide the opportunity to transform clinical research and patient care. Recently the registry-based randomized clinical trial has emerged as a pragmatic and inexpensive alternative to the gold standard in clinical trial design, the randomized controlled trial. Registries may also provide platforms for strategy trials, implementation trials, and screening. Using examples from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry and others, the present review provides insights into how registry-based research can address many of the unmet needs in HF., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest TP: None. PK: None related to the present work. Reports fee for lectures from Vifor and personal fee for lecture from AstraZeneca. LHL: None related to the present work. Outside the present work: Grants: AstraZeneca, Vifor, Boston Scientific, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, MSD; Consulting: Vifor, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Pharmacosmos, MSD, MedScape, Sanofi, Lexicon, Myokardia, Boehringer Ingelheim, Servier, Edwards Life Sciences, Alleviant; Speaker's honoraria: Abbott, OrionPharma, MedScape, Radcliffe, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer; Patent: AnaCardio., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Heart failure (HF) medication may reduce blood pressure (BP). Low BP is associated with worse outcomes but how this association is modified by HF medication has not been studied. We evaluated the association between BP and outcomes according to HF medication dose in HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF)., Methods and Results: We studied HFrEF patients from the Swedish HF registry (2000-2018). Associations between systolic BP (SBP) and cardiovascular death (CVD) and/or HF hospitalization (HFH) were analysed according to doses of renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors, beta-blockers and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA). Among 42 040 patients (median age 74.0), lower baseline SBP was associated with higher risk of CVD/HFH (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] per 10 mmHg higher SBP: 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92-0.93), which was less high risk under optimized RAS inhibitor and beta-blocker doses (10% decrease in event rates per 10 mmHg SBP increase in untreated patients vs. 7% decrease in patients at maximum dose, both adjusted p < 0.02). Among the 13 761 patients with repeated measurements, 9.9% reported a SBP decrease >10 mmHg when HF medication doses were increased, whereas 24.6% reported a SBP decrease >10 mmHg with stable/decreasing doses. Decreasing SBP was associated with higher risk of CVD/HFH in patients with stable (HR 1.10, 95% CI 1.04-1.17) or decreasing (HR 1.29, 95% CI 1.18-1.42) HF medication dose but not in patients with an increase in doses (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.86-1.02)., Conclusions: The association of lower SBP with higher risk of CVD/HFH is attenuated in patients with optimized HF medication. These results suggest that low or declining SBP should not limit HF medication optimization., (© 2023 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) improve outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) but remain underused and are often discontinued especially in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) due to concerns on renal safety. Therefore, in a real-world HFrEF population we investigated the safety of MRA use, in terms of risk of renal events, any mortality and any hospitalization, across the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) spectrum including severe CKD., Methods and Results: We analysed patients with HFrEF (ejection fraction <40%), not on dialysis, from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry. We performed multivariable logistic regression models to investigate patient characteristics independently associated with MRA use, and univariable and multivariable Cox regression models to assess the associations between MRA use and outcomes. Of 33 942 patients, 17 489 (51%) received MRA, 32%, 45%, 54%, 54% with eGFR <30, 30-44, 45-59 or ≥60 ml/min/1.73 m 2 , respectively. An eGFR ≥60 ml/min/1.73 m 2 and patient characteristics linked with more severe HF were independently associated with more likely MRA use. In multivariable analyses, MRA use was consistently not associated with a higher risk of renal events (i.e. composite of dialysis/renal death/hospitalization for renal failure or hyperkalaemia) (hazard ratio [HR] 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98-1.10), all-cause death (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.97-1.08) as well as of all-cause hospitalization (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.95-1.02) across the eGFR spectrum including also severe CKD., Conclusions: The use of MRAs in patients with HFrEF decreased with worse renal function; however their safety profile was demonstrated to be consistent across the entire eGFR spectrum., (© 2023 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Guideline recommendations for the treatment of heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) derive from small subgroups in post-hoc analyses of randomized trials., Objectives: We investigated predictors of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors/angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (RASI/ARNI) and beta-blockers use, and the associations between these medications and mortality/morbidity in a large real-world cohort with HFmrEF., Methods and Results: Patients with HFmrEF (EF 40-49%) from the Swedish HF Registry were included. The associations between medications and cardiovascular (CV) mortality/HF hospitalization (HFH), and all-cause mortality were assessed through Cox regressions in a 1:1 propensity score-matched cohort. A positive control analysis was performed in patients with EF < 40%, while a negative control outcome analysis had cancer-related hospitalization as endpoint. Of 12 421 patients with HFmrEF, 84% received RASI/ARNI and 88% beta-blockers. Shared-independent predictors of RASI/ARNI and beta-blockers use were younger age, being an outpatient, follow-up in specialty care, and hypertension. In the matched cohorts, use of both RASI/ARNI and beta-blocker use was separately associated with lower risk of CV mortality/HFH [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.83-0.98 and HR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.74-0.90, respectively] and of all-cause mortality (HR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.69-0.81 and HR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.72-0.87, respectively). Results were consistent at the positive control analysis, and there were no associations between treatment use and the negative control outcome., Conclusions: RASI/ARNI and beta-blockers were extensively used in this large real-world cohort with HFmrEF. Their use was safe since associated with lower mortality and morbidity. Our findings confirm the real-world evidence from previous post-hoc analyses of trials, and represent a further call for implementing guideline recommendations., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) reduce mortality/morbidity in heart failure (HF). We explored the implementation of SGLT2i over time, and patient characteristics associated with their use, in a large, nationwide population with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF)., Methods and Results: Patients with HFrEF (ejection fraction <40%), no type 1 diabetes, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <20 ml/min/1.73 m 2 and/or on dialysis, registered in the Swedish HF Registry between 1 November 2020 and 5 August 2022 were included. Independent predictors of use were investigated by multivariable logistic regressions. Of 8192 patients, 37% received SGLT2i. Use increased overall from 20.5% to 59.0% over time, from 46.2% and 12.5% to 69.8% and 55.4% in patients with and without type 2 diabetes, from 14.7% and 22.3% to 58.0% and 59.8% in eGFR <60 versus ≥60 ml/min/1.73 m 2 , from 21.0% and 18.9% to 61.6% and 52.0% in males versus females, from 24.2% and 18.0% to 60.8% and 57.7% in patients with versus without recent HF hospitalization, from 26.1% and 19.8% to 54.7% and 59.6% in inpatients versus outpatients, and from 20.2% and 21.2% to 59.2% and 58.7% in those with HF duration <6 versus ≥6 months, respectively. Important characteristics associated with SGLT2i use were male sex, recent HF hospitalization, specialized HF follow-up, lower ejection fraction, type 2 diabetes, higher education level, use of other HF/cardiovascular interventions. Older age, higher blood pressure, atrial fibrillation and anaemia were associated with less use. Discontinuation rate at 6 and 12 months was 13.1% and 20.0%, respectively., Conclusions: Use of SGLT2i increased three-fold over 2 years. Although this indicates a more rapid translation of trial results and guidelines into clinical practice compared to previous HF drugs, further efforts are advocated to complete the implementation process while avoiding inequities across different patient subgroups and discontinuations., (© 2023 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Iron deficiency (ID) is common in heart failure (HF) and linked with poor prognosis regardless of anaemia. We assessed temporal trends in ID testing, ID prevalence, ID incidence, iron need, and outcomes associated with ID in HF across the ejection fraction (EF) spectrum., Methods and Results: From the Swedish HF registry, we enrolled 15 197 patients from Region Stockholm with available EF and collected laboratory tests from routine practice. Iron screening improved since 2016 but remained <25% as of 2018. In 1486 patients with iron biomarkers at baseline, the prevalence of ID was 55% (HF with reduced EF 54%; mildly reduced EF 51%; preserved EF 61%). Iron need was ≥1500 mg in 72% of patients. ID was independently associated with higher risk for HF rehospitalizations (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13-2.31) and with cardiovascular (CV) death or repeated HF hospitalizations (IRR 1.63, 95% CI 1.15-2.30) regardless of EF (p-interaction 0.21 and 0.26, respectively), but not with all-cause death, CV death, or first HF hospitalization. Among 96 patients without ID at baseline and with follow-up iron biomarkers, 21% developed ID within 6 months., Conclusions: Iron deficiency screening improved over time but is still limitedly implemented, despite being highly prevalent and incident, and independently associated with CV death or HF rehospitalizations regardless of EF. Most patients with ID had an iron need necessitating either repeated administrations of intravenous iron or a preparation permitting >1000 mg doses. These data highlight the need for improved screening for ID in HF., (© 2023 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aim: We investigated the eligibility for vericiguat in a real-world heart failure (HF) population based on trial, guideline and label criteria., Methods and Results: From the Swedish HF registry, 23 573 patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) enrolled between 2000 and 2018, with a HF duration ≥6 months, were considered. Eligibility for vericiguat was calculated based on criteria from (i) the Vericiguat Global Study in Subjects with Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction (VICTORIA) trial; (ii) European and American guidelines on HF; (iii) product labelling according to the Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency. Estimated eligibility for vericiguat in the trial, guidelines, and label scenarios was 21.4%, 47.4%, and 47.4%, respectively. Prior HF hospitalization within 6 months was the criterion limiting eligibility the most in all scenarios (met by 49.1% of the population). In the trial scenario, other criteria meaningfully limiting eligibility were elevated N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels and nitrate use. In all scenarios, eligibility was higher among patients hospitalized for HF at baseline (44.3% vs. 21.4% [trial scenario] and 97.3% vs. 47.4% [guideline/label scenarios] for hospitalized vs. non-hospitalized patients). Overall, eligible patients were older, had more severe HF, more comorbidities, and consequently higher cardiovascular mortality and HF hospitalization rates compared with ineligible patients across all scenarios., Conclusion: In a large and contemporary real-world HFrEF cohort, we estimated that 21.4% of patients would be eligible for vericiguat according to the VICTORIA trial selection criteria, 47.4% based on guidelines and labelling. Eligibility for vericiguat translated into the selection of a population at high risk of morbidity/mortality., (© 2023 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: To investigate whether a heart failure (HF) hospitalization is associated with initiation/discontinuation of guideline-directed medical HF therapy (GDMT) and consequent outcomes., Methods and Results: Among patients in the Swedish HF registry with an ejection fraction <50% enrolled in 2009-2018, initiation/discontinuation of GDMT was investigated by assessing dispensations of GDMT in those with versus without a HF hospitalization. Of 14 737 patients, 6893 (47%) were enrolled when hospitalized for HF. Initiation of GDMT was more likely than discontinuation following a HF hospitalization compared to a control group of patients without a HF hospitalization (odds ratio range 2.1-4.0 vs. 1.4-1.6 for the individual medications), although the proportion of patients not on GDMT was still high (8.1-44.0%). Key patient characteristics triggering less use of GDMT (i.e. less initiation or more discontinuation) were older age and worse renal function. Following a HF hospitalization, initiation of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors or beta-blockers was associated with lower and their discontinuation with higher mortality risk, but no association with mortality was observed for initiation/discontinuation of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists., Conclusions: Following a HF hospitalization, initiation of GDMT was more likely than discontinuation, although still limited. Perceived or actual low tolerance were barriers to GDMT implementation. Early re-/initiation of GDMT was associated with better survival. Our findings represent a call for further implementing the current guideline recommendation for an early re-/initiation of GDMT following a HF hospitalization., (© 2023 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: The SOLOIST-WHF trial demonstrated efficacy of sotagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and recent worsening heart failure (HF) regardless of ejection fraction (EF). Selection criteria in trials may limit their generalizability. Therefore, we aimed to investigate eligibility for sotagliflozin based on the SOLOIST-WHF criteria in a real-world HF population., Methods and Results: SOLOIST-WHF criteria were applied to patients stabilized after HF hospitalization in the Swedish HF Registry according to (i) literal scenario (all inclusion/exclusion criteria) or (ii) pragmatic scenario (only criteria likely to influence treatment decisions). Of 5453 inpatients with T2DM and recent worsening HF, 51.4% had reduced EF (HFrEF), 19.1% mildly reduced (HFmrEF), and 29.5% preserved EF (HFpEF). Eligibility (literal) was: 27.2% (32.4% in HFrEF, 24.7% in HFmrEF, 19.7% in HFpEF) and eligibility (pragmatic) was 62.8% (69.1%, 60.3%, 53.4%, respectively). In the literal scenario, criteria limiting eligibility were HF duration <3 months, eGFR <30 ml/min/1.73 m2, age >85 years, acute coronary syndrome <3 months, and insufficiently high N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels. Eligible vs. non-eligible patients had more severe HF, higher cardiovascular (CV) comorbidity burden, higher use of HF treatments, and higher event rates (all-cause death 30.8 vs. 27.2 per 100 patient-years, CV death 19.1 vs. 16.6, and HF hospitalization 36.7 vs. 24.0)., Conclusion: In this large, real-world HF cohort with T2DM, ∼1/3 of patients were eligible for sotagliflozin in the literal and ∼2/3 of patients in the pragmatic scenario. Eligible patients had more severe HF and higher event rates, in particular CV and HF events., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: To investigate the use of guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMT) and associated outcomes in obese (body mass index ≥30 kg/m 2 ) versus non-obese patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF)., Methods and Results: Patients with HFrEF from the Swedish HF Registry were included. Of 16 116 patients, 24% were obese. In obese versus non-obese patients, use of treatments was 91% versus 86% for renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi)/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNi), 94% versus 91% for beta-blockers, 53% versus 43% for mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. Obesity was shown to be independently associated with more likely use of each treatment, triple combination therapy, and the achievement of target dose by multivariable logistic regressions. Multivariable Cox regressions showed use of RASi/ARNi and beta-blockers being independently associated with lower risk of all-cause/cardiovascular death regardless of obesity, although, when considering competing risks, a lower risk of cardiovascular death with RASi/ARNi in obese versus non-obese patients was observed. RASi/ARNi were associated with lower risk of HF hospitalization in obese but not in non-obese patients, whereas beta-blockers were not associated with the risk of HF hospitalization regardless of obesity. At the competing risk analysis, RASi/ARNi use was associated with higher risk of HF hospitalization regardless of obesity., Conclusion: Obese patients were more likely to receive optimal treatments after adjustment for factors affecting tolerability, suggesting that perceived beyond actual tolerance issues limit GDMT implementation. RASi/ARNi and beta-blockers were associated with lower mortality regardless of obesity, with a greater association between RASi/ARNi and lower cardiovascular death in obese versus non-obese patients when considering competing risk., (© 2023 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Digoxin is included in some heart failure (HF) guidelines but controversy persists about the true role for and impact of treatment with this drug, particularly in the absence of atrial fibrillation (AF). The aim of this study was to assess the association between clinical characteristics and digoxin use and between digoxin use and mortality/morbidity in a large, contemporary cohort of patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) stratified by history of AF., Methods and Results: Patients with HFrEF (EF < 40%) enrolled in the Swedish HF registry between 2005 and 2018 were analysed. The independent association between digoxin use and patient characteristics was assessed by logistic regression, and between digoxin use and outcomes [composite of all-cause mortality or HF hospitalization (HFH), all-cause mortality, and HFH] by Cox regressions in a 1:1 propensity score matched population. Digoxin use was analysed at baseline and as a time-dependent variable. Of 42 456 patients with HFrEF, 16% received digoxin, 29% in the AF group and 2.8% in the non-AF group. The main independent predictors of use were advanced HF, higher heart rate, history of AF, preserved renal function, and concomitant use of beta blockers. Digoxin use was associated with lower risk of all-cause death/HFH [hazard ratio (HR): 0.95; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.91-0.99] in AF, but with higher risk in non-AF (HR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.09-1.43). Consistent results were observed when digoxin use was analysed as a time-dependent variable., Conclusion: The great majority of digoxin users had a history of AF. Digoxin use was associated with lower mortality/morbidity in patients with AF, but with higher mortality/morbidity in patients without AF., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Hypertension is common in patients with heart failure (HF), but less is known about resistant hypertension., Objectives: This study sought to investigate apparent treatment-resistant hypertension (aTRH) in patients with HF in the SwedeHF (Swedish Heart Failure Registry), across the spectrum of HF phenotypes (heart failure with reduced ejection fraction [HFrEF], heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction [HFmrEF], and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction [HFpEF])., Methods: aTRH was defined as systolic blood pressure ≥140 mm Hg (≥135 mm Hg in diabetes) despite treatment with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, angiotensin receptor blocker, or sacubitril-valsartan, as well as a calcium-channel blocker and a diuretic; non-treatment-resistant hypertension (TRH) was defined as systolic blood pressure above these thresholds but not on the 3-drug combination; and normal blood pressure was defined as under these thresholds. In each left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) category, patient factors associated with aTRH and non-TRH and outcomes (HF hospitalization and cardiovascular death composite, its components, and all-cause death) according to hypertension category were examined., Results: Among 46,597 patients, aTRH was present in 2,693 (10%), 1,514 (14%), and 1,450 (17%) patients with HFrEF, HFmrEF, and HFpEF, respectively. Older age, obesity, diabetes, and kidney disease were associated with a greater likelihood of aTRH and non-TRH (vs normal blood pressure). Associations were generally similar irrespective of LVEF category. Compared with normal blood pressure, aTRH was associated with a lower adjusted risk of the composite outcome in HFrEF and HFmrEF (HR: 0.79 [95% CI: 0.74-0.85] and HR: 0.86 [95% CI: 0.77-0.96]) but not in HFpEF (HR: 0.93 [95% CI: 0.84-1.04])., Conclusions: aTRH was most common in HFpEF and least common in HFrEF. Associated patient characteristics were similar irrespective of LVEF category. aTRH (vs normal blood pressure) was associated with a lower risk of first HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death in HFrEF and HFmrEF but not in HFpEF., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures SwedeHF is funded by the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare, the Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions, the Swedish Society of Cardiology, and the Swedish Heart-Lung Foundation. No funding agency had any role in the design, conduct, or decision or approval to publish this study. Dr Lund is supported by Karolinska Institutet, the Swedish Research Council (grant 523-2014-2336), the Swedish Heart Lung Foundation (grants 20150557 and 20190310), and the Stockholm County Council (grants 20170112 and 20190525). Dr Jackson is supported by a British Heart Foundation Clinical Research Training Fellowship (FS/18/14/33330). Drs McMurray and Petrie are supported by a British Heart Foundation Centre of Research Excellence Grant (RE/18/6/34217). Dr Petrie has received lecture fees from AstraZeneca and Eli Lilly; personal fees from Novo Nordisk, AstraZeneca, NAPP Pharmaceuticals, Takeda Pharmaceutical, Alnylam, Bayer, Resverlogix, and Cardiorentis; and grants and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim and Novartis. Dr Jhund has received personal fees from Novartis and AstraZeneca; personal fees and grants from Boehringer Ingelheim; and his employer, the University of Glasgow, has received remuneration from AstraZeneca for work on the DAPA-HF and DELIVER trials. Mr Dahlström has received research grants from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Vifor Pharma, and Roche Diagnostics; and consulting honoraria from Novartis, Amgen, AstraZeneca, and Pfizer all outside of the submitted work. Ms Hage has received consulting fees from Novartis and Roche Diagnostics; and speaker and honoraria from Merck Sharp & Dohme, and is supported by the Swedish Research Council (grant 20180899). Mr Savarese has received grants and personal fees from Vifor; grants and nonfinancial support from Boehringer Ingelheim; personal fees from Società Prodotti Antibiotici; grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca; personal fees from Roche, Servier, GENESIS, Cytokinetics, and Medtronic; and grants from Novartis, Boston Scientific, PHARMACOSMOS, and Merck, outside the submitted work. Dr McMurray reports that his employer, Glasgow University, has been paid by Novartis for his serving as an executive committee member and co–principal investigator of the ATMOSPHERE, PARADIGM-HF, and PARAGON-HF trials and as an executive/steering committee member of the PARADISE-MI and PERSPECTIVE trials (with sacubitril-valsartan) and for meetings/presentations related to these trials, aliskiren, and sacubitril-valsartan. Novartis has also paid for his travel and accommodation for some of these meetings. Glasgow University has also been paid by Novartis for Dr McMurray serving on an advisory board; by Bayer for serving as a steering committee member of the PANACHE trial using neladenoson bialanate (BAY 1067197); by Cardiorentis for serving as a steering committee member and endpoint committee chair for the TRUE-AHF trial and attending meetings related to this trial; by Cardiorentis for travel and accommodation to attend some of these meetings; by Amgen for serving as a steering committee member for the ATOMIC-HF and COSMIC-HF trials and attending meetings related to these trials; by Amgen for travel and accommodation for some of these meetings; by Oxford University (which received a grant from Bayer, which manufactures acarbose) for serving as a steering committee member for the ACE (Acarbose Cardiovascular Evaluation) trial (using acarbose) and attending meetings related to this trial; by Theracos for serving as principal investigator for the BEST trial and attending meetings related to this trial; by Theracos for travel and accommodation to attend some of these meetings; by AbbVie (which manufactures atrasentan) for serving as a steering committee member for the SONAR trial (using atrasentan) and to attend meetings related to this trial; by AbbVie for travel and accommodation to attend some of these meetings; by DalCor Pharmaceuticals for serving as a steering committee member for the Dal-GenE trial and to attend meetings related to this trial; by Pfizer for serving on the data safety monitoring committee for the SPIRE trial and to attend meetings related to this trial; by Merck for serving on the data safety monitoring committee for the MK-3102 program for the VICTORIA trial and for attending meetings related to this trial; by AstraZeneca (which markets dapagliflozin) for serving as principal investigator of DAPA-HF and co–principal investigator of DELIVER and to attend meetings related to these trials; by AstraZeneca for travel and accommodation to attend meetings; by GlaxoSmithKline for serving as co–principal investigator and steering committee member, respectively, for the Harmony-Outcomes trial (albiglutide) and 2 trials, ASCEND-D and ASCEND-ND, using daprodustat, and to attend meetings related to these trials; by GlaxoSmithKline for travel and accommodation to attend some of the meetings; by Bristol Myers Squibb for serving as a steering committee member for the STAND-UP clinical trial (using an HNO donor) on heart failure and to attend meetings related to this trial; by Kings College Hospital (which has received a grant from KRUK and Vifor-Fresenius, which manufacture intravenous iron) for serving as a steering committee member for the PIVOTAL trial (using intravenous iron) and for running the endpoint adjudication committee for this trial; and to attend meetings related to PIVOTAL and for travel and accommodation to attend some of the meetings. All payments were made through consultancies with Glasgow University, and Dr McMurray has not received any personal payments in relation to the trials or drugs. Dr Lund has received research grants from AstraZeneca, Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Vifor Pharma, Relypsa, and Pharmacosmos; and consulting/speaker honoraria from AstraZeneca, Novartis, Bayer, Vifor Pharma, Sanofi, Lexicon, MyoKardia, Orion Pharma, Merck/Merck Sharp & Dohme, Respicardia, and Medscape. Ms Benson has reported that she has no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: To assess the association between combination, dose and use of current guideline-recommended target doses (TD) of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi), angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNi) and β-blockers, and outcomes in a large and unselected contemporary cohort of patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced ejection fraction., Methods and Results: Overall, 17 809 outpatients registered in the Swedish Heart Failure Registry (SwedeHF) from May 2000 to December 2018, with ejection fraction <40% and duration of HF ≥90 days were selected. Primary outcome was a composite of time to cardiovascular death and first HF hospitalization. Compared with no use of RASi or ARNi, the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 0.83 (0.76-0.91) with <50% of TD, 0.78 (0.71-0.86) with 50%-99%, and 0.73 (0.67-0.80) with ≥100% of TD. Compared with no use of β-blockers, the adjusted HR (95% CI) was 0.86 (0.76-0.91), 0.81 (0.74-0.89) and 0.74 (0.68-0.82) with <50%, 50%-99% and ≥100% of TD, respectively. Patients receiving both an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi)/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB)/ARNi and a β-blocker at 50%-99% of TD had a lower adjusted risk of the primary outcome compared with patients only receiving one drug, i.e. ACEi/ARB/ARNi or β-blocker, even if this was at ≥100% of TD., Conclusion: Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction patients using higher doses of RASi or ARNi and β-blockers had lower risk of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization. Use of two drug classes at 50%-99% of TD dose was associated with lower risk than one drug class at 100% of TD., (© 2022 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Patients with heart failure (HF) are often cared for by non-cardiologists. The implications are unknown., Methods: In a nationwide HF cohort with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), we compared demographics, clinical characteristics, guideline-based therapy use and outcomes in non-cardiology vs. cardiology in-patient and out-patient care., Results: Between 2000 and 2016, 36,076 patients with HFrEF were enrolled in the Swedish HF registry (19,337 [54%] in-patients overall), with 44% of in-patients and 45% of out-patients managed in non-cardiology settings. Predictors of treatment in non-cardiology were age > 75 years (adjusted odds ratio for non-cardiology 1.20; 95% confidence interval 1.14-1.27), lower education level (0.71; 0.66-0.76 for university vs. compulsory), valve disease (1.24; 1.18-1.31) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) >120 mmHg (1.05; 1.00-1.10). Non-cardiology care was significantly associated with lower use of beta-blockers (0.80; 0.74-0.86) and devices (intracardiac defibrillator [ICD] and/or cardiac resynchronization therapy [CRT]: 0.63; 0.56-0.71), and less frequent specialist follow-up (0.61; 0.57-0.65). Over 1-year follow-up the risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 1.09; 1.03-1.15) was higher but the risk of first HF (re-) hospitalization was lower (0.93; 0.89-0.97) in non-cardiology vs. cardiology care., Conclusions: In HFrEF, non-cardiology care was independently associated with older ageand lower education. After covariate adjustment, non-cardiology care was associated with lower use of beta-blockers and devices, higher mortality, and lower risk of HF hospitalization. Access to cardiology care may not be equitable and this may have implications for use of guideline-based care and outcomes., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Iron deficiency (ID) is associated with poor prognosis regardless of anaemia. Intravenous iron improves quality of life and outcomes in patients with ID and heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). In the Swedish HF registry, we assessed (i) frequency and predictors of ID testing; (ii) prevalence and outcomes of ID with/without anaemia; (iii) use of ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) and its predictors in patients with ID., Methods and Results: We used multivariable logistic regressions to assess patient characteristics independently associated with ID testing/FCM use, and Cox regressions to assess risk of outcomes associated with ID. Of 21 496 patients with HF and any ejection fraction enrolled in 2017-2018, ID testing was performed in 27%. Of these, 49% had ID and more specifically 36% had ID-/anaemia-, 15% ID-/anaemia+, 29% ID+/anaemia-, and 20% ID+/anaemia+ (48%, 39%, 13%, 30% and 18% in HFrEF, respectively). Risk of recurrent all-cause hospitalizations was higher in patients with ID regardless of anaemia. Of 1959 patients with ID, 19% received FCM (24% in HFrEF). Important independent predictors of ID testing and FCM use were anaemia, higher New York Heart Association class, having HFrEF, and referral to HF specialty care., Conclusion: In this nationwide HF registry, ID testing occurred in only about a quarter of the patients. Among tested patients, ID was present in one half, but only one in five patients received FCM indicating low adherence to current guidelines on screening and treatment., (© 2021 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Use of sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) in real-world heart failure (HF) is poorly characterised. In contemporary patients with HF and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) we assessed over time SGLT2i use, clinical characteristics and outcomes associated with SGLT2i use., Methods and Results: Type 2 diabetes patients enrolled in the Swedish HF Registry between 2016-2018 were considered. We performed multivariable logistic regression models to assess the independent predictors of SGLT2i use and Cox regression models in a 1:3 propensity score-matched cohort and relevant subgroups to investigate the association between SGLT2i use and outcomes. Of 6805 eligible HF patients with T2DM, 376 (5.5%) received SGLT2i, whose use increased over time with 12% of patients on treatment at the end of 2018. Independent predictors of SGLT2i use were younger age, HF specialty care, ischaemic heart disease, preserved kidney function, and absence of anaemia. Over a median follow-up of 256 days, SGLT2i use was associated with a 30% lower risk of cardiovascular (CV) death/first HF hospitalisation (hazard ratio 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.52-0.95), which was consistent regardless of ejection fraction, background metformin treatment and kidney function. SGLT2i use was also associated with a lower risk of all-cause and CV death, HF and CV hospitalisation, and CV death/myocardial infarction/stroke., Conclusion: In a contemporary HF cohort with T2DM, SGLT2i use increased over time, was more common with specialist care, younger age, ischaemic heart disease, and preserved renal function, and was associated with lower mortality and morbidity., (© 2021 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: It is unknown if β-blockers reduce mortality/morbidity in patients with heart failure (HF) and advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD), a population underrepresented in HF trials., Methods: Observational cohort of HF patients with advanced CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min per 1.73 m 2 ) from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry between 2001 and 2016. We first explored associations between β-blocker use, 5-year death, and the composite of cardiovascular death/HF hospitalization among 3775 patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and advanced CKD. We compared observed hazards with those from a control cohort of 15 346 patients with HFrEF and moderate CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate <60-30 mL/min per 1.73 m 2 ), for whom β-blocker trials demonstrate benefit. Second, we explored outcomes associated to β-blocker among advanced CKD participants with preserved (HFpEF; N=2009) and midrange ejection fraction (HFmrEF; N=1514)., Results: During a median follow-up of 1.3 years, 2012 patients had a subsequent HF hospitalization, and 2849 died in the HFrEF cohort, of which 2016 died due to cardiovascular causes. Among patients with HFrEF, β-blocker use was associated with lower risk of death (adjusted hazard ratio 0.85 [95% CI, 0.75-0.96]) and cardiovascular mortality/HF hospitalization (0.87 [0.77-0.98]) compared with nonuse. The magnitude of the associations was similar to that observed for HFrEF patients with moderate CKD. Conversely, no significant association was observed for β-blocker users in advanced CKD with HFpEF (death: 0.88 [0.77-1.02], cardiovascular mortality/HF hospitalization: 1.05 [0.90-1.23]) or HFmrEF (death: 0.95 [0.79-1.14], cardiovascular mortality/HF hospitalization: 1.09 [0.90-1.31])., Conclusions: In HFrEF patients with advanced CKD, the use of β-blockers was associated with lower morbidity and mortality. Although inconclusive due to limited power, these benefits were not observed in similar patients with HFpEF or HFmrEF.

Aims: Left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) is required to categorize heart failure (HF) [i.e. HF with preserved (HFpEF), mid-range (HFmrEF), and reduced (HFrEF) EF] but is often not captured in population-based cohorts or non-HF registries. The aim was to create an algorithm that identifies EF subphenotypes for research purposes., Methods and Results: We included 42 061 HF patients from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry. As primary analysis, we performed two logistic regression models including 22 variables to predict (i) EF≥ vs. <50% and (ii) EF≥ vs. <40%. In the secondary analysis, we performed a multivariable multinomial analysis with 22 variables to create a model for all three separate EF subphenotypes: HFrEF vs. HFmrEF vs. HFpEF. The models were validated in the database from the CHECK-HF study, a cross-sectional survey of 10 627 patients from the Netherlands. The C-statistic (discrimination) was 0.78 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77-0.78] for EF ≥50% and 0.76 (95% CI 0.75-0.76) for EF ≥40%. Similar results were achieved for HFrEF and HFpEF in the multinomial model, but the C-statistic for HFmrEF was lower: 0.63 (95% CI 0.63-0.64). The external validation showed similar discriminative ability to the development cohort., Conclusions: Routine clinical characteristics could potentially be used to identify different EF subphenotypes in databases where EF is not readily available. Accuracy was good for the prediction of HFpEF and HFrEF but lower for HFmrEF. The proposed algorithm enables more effective research on HF in the big data setting., (© 2020 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: The cardiorenal syndrome refers to a bidirectional relationship between the kidney and the heart. However, epidemiological evidence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) as a risk factor for chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression is actually scarce., Methods and Results: We examined the slopes of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) decline in the 2 years before vs. after an incident hospitalization with heart failure (HF) (n = 20 420), coronary heart disease (CHD) (n = 18 152), or stroke (n = 1808) using data from a complete laboratory data collection in Stockholm, Sweden between 2006 and 2011. eGFR slopes were estimated using mixed-effect models with unstructured residual correlation. Overall, incident hospitalization with HF and CHD, but not stroke, was significantly associated with a subsequent accelerated decline in eGFR, with a faster eGFR decline and greater slope change after HF than CHD. The pre-event vs. post-event eGFR slopes (mL/min/1.73 m 2 per year) were -1.67 (-1.77 to -1.57) vs. -2.76 (-2.82 to -2.71), with a Δslope of -1.09 (-1.16 to -1.02) for HF; -1.09 (-1.20 to -0.98) vs. -1.87 (-1.92 to -1.81), with a Δslope of -0.78 (-0.85 to -0.70) for CHD; and -1.00 (-1.37 to -0.63) vs. -0.99 (-1.19 to -0.78), with a Δslope of 0.02 (-0.24 to 0.27) for stroke. The accelerated declines in eGFR after HF and CHD were consistent across the spectrum of eGFR, although pre-event eGFR slopes were steeper in lower eGFR (e.g. pre-event eGFR slope for HF -0.64 (-0.76 to -0.53) for eGFR ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m 2 , -1.43 (-1.57 to -1.30) for eGFR 30-59 mL/min/1.73 m 2 , and -2.42 (-2.71 to -2.12) for eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m 2 )., Conclusions: Incident hospitalization with cardiac diseases (i.e. HF and CHD) was significantly associated with a subsequent acceleration of eGFR decline., (© 2020 European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Comorbidities may differently affect treatment response and cause-specific outcomes in heart failure (HF) with preserved (HFpEF) vs. mid-range/mildly-reduced (HFmrEF) vs. reduced (HFrEF) ejection fraction (EF), complicating trial design. In patients with HF, we performed a comprehensive analysis of type 2 diabetes (T2DM), atrial fibrillation (AF) chronic kidney disease (CKD), and cause-specific outcomes., Methods and Results: Of 42,583 patients from the Swedish HF registry (23% HFpEF, 21% HFmrEF, 56% HFrEF), 24% had T2DM, 51% CKD, 56% AF, and 8% all three comorbidities. HFpEF had higher prevalence of CKD and AF, HFmrEF had intermediate prevalence of AF, and prevalence of T2DM was similar across the EF spectrum. Patients with T2DM, AF and/or CKD were more likely to have also other comorbidities and more severe HF. Risk of cardiovascular (CV) events was highest in HFrEF vs. HFpEF and HFmrEF; non-CV risk was highest in HFpEF vs. HFmrEF vs. HFrEF. T2DM increased CV and non-CV events similarly but less so in HFpEF. CKD increased CV events somewhat more than non-CV events and less so in HFpEF. AF increased CV events considerably more than non-CV events and more so in HFpEF and HFmrEF., Conclusion: HFpEF is distinguished from HFmrEF and HFrEF by more comorbidities, non-CV events, but lower effect of T2DM and CKD on events. CV events are most frequent in HFrEF. To enrich for CV vs. non-CV events, trialists should not exclude patients with lower EF, AF and/or CKD, who report higher CV risk., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest GS reports grants and personal fees from Vifor, non-financial support from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from Societa´ Prodotti Antibiotici, grants from MSD, grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Roche, personal fees from Servier, grants from Novartis, personal fees from GENESIS, personal fees from Medtronic, personal fees from Cytokinetics, outside the submitted work. LHL reports grants and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Merck, personal fees from Sanofi, grants and personal fees from Vifor-Fresenius, grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, grants and personal fees from Relypsa, personal fees from Bayer, grants from Boston Scientific, grants and personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Pharmacosmos, personal fees from Abbott, grants and personal fees from Mundipharma, personal fees from Medscape, outside the submitted work. CS, BS, TT, IL, US, LB, FC, FA: None related with the current study. AM, SFF, MB, KGB and OV are employed by Boehringer Ingelheim., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients with heart failure having a low expected probability of arrhythmic death may not benefit from implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs)., Objective: The objective was to validate models to identify cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) candidates who may not require CRT devices with ICD functionality., Methods: Heart failure (HF) patients with CRT-Ds and non-CRT ICDs from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry and others with no device from 3 separate registries and 3 heart failure trials were analyzed using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression for survival with the Seattle Heart Failure Model (SHFM; estimates overall mortality) and the Seattle Proportional Risk Model (SPRM; estimates proportional risk of arrhythmic death)., Results: Among 60,185 patients (age 68.6 ± 11.3 years, 31.9% female) meeting CRT-D criteria, 38,348 had CRT-Ds, 11,389 had non-CRT ICDs, and 10,448 had no device. CRT-D patients had a prominent adjusted survival benefit (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.50-0.55, P < .0001 versus no device). CRT-D patients with SHFM-predicted 4-year survival ≥81% (median) and a low SPRM-predicted probability of an arrhythmic mode of death ≤42% (median) had an absolute adjusted risk reduction attributable to ICD functionality of just 0.95%/year with the majority of survival benefit (70%) attributable to CRT pacing. In contrast, CRT-D patients with SHFM-predicted survival median had substantially more ICD-attributable benefit (absolute risk reduction of 2.6%/year combined; P < .0001)., Conclusions: The SPRM and SHFM identified a quarter of real-world, primary prevention CRT-D patients with minimal benefit from ICD functionality. Further studies to evaluate CRT pacemakers in these low-risk CRT candidates are indicated., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Accurate prediction of risk of death or hospitalizations in patients with heart failure (HF) may allow physicians to explore how more accurate decisions regarding appropriateness and timing of disease-modifying treatments, advanced therapies, or the need for end-of-life care can be made., Objective: To develop and validate a prognostic model for patients with HF., Design, Setting, and Participants: Multivariable analyses were performed in a stepwise fashion. Harrell C statistic was used to assess the discriminative ability. The derivation cohort was Prospective Comparison of ARNI With ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure trial (PARADIGM-HF) participants. The models were validated using the Aliskiren Trial to Minimize Outcomes in Patients with Heart Failure Trial (ATMOSPHERE) study and in the Swedish Heart Failure Registry (SwedeHF). A total of 8399 participants enrolled in PARADIGM-HF. Data were analyzed between June 2016 and June 2018., Main Outcomes and Measures: Cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, and the composite of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization at both 1 and 2 years., Results: Complete baseline clinical data were available for 8011 patients in PARADIGM-HF. The mean (SD) age of participants was 64 (11.4) years, 78.2% were men (n = 6567 of 8399), and 70.6% were New York Heart Association class II (n = 5919 of 8399). During a mean follow-up of 27 months, 1546 patients died, and 2031 had a cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization. The common variables were: male sex, race/ethnicity (black or Asian), region (Central Europe or Latin America), HF duration of more than 5 years, New York Heart Association class III/ IV, left ventricular ejection fraction, diabetes mellitus, β-blocker use at baseline, and allocation to sacubitril/valsartan. Ranked by χ2, N-terminal pro brain natriuretic peptide was the single most powerful independent predictor of each outcome. The C statistic at 1 and 2 years was 0.74 (95% CI, 0.71-0.76) and 0.71 (95% CI, 0.70-0.73) for the primary composite end point, 0.73 (95% CI, 0.71-0.75) and 0.71 (95% CI, 0.69-0.73) for cardiovascular death, and 0.71 (95% CI, 0.69-0.74) and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.67-0.74) for all-cause death, respectively. When validated in ATMOSPHERE, the C statistic at 1 and 2 years was 0.71 (95% CI, 0.69-0.72) and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.68-0.71) for the primary composite end point, 0.71 (95% CI, 0.69-0.74) and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.69-0.72) for cardiovascular death, and 0.71 (95% CI, 0.69-0.74) and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.68-0.72) for all-cause death, respectively. An online calculator was created to allow calculation of an individual's risk (http://www.predict-hf.com)., Conclusions and Relevance: Predictive models performed well and were developed and externally validated in large cohorts of geographically representative patients, comprehensively characterized with clinical and laboratory data including natriuretic peptides, who were receiving contemporary evidence-based treatment.