Search

Background: Patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) have a poor prognosis, and no therapies have been proven to improve outcomes. It has been proposed that heart failure, including HFpEF, represents overlapping syndromes that may have different prognoses. We present an exploratory study of patients enrolled in the Irbesartan in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction Study (I-PRESERVE) using latent class analysis (LCA) with validation using the Candesartan in Heart failure: Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and morbidity (CHARM)-Preserved study to identify HFpEF subgroups.Methods and Results: In total, 4113 HFpEF patients randomized to irbesartan or placebo were characterized according to 11 clinical features. The HFpEF subgroups were identified using LCA. Event-free survival and effect of irbesartan on the composite of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular hospitalization were determined for each subgroup. Subgroup definitions were applied to 3203 patients enrolled in CHARM-Preserved to validate observations regarding prognosis and treatment response. Six subgroups were identified with significant differences in event-free survival (P < 0.001). Clinical profiles and prognoses of the six subgroups were similar in CHARM-Preserved. The two subgroups with the worst event-free survival in both studies were characterized by a high prevalence of obesity, hyperlipidaemia, diabetes mellitus, anaemia, and renal insufficiency (Subgroup C) and by female predominance, advanced age, lower body mass index, and high rates of atrial fibrillation, valvular disease, renal insufficiency, and anaemia (Subgroup F).Conclusion: Using a data-driven approach, we identified HFpEF subgroups with significantly different prognoses. Further development of this approach for characterizing HFpEF subgroups is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The impact of depression on outcome in implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) recipients has not been fully appreciated. We assessed the prevalence of depression and its association with heart failure (HF) outcome among veterans with ICDs. Methods and Results Patients enrolled between January 2005 and January 2010 in the Outcomes among Veterans with Implantable Defibrillators Registry were studied. We examined the cross-sectional association of depression with severity of HF functional class as well as the association of depression with the composite outcome of mortality or HF hospitalization over a mean follow-up time of 2.7 years. There were 3,862 patients enrolled. Patients with depression (1,162, 43%) were younger (63.1 ± 9.4 years vs 66.6 ± 9.9 years, P < 0.001), more likely to have a history of tobacco or alcohol abuse (P < 0.0001) or atrial fibrillation (P = 0.05) while having a higher ejection fraction (28.3% vs 27.4%, P = 0.03). Depression was associated with advanced HF class at time of implant; odds ratio (OR; vs class I) for class III: 1.65 (confidence interval [CI] 1.17-2.33), class IV: 1.73 (95% CI 1.08-2.76). Death or HF hospitalization was more likely to occur in patients with depression (35.2% vs 32.0%, HR: 1.15 [95% CI 0.99-1.33]). The predictive value of depression was stronger after multivariable adjustment; HR: 1.25 (95% CI 1.05-1.49). Conclusion Depression was prevalent among veterans with ICDs. Depression was associated with severity of HF. The predictive value of associated depression was significant after multivariable adjustment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Older patients often receive less guideline-concordant care for heart failure than younger patients.Objective: To determine whether age differences in heart failure care are explained by patient, provider, and health system characteristics and/or by chart-documented reasons for non-adherence to guidelines.Design and Patients: Retrospective cohort study of 2,772 ambulatory veterans with heart failure and left ventricular ejection fraction <40% from a 2004 nationwide medical record review program (the VA External Peer Review Program).Main Measures: Ambulatory use of ACE inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), and beta blockers.Results: Among 2,772 patients, mean age was 73 +/- 10 years, 87% received an ACE inhibitor or ARB, and 82% received a beta blocker. When patients with explicit chart-documented reasons for not receiving these drugs were excluded, 95% received an ACE inhibitor or ARB and 89% received a beta blocker. In multivariable analyses controlling for a variety of patient and health system characteristics, the adjusted odds ratio for ACE-inhibitor and ARB use was 0.43 (95% CI 0.24-0.78) for patients age 80 and over vs. those age 50-64 years, and the adjusted odds ratio for beta blocker use was 0.66 (95% CI 0.48-0.93) between the two age groups. The magnitude of these associations was similar but not statistically significant after excluding patients with chart-documented reasons for not prescribing ACE inhibitors or ARBs and beta blockers.Conclusions: A high proportion of veterans receive guideline-recommended medications for heart failure. Older veterans are consistently less likely to receive these drugs, although these differences were no longer significant when accounting for patients with chart-documented reasons for not prescribing these drugs. Closely evaluating reasons for non-prescribing in older adults is essential to assessing whether non-treatment represents good clinical judgment or missed opportunities to improve care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a survey conducted to understand the current staffing environment of heart failure (HF), transplant, and mechanical circulatory support device (MCSD) programs in the U.S. and abroad. The study involved an online survey for members of the 3 participating American heart organizations who professed interest in HF, heart transplant or both, and was done from March 12 to May 12, 2009. Results revealed that the HF patient population is growing both in the U.S. and abroad and that an adequate number of qualified professionals are needed.

Background: Hospital to Home (H2H) is a national quality improvement (QI) initiative composed of three recommended hospital interventions to improve the transition of care for hospitalized patients with heart disease. A study was conducted to determine if enrollment of Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals in H2H and adoption of the recommended interventions would both increase following facilitation of an existing Heart Failure (HF) provider-based community of practice (COP) within the VA health care system. The VA HF COP includes more than 800 VA providers and other VA staff from VA inpatient medical centers., Methods: In 2010, 122 VA hospitals were randomized to facilitation using the VA HF COP (intervention) or no facilitation (control). COP members from intervention hospitals were invited to periodic teleconferences promoting H2H and received multiple e-mails asking members to report interest and then progress in H2H implementation., Results: Among the 61 hospitals randomized to HF COP facilitation, 33 (54%) enrolled in H2H, compared with 6 (10%) of 61 control hospitals (p<.001) at five months after randomization. Of 38 intervention hospitals responding to the follow-up survey, 13 stated they had initiated 22 QI projects as a result of the H2H campaign. Another 7 hospitals had planned H2H projects. Of 20 control hospitals that responded, 5 had initiated 9 projects as a result of H2H, and no additional hospitals had plans to do so., Conclusions: Facilitation using the VA HF COP was successful in increasing enrollment in the H2H initiative and providing implementation support for recommended QI projects. Multihospital provider groups are a potentially valuable tool for implementation of national QI campaigns.

Background: Hospital readmission is an important clinical outcome of patients with heart failure. Its relation to length of stay for the initial hospitalization is not clear., Methods and Results: We used hierarchical modeling of data from a clinical trial to examine variations in length of stay across countries and across hospitals in the United States and its association with readmission within 30 days of randomization. Main outcomes included associations between country-level length of stay and readmission rates, after adjustment for patient-level case mix; and associations between length of stay and readmission rates across sites in the United States. Across 27 countries with 389 sites and 6848 patients, mean length of stay ranged from 4.9 to 14.6 days (6.1 days in the United States). Rates of all-cause readmission ranged from 2.5% to 25.0% (17.8% in the United States). There was an inverse correlation between country-level mean length of stay and readmission (r=-0.52; P<0.01). After multivariable adjustment, each additional inpatient day across countries was associated with significantly lower risk of all-cause readmission (odds ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-0.98; P=0.02) and heart failure readmission (odds ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.99; P=0.03). Similar trends were observed across US study sites concerning readmission for any cause (odds ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.85-1.00; P=0.06) and readmission for heart failure (odds ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.80-1.01; P=0.07). Across countries and across US sites, longer median length of stay was independently associated with lower risk of readmission., Conclusions: Countries with longer length of stay for heart failure hospitalizations had significantly lower rates of readmission within 30 days of randomization. These findings may have implications for developing strategies to prevent readmission, defining quality measures, and designing clinical trials in acute heart failure., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00475852.

Background: Heart failure (HF) care takes place in multiple settings, with a variety of providers, and generally involves patients who have multiple comorbidities. This situation is a "perfect storm" of factors that predispose patients to medication errors., Methods and Results: The goals of this paper are to outline potential roles for clinical pharmacists in a multidisciplinary HF team, to document outcomes associated with interventions by clinical pharmacists, to recommend minimum training for clinical pharmacists engaged in HF care, and to suggest financial strategies to support clinical pharmacy services within a multidisciplinary team. As patients transition from inpatient to outpatient settings and between multiple caregivers, pharmacists can positively affect medication reconciliation and education, assure consistency in management that results in improvements in patient satisfaction and medication adherence, and reduce medication errors. For mechanical circulatory support and heart transplant teams, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services considers the participation of a transplant pharmacology expert (e.g., clinical pharmacist) to be a requirement for accreditation, given the highly specialized and complex drug regimens used. Although reports of outcomes from pharmacist interventions have been mixed owing to differences in study design, benefits such as increased use of evidence-based therapies, decreases in HF hospitalizations and emergency department visits, and decreases in all-cause readmissions have been demonstrated. Clinical pharmacists participating in HF or heart transplant teams should have completed specialized postdoctoral training in the form of residencies and/or fellowships in cardiovascular and/or transplant pharmacotherapy, and board certification is recommended. Financial mechanisms to support pharmacist participation in the HF teams are variable., Conclusions: Positive outcomes associated with clinical pharmacist activities support the value of making this resource available to HF teams., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: A medical device advisory issued by St Jude Medical in November 2011 estimated 0.63% all-cause abrasion rate on their Riata and Riata ST silicone high-voltage lead families (Riata/ST), leading to Food and Drug Administration class I recall. We performed an independent comparative, long-term electrical survival analysis of Riata/ST and 3 other high-voltage lead families in a large national cohort of patients., Objective: To evaluate long-term electrical survival of Riata/ST leads relative to other commonly evaluated high-voltage leads., Methods: Failure rates of Riata/ST, Sprint Quattro Secure (Quattro), Sprint Fidelis (Fidelis), and Endotak Reliance G/SG (Endotak) leads from the Veterans Administration's National Cardiac Device Surveillance Center database, consisting of 24,145 patients with remote transmissions since 2003, were analyzed. Survival Probabilities were determined with Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and compared using the log-rank test., Results: Of 1,403 Riata/ST, 6,091 Quattro, 5,073 Fidelis, and 2,401 Endotak leads identified, 5-year survival probability of Riata/ST leads (97.5%) was significantly lower than that of Quattro (99.3%) and Endotak (99.4%) leads (P <.0001) but higher than that of Fidelis leads (89.6%) (P <.0001). Riata ST leads showed a 5-year survival of 95.5% (95% confidence interval 92.4-97.4) compared to 98.4% (95% confidence interval 97.1-99.1) in Riata leads (P = .003)., Conclusions: There is decreased survival probability of Riata/ST leads compared to other contemporary high-voltage leads, with decreased survival of Riata ST silicone compared to Riata lead series. Careful long-term follow-up should be maintained in patients with Riata/ST leads in order to prevent inappropriate shocks or failed device interventions. Our results were determined in advance of Food and Drug Administration class I recall, which suggested that large-scale remote monitoring may be an effective tool for continued implantable cardioverter-defibrillator system surveillance., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Aims: In patients with acute heart failure (AHF), early worsening heart failure (WHF) predicts a significant proportion of post-discharge readmissions and mortality. We aimed to identify the predictors of 7-day heart failure events or death in patients hospitalized with AHF., Methods and Results: A predictive model and risk score for the short-term primary composite endpoint of 7-day death, HF rehospitalization, or WHF was created using variables collected within 24 h of admission from patients with complete data (n = 2015) enrolled in the PROTECT trial of AHF patients. The 7-day composite was experienced by 294 patients (14.6%), with a mortality rate of 1.8% (n = 37), HF rehospitalization rate of 0.5% (n = 9), and WHF rate of 13.1% (n = 264). In multivariable analyses, the strongest predictor of short-term morbidity and mortality was higher blood urea nitrogen (BUN) concentration. Additional independent predictors of a worse outcome were lower serum albumin, cholesterol, and systolic blood pressure, as well as higher heart rate and respiratory rate. Model coefficients were converted to an additive risk score for predicting the 7-day composite endpoint with a total point range of 0-100. The risk score allowed discrimination of a wide spectrum of risk (4.8% risk with score ≤35, to 28.7% risk with score >55)., Conclusions: Using the PROTECT 7-day risk model and score, the main determinants of an adverse outcome for AHF patients included impaired metabolic status, neurohormonal activation, and reduced cardiac performance, gauged by BUN, serum albumin and cholesterol levels, systolic blood pressure, heart rate, and respiratory rate.

Background: Older patients often receive less guideline-concordant care for heart failure than younger patients., Objective: To determine whether age differences in heart failure care are explained by patient, provider, and health system characteristics and/or by chart-documented reasons for non-adherence to guidelines., Design and Patients: Retrospective cohort study of 2,772 ambulatory veterans with heart failure and left ventricular ejection fraction <40% from a 2004 nationwide medical record review program (the VA External Peer Review Program)., Main Measures: Ambulatory use of ACE inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), and beta blockers., Results: Among 2,772 patients, mean age was 73 +/- 10 years, 87% received an ACE inhibitor or ARB, and 82% received a beta blocker. When patients with explicit chart-documented reasons for not receiving these drugs were excluded, 95% received an ACE inhibitor or ARB and 89% received a beta blocker. In multivariable analyses controlling for a variety of patient and health system characteristics, the adjusted odds ratio for ACE-inhibitor and ARB use was 0.43 (95% CI 0.24-0.78) for patients age 80 and over vs. those age 50-64 years, and the adjusted odds ratio for beta blocker use was 0.66 (95% CI 0.48-0.93) between the two age groups. The magnitude of these associations was similar but not statistically significant after excluding patients with chart-documented reasons for not prescribing ACE inhibitors or ARBs and beta blockers., Conclusions: A high proportion of veterans receive guideline-recommended medications for heart failure. Older veterans are consistently less likely to receive these drugs, although these differences were no longer significant when accounting for patients with chart-documented reasons for not prescribing these drugs. Closely evaluating reasons for non-prescribing in older adults is essential to assessing whether non-treatment represents good clinical judgment or missed opportunities to improve care.

This paper details the substance and recommendations arising from a meeting convened by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute in August 2009, to assess the challenges and opportunities of emergency department management of acute heart failure syndrome (AHFS). The assembled faculty represented a large cross section of medical professionals spanning the medical management continuum of patients presenting with acute heart failure and included heart failure cardiologists, emergency physicians, laboratory medicine specialists, nurses, and bench scientists. Their recommendations include proposals regarding the design and conduct of emergency department-based clinical trials, suggestions regarding the development of improved methods for early detection and monitoring of AHFS, and potential needs for expanding translational and applied AHFS focused research and biotechnology. We anticipate that this review will serve as a starting point for future investigations across the spectrum of funding sources., (Copyright 2010 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute convened an expert panel April 28 to 29, 2008, to identify gaps and recommend research strategies to prevent atrial fibrillation (AF). The panel reviewed the existing basic scientific, epidemiological, and clinical literature about AF and identified opportunities to advance AF prevention research. After discussion, the panel proposed the following recommendations: (1) enhance understanding of the epidemiology of AF in the population by systematically and longitudinally investigating symptomatic and asymptomatic AF in cohort studies; (2) improve detection of AF by evaluating the ability of existing and emerging methods and technologies to detect AF; (3) improve noninvasive modalities for identifying key components of cardiovascular remodeling that promote AF, including genetic, fibrotic, autonomic, structural, and electrical remodeling markers; (4) develop additional animal models reflective of the pathophysiology of human AF; (5) conduct secondary analyses of already-completed clinical trials to enhance knowledge of potentially effective methods to prevent AF and routinely include AF as an outcome in ongoing and future cardiovascular studies; and (6) conduct clinical studies focused on secondary prevention of AF recurrence, which would inform future primary prevention investigations.

Background: Heart failure (HF) developing in hypertensive patients may occur with preserved or reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (PEF [>or=50%] or REF [<50%]). In the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT), 42 418 high-risk hypertensive patients were randomized to chlorthalidone, amlodipine, lisinopril, or doxazosin, providing an opportunity to compare these treatments with regard to occurrence of hospitalized HFPEF or HFREF., Methods and Results: HF diagnostic criteria were prespecified in the ALLHAT protocol. EF estimated by contrast ventriculography, echocardiography, or radionuclide study was available in 910 of 1367 patients (66.6%) with hospitalized events meeting ALLHAT criteria. Cox regression models adjusted for baseline characteristics were used to examine treatment differences for HF (overall and by PEF and REF). HF case fatality rates were examined. Of those with EF data, 44.4% had HFPEF and 55.6% had HFREF. Chlorthalidone reduced the risk of HFPEF compared with amlodipine, lisinopril, or doxazosin; the hazard ratios were 0.69 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53 to 0.91; P=0.009), 0.74 (95% CI, 0.56 to 0.97; P=0.032), and 0.53 (95% CI, 0.38 to 0.73; P<0.001), respectively. Chlorthalidone reduced the risk of HFREF compared with amlodipine or doxazosin; the hazard ratios were 0.74 (95% CI, 0.59 to 0.94; P=0.013) and 0.61 (95% CI, 0.47 to 0.79; P<0.001), respectively. Chlorthalidone was similar to lisinopril with regard to incidence of HFREF (hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.40; P=0.596). After HF onset, death occurred in 29.2% of participants (chlorthalidone/amlodipine/lisinopril) with new-onset HFPEF versus 41.9% in those with HFREF (P<0.001; median follow-up, 1.74 years); and in the chlorthalidone/doxazosin comparison that was terminated early, 20.0% of HFPEF and 26.0% of HFREF patients died (P=0.185; median follow-up, 1.55 years)., Conclusions: In ALLHAT, with adjudicated outcomes, chlorthalidone significantly reduced the occurrence of new-onset hospitalized HFPEF and HFREF compared with amlodipine and doxazosin. Chlorthalidone also reduced the incidence of new-onset HFPEF compared with lisinopril. Among high-risk hypertensive men and women, HFPEF has a better prognosis than HFREF.

Hospitals may not support programs that improve the quality of care delivered to heart failure patients because these programs lower readmission rates and empty beds, and therefore further diminish already-declining revenues. A conflict between the highest quality of care and financial solvency does not serve the interests of patients, physicians, hospitals, or payers. In principle, resolution of this conflict is simple: reimbursement systems should reward higher quality care. In practice, resolving the conflict is not simple. A recent roundtable discussion sponsored by the Heart Failure Society of America identified 4 major challenges to the design and implementation of reimbursement schemes that promote higher quality care for heart failure: defining quality, accounting for differences in disease severity, crafting novel payment mechanisms, and overcoming professional parochialism. This article describes each of these challenges in turn.