Search

Background: To determine whether granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) improves clinical outcomes after large ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) when administered early in patients with left ventricular (LV) dysfunction after successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)., Methods: STEM-AMI OUTCOME was designed as a prospective, multicentre, nationwide, randomised, open-label, phase III trial (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01969890) to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of early G-CSF administration in reducing 2-year cardiac mortality and morbidity in patients with STEMI with LV ejection fraction ≤45% after PCI. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause death, recurrence of myocardial infarction and hospitalisation for heart failure. Due to low recruitment and event rates, the study was discontinued and did not achieve adequate statistical power to verify the hypothesis., Results: Patients were randomly allocated to G-CSF (n=260) or standard of care (SOC; n=261). No difference was found in the composite primary outcome between study groups (HR 1.20; 95% CI 0.63 to 2.28). The 2-year mortality was 2.31% in the G-CSF and 2.68% in the control group (HR 0.88; 95% CI 0.29 to 2.60). Adverse events did not differ between the G-CSF (n=65) and SOC groups (n=58; OR 1.17; 95% CI 0.78 to 1.75). In post hoc analyses on the intervention group, we observed a trend towards fewer composite primary outcomes in patients with low bone marrow (BM) cell mobilisation (n=108) versus those with high mobilisation (n=152, with peak leucocyte count >50×10 9 /L; HR 2.86; 95% CI 0.96 to 8.56). Primary outcomes were lower in patients with severe LV systolic dysfunction at discharge treated with G-CSF than in controls (interaction β±SE, -0.08±0.04; p=0.034)., Conclusions: Although inconclusive, this is the largest trial in the field of cell-based cardiac repair after STEMI providing evidence of the tolerability and long-term safety of G-CSF treatment. The results prompt further studies to understand which patient can benefit most from BM cell mobilisation., Trial Registration Number: NCT01969890., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: In the EMPA-KIDNEY trial, empagliflozin, a sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor, had positive cardiorenal effects in patients with chronic kidney disease who were at risk for disease progression. Post-trial follow-up was designed to assess how the effects of empagliflozin would evolve after the discontinuation of the trial drug., Methods: In the active trial, patients with chronic kidney disease were randomly assigned to receive either empagliflozin (10 mg once daily) or matching placebo and were followed for a median of 2 years. All the patients had an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of at least 20 but less than 45 ml per minute per 1.73 m 2 of body-surface area or an eGFR of at least 45 but less than 90 ml per minute per 1.73 m 2 with a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (with albumin measured in milligrams and creatinine measured in grams) of at least 200. Subsequently, surviving patients who consented were observed for 2 additional years. No trial empagliflozin or placebo was administered during the post-trial period, but local practitioners could prescribe open-label SGLT2 inhibitors, including open-label empagliflozin. The primary composite outcome was kidney disease progression or cardiovascular death as assessed from the start of the active-trial period to the end of the post-trial period., Results: Of the 6609 patients who had undergone randomization in the active trial, 4891 (74%) were enrolled in the post-trial period. During this period, the use of open-label SGLT2 inhibitors was similar in the two groups (43% in the empagliflozin group and 40% in the placebo group). During the combined active- and post-trial periods, a primary-outcome event occurred in 865 of 3304 patients (26.2%) in the empagliflozin group and in 1001 of 3305 patients (30.3%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72 to 0.87). During the post-trial period only, the hazard ratio for a primary-outcome event was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.76 to 0.99). During the combined periods, the risk of kidney disease progression was 23.5% in the empagliflozin group and 27.1% in the placebo group; the risk of the composite of death or end-stage kidney disease was 16.9% and 19.6%, respectively; and the risk of cardiovascular death was 3.8% and 4.9%, respectively. There was no effect of empagliflozin on death from noncardiovascular causes (5.3% in both groups)., Conclusions: In a broad range of patients with chronic kidney disease at risk for progression, empagliflozin continued to have additional cardiorenal benefits for up to 12 months after it was discontinued. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim and others; EMPA-KIDNEY ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03594110; EuDRACT number, 2017-002971-24.)., (Copyright © 2024 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Background: Cognitive impairment is common in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction but its clinical correlates and prognostic associations are poorly understood., Methods: We analyzed cognitive function, using the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction enrolled in a prespecified substudy of the PARAGON-HF trial (Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibitor With Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Global Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction). Logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the variables associated with lower MMSE scores at baseline and postbaseline decline in MMSE scores at 48 weeks. Cox proportional hazards regression and semiparametric proportional rates models were used to examine the risk of clinical outcomes related to baseline MMSE scores, and decline in MMSE scores during follow-up, adjusted for prognostic variables including NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide)., Results: At baseline, cognitive function was normal (MMSE score 28-30) in 1809 of 2895 patients (62.5%), borderline (score 24-27) in 794 (27.4%), and impaired (score <24) in 292 (10.1%). Variables associated with both a lower MMSE score at baseline and a decline in score from baseline included older age, a history of stroke or transient ischemia attack, and lower serum albumin. Compared with those with baseline MMSE scores of 28 to 30, patients in the lower MMSE score categories had a stepwise increase in the risk of the composite of time to first HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death, with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.27 (95% CI, 1.06-1.53) for those with scores of 24 to 27 and 1.58 (95% CI, 1.21-2.06) for those with scores <24, respectively. These associations were also found for the individual components of the composite and all-cause death. Likewise, cognitive impairment was associated with a 50% higher risk of total (first and repeat) heart failure hospitalizations and cardiovascular deaths. Examining the change in MMSE score from baseline, a decrease in MMSE score during follow-up was associated with a higher risk of death., Conclusions: In patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction, even modest baseline impairment of cognitive function was associated with worse outcomes, including death. A decline in MMSE score during follow-up was a strong predictor of mortality, independent of other prognostic variables.

Aims: The lack of standardised definitions for heart failure outcome measures limits the ability to reliably assess effectiveness of heart failure therapies. The European Unified Registries for Heart Care Evaluation and Randomised Trials (EuroHeart) aimed to produce a catalogue of internationally endorsed data definitions for heart failure outcome measures., Methods: Following the EuroHeart methods for the development of cardiovascular data standards, a working group was formed of representatives from the European Society of Cardiology Heart Failure Association and other leading heart failure experts. A systematic review of observational and randomised clinical trials identified current outcome measures, which was supplemented by clinical practice guidelines and existing registries for contemporary definitions. A modified Delphi process was employed to gain consensus for variable inclusion and whether collection should be mandatory (Level 1) or optional (Level 2) within EuroHeart. In addition, a set of complementary outcome measures were identified by the Working Group as of scientific and clinical importance for longitudinal monitoring for people with heart failure., Results: Five Level 1 and two Level 2 outcome measures were selected and defined, alongside five complementary monitoring outcomes for patients with heart failure., Conclusion: We present a structured, hierarchical catalogue of internationally endorsed heart failure outcome measures. This will facilitate quality improvement, high quality observational research, registry-based trials, and post market surveillance of medical devices., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background and Aims: To assess sex differences in disease characteristics and treatment of patients with severe native valvular heart disease (VHD) included in the VHD II EURObservational Research Programme., Methods: A total of 5219 patients were enrolled in 208 European and North African centres and followed for 6 months [41.2% aortic stenosis (AS), 5.3% aortic regurgitation (AR), 4.5% mitral stenosis (MS), 21.3% mitral regurgitation (MR), 2.7% isolated right-sided VHD, 24.9% multiple left-sided VHD]. Indications for intervention were considered concordant if corresponding to class I recommendations specified in the 2012 ESC or 2014 AHA/ACC VHD guidelines., Results: Overall, women were older, more symptomatic, and presented with a higher EuroSCORE II. Bicuspid aortic valve and AR were more prevalent among men while mitral disease, concomitant tricuspid regurgitation (TR), and AS above age 65 were more prevalent among women. On multivariable regression analysis, concordance with recommended treatment was significantly poorer in women with MS and primary MR (both P < .001). Age, patient refusal, and decline of symptoms after conservative treatment were reported significantly more often as reasons to withhold the intervention in females. Concomitant tricuspid intervention was performed at a similar rate in both sexes although prevalence of significant TR was significantly higher in women. In-hospital and 6-month survival did not differ between sexes., Conclusions: (i) Valvular heart disease subtype varied between sexes; (ii) concordance with recommended intervention for MS and primary MR was significantly lower for women; and (iii) survival of men and women was similar at 6 months., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: The ISCHEMIA trial (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) demonstrated greater health status benefits with an initial invasive strategy, as compared with a conservative one, for patients with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia. Whether these benefits vary globally is important to understand to support global adoption of the results., Methods: We analyzed participants' disease-specific health status using the validated 7-item Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ: >5-point differences are clinically important) at baseline and over 1-year follow-up across 37 countries in 6 international regions. The average effect of initial invasive versus conservative strategies on 1-year SAQ scores was estimated using Bayesian proportional odds regression and compared across regions., Results: Considerable regional variation in baseline health status was observed among 4617 participants (mean age=64.4±9.5 years, 24% women), with the mean SAQ summary scores of 67.4±19.5 in Eastern Europe participants (17% of the total), 71.4±15.4 in Asia-Pacific (18%), 74.9±16.7 in Central and South America (10%), 75.5±19.5 in Western Europe (26%), and 78.6±19.2 in North America (28%). One-year improvements in SAQ scores were greater in regions with lower baseline scores with initial invasive management (17.7±20.9 in Eastern Europe and 11.4±19.3 in North America), but similar in the conservative arm. Adjusting for baseline SAQ scores, similar health status benefits of an initial invasive strategy on 1-year SAQ scores were observed (ranging from 2.38 points [95% CI, 0.04-4.50] in North America to 4.66 points [95% CI, 2.46-6.94] in Eastern Europe), with an 88.3% probability that the difference in benefit across regions was <5 points., Conclusions: In patients with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, initial invasive management was associated with a consistent health status benefit across regions, with modest regional variability, supporting the international generalizability of health status benefits from invasive management of chronic coronary disease., Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01471522., Competing Interests: Dr Ikemura received an unrestricted research grant for the Department of Cardiology, Keio University School of Medicine from Bristol Myer Squibb. Dr Spertus discloses providing consultative services on patient-reported outcomes and evidence evaluation to Alnylam, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Merck, Janssen, Bristol Meyers Squibb, Edwards, Kineksia, 4DT Medical, Terumo, Cytokinetics, Imbria, and United Healthcare. He holds research grants from Bristol Meyers Squibb, Abbott Vascular, and Janssen. He owns the copyright to the Seattle Angina Questionnaire, Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, and Peripheral Artery Questionnaire and serves on the Board of Directors for Blue Cross Blue Shield of Kansas City. Dr Nguyen is currently supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute under Award Number T32HL110837. Dr Reynolds reports grants from National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, during the conduct of the study, she received support from Abbott Vascular (donation of optical coherence tomography catheters for an unrelated research study) and Biotelemetry Inc (donation of telemetry monitors for an unrelated research study). Dr Bangalore reports grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, during the conduct of the study; grants and personal fees from Abbott Vascular; personal fees from Biotronik, Pfizer, Amgen, and Reata outside the submitted work. Dr Bhargava reports grants from the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, during the conduct of the study. Dr Senior reports grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during the conduct of the study and speaker fees from Bracco, Lantheus Medical Imaging Boston USA, and Philips Healthcare outside the submitted work. A. Elghamaz reports grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during the conduct of the study. Dr Goodman reports research grant support (eg, steering committee or data and safety monitoring committee) and speaker/consulting honoraria (eg, advisory boards) from Amgen, Anthos Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, CYTE Ltd., Daiichi-Sankyo/American Regent, Eli Lilly, Esperion, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, HLS Therapeutics, JAMP Pharma, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk A/C, Pendopharm/Pharmascience, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Servier, Tolmar Pharmaceuticals, Valeo Pharma; and salary support/honoraria from the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario/University of Toronto (Polo) Chair, Canadian Heart Failure Society, Canadian Heart Research center and MD Primer, Canadian VIGOUR center, Cleveland Clinic Coordinating Center for Clinical Research, Duke Clinical Research Institute, New York University Clinical Coordinating center, PERFUSE Research Institute, TIMI Study Group (Brigham Health). Dr Lopes reports grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during the conduct of the study; other from Bayer and Boehringer Ingelheim; grants and other from Bristol-Myers Squibb; other from Daiichi Sankyo; grants and other from GlaxoSmithKline and Medtronic; other from Merck; grants and other from Pfizer; other from Portola; and grants and other from Sanofi, outside the submitted work. Dr Pracon reports grants from National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, during the conduct of the study and research grant honoraria from NYU. Dr Lopez-Sendon reports grants from National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, during the conduct of the study; other from Bayer, other from Boehringer Ingleheim, grants and other from Bristol-Myers Squibb, other from Daiichi Sankyo, grants and other from Glaxo Smith Kline, grants and other from Medtronic, other from Merck, grants and other from Pfizer, other from Portola, grants and other from Sanofi, outside the submitted work. Dr Maggioni reports grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during the conduct of the study; and personal fees from Bayer, AstraZeneca, Sanofi and Novartis, outside the submitted work. Dr Kohsaka has received grant support paid to the institution and fees from Novartis and AstraZeneca. Dr White has received grant support paid to the institution and fees for serving on Steering Committees of the ODYSSEY trial from Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, the ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) and MINT study from the National Institutes of Health, the STRENGTH trial from Omthera Pharmaceuticals, the HEART-FID study from American Regent, the DAL-GENE study from DalCor Pharma UK Inc., the AEGIS-II study from CSL Behring, the CLEAR OUTCOMES study from Esperion Therapeutics Inc, and the SOLIST-WHF and SCOREDS trials from Sanofi Aventis Australia Pty Ltd. Dr Mavromatis reports grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; grants from National Heart, Blood, and Lung Institute (CV Inflammation Reduction Trial and GMCSF in PAD-3 Trial), grants from CSL Behring, St Jude’s Medical, Medtronic, DalCor Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Regeneron, and Member of American College of Cardiology and Society of Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions. Dr Boden reports grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, during the conduct of the study; grants from Abbvie, grants from Amarin, grants from Amgen, personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from Cleveland Clinic Clinical Coordinating Center, personal fees from Janssen, outside the submitted work. Dr Fatima Rodriguez reports consulting fees from Novartis, NovoNordisk, AstraZeneca, and Health Pals, and research support from the National Institutes of Health, the American Heart Association, and the Doris Duke Foundation. Dr Hochman is PI for the ISCHEMIA trial (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) for which, in addition to support by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute grant, devices and medications were provided by Abbott Vascular; Medtronic Inc.; Abbott Laboratories (formerly St. Jude Medical Inc); Royal Philips NV (formerly Volcano Corporation); Arbor Pharmaceuticals, LLC; AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, LP; Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.; Omron Healthcare Inc, and financial donations from Arbor Pharmaceuticals LLC and AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP. She is also the PI for ISCHEMIA-EXTEND. Dr Maron reports grants from National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, during the conduct of the study. The other authors report no conflicts.

Background: Atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases remain the primary cause of mortality in Italy. Individuals with a history of acute coronary syndrome, peripheral arterial disease, and ischemic stroke/transient ischemic attack face an elevated risk of recurrent major adverse cardiovascular events, including mortality. The population aging, coupled with increasing risk factors such as diabetes mellitus and obesity, exacerbates the disease's economic impact., Objectives: This study aims to comprehensively assess the economic burden of atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases in Italy, specifically focusing on direct healthcare costs., Methods: We analyzed real-world data from administrative databases in the Marche region and Local Health Unit Umbria 2. The economic burden of patients discharged with acute coronary syndrome, peripheral arterial disease, and ischemic stroke/transient ischemic attack was evaluated, with a focus on direct costs associated with hospitalizations, drugs, and outpatient visits. Results were stratified by age, sex, comorbidities at baseline, and adherence to lipid-lowering therapy and antihypertensive agents., Results: Annually, nearly 350,000 patients were hospitalized for peripheral arterial disease, acute coronary syndrome, or ischemic stroke/transient ischemic attack. Direct health costs averaged €7190 per patient over a 2-year follow-up, with hospitalizations accounting for nearly 70% of the total. Male patients incurred significantly higher costs (€7467) than female patients (€6625). Costs correlated positively with age and with the number of baseline comorbidities, with a range from €5259 (0-1 comorbidities) to €17,095 (4+ comorbidities). Costs were significantly lower in adherent subjects (€6813) compared with non-adherent subjects (€7757)., Conclusions: This study provides valuable insights into the economic implications of atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases in Italy, emphasizing the necessity of a comprehensive approach to preventive measures, optimal medication adherence, and lifestyle modifications to mitigate its impact., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Aims: A set of indicators to assess the quality of care for patients hospitalized for heart failure was developed by an expert working group of the Italian Health Ministry. Because a better performance profile measured using these indicators does not necessarily translate to better outcomes, a study to validate these indicators through their relationship with measurable clinical outcomes and healthcare costs supported by the Italian National Health System was carried out., Methods and Results: Residents of four Italian regions (Lombardy, Marche, Lazio, and Sicily) who were newly hospitalized for heart failure (irrespective of stage and New York Heart Association class) during 2014-2015 entered in the cohort and followed up until 2019. Adherence to evidence-based recommendations [i.e. renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAS) inhibitors, beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), and echocardiograms (ECCs)] experienced during the first year after index discharge was assessed. Composite clinical outcomes (cardiovascular hospital admissions and all-cause mortality) and healthcare costs (hospitalizations, drugs, and outpatient services) were assessed during the follow-up. The restricted mean survival time at 5 years (denoted as the number of months free from clinical outcomes), the hazard of clinical outcomes (according to the Cox model), and average annual healthcare cost (expressed in euros per person-year) were compared between adherent and non-adherent patients. A non-parametric bootstrap method based on 1000 resamples was used to account for uncertainty in cost-effectiveness estimates. A total of 41 406 patients were included in this study (46.3% males, mean age 76.9 ± 9.4 years). Adherence to RAS inhibitors, beta-blockers, MRAs, and ECCs were 64%, 57%, 62%, and 20% among the cohort members, respectively. Compared with non-adherent patients, those who adhered to ECCs, RAS inhibitors, beta-blockers, and MRAs experienced (i) a delay in the composite outcome of 1.6, 1.9, 1.6, and 0.6 months and reduced risks of 9% (95% confidence interval, 2-14%), 11% (7-14%), 8% (5-11%), and 4% (-1-8%), respectively; and (ii) lower (€262, €92, and €571 per year for RAS inhibitors, beta-blockers, and MRAs, respectively) and higher costs (€511 per year for ECC). Adherence to RAS inhibitors, beta-blockers, and MRAs showed a delay in the composite outcome and a saving of costs in 98%, 84%, and 93% of the 1000 bootstrap replications, respectively., Conclusions: Strict monitoring of patients with heart failure through regular clinical examinations and drug therapies should be considered the cornerstone of national guidelines and audits., (© 2024 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Importance: Sudden death is a leading cause of death after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The Prospective ARNi vs ACE Inhibitor Trial to Determine Superiority in Reducing Heart Failure Events After MI (PARADISE-MI) and Valsartan in Acute Myocardial Infarction (VALIANT) trials enrolled patients with pulmonary congestion and/or left ventricular dysfunction after AMI. Whether the prognosis in such patients has changed over time has not been examined., Objective: To compare the rate of sudden death/resuscitated cardiac arrest (RCA) after AMI in the PARADISE-MI and VALIANT trials., Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a secondary analysis of multicenter randomized clinical trials enrolling patients after AMI. In the primary analysis, the VALIANT cohort was restricted to patients with "PARADISE-MI-like" characteristics (eg, at least 1 augmenting risk factor and no history of heart failure). The baseline characteristics of people in both trials were compared. The VALIANT trial enrolled from December 1998 to June 2001, and the PARADISE-MI trial enrolled between December 2016, and March 2020. The median follow-up in the VALIANT and PARADISE-MI trials was 24.7 and 22 months, respectively. People with AMI, complicated by pulmonary congestion and/or left ventricular dysfunction, were included in the analysis., Exposure: Sudden death after AMI., Results: A total of 5661 patients were included in the PARADISE-MI cohort (mean [SD] age, 63.7 [11.5] years; 4298 male [75.9%]), 9617 were included in the VALIANT (PARADISE-MI-like) cohort (mean [SD] age, 66.1 [11.5] years; 6504 male [67.6%]), and 14 703 patients were included in the VALIANT (total) cohort (mean [SD] age, 64.8 [11.8] years; 10 133 male [68.9%]). In the PARADISE-MI-like cohort of the VALIANT trial, 707 of 9617 participants (7.4%) experienced sudden death/RCA. A total of 148 of 5661 people (2.6%) in the PARADISE-MI trial experienced sudden death/RCA. Sudden death rates were highest in the first month after infarction in both trials: 19.3 (95% CI, 16.4-22.6) per 100 person-years in the VALIANT trial and 9.5 (95% CI, 7.0-12.7) per 100 person-years in the PARADISE-MI trial, and these rates declined steadily thereafter. Compared with the VALIANT cohort, people in the PARADISE-MI trial were more often treated with percutaneous coronary intervention for their qualifying AMI and received a β-blocker, statin, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist more frequently., Conclusions and Relevance: After AMI, the risk of sudden death/RCA was highest in the first month, declining rapidly thereafter. Results revealed that compared with counterparts from 20 years ago, the rate of sudden death/RCA in patients with a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction and/or pulmonary congestion was 2- to 3-fold lower in people receiving contemporary management. Interventions to further protect people in the highest risk first month after infarction are needed., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02924727.

Background: The clinical governance of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) has markedly changed in the last few years. We sought to assess the contemporary in-hospital management patterns of patients with AMI at a country level., Methods: EYESHOT (EmploYEd antithrombotic therapies in patients with acute coronary Syndromes HOspitalized in iTalian cardiac care units)-2 was a nationwide, prospective registry aimed to evaluate the current management of patients admitted to intensive cardiac care units (CCUs) for an AMI in Italy., Results: Over a 4-week period (February 1st-29th, 2024), 183 CCUs enrolled 2806 consecutive patients: 52.6 % with non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and 47.4 % with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The median time from hospital admission to angiography in NSTEMI was 22.3 h (IQR 10.9-46.1), while for STEMI was 1.1 h (IQR 0.5-2.2) with significant difference between hospitals with and without catheterization laboratories. In both NSTEMI and STEMI patients, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was the preferred management strategy (73.3 % and 94.2 %, respectively). An optimal secondary prevention therapy, including dual antiplatelet therapy, inhibition of the renin-angiotensin system, a beta-blocker and a high-intensity statin was prescribed at discharge in more than 75 % of patients with AMI. In-hospital major bleedings occurred in 2.0 % and 2.3 % (p = 0.58), while death in 1.8 % and 2.8 % (p = 0.09) of NSTEMI and STEMI patients, respectively., Conclusions: The EYESHOT-2 registry shows the current management strategies and outcome of AMI patients admitted to Italian CCUs and provides insights to improve the clinical care of such patients., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www., Clinicaltrials: gov. Unique identifier: NCT06316128., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest LDL received honoraria for advisory boards or as speaker/chairman at scientific congresses from the following companies: Amgen, Aspen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Daiichi Sankyo, Menarini, Novonordisk, Pfizer/Bristol-Myers Squibb, Sanofi and Servier. APM received personal fees for participation in study committees sponsored by Bayer, AstraZeneca, Novartis and Sanofi, outside the present work. SL received honoraria for advisory boards or as speaker/chairman at scientific congresses from the following companies: AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Daiichi Sankyo, Novonordisk, Pfizer/Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Sanofi. DL is an employee of Heart Care Foundation which conducted the study, partially supported by an unresctricted grant of research from Chiesi Farmaceutici S.p.A., Italy. MMG has no conflict of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Aims: We analysed baseline characteristics and guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) use and decisions in the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Heart Failure (HF) III Registry., Methods and Results: Between 1 November 2018 and 31 December 2020, 10 162 patients with acute HF (AHF, 39%, age 70 [62-79], 36% women) or outpatient visit for HF (61%, age 66 [58-75], 33% women), with HF with reduced (HFrEF, 57%), mildly reduced (HFmrEF, 17%) or preserved (HFpEF, 26%) ejection fraction were enrolled from 220 centres in 41 European or ESC-affiliated countries. With AHF, 97% were hospitalized, 2.2% received intravenous treatment in the emergency department, and 0.9% received intravenous treatment in an outpatient clinic. AHF was seen by most by a general cardiologist (51%) and outpatient HF most by a HF specialist (48%). A majority had been hospitalized for HF before, but 26% of AHF and 6.1% of outpatient HF had de novo HF. Baseline use, initiation and discontinuation of GDMT varied according to AHF versus outpatient HF, de novo versus pre-existing HF, and by ejection fraction. After the AHF event or outpatient HF visit, use of any renin-angiotensin system inhibitor, angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, beta-blocker, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist and loop diuretics was 89%, 29%, 92%, 78%, and 85% in HFrEF; 89%, 9.7%, 90%, 64%, and 81% in HFmrEF; and 77%, 3.1%, 80%, 48%, and 80% in HFpEF., Conclusion: Use and initiation of GDMT was high in cardiology centres in Europe, compared to previous reports from cohorts and registries including more primary care and general medicine and regions more local or outside of Europe and ESC-affiliated countries., (© 2024 European Society of Cardiology.)

Introduction: Exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) can increase the risk of severe cardiovascular events., Objective: Assess the crude incidence rates (IR) of cardiovascular events and the impact of exacerbations on the risk of cardiovascular events within different time periods following an exacerbation., Methods: COPD patients aged ≥45 years between 01/01/2015 and 12/31/2018 were identified from the Fondazione Ricerca e Salute administrative database. IRs of severe non-fatal and fatal cardiovascular events were obtained for post-exacerbation time periods (1-7, 8-14, 15-30, 31-180, 181-365 days). Time-dependent Cox proportional hazard models compared cardiovascular risks between periods with and without exacerbations., Results: Of 216,864 COPD patients, >55 % were male, mean age was 74 years, frequent comorbidities were cardiovascular, metabolic and psychiatric. During an average 34-month follow-up, 69,620 (32 %) patients had ≥1 exacerbation and 46,214 (21 %) experienced ≥1 cardiovascular event. During follow-up, 55,470 patients died; 4,661 were in-hospital cardiovascular-related deaths. Among 10,269 patients experiencing cardiovascular events within 365 days post-exacerbation, the IR was 15.8 per 100 person-years (95 %CI 15.5-16.1). Estimated hazard ratios (HR) for the cardiovascular event risk associated with periods post-exacerbation were highest within 7 days (HR: 34.3, 95 %CI: 33.1-35.6), especially for heart failure (HR 50.6; 95 %CI 48.6-52.7) and remained elevated throughout 365 days (HR 1.1, 95 %CI 1.02-1.13)., Conclusions: COPD patients in Italy are at high risk of severe cardiovascular events following exacerbations, suggesting the need to prevent exacerbations and possible subsequent cardiovascular events through early interventions and treatment optimization., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest APM received personal fees for the participation in clinical studies supported by Bayer, Novartis, Sanofi and Astra Zeneca, outside the present work. PR participated as a lecturer and advisor in scientific meetings and courses under the sponsorship of Almirall, AstraZeneca, Biofutura, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi Farmaceutici, GlaxoSmithKline, Menarini Group, Mundipharma, and Novartis, and her department was funded by Almirall, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi Farmaceutici Novartis, and Zambon. FD received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speaker bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Alfa Wassermann, Alfasigma, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer, BMS/Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, IL, GSK, Menarini, Novartis, Sandoz, Sanofi, Tillots Pharma AG. CN is an AstraZeneca employee and declares that her collaboration to this manuscript reflects only personal opinions. KR is an AstraZeneca employee and shareholder and declares that her collaboration to this manuscript reflects only personal opinions. The other authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: The optimal strategy for identification of hemodynamically stable patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) at risk for death and clinical deterioration remains undefined., Objectives: We aimed to assess the performances of currently available models/scores for identifying hemodynamically stable patients with acute, symptomatic PE at risk of death and clinical deterioration., Methods: This was a prospective multicenter cohort study including patients with acute PE (NCT03631810). Primary study outcome was in-hospital death within 30 days or clinical deterioration. Other outcomes were in-hospital death, death, and PE-related death, all at 30 days. We calculated positive and negative predictive values, c-statistics of European Society of Cardiology (ESC)-2014, ESC-2019, Pulmonary Embolism Thrombolysis (PEITHO), Bova, Thrombo-embolism lactate outcome study (TELOS), fatty acid binding protein, syncope and tachicardia (FAST), and National Early Warning Scale 2 (NEWS2) for the study outcomes., Results: In 5036 hemodynamically stable patients with acute PE, positive predictive values for the evaluated models/scores were all below 10%, except for TELOS and NEWS2; negative predictive values were above 98% for all the models/scores, except for FAST and NEWS2. ESC-2014 and TELOS had good performances for in-hospital death or clinical deterioration (c-statistic of 0.700 and 0.722, respectively), in-hospital death (c-statistic of 0.713 and 0.723, respectively), and PE-related death (c-statistic of 0.712 and 0.777, respectively); PEITHO, Bova, and NEWS2 also had good performances for PE-related death (c-statistic of 0.738, 0.741, and 0.742, respectively)., Conclusion: In hemodynamically stable patients with acute PE, the accuracy for identification of hemodynamically stable patients at risk for death and clinical deterioration varies across the available models/scores; TELOS seems to have the best performance. These data can inform management studies and clinical practice., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interests None of the authors have conflicts of interest related to this manuscript., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: In the absence of randomized trial evidence, we performed a large observational analysis of the association between beta-blocker (BB) use and clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF) and mildly reduced (HFmrEF) and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF)., Methods and Results: We pooled individual patient data from four large HFmrEF/HFpEF trials (I-Preserve, TOPCAT, PARAGON-HF, and DELIVER). The primary outcome was the composite of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization. Among the 16 951 patients included, the mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was 56.8%, and 13 400 (79.1%) had HFpEF (LVEF ≥50%). Overall, 12 812 patients (75.6%) received a BB. The median bisoprolol-equivalent dose of BB was 5.0 (Q1-Q3: 2.5-5.0) mg with BB continuation rates of 93.1% at 2 years (in survivors). The unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) for the primary outcome did not differ between BB users and non-users (HR 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.91-1.05), but the adjusted HR was lower in BB users than non-users (0.81, 95% CI 0.74-0.88), and this association was maintained across LVEF (p interaction  = 0.88). In subgroup analyses, the adjusted risk of the primary outcome was similar in BB users and non-users with or without a history of myocardial infarction, hypertension, or a baseline heart rate <70 bpm. By contrast, a better outcome with BB use was seen in patients with atrial fibrillation compared to those without atrial fibrillation (p intreraction  = 0.02)., Conclusions: In this observational analysis of non-randomized BB treatment, there was no suggestion that BB use was associated with worse HF outcomes in HFmrEF/HFpEF, even after extensive adjustment for other prognostic variables., (© 2024 European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Whether transcatheter mitral-valve repair improves outcomes in patients with heart failure and functional mitral regurgitation is uncertain., Methods: We conducted a randomized, controlled trial involving patients with heart failure and moderate to severe functional mitral regurgitation from 30 sites in nine countries. The patients were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either transcatheter mitral-valve repair and guideline-recommended medical therapy (device group) or medical therapy alone (control group). The three primary end points were the rate of the composite of first or recurrent hospitalization for heart failure or cardiovascular death during 24 months; the rate of first or recurrent hospitalization for heart failure during 24 months; and the change from baseline to 12 months in the score on the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-Overall Summary (KCCQ-OS; scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health status)., Results: A total of 505 patients underwent randomization: 250 were assigned to the device group and 255 to the control group. At 24 months, the rate of first or recurrent hospitalization for heart failure or cardiovascular death was 37.0 events per 100 patient-years in the device group and 58.9 events per 100 patient-years in the control group (rate ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48 to 0.85; P = 0.002). The rate of first or recurrent hospitalization for heart failure was 26.9 events per 100 patient-years in the device group and 46.6 events per 100 patient-years in the control group (rate ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.82; P = 0.002). The KCCQ-OS score increased by a mean (±SD) of 21.6±26.9 points in the device group and 8.0±24.5 points in the control group (mean difference, 10.9 points; 95% CI, 6.8 to 15.0; P<0.001). Device-specific safety events occurred in 4 patients (1.6%)., Conclusions: Among patients with heart failure with moderate to severe functional mitral regurgitation who received medical therapy, the addition of transcatheter mitral-valve repair led to a lower rate of first or recurrent hospitalization for heart failure or cardiovascular death and a lower rate of first or recurrent hospitalization for heart failure at 24 months and better health status at 12 months than medical therapy alone. (Funded by Abbott Laboratories; RESHAPE-HF2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02444338.)., (Copyright © 2024 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Background: For patients with functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) and symptomatic heart failure (HF), randomized trials of mitral transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (M-TEER) have produced conflicting results., Objectives: This study sought to assess the impact of M-TEER on hospitalization rates, and explore the effects of M-TEER on patients who did or did not have a history of recent HF hospitalizations before undergoing M-TEER., Methods: RESHAPE-HF2 (Randomized Investigation of the MitraClip Device in Heart Failure: 2nd Trial in Patients with Clinically Significant Functional Mitral Regurgitation) included patients with symptomatic HF and moderate to severe FMR (mean effective regurgitant orifice area 0.25 cm 2 ; 14% >0.40 cm 2 , 23% <0.20 cm 2 ) and showed that M-TEER reduced recurrent HF hospitalizations with and without the addition of cardiovascular (CV) death and improved quality of life. We now report the results of prespecified analyses on hospitalization rates and for the subgroup of patients (n = 333) with a HF hospitalization in the 12 months before randomization., Results: At 24 months, the time to first event of CV death or HF hospitalization (HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.49-0.85; P = 0.002), the rate of recurrent CV hospitalizations (rate ratio [RR]: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.57-0.99; P = 0.046), the composite rate of recurrent CV hospitalizations and all-cause mortality (RR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.57-0.95; P = 0.017), and of recurrent CV death and CV hospitalizations (RR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.58-0.99; P = 0.040), were all lower in the M-TEER group. The RR of recurrent hospitalizations for any cause was 0.82 (95% CI: 0.63-1.07; P = 0.15) for patients in the M-TEER group vs control group patients. Patients randomized to M-TEER lost fewer days due to death or HF hospitalization (13.9% [95% CI: 13.0%-14.8%] vs 17.4% [95% CI: 16.4%-18.4%] of follow-up time; P < 0.0001, and 1,067 vs 1,776 total days lost; P < 0.0001). Patients randomized to M-TEER also had better NYHA functional class at 30 days and at 6, 12, and 24 months of follow-up (P < 0.0001). A history of HF hospitalizations before randomization was associated with worse outcomes and greater benefit with M-TEER on the rate of the composite of recurrent HF hospitalizations and CV death (P interaction  = 0.03) and of recurrent HF hospitalizations within 24 months (P interaction  = 0.06)., Conclusions: These results indicate that a broader application of M-TEER in addition to optimal guideline-directed medical therapy should be considered among patients with symptomatic HF and moderate to severe FMR, particularly in those with a history of a recent hospitalization for HF., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Prof Ponikowsaki has received a grant from Vifor Pharma; has received consulting fees and/or honoraria from Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Vifor Pharma, Servier, Novartis, Berlin Chemie, Bayer, Abbott Vascular, Novo Nordisk, Pharmacosmos, Moderna, Pfizer, and Abbott Vascular; and has received fees for trial committee work from Boehringer Ingelheim, Vifor Pharma, Novo Nordisk, Pharmacosmos, and Moderna. Dr Friede has received payments to his institution from Abbott; has received grants from Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG), Federal Joint Committee (G-BA), and European Commission; has received consulting fees from Actimed, Bayer, BMS, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Galapagos, Immunic, KyowaKirin, LivaNova, Minoryx, Novartis, RECARDIO, Relaxera, Roche, Servier, Viatris, and Vifor; has received payments from Fresenius Kabi and PINK gegen Brustkrebs; is a trial data monitoring committee member for Aslan, Bayer, Biosense Webster, Enanta, Galapagos, IQVIA, Novartis, PPD, Recordati, Roche, and VICO Therapeutics; and is a trial steering committee member for SCLBehring. Dr von Bardeleben has received an EchoCoreLab IIT grant from Clinical Trial Unit of UMG Göttingen; has received consulting fees from Abbott Vascular, Jenscare, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic; has received honoraria from Abbott Vascular, Jenavalve, Jenscare, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Philips, Siemens; and is a trial committee member for Medtronic and Heart Valve Society (unpaid), and EU SHD Coalition (unpaid). Dr Butler has received consulting fees from Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, Applied Therapeutic, AskBio, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardiac Dimension, Cardiocell, Cardior, Cardiorem, CSL Bearing, CVRx, Cytokinetics, Daxor, Edwards Lifesciences, Element Science, Faraday, Foundry, G3P, Innolife, Impulse Dynamics, Imbria, Inventiva, Ionis, Lexicon, Lilly, LivaNova, Janssen, Medtronic, Merck, Occlutech, Owkin, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Pharmain, Pfize, Prolaio, Regeneron, Renibus, Roche, Salamandra, Sanofi, SC Pharma, Secretome, Sequana, SQ Innovation, Tenex, Tricog, Ultromics, Vifor, and Zoll; and has received honoraria from Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim-Lilly, AstraZeneca, Impulse Dynamics, and Vifor. Dr Khan has participated in a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Bayer. Dr Ferrari has received honoraria and support for attending meetings from Servier, Merck Serono, Bayer, Lupin, and Sunpharma. Dr Abraham has received payments from Abbott; has received grants from National Institutes of Health 1 UG3 / UH3 HL140144-01; has received consulting fees from Zoll Respicardia; has received honoraria from Impulse Dynamics, Edwards Lifesciences, and Abbott; and is an advisory board member for Sensible Medical, WhiteSwell, AquaPass, Cordio Medical, and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Auricchio has received consulting fees and honoraria from Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Microport CRM, Philips, Xspline, and Abbott. Dr Bayes-Genis has lectured and/or participated in advisory boards for Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Medtronic, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Roche Diagnostics, and Vifor. Dr Cleland has received grants from Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL-Vifor, British Heart Foundation, and Pharmacosmos; has received consulting fees from Pharmacosmos, CSL-Vifor, and Biopeutics; and has received honoraria from Pharmacosmos. Dr Filippatos has received honoraria from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Servier, and Novartis; has served on the trial committee boards for Bayer, Medtronic, Boehringer Ingelheim, Vifor, Amgen, Servier, Impulse Dynamics, Cardior, and Novo Nordisk; and has served on the boards of the Heart Failure Association and JACC Heart Failure. Dr Gustafsson has received consulting fees and/or honoraria from Abbott, Bayer, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca; has participated on the trial committee board of AdJuCor; and has served on the board of the Heart Failure Association. Dr Haverkamp has received consulting fees and/or honoraria from Bayer and AstraZeneca. Dr Kelm has received grants or contracts from Microvision Medical Holding B.V., Edwards Lifesciences, Mars Scientific Advisory Council, Abiomed Europe GmbH, B. Braun Melsungen AG, DFG SFB 1116, EU Horizon 2020, and Daiichi-Sankyo Deutschland GmbH; and has received payment or honoraria from Bayer Vital GmbH, Abiomed Europe GmbH, AstraZeneca, Amarin GmbH, and CTI congress GmbH. Dr Landmesser has received grants from Abbott and Novartis; and has received consulting fees and honoraria from Abbott. Dr Maggioni has participated on trial committee boards for Bayer, AstraZeneca, Novartis, and Sanofi. Dr Metra has received consulting fees from Abbott Structural Heart, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Roche Diagnostics, Edwards Lifesciences, Novo Nordisk, and Bayer. Dr Petrie has received grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche Diagnostics, SQ Innovations, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Pharmacosmos; has received consulting fees and/or honoraria from Akero, Applied Therapeutics, Amgen, AnaCardio, Biosensors, Boehringer Ingelheim, Corteria, FIRE-1, Biosensors, REPRIEVE, Corvia, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Novo Nordisk, AbbVie, Bayer, Horizon Therapeutics, Takeda, Cardiorentis, Pharmacosmos, Roche Pharma, Siemens, Eli Lilly, Vifor, New Amsterdam, Moderna, Teikoku, LIB Therapeutics, and 3R Lifesciences; and has participated on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AstraZeneca, Moderna, and Teikoku. Dr Rassaf has received consulting fees and/or honoraria from BMS, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Novartis, Bayer, Daiichi-Sankyo, and CVRxInc; and has pending patent applications regarding amelioration and treatment of infarct damage (W02023079141A2), blood pressure lowering composition (EP3646861A1), and Bnip3 peptides for the treatment of reperfusion injury (C=2021015130A2). Dr Ruschitzka has not received personal payments by pharmaceutical companies or device manufacturers in the last 3 years; the Department of Cardiology (University Hospital of Zurich/University of Zurich) has received research, educational, and/or travel grants from Abbott, Abiomed, Alexion, Amgen, AstraZeneca, At the Limits Ltd., Bayer, Berlin Heart, B. Braun, Biosense Webster, Biosensors Europe AG, Biotronik, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bracco, Cardinal Health Switzerland, Concept Medical, Corteria, CSL, Daiichi Sankyo, Diatools AG, Edwards Lifesciences, Guidant Europe NV (BS), Hamilton Health Sciences, IHF, Innosuisse, Johnson/Johnson, Kaneka Corporation, Kantar, Kiniksa, Labormedizinisches Zentrum, MedAlliance, Medical Education Global Solutions, Medtronic, MicroPort, MSD, Mundipharma Medical Company, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Orion, Pfizer, Quintiles Switzerland Sarl, Recor Medical, Roche Diagnostics, Roche Pharma, Sahajanand IN, Sanofi, Sarstedt AG, Servier, SIS Medical, Sorin CRM SAS, SSS International Clinical Research, Stromal, Terumo Deutschland, Trama Solutions, V-Wave, Vascular Medical, Vifor, Wissens Plus, and ZOLL. Dr Schäfer has received grants, consulting fees, honoraria, and personal fees for consultancies, trial committee work, and/or lectures from Abbott Vascular, Edwards Lifesciences, and Polares Medical. Dr Schulze has received grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, Abiomed Inc, Edwards Lifesciences Inc, Cytosorb Inc, and Boston Scientific; and has received consulting fees and/or honoraria from Bayer, AstraZeneca, Daiichi- Sankyo, Novartis, Actelion, Roche, Sanofi, Pharmacosmos, Medtronic, Thoratec, Boehringer Ingelheim, HeartWare, Coronus, Abbott, Boston Scientific, St. Jude Medical, Abiomed, and DGK, and trial committee work for Abbott, Abiomed. Dr Spargias has received fees for proctoring for Abbott Vascular. Dr Vahanian has participated on a data safety monitoring board for Edwards Lifesciences, VenusTech, and Mayo Clinic. Dr Zamorano has received personal payments or honoraria from Viatris, Bayer, and Novartis. Dr Zeiher has received grants or contracts from or served on scientific advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Novo Nordisk. Dr Koehler has received grants for Project 5G-MedCamp from the German Federal Ministry of Economics and climate protection (BMWK) and grants for projects RESKRIVER and 6 G Health; consulting fees and/or payments or honoraria from BIOTRONIK, Boehringer Ingelheim, Sanofi Germany GmbH, Novartis Germany (till 2022), and AMGEN Germany (in 2021). Dr Lainscak has received a grant from Slovenian Research Agency; and has received honoraria from Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, and AstraZeneca. Drs Mezilis and Theofilogiannakos have received support from Abbott for attending meetings. Dr Chrissoheris has received fees for proctoring for Abbott Vascular and Edwards Lifesciences; and has received honoraria from Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Papadopoulos has received consulting fees and honoraria from GE Healthcare. Dr Smolka has received fees for proctoring for Abbott Vascular. Dr Wojakowski has received consulting fees and/or honoraria from Abbott Vascular, Medtronic, and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Reczuch has received honoraria for lectures from Abbott. Dr Pinto has received consulting fees and/or honoraria from Boehringer Ingelheim, Daichi-Sankyo, Novartis, Servier, Vifor, and Zydus; and participated on advisory boards for Medtronic, Novartis, Servier, and Vifor. Dr Adamo has received honoraria from Abbott Vascular and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Ruf has received fees proctoring and consulting for Abbott Laboratories and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Hasenfuß has received personal fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer, Corvia, Impulse Dynamics, Novartis, Pfizer, and Servier; and has served on trial committees for AstraZeneca, Boehringer, Corvia (no honoraria), Impulse Dynamics, Novartis, Servier, and Vifor Pharma. Dr Schillinger has received consulting and lecture fees and travel expenses from Abbott Vascular. Dr Anker has received grants and personal fees from Vifor and Abbott Vascular; has received personal fees for consultancies, trial committee work, and/or lectures from Actimed, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bioventrix, Boehringer Ingelheim, Brahms, Cardiac Dimensions, Cardior, Cordio, CVRx, Cytokinetics, Edwards Lifesciences, Farraday Pharmaceuticals, GSK, HeartKinetics, Impulse Dynamics, Medtronic, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Occlutech, Pfizer, Regeneron, Relaxera, Repairon, Scirent, Sensible Medical, Servier, Vectorious, and V-Wave; and is named as coinventor of two patent applications regarding MR-proANP (DE 102007010834 & DE 102007022367), but he does not benefit personally from the related issued patents. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Although the prevalence of heart failure (HF) increases markedly with advancing age, surprisingly little is known about HF in the very elderly. The aim of this study was to describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of octogenarians with HF., Methods and Results: Individual participant meta-analysis of patients with HF and reduced, mildly reduced, and preserved ejection fraction (HFrEF, HFmrEF, and HFpEF, respectively) enrolled in eight large randomized trials. Overall, the proportion of octogenarians was 1518 of 20 168 patients (7.5%) with HFrEF, 610 of 4609 (13.2%) with HFmrEF, and 3130 of 15 354 (20.4%) with HFpEF. Regardless of HF phenotype, octogenarian patients were more often female and had more comorbidities, more symptoms and signs of congestion, and worse health status (but not quality of life), in comparison to patients aged <80 years. The incidence (per 100 person-years) of the composite of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization was 13.3 (95% confidence interval [CI] 12.7-14.0) in octogenarians versus 9.5 (95% CI 9.3-9.7) in non-octogenarians (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.40, 95% CI 1.32-1.48). Each component of the composite was more frequent in octogenarians with rates of cardiovascular mortality of 7.0 (95% CI 6.5-7.4) per 100 person-years versus 4.9 (95% CI 4.8-5.1) in non-octogenarians (aHR 1.60, 95% CI 1.48-1.72, p < 0.001). Octogenarians received less evidence-based therapy, especially mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, than younger patients., Conclusion: Despite worse health status and higher hospitalization and mortality rates, octogenarians were undertreated compared to younger patients., (© 2024 European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: The European Unified Registries On Heart Care Evaluation and Randomized Trials (EuroHeart) aims to improve the quality of care and clinical outcomes for patients with cardiovascular disease. The collaboration of acute coronary syndrome/percutaneous coronary intervention (ACS/PCI) registries is operational in seven vanguard European Society of Cardiology member countries., Methods and Results: Adults admitted to hospitals with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) are included, and individual patient-level data collected and aligned according to the internationally agreed EuroHeart data standards for ACS/PCI. The registries provide up to 155 variables spanning patient demographics and clinical characteristics, in-hospital care, in-hospital outcomes, and discharge medications. After performing statistical analyses on patient data, participating countries transfer aggregated data to EuroHeart for international reporting. Between 1st January 2022 and 31st December 2022, 40 021 admissions (STEMI 46.7%, NSTEMI 53.3%) were recorded from 192 hospitals in the seven vanguard countries: Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Portugal, Romania, Singapore, and Sweden. The mean age for the cohort was 67.9 (standard deviation 12.6) years, and it included 12 628 (31.6%) women., Conclusion: The EuroHeart collaboration of ACS/PCI registries prospectively collects and analyses individual data for ACS and PCI at a national level, after which aggregated results are transferred to the EuroHeart Data Science Centre. The collaboration will expand to other countries and provide continuous insights into the provision of clinical care and outcomes for patients with ACS and undergoing PCI. It will serve as a unique international platform for quality improvement, observational research, and registry-based clinical trials., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: No study has investigated the perioperative management and clinical outcomes in patients who are receiving rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice a day and acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) 81 to 100 mg daily., Objective: To assess perioperative management and outcomes in patients who are receiving low-dose rivaroxaban, 2.5 mg twice-daily, and low-dose ASA, 81 to 100 mg daily. To assess perioperative management and outcomes in patients who are receiving low-dose rivaroxaban, 2.5 mg twice-daily, and low-dose ASA, 81 to 100 mg daily., Methods: Subanalysis of the Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies (COMPASS) trial was performed to assess perioperative management and clinical outcomes in patients with stable coronary or peripheral artery disease who were randomized to receive rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice a day plus ASA 100 mg daily, rivaroxaban 5 mg twice a day, or ASA 100 mg daily. Patients studied required a surgery/procedure during the trial. The study outcomes, which included myocardial infarction, angina, stroke, acute limb ischemia, bleeding, and death, were assessed according to treatment allocation., Results: There were 2632 patients studied (mean age, 68 years; 80% male) who had a surgery/procedure, comprising percutaneous coronary interventions (∼43%), carotid or other arterial angioplasty (∼15%), pacemaker or internal cardiac defibrillator implantation (∼9%), and coronary artery bypass graft surgery (∼7%). Perioperative study drug management varied, with about one-third of patients not interrupting study drug and the remainder interrupting it between 1 and ≥10 days preprocedure. The incidences of adverse outcomes across treatment groups were 12.7% to 15.3% for myocardial ischemia, 0.8% to 1.2% for stroke, 0.1% to 0.2% for venous thromboembolism, and 3.1% to 4.2% for any bleeding. There was no statistically significant difference in outcome rates across treatment groups., Conclusion: In patients in the COMPASS trial who required a surgery/procedure, there was no significant difference in perioperative adverse outcomes whether patients were receiving rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice a day and ASA 100 mg daily, rivaroxaban 5 mg twice a day, or ASA alone., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interests There was no funding provided for the development and for any other aspect of the work in this manuscript. J.D.D. reports consulting and lecture honoraria from Servier Canada, Leo Pharma, Pfizer, and Fresinius Kabi. Q.L. reports no disclosures. D.L.B. reports advisory for Angiowave, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology, High Enroll, Janssen, Level Ex, McKinsey, Medscape Cardiology, Merck, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Regado Biosciences, and Stasys and research funding from Abbott, Acesion Pharma, Afimmune, Aker Biomarine, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beren, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Chiesi, CinCor, CSL Behring, Eisai, Ethicon, Faraday Pharmaceuticals, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Forest Laboratories, Fractyl, Garmin, HLS Therapeutics, Idorsia, Ironwood, Ischemix, Janssen, Javelin, Lexicon, Lilly, Medtronic, Merck, Moderna, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Owkin, Pfizer, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Recardio, Regeneron, Reid Hoffman Foundation, Roche, Sanofi, Stasys, Synaptic, The Medicines Company, Youngene, and 89Bio. E.M. reports being employed as a global clinical lead by Bayer AG, Germany. M.K.W. reports no disclosures. S.C. reports grants from Bayer AG and personal fees from BMS, Pfizer, Portola, Boehringer Ingelheim, Servier, Daiichi Sankyo, and Medtronic. S.Y. reports grants and personal fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Cadila. A.P.M. reports receiving personal fees from Bayer, AstraZeneca, and Novartis. J.W.E. reports grants and/or personal fees from Anthos, Bayer AG, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, Idorsia, Janssen, Astra Zeneca, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKlein, and Sanofi Aventis., (Copyright © 2024 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: A hypothetical concern has been raised that sacubitril/valsartan might cause cognitive impairment because neprilysin is one of several enzymes degrading amyloid-β peptides in the brain, some of which are neurotoxic and linked to Alzheimer-type dementia. To address this, we examined the effect of sacubitril/valsartan compared with valsartan on cognitive function in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in a prespecified substudy of PARAGON-HF (Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibitor With Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Global Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction)., Methods: In PARAGON-HF, serial assessment of cognitive function was conducted in a subset of patients with the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE; score range, 0-30, with lower scores reflecting worse cognitive function). The prespecified primary analysis of this substudy was the change from baseline in MMSE score at 96 weeks. Other post hoc analyses included cognitive decline (fall in MMSE score of ≥3 points), cognitive impairment (MMSE score <24), or the occurrence of dementia-related adverse events., Results: Among 2895 patients included in the MMSE substudy with baseline MMSE score measured, 1453 patients were assigned to sacubitril/valsartan and 1442 to valsartan. Their mean age was 73 years, and the median follow-up was 32 months. The mean±SD MMSE score at randomization was 27.4±3.0 in the sacubitril/valsartan group, with 10% having an MMSE score <24; the corresponding numbers were nearly identical in the valsartan group. The mean change from baseline to 96 weeks in the sacubitril/valsartan group was -0.05 (SE, 0.07); the corresponding change in the valsartan group was -0.04 (0.07). The mean between-treatment difference at week 96 was -0.01 (95% CI, -0.20 to 0.19; P =0.95). Analyses of a ≥3-point decline in MMSE, decrease to a score <24, dementia-related adverse events, and combinations of these showed no difference between sacubitril/valsartan and valsartan. No difference was found in the subgroup of patients tested for apolipoprotein E ε4 allele genotype., Conclusions: Patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in PARAGON-HF had relatively low baseline MMSE scores. Cognitive change, measured by MMSE, did not differ between treatment with sacubitril/valsartan and treatment with valsartan in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction., Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01920711., Competing Interests: Dr Jhund reports receiving grant support from Boehringer Ingelheim and fees for serving on an advisory board from Cytokinetics. Dr Anand reports receiving fees for serving on a steering committee from AstraZeneca, ARCA biopharma, Amgen, and LivaNova; fees for serving as chair of a data and safety monitoring board from Boston Scientific; fees for serving on an end-point committee from Boehringer Ingelheim; and fees for serving on an advisory board from Zensun. Dr Claggett received consulting fees from AOBiome, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Corvia Medical, Gilead Sciences, and MyoKardia. Dr Desai received consulting fees from Abbott, Boehringer Ingelheim, DalCor Pharmaceuticals, and Regeneron; grant support, paid to Brigham and Women’s Hospital, consulting fees, and fees for serving on an advisory board from Alnylam Pharmaceuticals and AstraZeneca; consulting fees and fees for serving on a steering committee from Biofourmis; consulting fees and fees for serving on a data and safety monitoring committee from Boston Scientific; fees for serving on an advisory board from Corvidia; and fees for serving on an advisory board and consulting fees from Relypsa. Drs Chiang, Gong, and Lefkowitz are employed by Novartis Pharmaceuticals. Dr Lam received grant support and fees for serving on an advisory board from Boston Scientific and Roche Diagnostics; grant support, fees for serving on an advisory board, and fees for serving on steering committees from Bayer; grant support from Medtronics; grant support and fees for serving on a steering committee from Vifor Pharma; fees for serving on an advisory board and fees for serving on steering committees from AstraZeneca and Novartis; fees for serving on an advisory board from Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Abbott Diagnostics; consulting fees from Merck and Stealth BioTherapeutics; fees for serving on a steering committee from Janssen Research and Development; lecture fees and consulting fees from Menarini; and fees for serving on a scientific committee from Corvia Medical and holding a pending patent (PCT/SG2016/050217) on a method regarding diagnosis and prognosis of chronic heart failure. Dr Maggioni received fees for serving on a study committee from Bayer and Fresenius. Dr Packer received consulting fees from AbbVie, Akcea Therapeutics, Actavis, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardiorentis, Daiichi Sankyo, Gilead Sciences, Johnson & Johnson, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Relypsa, Sanofi, Synthetic Biologics, and Theravance Biopharma. Dr Rouleau received consulting fees from AstraZeneca. Dr van Veldhuisen received fees for serving on a steering committee and travel support from ARCA Biopharma and Corvia Medical. Dr Zannad received fees for serving on a steering committee from Janssen, Bayer, Boston Scientific, CVRx, and Boehringer Ingelheim; consulting fees from Amgen, Vifor Pharma–Fresenius, Cardior, Cereno Pharmaceutical, Applied Therapeutics, and Merck; and consulting fees and fees for serving on a steering committee from AstraZeneca and serving as founder of cardiorenal and CVCT. Dr Zile received fees for serving on a steering committee from Abbott and Ironwood Pharma; consulting fees from Boston Scientific and MyoKardia; grant support and fees for serving on a steering committee from CVRx and Medtronic; fees for serving on an eligibility committee from EBR Systems and V-Wave; fees for serving on a clinical-events committee from Endotronics; and fees for serving on a data and safety monitoring board from Merck. Dr Solomon received grant support, paid to Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and consulting fees from Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, MyoKardia, Novartis, Theracos, Bayer, and Cytokinetics; grant support, paid to Brigham and Women’s Hospital, from Bellerophon Therapeutics, Celladon, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Lonestar Heart, Mesoblast, Sanofi Pasteur, and Eidos Therapeutics; consulting fees from Akros Pharma, Corvia Medical, Ironwood Pharma, Merck, Roche, Takeda Pharmaceutical, Quantum Genomics, AOBiome, Cardiac Dimensions, Tenaya Therapeutics, and Daiichi Sankyo; and fees for serving on a data and safety monitoring board from Janssen. Dr McMurray reports that his employer, Glasgow University, has been paid by Novartis for serving as an executive committee member and coprincipal investigator of ATMOSPHERE, PARADIGM-HF, and PARAGON-HF trials and 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 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 end-point 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 steering committee member for the ATOMIC-HF and COSMIC-HF trials and attending meetings related to this trial; 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 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 steering committee member for the SONAR trial (using atrasentan) and to attend meetings related to this trial; by Abbvie for his travel and accommodation to attend some of these meetings; by DalCor Pharmaceuticals for serving as 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 to attend meetings related to these trials; by AstraZeneca (which markets dapagliflozin) for serving as principal investigator of DAPA-HF and coprincipal investigator of DELIVER (trials using dapagliflozin on heart failure) and to attend meetings related trial; by AstraZeneca for his travel and accommodation to attend meetings; by GSK for serving as coprincipal investigator and steering committee member for the Harmony-Outcomes trial (albiglutide) and the trials ASCEND-D and ASCEND-ND, using daprodustat, respectively, and to attend meetings related to these trials; by GSK for his travel and accommodation to attend some of the meetings; by BMS 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; and by Kings College Hospital (which has received a grant from KRUK and Vifor-Fresenius, which manufactures intravenous iron) for serving as steering committee member for the PIVOTAL trial (using intravenous iron) and for running the end-point adjudication committee for this trial, to attend meetings related to PIVOTAL, and for his travel and accommodation for 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. The other authors report no conflicts. The study supporters had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; or decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Background and Aims: Contemporary multicentre data on clinical and diagnostic spectrum and outcome in myocarditis are limited. Study aims were to describe baseline features, 1-year follow-up, and baseline predictors of outcome in clinically suspected or biopsy-proven myocarditis (2013 European Society of Cardiology criteria) in adult and paediatric patients from the EURObservational Research Programme Cardiomyopathy and Myocarditis Long-Term Registry., Methods: Five hundred eighty-one (68.0% male) patients, 493 adults, median age 38 (27-52) years, and 88 children, aged 8 (3-13) years, were divided into 3 groups: Group 1 (n = 233), clinically suspected myocarditis with abnormal cardiac magnetic resonance; Group 2 (n = 222), biopsy-proven myocarditis; and Group 3 (n = 126) clinically suspected myocarditis with normal or inconclusive or no cardiac magnetic resonance. Baseline features were analysed overall, in adults vs. children, and among groups. One-year outcome events included death/heart transplantation, ventricular assist device (VAD) or implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation, and hospitalization for cardiac causes., Results: Endomyocardial biopsy, mainly right ventricular, had a similarly low complication rate in children and adults (4.7% vs. 4.9%, P = NS), with no procedure-related death. A classical myocarditis pattern on cardiac magnetic resonance was found in 31.3% of children and in 57.9% of adults with biopsy-proven myocarditis (P < .001). At 1-year follow-up, 11/410 patients (2.7%) died, 7 (1.7%) received a heart transplant, 3 underwent VAD (0.7%), and 16 (3.9%) underwent ICD implantation. Independent predictors at diagnosis of death or heart transplantation or hospitalization or VAD implantation or ICD implantation at 1-year follow-up were lower left ventricular ejection fraction and the need for immunosuppressants for new myocarditis diagnosis refractory to non-aetiology-driven therapy., Conclusions: Endomyocardial biopsy was safe, and cardiac magnetic resonance using Lake Louise criteria was less sensitive, particularly in children. Virus-negative lymphocytic myocarditis was predominant both in children and adults, and use of immunosuppressive treatments was low. Lower left ventricular ejection fraction and the need for immunosuppressants at diagnosis were independent predictors of unfavourable outcome events at 1 year., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aim: The RESHAPE-HF2 trial is designed to assess the efficacy and safety of the MitraClip device system for the treatment of clinically important functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) in patients with heart failure (HF). This report describes the baseline characteristics of patients enrolled in the RESHAPE-HF2 trial compared to those enrolled in the COAPT and MITRA-FR trials., Methods and Results: The RESHAPE-HF2 study is an investigator-initiated, prospective, randomized, multicentre trial including patients with symptomatic HF, a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) between 20% and 50% with moderate-to-severe or severe FMR, for whom isolated mitral valve surgery was not recommended. Patients were randomized 1:1 to a strategy of delivering or withholding MitraClip. Of 506 patients randomized, the mean age of the patients was 70 ± 10 years, and 99 of them (20%) were women. The median EuroSCORE II was 5.3 (2.8-9.0) and median plasma N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) was 2745 (1407-5385) pg/ml. Most patients were prescribed beta-blockers (96%), diuretics (96%), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (82%) and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (82%). The use of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors was rare (7%). Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices had been previously implanted in 29% of patients. Mean LVEF, left ventricular end-diastolic volume and effective regurgitant orifice area (EROA) were 31 ± 8%, 211 ± 76 ml and 0.25 ± 0.08 cm 2 , respectively, whereas 44% of patients had mitral regurgitation severity of grade 4+. Compared to patients enrolled in COAPT and MITRA-FR, those enrolled in RESHAPE-HF2 were less likely to have mitral regurgitation grade 4+ and, on average, HAD lower EROA, and plasma NT-proBNP and higher estimated glomerular filtration rate, but otherwise had similar age, comorbidities, CRT therapy and LVEF., Conclusion: Patients enrolled in RESHAPE-HF2 represent a third distinct population where MitraClip was tested in, that is one mainly comprising of patients with moderate-to-severe FMR instead of only severe FMR, as enrolled in the COAPT and MITRA-FR trials. The results of RESHAPE-HF2 will provide crucial insights regarding broader application of the transcatheter edge-to-edge repair procedure in clinical practice., (© 2024 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Clinical trials provide the best evidence on the effect of a treatment, but they evaluate this effect on the total population of the study as if the effect of the randomized treatment was identical in all possible subgroups of patients (young, elderly, male, female, etc.). Subgroup analyses are an important tool to evaluate the presence of any diversity of the treatment effect concerning specific patient characteristics, if there are practical questions about who to treat and when, or if there are doubts about the benefit/risk profile of a therapy in a specific subpopulation. Subgroup analyses should be defined a priori, biologically plausible, and limited to few clinically important questions. Subgroup analyses have greater relevance in the context of studies that have demonstrated an overall significant difference between treatments. In the case of neutral or negative studies, any significant analyses between subgroups should be considered as essentially exploratory. Post-hoc subgroup analyses should be treated with great caution and considered more credible as the results are consistent with other studies. If significant heterogeneity is expected in specific subgroups of patients when planning a trial, they should have sufficient statistical power to detect the difference in the effect. In this review, we propose a critical approach for interpreting subgroup analyses in cardiovascular trials.

Background: Sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are recommended treatment for adults with chronic kidney disease (CKD), but uncertainty exists regarding their use in patients with frailty and/or multimorbidity, among whom polypharmacy is common. We derived a multivariable logistic regression model to predict hospitalization (reflecting frailty) and assessed empagliflozin's risk-benefit profile in a post-hoc analysis of the double-blind, placebo-controlled EMPA-KIDNEY trial., Methods: The EMPA-KIDNEY trial randomized 6609 patients with CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] ≥20<45 mL/min/1.73m2, or ≥45<90 mL/min/1.73m2 with urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio ≥200 mg/g) to receive either empagliflozin 10 mg daily or matching placebo and followed for two years (median). Additional characteristics analysed in subgroups were multimorbidity, polypharmacy and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at baseline. Cox regression analyses were performed with subgroups defined by approximate thirds of each variable., Results: The strongest predictors of hospitalization were N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide, poor mobility and diabetes; then eGFR and other comorbidities. Empagliflozin was generally well-tolerated independent of predicted risk of hospitalization. In relative terms, allocation to empagliflozin reduced the risk of the primary outcome of kidney disease progression or cardiovascular death by 28% (hazard ratio [HR] 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64-0.82); and all-cause hospitalization by 14% (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.78-0.95); with broadly consistent effects across subgroups of predicted risk of hospitalization, multimorbidity, polypharmacy or HRQoL. In absolute terms, the estimated benefits of empagliflozin were greater in those at highest predicted risk of hospitalization (reflecting frailty) and outweighed potential serious harms., Conclusions: These findings support the use of SGLT2 inhibitors in CKD, irrespective of frailty, multimorbidity or polypharmacy., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Society of Nephrology.)

Background. Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) can be successfully treated with sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2-Is), regardless of diabetes. Fondazione Ricerca e Salute's (ReSD) administrative and Health Search's (HSD) primary care databases were combined in the Database Consortium ReS-HS to quantify and describe patients with CKD potentially eligible for SGLT2-Is and assess costs charged to the Italian National Health Service (SSN). Methods. Patients aged ≥18 with CKD and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <60 ml/min in 2018, without dialysis and/or renal transplantation, were included. HSD was used to develop and validate algorithms for estimating eGFR, based on covariates, within the ReSD. Comorbidities, dispensed drugs, and direct healthcare costs were assessed. Results. In 2018, 66,297 (5.0% of HSD population) and 211,494 (4.4% of ReSD population) patients with CKD potentially eligible for SGLT2-Is were identified (females ≥58%). Prevalence increased with age with a peak at 75-84 years. Within HSD and ReSD cohorts, respectively: 31.0% and 41.5% had diabetes; in the observation periods, >82% and >96% received ≥1 pharmacological treatment, of which ≥50% and ≥25% received cardiovascular/blood agents and antidiabetics, respectively. From ReSD, mean per capita direct SSN cost was € 3,825 (CI 95%, € 3,655-€ 4,000): 50.1% due to hospitalizations, and 40.2% to pharmaceuticals (31.6% to cardiovascular drugs and 10.1% to antidiabetics). Conclusion. The Database Consortium ReS-HS methodology found 5% of adult SSN beneficiaries with CKD potentially eligible for SGLT2-Is bringing with them a high cardio-metabolic burden which increases the risk of CKD progression., (Copyright by Società Italiana di Nefrologia SIN, Rome,Italy.)

Importance: Concerns have arisen that renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockers are less effective in Black patients than non-Black patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF)., Objective: To determine whether the effects of RAS blockers on cardiovascular outcomes differ between Black patients and non-Black patients with HFrEF., Data Sources: MEDLINE and Embase databases through December 31, 2023., Study Selection: Randomized trials investigating the effect of RAS blockers on cardiovascular outcomes in adults with HFrEF that enrolled Black and non-Black patients., Data Extraction and Synthesis: Individual-participant data were extracted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Independent Personal Data (PRISMA-IPD) reporting guidelines. Effects were estimated using a mixed-effects model using a 1-stage approach., Main Outcome and Measure: The primary outcome was first hospitalization for HF or cardiovascular death., Results: The primary analysis, based on the 3 placebo-controlled RAS inhibitor monotherapy trials, included 8825 patients (9.9% Black). Rates of death and hospitalization for HF were substantially higher in Black than non-Black patients. The hazard ratio (HR) for RAS blockade vs placebo for the primary composite was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.69-1.03) in Black patients and 0.73 (95% CI, 0.67-0.79) in non-Black patients (P for interaction = .14). The HR for first HF hospitalization was 0.89 (95% CI, 0.70-1.13) in Black patients and 0.62 (95% CI, 0.56-0.69) in non-Black patients (P for interaction = .006). Conversely, the corresponding HRs for cardiovascular death were 0.83 (95% CI, 0.65-1.07) and 0.84 (95% CI, 0.77-0.93), respectively (P for interaction = .99). For total hospitalizations for HF and cardiovascular deaths, the corresponding rate ratios were 0.82 (95% CI, 0.66-1.02) and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.66-0.80), respectively (P for interaction = .27). The supportive analyses including the 2 trials adding an angiotensin receptor blocker to background angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor treatment (n = 16 383) gave consistent findings., Conclusions and Relevance: The mortality benefit from RAS blockade was similar in Black and non-Black patients. Despite the smaller relative risk reduction in hospitalization for HF with RAS blockade in Black patients, the absolute benefit in Black patients was comparable with non-Black patients because of the greater incidence of this outcome in Black patients.

Aims: We examine the effects of symptoms and cardiovascular disease (CVD) events on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and healthcare costs in a European population with atrial fibrillation (AF)., Methods and Results: In the EURObservational Research Programme on AF long-term general registry, AF patients from 250 centres in 27 European countries were enrolled and followed for 2 years. We used fixed effects models to estimate the association of symptoms and CVD events on HRQOL and annual healthcare costs. We found significant decrements in HRQOL in AF patients in whom ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) [-0.075 (95% confidence interval -0.144, -0.006)], angina or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) [-0.037 (-0.071, -0.003)], new-onset/worsening heart failure [-0.064 (-0.088, -0.039)], bleeding events [-0.031 (-0.059, -0.003)], thromboembolic events [-0.071 (-0.115, -0.027)], mild symptoms [0.037 (-0.048, -0.026)], or severe/disabling symptoms [-0.090 (-0.108, -0.072)] occurred during the follow-up. During follow-up, annual healthcare costs were associated with an increase of €11 718 (€8497, €14 939) in patients with STEMI, €5823 (€4757, €6889) in patients with angina/NSTEMI, €3689 (€3219, €4158) in patients with new-onset or worsening heart failure, €3792 (€3315, €4270) in patients with bleeding events, and €3182 (€2483, €3881) in patients with thromboembolic events, compared with AF patients without these events. Healthcare costs were primarily driven by inpatient costs. There were no significant differences in HRQOL or healthcare resource use between EU regions or by sex., Conclusion: Symptoms and CVD events are associated with a high burden on AF patients and healthcare systems throughout Europe., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: J.L., A.G., and R.L.F. report research grants from ESC. A.D.T. has stock in two start-up companies, receiving no income from these investments. A.T. has a consultancy agreement with ESC. A.P.M. reports payments from Astra Zeneca, Novartis, Sanofi, and Bayer for participation in study committees in areas outside the present work. P.V. reports consulting fees from Servier International, Hygeia Hospital Group, and ESC. M.W.A., R.H., and M.L. report no disclosures., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) reduces morbidity and mortality, but its implementation is often poor in daily clinical practice. Barriers to implementation include clinical and organizational factors that might contribute to clinical inertia, i.e. avoidance/delay of recommended treatment initiation/optimization. The spectrum of strategies that might be applied to foster GDMT implementation is wide, and involves the organizational set-up of heart failure care pathways, tailored drug initiation/optimization strategies increasing the chance of successful implementation, digital tools/telehealth interventions, educational activities and strategies targeting patient/physician awareness, and use of quality registries. This scientific statement by the Heart Failure Association of the ESC provides an overview of the current state of GDMT implementation in HFrEF, clinical and organizational barriers to implementation, and aims at suggesting a comprehensive framework on how to overcome clinical inertia and ultimately improve implementation of GDMT in HFrEF based on up-to-date evidence., (© 2024 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

The Italian Network on Congestive Heart Failure (IN-CHF) project, later known as IN-HF Online, was launched in 1995 to provide the Italian cardiology community with a digital tool, standardized across the country, for managing outpatients with heart failure (HF), that enabled the creation of a database for clinical, educational and scientific purposes. During its almost three decades of activity, this observational research program has achieved highly positive scientific results. Indeed, IN-HF fostered professional relationships among individuals working in different centers, established a cultural network for the care of HF patients, periodically updated on the scientific advances, and allowed the assessment of several clinical, epidemiological, and prognostic features. These findings have been published in numerous national and international journals, as summarized in the present overview.

Background and Aims: There are no established clinical tools to predict left ventricular (LV) recovery in women with peripartum cardiomyopathy (PPCM). Using data from women enrolled in the ESC EORP PPCM Registry, the aim was to derive a prognostic model to predict LV recovery at 6 months and develop the 'ESC EORP PPCM Recovery Score'-a tool for clinicians to estimate the probability of LV recovery., Methods: From 2012 to 2018, 752 women from 51 countries were enrolled. Eligibility included (i) a peripartum state, (ii) signs or symptoms of heart failure, (iii) LV ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 45%, and (iv) exclusion of alternative causes of heart failure. The model was derived using data from participants in the Registry and internally validated using bootstrap methods. The outcome was LV recovery (LVEF ≥50%) at six months. An integer score was created., Results: Overall, 465 women had a 6-month echocardiogram. LV recovery occurred in 216 (46.5%). The final model included baseline LVEF, baseline LV end diastolic diameter, human development index (a summary measure of a country's social and economic development), duration of symptoms, QRS duration and pre-eclampsia. The model was well-calibrated and had good discriminatory ability (C-statistic 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74-0.83). The model was internally validated (optimism-corrected C-statistic 0.78, 95% CI 0.73-0.82)., Conclusions: A model which accurately predicts LV recovery at 6 months in women with PPCM was derived. The corresponding ESC EORP PPCM Recovery Score can be easily applied in clinical practice to predict the probability of LV recovery for an individual in order to guide tailored counselling and treatment., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background and Aims: Childhood-onset cardiomyopathies are rare and poorly characterized. This study examined the baseline characteristics and 1-year follow-up of children with cardiomyopathy in the first European Cardiomyopathy Registry., Methods: Prospective data were collected on individuals aged 1-<18 years enrolled in the European Society of Cardiology EURObservational Research Programme Cardiomyopathy and Myocarditis long-term registry (June 2014-December 2016)., Results: A total of 633 individuals aged ≤18 years with hypertrophic [HCM; n = 388 (61.3%)], dilated [DCM; n = 206 (32.5%)], restrictive [RCM; n = 28 (4.4%)], and arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy [ARVC; n = 11 (1.7%)] were enrolled by 23 referral centres in 14 countries. Median age at diagnosis was 4.0 [interquartile range (IQR) 0-10] years, and there was a male predominance [n = 372 (58.8%)] across all subtypes, with the exception of DCM diagnosed <10 years of age; 621 (98.1%) patients were receiving cardiac medication and 80 (12.6%) had an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. A total of 253 patients (253/535, 47.3%) had familial disease. Genetic testing was performed in 414 (67.8%) patients with a pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant reported in 250 (60.4%). Rare disease phenocopies were reported in 177 patients (28.0%) and were most frequent in patients under 10 years [142 (30.9%) vs. 35 (19.6%); P = .003]. Over a median follow-up of 12.5 months (IQR 11.3-15.3 months), 18 patients (3.3%) died [HCM n = 9 (2.6%), DCM n = 5 (3.0%), RCM n = 4 (16.0%)]. Heart failure events were most frequent in RCM patients (36.0%)., Conclusions: The findings confirm the heterogeneous aetiology of childhood cardiomyopathies and show a high frequency of familial disease. Outcomes differed by cardiomyopathy subtype, highlighting a need for disease-specific evaluation and treatment., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Gender-related discrepancies in personal and professional life have been reported among radio-exposed workers. We assessed this topic among cardiac catheterization workers in Italy, with a focus on gender and working position., Methods: Radio-exposed workers affiliated with the Italian Association of Hospital Cardiologists were invited to answer an online survey, which included 41 questions formatted as multiple choice., Results: Overall, 237 workers responded. The proportion of males was significantly higher than that of females in the population aged >50 years. A greater portion of females than males perceived female-gender discrimination regarding career advancement (77.2% vs 30.9%, p < 0.001) and work compensation (49.1% vs. 17.1%, p < 0.001). There was no difference in perceived gender- discrimination in terms of career advancement opportunities between physician and non-physicians. A larger portion of females than males experienced workplace discrimination (51.8% of females vs. 8.1% of males, p < 0.0001). Non-physician responders made up 38.8% of all respondents and reported a lower yearly radiation exposure than physicians. Non-physicians were more aware of the laws regulating lab access during pregnancy than physicians (93.5% vs. 48.3%, p < 0.0001). A greater percentage of female nurses than physicians communicate without hesitation the pregnancy status to their employers (45.6% vs 20%, p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Gender-based career disparities were perceived among physicians and non-physician staff of cardiology interventional laboratories. Strategies should be implemented to ensure gender equality in career opportunities and to increase knowledge of radioprotection and the laws regulating access to laboratories during pregnancy., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Traditional scores as CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-Vasc are suitable for predicting stroke and systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and have shown to be also associated with mortality. Other more complex scores have been recommended for survival prediction. The purpose of our analysis was to test the performance of different clinical scores in predicting 1-year mortality in AF patients., Material and Methods: CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-Vasc scores were calculated for AF patients of the BLITZ-AF register and compared to R2-CHADS2, R2-CHA2DS2-Vasc and CHA2DS2VASc-RAF scores in predicting 1-year survival. Scores including renal function were calculated both with glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and creatinine clearance., Results: One-year vital status (1960 alive and 199 dead) was available in 2159 patients. Receiver-operating characteristic curves displayed an association of each score to all-cause mortality, with R2(ClCrea)-CHADS2 being the best [area under the curve (AUC) 0.734]. Differences among the AUCs of the eight scores were not so evident, and a significant difference was found only between R2(ClCrea)-CHADS2 and CHADS2, CHA2DS2VASc, (ClCrea)-CHA2DS2-VASC-RAF.All the scores showed a similar performance for cardiovascular (CV) mortality, with CHA2DS2VASc-RAF being the best (AUC 0.757), with a significant difference with respect to CHADS2, CHA2DS2VASc, and (ClCrea)CHA2DS2Vasc-RAF., Conclusions: More complex scores, even if with better statistical performance, do not show a clinically relevant higher capability to discriminate alive or dead patients at 12 months. The classical and well known CHA2DS2VASc score, which is routinely used all around the world, has a high sensitivity in predicting all-cause mortality (AUC 0.695; Sensit. 80.4%) and CV mortality (AUC 0.691; Sensit. 80.0%)., Graphical Abstract: http://links.lww.com/JCM/A632., (Copyright © 2024 Italian Federation of Cardiology - I.F.C. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is commonly observed in patients with severe left-sided valvular heart disease (VHD). This study sought to assess TR frequency, management and outcome in this population., Methods and Results: Among 6883 patients with severe native left-sided VHD or previous left-sided valvular intervention enrolled in the EURObservational Research Programme prospective VHD II survey, moderate or severe TR was very frequent in patients with severe mitral VHD (30% when mitral stenosis, 36% when mitral regurgitation [MR]), especially in patients with secondary MR (46%), and rare in patients with severe aortic VHD (4% when aortic stenosis, 3% when aortic regurgitation). An increase in TR grade was associated with a more severe clinical presentation and a poorer 6-month survival (p < 0.0001). Rates of concomitant tricuspid valve (TV) intervention at the time of left-sided heart valve surgery were high at the time of mitral valve surgery (50% when mitral stenosis, 41% when MR). Concordance between class I indications (patients with severe TR) for concomitant TV surgery at the time of left-sided valvular heart surgery according to guidelines and real-practice decision-making was very good (88% overall, 95% in patients operated on for MR)., Conclusion: In this large international prospective survey among patients with severe left-sided VHD, moderate/severe TR was frequent in patients with mitral valve disease and was associated with a poorer outcome as TR grade increased. In patients with severe TR, compliance to guidelines for class I indications for concomitant TV surgery at the time of left-sided heart valve surgery was very good., (© 2024 European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Patients who sustain an acute myocardial infarction (AMI), including ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), remain at high risk for heart failure (HF), coronary events, and death. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors have been shown to significantly decrease the risk for cardiovascular events in both STEMI and NSTEMI patients., Objectives: The objectives were to determine whether angiotensin-receptor blockade and neprilysin inhibition with sacubitril/valsartan, compared with ramipril, has impact on reducing cardiovascular events according to the type of AMI., Methods: The PARADISE-MI (Prospective ARNI versus ACE inhibitor trial to DetermIne Superiority in reducing heart failure Events after Myocardial Infarction) trial enrolled patients with AMI complicated by left ventricular dysfunction and/or pulmonary congestion and at least 1 risk-enhancing factor. Patients were randomized to either sacubitril/valsartan or ramipril. The primary endpoint was death from cardiovascular causes or incident HF. In this prespecified analysis, we stratified patients according to AMI type., Results: Of 5,661 enrolled patients, 4,291 (75.8%) had STEMI. These patients were younger and had fewer comorbidities and cardiovascular risk factors than NSTEMI patients. After adjustment for potential confounders, the risk for the primary outcome was marginally higher in NSTEMI vs STEMI patients (adjusted HR: 1.19; 95% CI: 1.00-1.41), with borderline statistical significance (P = 0.05). The primary composite outcome occurred at similar rates in patients randomized to sacubitril/valsartan vs ramipril in STEMI (10% vs 12%; HR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.73-1.04; P = 0.13) and NSTEMI patients (17% vs 17%; HR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.75-1.25; P = 0.80; P interaction = 0.53)., Conclusions: Compared with ramipril, sacubitril/valsartan did not significantly decrease the risk for cardiovascular death and HF in patients with AMI complicated by left ventricular dysfunction, irrespective of the type of AMI. (Prospective ARNI vs ACE Inhibitor Trial to Determine Superiority in Reducing Heart Failure Events After MI; NCT02924727)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The PARADISE-MI trial was funded by Novartis. Dr Braunwald has received research grants through his institution from AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, Merck, and Novartis; and has consultancies with Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim/Lilly, Cardurion, and Verve. Dr Claggert has received consultancy fees from Novartis, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardurion, Corvia, and Myokardia. Dr Granger has received research grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, Duke Clinical Research Institute, FDA, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceutical Products, L.P., Medtronic Foundation, Novartis Pharmaceutic Company, and Pfizer; has received consulting fees from Abbvie, Abiomed, Alnylam Pharm, Bayer Corporation US, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific Corporation, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardionomic, CeleCor Therapeutics, HengRui USA, Janssen Pharmaceutica Products, L.P., Medscape, LLC, Medtronic Inc, Merck, NIH, Novo Nordisk, Novartis Pharmaceutic Company, Pfizer, Phillips, and REATA; and owns equity in Tenac.io. Dr Kerkar has received speaker fees from Novartis, AstraZeneca, Bayer Zydus, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cipla, Dr Reddy’s, Emcure, Intas, Johnson and Johnson, Mankind, Pfizer, Torrent, and USV. Dr Kober has received speaker honorarium from Nova, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Bayer, and Boehringer. Dr Lewis has received personal fees from Amgen and Dal-Cor. Dr Maggioni has received personal fees for participation in committees of studies supported by Bayer, Novartis, AstraZeneca, and Fresenius, outside the present work. Dr Mann has received consulting fees from Cardurion, HAYA Therapeutics, Tenaya, and Novo Nordisk. Dr Mehran has received institutional research payments from Abbott, Abiomed, Alleviant Medical, AM-Pharma, Applied Therapeutics, Arena, AstraZeneca, BAIM, Bayer, Beth Israel Deaconess, Biosensors, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, CardiaWave, CellAegis, CeloNova, CERC, Chiesi, Concept Medical, CSL Behring, Cytosorbents, DSI, Duke University, Element Science, Faraday, Humacyte, Idorsia, Insel Gruppe AG, Magenta, Medtronic, Novartis, OrbusNeich, Philips, RenalPro, Vivasure, and Zoll; has received personal fees from Cine-Med Research and WebMD; has received consulting fees paid to the institution from Abbott, Janssen, Medtronic, and Novartis; has equity <1% in Applied Therapeutics, Elixir Medical, STEL, and CONTROLRAD (spouse); and is on the Scientific Advisory Board for AMA, ACC (BOT Member), SCAI (Women in Innovations Committee Member), and JAMA Associate Editor; and Faculty CRF (no fee). Dr McMurray has received payments through Glasgow University from work on clinical trials, consulting, and other activities from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Cardurion, Cytokinetics, GSK, KBP Biosciences, and Novartis; has received personal consultancy fees from Alnylam Pharma, Bayer, BMS, George Clinical PTY Ltd, Ionis Pharma, Novartis, Regeneron Pharma, and River 2 Renal Corporation; has received personal lecture fees from Abbott, Alkem Metabolics, AstraZeneca, Blue Ocean Scientific Solutions Ltd., Boehringer Ingelheim, Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge, Emcure Pharma. Ltd, Eris Lifesciences, European Academy of CME, Hikma Pharmaceuticals, Imagica health, Intas Pharma, J.B. Chemicals & Pharma. Ltd, Lupin Pharma, Medscape/Heart.Org, ProAdWise Communications, Radcliffe Cardiology, Sun Pharma., The Corpus, Translation Research Group, and Translational Medicine Academy; and he is a director of Global Clinical Trial Partners Ltd. Dr Nunez has received personal fees from or is on the advisory boards for Alleviant, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, Cytokinetics, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Rovi, and Vifor Pharma. Dr Pfeffer has received research grant support through his institution from Novartis; has been a consultant to Alnylam, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly Alliance, Corvidia, DalCor, GlaxoSmithKline, Lexicon, NHLBI CONNECTs (Master Protocol Committee), Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Peerbridge, and Sanofi; and has equity in DalCor. Dr Rouleau has received consultant fees from Novartis, BMS, Bayer, and AstraZeneca. Dr Sim has received research grants from Actelion, Alnylam, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bellerophon, Bayer, BMS, Celladon, Cytokinetics, Eidos, Gilead, GSK, Ionis, Lilly, Mesoblast, MyoKardia, NIH/NHLBI, Neurotronik, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Respicardia, Sanofi Pasteur, Theracos, and US2.AI; and has consulted for Abbott, Action, Akros, Alnylam, Amgen, Arena, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Cardior, Cardurion, Corvia, Cytokinetics, Daiichi-Sankyo, GSK, Lilly, Merck, Myokardia, Novartis, Roche, Theracos, Quantum Genomics, Cardurion, Janssen, Cardiac Dimensions, Tenaya, Sanofi-Pasteur, Dinaqor, Tremeau, CellProThera, Moderna, American Regent, Sarepta, Lexicon, Anacardio, Akros, and Puretech Health. Dr Solomon has received research grants from Actelion, Alnylam, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bellerophon, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celladon, Cytokinetics, Eidos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Ionis, Lilly, Mesoblast, MyoKardia, National Institutes of Health/NHLBI, Neurotronik, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Respicardia, Sanofi Pasteur, Theracos, and US2.AI; and has consulted for Abbott, Action, Akros, Alnylam, Amgen, Arena, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardior, Cardurion, Corvia, Cytokinetics, Daiichi-Sankyo, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Merck, Myokardia, Novartis, Roche, Theracos, Quantum Genomics, Cardurion, Janssen, Cardiac Dimensions, Tenaya, Sanofi-Pasteur, Dinaqor, Tremeau, CellPro-Thera, Moderna, American Regent, and Sarepta. Dr Steg has received research grants from Amarin, Bayer, Sanofi, and Servier; and has received speaker or consultant fees from Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen, Kowa, Idorsia, Lexicon, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, and Servier. Dr Van der Meer has received consultancy fees and/or grants, through the University Medical Center Groningen, from Novartis, Pharmacosmos, Vifor Pharma, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Pharma Nord, BridgeBio, Novo Nordisk, Daiichi-Sankyo, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Ionis. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Crown Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

For over 40 years, clinical research has been one of the most important aims of the Italian Association of Hospital Cardiologists (ANMCO), being an essential tool in pursuing promotion and fulfillment of good clinical practices in prevention, treatment and rehabilitation of cardiovascular diseases. Since 1992, with the creation of the Research Center (now part of the Heart Care Foundation), ANMCO is capable of independently and professionally managing all the aspects related to planning, management, and publication of the results of clinical studies. The other strength of ANMCO is the network built in Cardiology Departments on the whole territory of Italy, a human capital that allows ANMCO to deal with the new scientific challenges, in a context of profound changes in the social, economic, technological, and methodological setting. This document is based on the debate about the state of clinical research in Italy and the role of ANMCO in this setting that took place during the 2023 ANMCO States General.

Objective: The cardiovascular benefits of low-dose colchicine have been demonstrated in patients with coronary disease. Its effects were evaluated in this prespecified analysis in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) from the Colchicine Cardiovascular Outcomes Trial (COLCOT)., Research Design and Methods: COLCOT was a randomized, double-blinded trial of colchicine, 0.5 mg daily, versus placebo initiated within 30 days after a myocardial infarction., Results: There were 959 patients with T2D enrolled and monitored for a median of 22.6 months. A primary end point event occurred in 8.7% of patients in the colchicine group and in 13.1% in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0.65; 95% CI 0.44-0.96; P = 0.03). Nausea was reported in 2.7% and 0.8% in the study groups (P = 0.03), and pneumonia occurred in 2.4% and 0.4% (P = 0.008)., Conclusions: Among patients with T2D and a recent myocardial infarction, colchicine, 0.5 mg daily, leads to a large reduction of cardiovascular events. These results support the conduct of the COLCOT-T2D trial in primary prevention., (© 2024 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Background: Peripartum cardiomyopathy (PPCM) is a global disease with substantial morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to analyze to what extent socioeconomic factors were associated with maternal and neonatal outcomes., Methods: In 2011, >100 national and affiliated member cardiac societies of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) were contacted to contribute to a global PPCM registry, under the auspices of the ESC EORP Programme. We investigated the characteristics and outcomes of women with PPCM and their babies according to individual and country-level sociodemographic factors (Gini index coefficient [GINI index], health expenditure [HE] and human developmental index [HDI])., Results: 739 women from 49 countries (Europe [33%], Africa [29%], Asia-Pacific [15%], Middle East [22%]) were enrolled. Low HDI was associated with greater left ventricular (LV) dilatation at time of diagnosis. However, baseline LV ejection fraction did not differ according to sociodemographic factors. Countries with low HE prescribed guideline-directed heart failure therapy less frequently. Six-month mortality was higher in countries with low HE; and LV non-recovery in those with low HDI, low HE and lower levels of education. Maternal outcome (death, re-hospitalization, or persistent LV dysfunction) was independently associated with income. Neonatal death was significantly more common in countries with low HE and low HDI, but was not influenced by maternal income or education attainment., Conclusions: Maternal and neonatal outcomes depend on country-specific socioeconomic characteristics. Attempts should therefore be made to allocate adequate resources to health and education, to improve maternal and fetal outcomes in PPCM., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None of the authors have any conflict of interest to declare related to this manuscript., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: There is a paucity of data on the clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes of women compared with men with heart failure in low-income and middle-income countries compared with high-income countries. We examined sex differences in risk factors, clinical characteristics, and treatments, and prospectively assessed the risk of heart failure hospitalisation and mortality in patients with heart failure in 40 high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries., Methods: Participants aged 18 years or older with heart failure were enrolled from Dec 20, 2016, to Sept 9, 2020 in the prospective Global Congestive Heart Failure (G-CHF) study from 257 centres in 40 high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries. Participants were followed up until May 25, 2023. We recorded the demographic characteristics, medical history, and treatments of participants. We prospectively recorded data on heart failure hospitalisation and mortality by sex in the overall study, according to country economic status, and according to level of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)., Findings: 23 341 participants (9119 [39·1%] women and 14 222 [60·1%] men) were recruited and followed up for a mean of 2·6 years (SD 1·4). The mean age of women in the study was 62 years (SD 17) compared with 64 years (14) in men. Fewer women than men had an LVEF of 40% or lower (51·7% women vs 66·2% men). By contrast, more women than men had an LVEF of 50% or higher (33·2% women vs 18·6% men). Hypertensive heart failure was the most common aetiology in women (25·5% women vs 16·8% men), whereas ischaemic heart failure was the most common aetiology in men (45·6% men vs 26·6% women). Signs and symptoms of congestion were more common in women than men: 42·6% of women had a New York Heart Association functional class of III or IV compared with 37·9% of men. The use of heart failure medications and cardiac tests did not differ systematically between the sexes, although implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation was lower among women than men (8·7% women vs 17·2% men). The adjusted risk of heart failure hospitalisation was similar in women and men (women-to-men adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·99 [95% CI 0·92-1·05]). This pattern was consistent within groups of countries categorised by economic status, geographical region, and by LVEF level. However, women had a lower adjusted risk of mortality (women-to-men adjusted HR 0·79 [95% CI 0·75-0·84]) despite adjustments for prognostic factors-a pattern which was consistently observed across groups of countries irrespective of economic status, geography, and LVEF levels of patients., Interpretation: The underlying cause of heart failure and ejection fraction phenotype differ between women and men, as do the severity of symptoms. Heart failure treatments (except ICD use) were not consistently in favour of one sex. Paradoxically, while the rates of hospitalisations were similar among women and men, the risk of death was lower among women. These patterns were consistent regardless of the economic status of the countries. The higher mortality among men is unexplained and warrants further study., Funding: Bayer., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests PJ reports grants from Bayer during the conduct of the study. IJ reports grants or contracts from AstraZeneca; consulting fees from AstraZeneca and Novartis (for participation in advisory boards); and honoraria from AstraZeneca, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Boehringer Ingelheim. EL reports grants or contracts from Amgen, HLS Therapeutics, and Novartis (payments made to institution); consulting fees from Amgen, HLS Therapeutics, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Servier, AstraZeneca, and Bayer; honoraria from Novartis, HLS Therapeutics, Servier, and Amgen; and participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory board for LIB Therapeutics, GSK, Novartis, and The Medicines Company. APM reports grants from Bayer during the conduct of the study; participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for Bayer (outside the present work); and leadership or fiduciary roles in other boards for AstraZeneca, Novartis, Bayer, Sanofi (outside the present work). LM reports honoraria from Astra Zeneca, Merck, and Janssen; support for attending meetings and/or travel from Janssen; participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for Astra Zeneca and Merck; and leadership or fiduciary roles for the Canadian Heart Failure Society and Canadian Cardiovascular Society. AG reports grants from Bayer awarded to Hamilton Health Sciences during the conduct of the study. TM reports grants from Bayer to Hamilton Health Sciences during the conduct of the study. JM reports consulting fees from Anylam Pharmaceuticals, Bayer, BMS, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, River 2 Renal Corp, and Global Clinical Trial Partners; payment or honoraria from Abbott, Alkem Metabolics, AstraZeneca, Blue Ocean Scientific Solutions, Boehringer Ingelheim, Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge, Emcure Pharmaceuticals, Eris Lifesciences, European Academy of CME, Hikma Pharmaceuticals, Imagica Health, Intas Pharmaceuticals, J.B. Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals, Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Medscape/Heart.Org, ProAdWise Communications, Radcliffe Cardiology, Sun Pharmaceuticals, The Corpus, Translation Research Group, and Translational Medicine Academy; participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for George Clinical PTY; and investigator fees, executive committee membership, and advisory board membership for various trials, with payments made to his institution, from AstraZeneca, Amgen, Bayer, Cardurion, Cytokinetics, Glaxo Smith Kline, and KPB Biosciences. SY reports personal fees (honoraria and travel expenses) from Bayer, AstraZeneca, and Boehringer Ingelheim. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)