Search

Aims: Clinical pathways have been shown to improve outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF). Although patients with HF often have a cardiac implantable electronic device, few studies have reported the utility of device-derived risk scores to augment and organize care. TriageHF Plus is a device-based HF clinical pathway (DHFP) that uses remote monitoring alerts to trigger structured telephone assessment for HF stability and optimization. We aimed to evaluate the impact of TriageHF Plus on hospitalizations and describe the associated workforce burden., Methods and Results: TriageHF Plus was a multi-site, prospective study that compared outcomes for patients recruited between April 2019 and February 2021. All alert-triggered assessments were analysed to determine the appropriateness of the alert and the workload burden. A negative-binomial regression with inverse probability treatment weighting using a time-matched usual care cohort was applied to estimate the effect of TriageHF Plus on non-elective hospitalizations. A post hoc pre-COVID-19 sensitivity analysis was also performed. The TriageHF Plus cohort (n = 443) had a mean age of 68.8 ± 11.2 years, 77% male (usual care cohort: n = 315, mean age of 66.2 ± 14.5 years, 65% male). In the TriageHF Plus cohort, an acute medical issue was identified following an alert in 79/182 (43%) cases. Fifty assessments indicated acute HF, requiring clinical action in 44 cases. At 30 day follow-up, 39/66 (59%) of initially symptomatic patients reported improvement, and 20 (19%) initially asymptomatic patients had developed new symptoms. On average, each assessment took 10 min. The TriageHF Plus group had a 58% lower rate of hospitalizations across full follow-up [incidence relative ratio: 0.42, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.23-0.76, P = 0.004]. Across the pre-COVID-19 window, hospitalizations were 31% lower (0.69, 95% CI: 0.46-1.04, P = 0.077)., Conclusions: These data represent the largest real-world evaluation of a DHFP based on multi-parametric risk stratification. The TriageHF Plus clinical pathway was associated with an improvement in HF symptoms and reduced all-cause hospitalizations., (© 2024 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Many European healthcare providers struggle to adopt multidisciplinary, integrated care pathways for people with heart failure (HF) as recommended by the European Society of Cardiology. PRO-HF (Program to Optimize Heart Failure Patient Pathways) was developed to help clinicians identify strengths, gaps, and shortcomings in their HF pathways and support tailored interventions to optimize pathways and enhance patient care. We report initial findings from baseline assessments of HF pathway characteristics and challenges from 10 hospitals in six European countries (France, Ireland, Portugal, Spain, The Netherlands, and United Kingdom)., Methods and Results: Baseline assessments were holistic appraisals of full HF services to calibrate current status and development needs and assist management teams in prioritizing improvement projects. Assessments were performed using a comprehensive checklist of measures covering the HF patient journey from diagnosis to ongoing follow-up. These included a digital survey sent to full HF care teams and one-to-one interviews. The digital survey focused on four key areas (HF outpatient clinic; remote patient management; efficient device implantation and inpatient pathways; and network maximization) and 16 dimensions of excellence. Priority areas and themes for action identified in baseline assessments were (i) provision of HF specialist care; (ii) data capture and analysis; (iii) institutional care protocols; (iv) hospital-wide strategies; and (v) multidisciplinary teams (MDTs). Suboptimal specialist care of emergency inpatients was an issue at all hospitals and prioritized at 8/10. Availability and accessibility of data on patients, activities, and outcomes was an issue at all hospitals and prioritized by 4/10. A lack of clear protocols, templates, and tools for some HF activities created variability in patient care (e.g., HF specialist consultations, diagnostic testing, follow-up appointments, medications, and device eligibility) and inefficient use of clinician time. This made it difficult to initiate new technologies (e.g., remote patient monitoring) due to the risk of overburdening staff. MDTs were frequently understaffed. Multiple interventions were identified to address gaps and shortcomings that could be tailored to specific needs of individual hospitals (e.g., inpatient pathway optimization, creation/optimization of HF outpatient clinics, development of an HF performance dashboard, enhancement of protocol adherence, streamlining cardiac resynchronisation therapy pathways, and MDT coordination)., Conclusions: PRO-HF provides a valuable opportunity to identify gaps and significant shortcomings in HF pathways in European hospitals. Preliminary findings from hospitals that have initiated suggested changes to address these challenges are encouraging, though longer-term follow-up from more hospitals is needed to confirm the impact of PRO-HF on HF pathway optimization and patient care., (© 2024 The Author(s). ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

None of the spironolactone trials in heart failure (HF) assessed the blood pressure (BP) responses to exercise, while conflicting results were reported for exercise capacity. In the HOMAGE trial, 527 patients at increased HF risk were randomized to usual treatment with or without spironolactone (25-50 mg/day). The current substudy included 113 controls and 114 patients assigned spironolactone, who all completed the incremental shuttle walk test at baseline and months 1 and 9. Quality of life (QoL) was assessed by EQ5D questionnaire. Between-group differences (spironolactone minus control [Δs]) were analyzed by repeated measures ANOVA with adjustment for baseline and, if appropriate, additionally for sex, age and body mass index. Δs in the pre-exercise systolic/diastolic BP were -8.00 mm Hg (95% CI, -11.6 to -4.43)/-0.85 mm Hg (-2.96 to 1.26) at month 1 and -9.58 mm Hg (-14.0 to -5.19)/-3.84 mm Hg (-6.22 to -1.47) at month 9. Δs in the post-exercise systolic/diastolic BP were -8.08 mm Hg (-14.2 to -2.01)/-2.07 mm Hg (-5.79 to 1.65) and -13.3 mm Hg (-19.9 to -6.75)/-4.62 mm Hg (-8.07 to -1.17), respectively. For completed shuttles, Δs at months 1 and 9 were 2.15 (-0.10 to 4.40) and 2.49 (-0.79 to 5.67), respectively. Δs in QoL were not significant. The correlations between the exercise-induced BP increases and the number of completed shuttles were similar in both groups. In conclusion, in patients at increased risk of developing HF, spironolactone reduced the pre- and post-exercise BP, but did not improve exercise capacity or QoL., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Obesity is associated with adverse cardiac remodeling and is a key driver for the development and progression of heart failure (HF). Once-weekly semaglutide (2.4 mg) has been shown to improve HF-related symptoms and physical limitations, body weight, and exercise function in patients with obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), but the effects of semaglutide on cardiac structure and function in this population remain unknown., Objectives: In this echocardiography substudy of the STEP-HFpEF Program, we evaluated treatment effects of once-weekly semaglutide (2.4 mg) vs placebo on cardiac structure and function., Methods: Echocardiography at randomization and 52 weeks was performed in 491 of 1,145 participants (43%) in the STEP-HFpEF Program (pooled STEP-HFpEF [Semaglutide Treatment Effect in People with Obesity and HFpEF] and STEP-HFpEF DM [Semaglutide Treatment Effect in People with Obesity, HFpEF, and Type 2 Diabetes] trials). The prespecified primary outcome was change in left atrial (LA) volume, with changes in other echocardiography parameters evaluated as secondary outcomes. Treatment effects of semaglutide vs placebo were assessed using analysis of covariance stratified by trial and body mass index, with adjustment for baseline parameter values., Results: Overall, baseline clinical and echocardiographic characteristics were balanced among those receiving semaglutide (n = 253) and placebo (n = 238). Between baseline and 52 weeks, semaglutide attenuated progression of LA remodeling (estimated mean difference [EMD] in LA volume, -6.13 mL; 95% CI: -9.85 to -2.41 mL; P = 0.0013) and right ventricular (RV) enlargement (EMD in RV end-diastolic area: -1.99 cm 2 ; 95% CI: -3.60 to -0.38 cm 2 ; P = 0.016; EMD in RV end-systolic area: -1.41 cm 2 ; 95% CI: -2.42 to -0.40] cm 2 ; P = 0.0064) compared with placebo. Semaglutide additionally improved E-wave velocity (EMD: -5.63 cm/s; 95% CI: -9.42 to -1.84 cm/s; P = 0.0037), E/A (early/late mitral inflow velocity) ratio (EMD: -0.14; 95% CI: -0.24 to -0.04; P = 0.0075), and E/e' (early mitral inflow velocity/early diastolic mitral annular velocity) average (EMD: -0.79; 95% CI: -1.60 to 0.01; P = 0.05). These associations were not modified by diabetes or atrial fibrillation status. Semaglutide did not significantly affect left ventricular dimensions, mass, or systolic function. Greater weight loss with semaglutide was associated with greater reduction in LA volume (P interaction  = 0.033) but not with changes in E-wave velocity, E/e' average, or RV end-diastolic area., Conclusions: In the STEP-HFpEF Program echocardiography substudy, semaglutide appeared to improve adverse cardiac remodeling compared with placebo, further suggesting that treatment with semaglutide may be disease modifying among patients with obesity-related HFpEF. (Research Study to Investigate How Well Semaglutide Works in People Living With Heart Failure and Obesity [STEP-HFpEF]; NCT04788511; Research Study to Look at How Well Semaglutide Works in People Living With Heart Failure, Obesity and Type 2 Diabetes [STEP-HFpEF DM]; NCT04916470)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The STEP-HFpEF and STEP-HFpEF DM trials were sponsored by Novo Nordisk A/S. Dr Solomon has received research grants from Alexion, Alnylam, AstraZeneca, Bellerophon, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boston Scientific, Cytokinetics, Edgewise, Eidos, Gossamer, GSK, Ionis, Eli Lilly, MyoKardia, National Institutes of Health (NIH)/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Respicardia, Sanofi Pasteur, Theracos, and US2.AI; and has consulted for Abbott, Action, Akros, Alexion, 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, Janssen, Cardiac Dimensions, Tenaya, Sanofi-Pasteur, Dinaqor, Tremeau, CellProThera, Moderna, American Regent, Sarepta, Lexicon, Anacardio, Akros, and Valo. Dr Ostrominski has received grant support from the NIH (5T32HL007604-39). Dr Wang has received grant support from American College of Cardiology/Association of BlackCardiologists Merck Research Fellowship; and her institution has received fees for core lab services from Cytokinetics and Bristol Myers Squibb. Dr Shah has received support from research grants from the NIH (U54 HL160273, R01 HL140731, and R01 HL149423); has received research funding from AstraZeneca, Corvia, and Pfizer; and has received consulting fees from Abbott, Alleviant, Amgen, Aria CV, AstraZeneca, Axon Therapies, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, BridgeBio, Bristol Myers Squibb, Corvia, Cytokinetics, Edwards Lifesciences, Eidos, Imara, Impulse Dynamics, Intellia, Ionis, Lilly, Merck, NGM Biopharmaceuticals, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Prothena, Regeneron, Rivus, Sardocor, Shifamed, Tenax, Tenaya, and Ultromics. Dr Borlaug has received research support from the NIH and the US Department of Defense; has received research grant funding from AstraZeneca, Axon, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic, Mesoblast, Novo Nordisk, Rivus, and Tenax Therapeutics; has served as a consultant for Actelion, Amgen, Aria, Axon Therapies, BD, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Edwards Lifesciences, Eli Lilly, Imbria, Janssen, Merck, NGM Biopharmaceuticals, Novo Nordisk, NXT Medical, and VADovations; and is named inventor (US patent no. 10,307,179) for the tools and approach for a minimally invasive pericardial modification procedure to treat heart failure. Dr Butler has served as a consultant to 3live, Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, Applied Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardiac Dimension, Cardior, CVRx, Cytokinetics, Edwards, Element Science, Impulse Dynamics, Imbria, Innolife, Inventiva, Janssen, Lexicon, Lilly, LivaNova, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Occlutech, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, PharmaIN, Roche, Sequana, SQ Innovation, and Vifor. Dr Davies has served as a consultant, Advisory Board member, and speaker for Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi; has served as an Advisory Board member and speaker for AstraZeneca; has served as an Advisory Board member for Medtronic, Pfizer, and ShouTi Pharma; has served as a speaker for Amgen, Novartis, and Sanofi; and has received grants as an investigator in support of investigator-initiated trials from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi. Dr Kitzman has received support from the Kermit Glenn Phillips II Chair in Cardiovascular Medicine and NIH (grants U01AG076928, R01AG078153, R01AG045551, R01AG18915, P30AG021332, 14 U24AG059624, and U01HL160272); has received honoraria as a consultant for AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Corvia Medical, Ketyo, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, and Rivus; has received grant funding from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, and Rivus; and has stock ownership in Gilead Sciences. Dr Verma has received speaker and/or consulting fees from Abbott, Amarin, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group, Eli Lilly, HLS Therapeutics, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, PhaseBio, and TIMI. Drs Abildstrøm, Nygaard Einfeldt, and Rasmussen are employees and shareholders of Novo Nordisk A/S. Dr Abhayaratna has received honoraria or speaker fees as an Advisory Board member or speaker for Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, and Novo Nordisk. Dr Ahmed has received honoraria and/or consulting fees from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Medtronic, Novo Nordisk, Occlutech, Pharmacosmos, and Vifor. Dr Chopra has received speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cipla, Dr Reddy’s, Lupin, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Mankind, Pfizer, Sanofi, Sun Pharma, and Torrent. Dr Ito has received honoraria and/or consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Mochida, Novartis, and Novo Nordisk. Dr Merkely has received speaker fees and/or research payments from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Biotronik, Boehringer Ingelheim, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, DUKE Clinical Institute, Medtronic, and Novartis; and has received institutional grants from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Biotronik, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, DUKE Clinical Institute, Eli Lilly, Medtronic, Novartis, Terumo, and Vifor. Dr Núñez has received honoraria and/or consulting fees from Alleviant, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Pfizer, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Rovi, and Vifor. Dr Senni has received honoraria and/or consulting fees from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Vifor. Dr van der Meer has received institutional payments for consultancy fees and/or grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BridgeBio, Ionis, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Pharma Nord, and Vifor. Dr Wolf has received honoraria and/or consulting or speaker fees for serving as an Advisory Board member, consultant, or speaker from Novo Nordisk, Novartis, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and UCB. Dr Petrie has received research funding from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Novo Nordisk, Novartis, Pharmacosmos, Roche, and SQ Innovations; and has served on committees or consulted for AbbVie, Akero, AnaCardio, Applied Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardiorentis, Corvia, Eli Lilly, Horizon Therapeutics, LIB Therapeutics, Moderna, New Amsterdam, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pharmacosmos, Siemens, SQ Innovations, Takeda, Teikoku, and Vifor. Dr Kosiborod has served as a consultant or on an Advisory Board for 35Pharma, Alnylam, Amgen, Applied Therapeutics, Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Corcept Therapeutics, Cytokinetics, Dexcom, Eli Lilly, Esperion Therapeutics, Imbria Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Merck (Diabetes and Cardiovascular), Novo Nordisk, Pharmacosmos, Pfizer, Sanofi, scPharmaceuticals, Structure Therapeutics, Vifor Pharma, and Youngene Therapeutics; has received research grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Pfizer; holds stocks in Artera Health and Saghmos Therapeutics; has received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Novo Nordisk; and has received other research support from AstraZeneca and Vifor. Dr Ben-Gal has reported that he has no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Aims: Few randomized trials assessed the changes over time in the chronotropic heart rate (HR) reactivity (CHR), HR recovery (HRR) and exercise endurance (EE) in response to the incremental shuttle walk test (ISWT). We addressed this issue by analysing the open HOMAGE (Heart OMics in Aging) trial., Methods: In HOMAGE, 527 patients prone to heart failure were randomized to usual treatment with or without spironolactone (25-50 mg/day). The current sub-study included 113 controls and 114 patients assigned spironolactone (~70% on beta-blockers), who all completed the ISWT at baseline and at Months 1 and 9. Within-group changes over time (follow-up minus baseline) and between-group differences at each time point (spironolactone minus control) were analysed by repeated measures ANOVA, unadjusted or adjusted for sex, age and body mass index, and additionally for baseline for testing 1 and 9 month data., Results: Irrespective of randomization, the resting HR and CHR did not change from baseline to follow-up, with the exception of a small decrease in the HR immediately post-exercise (-3.11 b.p.m.) in controls at Month 9. In within-group analyses, HR decline over the 5 min post-exercise followed a slightly lower course at the 1 month visit in controls and at the 9 month visits in both groups, but not at the 1 month visit in the spironolactone group. Compared with baseline, EE increased by two to three shuttles at Months 1 and 9 in the spironolactone group but remained unchanged in the control group. In the between-group analyses, irrespective of adjustment, there were no HR differences at any time point from rest up to 5 min post-exercise or in EE. Subgroup analyses by sex or categorized by the medians of age, left ventricular ejection fraction or glomerular filtration rate were confirmatory. Combining baseline and Months 1 and 9 data in both treatment groups, the resting HR, CHR and HRR at 1 and 5 min averaged 61.5, 20.0, 9.07 and 13.8 b.p.m. and EE 48.3 shuttles., Conclusions: Spironolactone on top of usual treatment compared with usual treatment alone did not change resting HR, CHR, HRR and EE in response to ISWT. Beta-blockade might have concealed the effects of spironolactone. The current findings demonstrate that the ISWT, already used in a wide variety of pathological conditions, is a practical instrument to measure symptom-limited exercise capacity in patients prone to developing heart failure because of coronary heart disease., (© 2024 The Author(s). ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: This study aimed to examine the diagnostic pathways and outcomes of patients with heart failure (HF), stratified by left ventricular ejection fraction (EF), and to highlight deficiencies in real-world HF diagnosis and management., Methods and Results: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in Salford, United Kingdom, utilizing linked primary and secondary care data for HF patients diagnosed between January 2010 and November 2019. We evaluated characteristics, diagnostic patterns, healthcare resource utilization, and outcomes. Patients were categorized according to baseline (the latest measure prior to or within 90 days post-diagnosis) as having HF with reduced EF (HFrEF), mildly reduced EF (HFmrEF), or preserved EF (HFpEF). The data encompassed a 2 year period before diagnosis and up to 5 years post-diagnosis. A total of 3227 patients were diagnosed with HF between January 2010 and November 2019. The mean follow-up time was 2.6 [±1.9 standard deviation (SD)] years. The mean age at diagnosis was 74.8 (±12.7 SD) years, and 1469 (45.5%) were female. HFpEF was the largest cohort (46.6%, n pEF  = 1505), HFmrEF constituted 16.1% (n mrEF  = 520), and HFrEF 18.5% (n rEF  = 596) of the population, while 18.8% (n u  = 606) of patients remained unassigned due to insufficient evidence to support categorization. At baseline, measurement of natriuretic peptide (NP; brain NP and N-terminal pro-B-type NP) and echocardiographic report data were available for 592 (18.3%) and 2621 (81.2%) patients, respectively. A total of 2099 (65.0%) of the HF cohort had access to a cardiology-led outpatient clinic prior to the HF diagnosis, and 602 (18.7%) attended cardiac rehabilitation post-diagnosis. The 5 year crude survival rate was 37.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) (35.2-40.7%)], 42.3% [95% CI (38.0-47.2%)], and 45.5% [95% CI (41.0-50.4%)] for HFpEF, HFrEF, and HFmrEF, respectively., Conclusions: Low survival rates were observed across all HF groups, along with suboptimal rates of NP testing and specialist assessments. These findings suggest missed opportunities for timely and accurate HF diagnosis, a pivotal first step in improving outcomes for HF patients. Addressing these gaps in diagnosis and management is urgently needed., (© 2024 Pfizer Ltd. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Patients with acutely decompensated heart failure (ADHF) are usually admitted to hospital for management. There is growing interest in delivering intravenous (IV) diuretic therapy at home, in the community or at hospital day-care units; the safety and effectiveness of outpatient-based management (OPM) for ADHF has not been established. We conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analysis to investigate the short-term safety and effectiveness of OPM compared with inpatient management (IPM) of ADHF. Pre-specified endpoints were 30 day mortality and 30 day hospitalization. The meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4 software. Twenty-nine studies of OPM were identified, including 7683 patients. Only five studies directly compared OPM (n = 1303) with IPM (n = 2047), including three observational studies, and two randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The other 24 studies only stated OPM outcomes. For the five studies comparing IPM versus OPM, patients were generally aged >75 years and of similar age for each strategy, with a similar proportion of men (56%). In a study-level, aggregate analysis, 30 day all-cause mortality was 9.3% (121/1303) for OPM, compared with 15.6% (320/2047) for IPM [OR 0.29 (95% CI 0.09, 0.93) P = 0.04]. Four studies reported 30 day all-cause hospitalization; 22.0% for IPM versus 16.8% for OPM [OR 0.73 (95% CI 0.61, 0.89), P = 0.001]. In the two RCTs, we found no difference in 30 day mortality or hospitalization. In observational studies, OPM of ADHF is associated with lower 30 day hospitalization and lower 30 day mortality; such differences were not observed in two small, single-centre RCTs. A substantial, multicentre RCT is required to confirm the safety and effectiveness of OPM for ADHF., (© 2024 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) and cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators (CRT-D) are lifesaving treatments for patients at risk for sudden cardiac death. Effective physician-patient communication during the shared decision-making process is essential. Electrophysiologist-patient conversations were targeted to obtain objective data on the interaction, understand the conversation framework, and uncover opportunities for improved communication., Methods: Individuals previously identified as requiring an ICD/CRT-D but declined implantation were recruited for this four-stage interview and survey-based study. Quantitative analysis of surveys and AI analysis of conversation videos was conducted to evaluate patient participant expectations, analyze feedback about the conversations with study physicians, and gauge willingness for device implantation., Results: The study included 27 patients (mean age 51 years, 51.9% female) and 9 study physicians. Patients were significantly more willing to undergo ICD/CRT-D implantation after conversing with study physicians compared to their own physicians and pre-conversation surveys (mean scores: 5.0, 3.1, and 4.4 out of 7, respectively; p < 0.001). Patient participants had higher satisfaction with the study conversation, rating study physicians higher in effectiveness of explanations, responsiveness to questions, and overall quality of the conversation compared to their own physicians (all p < 0.001)., Conclusions: In a cohort of patients who previously declined ICD/CRT-D implantation, patient satisfaction and willingness to undergo implantation of a guideline-directed device therapy increased significantly following a structured conversation with study physicians. Identified key elements could be integrated into user-friendly tools and educational materials to facilitate these conversations, improving patient engagement with the decision-making process and enhancing informed acceptance of indicated device therapies., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Accelerometer-derived physical activity (PA) from cardiac devices are available via remote monitoring platforms yet rarely reviewed in clinical practice. We aimed to investigate the association between PA and clinical measures of frailty and physical functioning., Methods: The PATTErn study (A study of Physical Activity paTTerns and major health Events in older people with implantable cardiac devices) enrolled participants aged 60 + undergoing remote cardiac monitoring. Frailty was measured using the Fried criteria and gait speed (m/s), and physical functioning by NYHA class and SF-36 physical functioning score. Activity was reported as mean time active/day across 30-days prior to enrolment (30-day PA). Multivariable regression methods were utilised to estimate associations between PA and frailty/functioning (OR = odds ratio, β = beta coefficient, CI = confidence intervals)., Results: Data were available for 140 participants (median age 73, 70.7% male). Median 30-day PA across the analysis cohort was 134.9 min/day (IQR 60.8-195.9). PA was not significantly associated with Fried frailty status on multivariate analysis, however was associated with gait speed (β = 0.04, 95% CI 0.01-0.07, p = 0.01) and measures of physical functioning (NYHA class: OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.57-0.92, p = 0.01, SF-36 physical functioning: β = 4.60, 95% CI 1.38-7.83, p = 0.005)., Conclusions: PA from cardiac devices was associated with physical functioning and gait speed. This highlights the importance of reviewing remote monitoring PA data to identify patients who could benefit from existing interventions. Further research should investigate how to embed this into clinical pathways., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: In some countries, intravenous ferric derisomaltose (FDI) is only licensed for treating iron deficiency with anemia. Accordingly, we investigated the effects of intravenous FDI in a subgroup of patients with anemia in the IRONMAN (Effectiveness of Intravenous (IV) Iron Treatment Versus Standard Care in Patients With Heart Failure and Iron Deficiency) trial., Method and Results: IRONMAN enrolled patients with heart failure, a left ventricular ejection fraction of ≤45%, and iron deficiency (ferritin <100 µg/L or transferrin saturation of <20%), 771 (68%) of whom had anemia (hemoglobin <12 g/dL for women and <13 g/dL for men). Patients were randomized, open label, to FDI (n = 397) or usual care (n = 374) and followed for a median of 2.6 years. The primary end point, recurrent hospitalization for heart failure and cardiovascular death, occurred less frequently for those assigned to FDI (rate ratio 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.61-1.01; P = .063). First event analysis for cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure, less affected by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, gave similar results (hazard ratio 0.77, 95% confidence interval 0.62-0.96; P = .022). Patients randomized to FDI reported a better Minnesota Living with Heart Failure quality of life, for overall (P = .013) and physical domain (P = .00093) scores at 4 months., Conclusions: In patients with iron deficiency anemia and heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, intravenous FDI improves quality of life and may decrease cardiovascular events., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In the STEP-HFpEF (NCT04788511) and STEP-HFpEF DM (NCT04916470) trials, the GLP-1 receptor agonist semaglutide improved symptoms, physical limitations, bodyweight, and exercise function in people with obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. In this prespecified pooled analysis of the STEP-HFpEF and STEP-HFpEF DM trials, we aimed to provide a more definitive assessment of the effects of semaglutide across a range of outcomes and to test whether these effects were consistent across key patient subgroups., Methods: We conducted a prespecified pooled analysis of individual patient data from STEP-HFpEF and STEP-HFpEF DM, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials at 129 clinical research sites in 18 countries. In both trials, eligible participants were aged 18 years or older, had heart failure with a left ventricular ejection fraction of at least 45%, a BMI of at least 30 kg/m 2 , New York Heart Association class II-IV symptoms, and a Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Clinical Summary Score (KCCQ-CSS; a measure of heart failure-related symptoms and physical limitations) of less than 90 points. In STEP-HFpEF, people with diabetes or glycated haemoglobin A 1c concentrations of at least 6·5% were excluded, whereas for inclusion in STEP-HFpEF DM participants had to have been diagnosed with type 2 diabetes at least 90 days before screening and to have an HbA 1c of 10% or lower. In both trials, participants were randomly assigned to either 2·4 mg semaglutide once weekly or matched placebo for 52 weeks. The dual primary endpoints were change from baseline to week 52 in KCCQ-CSS and bodyweight in all randomly assigned participants. Confirmatory secondary endpoints included change from baseline to week 52 in 6-min walk distance, a hierarchical composite endpoint (all-cause death, heart failure events, and differences in changes in KCCQ-CSS and 6-min walk distance); and C-reactive protein (CRP) concentrations. Heterogeneity in treatment effects was assessed across subgroups of interest. We assessed safety in all participants who received at least one dose of study drug., Findings: Between March 19, 2021 and March 9, 2022, 529 people were randomly assigned in STEP-HFpEF, and between June 27, 2021 and Sept 2, 2022, 616 were randomly assigned in STEP-HFpEF DM. Overall, 1145 were included in our pooled analysis, 573 in the semaglutide group and 572 in the placebo group. Improvements in KCCQ-CSS and reductions in bodyweight between baseline and week 52 were significantly greater in the semaglutide group than in the placebo group (mean between-group difference for the change from baseline to week 52 in KCCQ-CSS 7·5 points [95% CI 5·3 to 9·8]; p<0·0001; mean between-group difference in bodyweight at week 52 -8·4% [-9·2 to -7·5]; p<0·0001). For the confirmatory secondary endpoints, 6-min walk distance (mean between-group difference at week 52 17·1 metres [9·2 to 25·0]) and the hierarchical composite endpoint (win ratio 1·65 [1·42 to 1·91]) were significantly improved, and CRP concentrations (treatment ratio 0·64 [0·56 to 0·72]) were significantly reduced, in the semaglutide group compared with the placebo group (p<0·0001 for all comparisons). For the dual primary endpoints, the efficacy of semaglutide was largely consistent across multiple subgroups, including those defined by age, race, sex, BMI, systolic blood pressure, baseline CRP, and left ventricular ejection fraction. 161 serious adverse events were reported in the semaglutide group compared with 301 in the placebo group., Interpretation: In this prespecified pooled analysis of the STEP-HFpEF and STEP-HFpEF DM trials, semaglutide was superior to placebo in improving heart failure-related symptoms and physical limitations, and reducing bodyweight in participants with obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. These effects were largely consistent across patient demographic and clinical characteristics. Semaglutide was well tolerated., Funding: Novo Nordisk., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests JB is a paid consultant to Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, Applied Therapeutic, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardiac Dimension, Cardior, CVRx, Cytokinetics, Daxor Edwards, Element Science, Innolife, Impulse Dynamics, Imbria, Inventiva, Lexicon, Lilly, LivaNova, Janssen, Medtronics, Merck, Occlutech, Owkin, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Pharmain, Prolaio, Roche, Secretome, Sequana, SQ Innovation, Tenex, and Vifor. SJS has received research grants from AstraZeneca, Corvia, and Pfizer, and consulting fees from Abbott, Alleviant, AstraZeneca, Amgen, Aria CV, Axon Therapies, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cyclerion, Cytokinetics, Edwards Lifesciences, Eidos, Imara, Impulse Dynamics, Intellia, Ionis, Lilly, Merck, MyoKardia, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Prothena, ReCor, Regeneron, Rivus, Sardocor, Shifamed, Tenax, Tenaya, and Ultromics. MCP has received research funding from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Novo Nordisk, Novartis, Pharmacosmos, Roche, and SQ Innovations, and has served on committees or consulted for AbbVie, Akero, AnaCardio, Applied Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardiorentis, Corvia, Eli Lilly, Horizon Therapeutics, LIB Therapeutics, Moderna, New Amsterdam, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pharmacosmos, Siemens, SQ Innovations, Takeda, Teikoku, and Vifor. BAB has received research funding from AstraZeneca, Axon, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic, Mesoblast, Novo Nordisk, Rivus, and Tenax Therapeutics, has served as a paid consultant for Actelion, Amgen, Aria, Axon Therapies, BD, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Edwards Lifesciences, Eli Lilly, Imbria, Janssen, Merck, NGM, Novo Nordisk, NXT, and VADovations, and is named inventor (US patent number 10 307 179) for the tools and approach for a minimally invasive pericardial modification procedure to treat heart failure. SZA, GKH, DVM, MNE, MLL, and SR are employees of, and shareholders in, Novo Nordisk. MJD has acted as paid consultant, advisory board member, and speaker for Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi, a paid advisory board member and speaker for AstraZeneca, a paid advisory board member for Medtronic, Pfizer, and ShouTi Pharma, and a paid speaker for Amgen, Novartis, and Sanofi, and has received grants as an investigator in support of investigator-initiated trials from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi-Aventis. DWK reports receiving honoraria as a consultant for AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Corvia Medical, Ketyo, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, and Rivus, has received grant funding from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, and Rivus, and owns stock in Gilead. SV reports speaking honoraria or consulting fees from Abbott, Amarin, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group, Eli Lilly, HLS Therapeutics, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, PhaseBio, and TIMI. WA reports honoraria or consulting fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, and Novo Nordisk. FZA reports honoraria or consulting fees from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Medtronic, Novo Nordisk, Occlutech, Pharmacosmos, and Vifor. VC reports speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cipla, Dr Reddy's, Lupin, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Mankind, Pfizer, Sanofi, Sun Pharma, and Torrent. JAE reports research support for trial leadership from American Regent, Applied Therapeutics, Bayer, Cytokinetics, Merck, and Novo Nordisk, reports honoraria for consultancy from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Otsuka, and serves as an advisor to US2.ai. HI reports honoraria or consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Mochida, Novartis, and Novo Nordisk. ML reports honoraria or consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Ewopharma, Gedeon Richter, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Roche, and Servier. VM reports consulting fees from Bayer, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Novo Nordisk and research grants from Regeneron. BM reports speaker fees or research payments from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Biotronik, Boehringer Ingelheim, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, DUKE Clinical Institute, Medtronic, and Novartis, and institutional grants from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Biotronik, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, DUKE Clinical Institute, Eli Lilly, Medtronic, Novartis, Terumo, and Vifor. JN reports honoraria or consulting fees from Alleviant, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Pfizer, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Rovi, and Vifor. EP reports honoraria from Novo Nordisk. MSc reports speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, and Novo Nordisk. MSe reports honoraria or consulting fees from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Vifor. KS received honoraria for serving as an advisory board member and consultant for Alleviant, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Janssen, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Rivus. PvdM reports institutional payments for consultancy fees or grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BridgeBio, Ionis, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Pharma Nord, and Vifor. DVL reports honoraria or consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Recardio, Sanofi, Sanova, and Vaxxinity. DW reports consultancy fees from Novo Nordisk. MNK served as a paid consultant or advisory board member for 35Pharma, Alnylam, Amgen, Applied Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Dexcom, Eli Lilly, Esperion Therapeutics, Imbria Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Merck (Diabetes and Cardiovascular), Novo Nordisk, Pharmacosmos, Pfizer, Sanofi, scPharmaceuticals, Structure Therapeutics, Vifor, and Youngene Therapeutics, has received research grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Pfizer, holds stocks in Artera Health and Saghmos Therapeutics, has received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Novo Nordisk, and has received other research support from AstraZeneca. TB-G and MF report no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Obesity and type 2 diabetes are prevalent in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and are characterized by a high symptom burden. No approved therapies specifically target obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in persons with type 2 diabetes., Methods: We randomly assigned patients who had heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, a body-mass index (the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters) of 30 or more, and type 2 diabetes to receive once-weekly semaglutide (2.4 mg) or placebo for 52 weeks. The primary end points were the change from baseline in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire clinical summary score (KCCQ-CSS; scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating fewer symptoms and physical limitations) and the change in body weight. Confirmatory secondary end points included the change in 6-minute walk distance; a hierarchical composite end point that included death, heart failure events, and differences in the change in the KCCQ-CSS and 6-minute walk distance; and the change in the C-reactive protein (CRP) level., Results: A total of 616 participants underwent randomization. The mean change in the KCCQ-CSS was 13.7 points with semaglutide and 6.4 points with placebo (estimated difference, 7.3 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.1 to 10.4; P<0.001), and the mean percentage change in body weight was -9.8% with semaglutide and -3.4% with placebo (estimated difference, -6.4 percentage points; 95% CI, -7.6 to -5.2; P<0.001). The results for the confirmatory secondary end points favored semaglutide over placebo (estimated between-group difference in change in 6-minute walk distance, 14.3 m [95% CI, 3.7 to 24.9; P = 0.008]; win ratio for hierarchical composite end point, 1.58 [95% CI, 1.29 to 1.94; P<0.001]; and estimated treatment ratio for change in CRP level, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.55 to 0.80; P<0.001]). Serious adverse events were reported in 55 participants (17.7%) in the semaglutide group and 88 (28.8%) in the placebo group., Conclusions: Among patients with obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and type 2 diabetes, semaglutide led to larger reductions in heart failure-related symptoms and physical limitations and greater weight loss than placebo at 1 year. (Funded by Novo Nordisk; STEP-HFpEF DM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04916470.)., (Copyright © 2024 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Background: To promote parent-child reunification, family dependency drug courts (FDDCs) facilitate substance use disorder treatment for people whose children have been removed due to parental substance use. The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted FDDC operations, forcing FDDCs to quickly adapt to new circumstances. Although existing research has examined COVID-19 impacts on adult drug courts and civil dependency courts, studies have yet to examine the impact of COVID-19 on FDDCs specifically., Methods: To explore the impact of COVID-19 on FDDCs, we conducted 20 focus groups and 5 individual interviews with court team members from five Florida FDDCs between 2020 and 2022. Data were analyzed using iterative categorization., Results: Five overarching themes emerged. First, FDDCs adopted virtual technology during the pandemic and more flexible drug screening policies. Second, virtual technology was perceived as improving hearing attendance but decreasing client engagement. FDDC team members discussed a potential hybrid in-person/virtual hearing model after the pandemic. Third, COVID-19 negatively impacted parent-child visitation opportunities, limiting development of bonds between parents and children, and parent-child bonding is a key consideration during judicial reunification decisions. Fourth, COVID-19 negatively impacted the mental health of court team members and clients. Court team members adopted new informal roles, such as providing technical support and emotional counseling to clients, in addition to regular responsibilities, resulting in feeling overwhelmed and overworked. Court team members described clients as feeling more depressed and anxious, in part due to limited visitation opportunities with children, which decreased clients' motivation for substance use recovery. Fifth, COVID-19 decreased recruitment of potential clients into FDDCs., Conclusions: If FDDCs continue to rely on virtual hearings beyond the pandemic, they must develop practices for improving client engagement during virtual hearings. FDDCs should preemptively develop procedures for improving parent-child visitation during future public health crises, because limited visitation opportunities could weaken parent-child bonding and, ultimately, the likelihood of reunification., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction is increasing in prevalence and is associated with a high symptom burden and functional impairment, especially in persons with obesity. No therapies have been approved to target obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction., Methods: We randomly assigned 529 patients who had heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and a body-mass index (the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters) of 30 or higher to receive once-weekly semaglutide (2.4 mg) or placebo for 52 weeks. The dual primary end points were the change from baseline in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire clinical summary score (KCCQ-CSS; scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating fewer symptoms and physical limitations) and the change in body weight. Confirmatory secondary end points included the change in the 6-minute walk distance; a hierarchical composite end point that included death, heart failure events, and differences in the change in the KCCQ-CSS and 6-minute walk distance; and the change in the C-reactive protein (CRP) level., Results: The mean change in the KCCQ-CSS was 16.6 points with semaglutide and 8.7 points with placebo (estimated difference, 7.8 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.8 to 10.9; P<0.001), and the mean percentage change in body weight was -13.3% with semaglutide and -2.6% with placebo (estimated difference, -10.7 percentage points; 95% CI, -11.9 to -9.4; P<0.001). The mean change in the 6-minute walk distance was 21.5 m with semaglutide and 1.2 m with placebo (estimated difference, 20.3 m; 95% CI, 8.6 to 32.1; P<0.001). In the analysis of the hierarchical composite end point, semaglutide produced more wins than placebo (win ratio, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.37 to 2.15; P<0.001). The mean percentage change in the CRP level was -43.5% with semaglutide and -7.3% with placebo (estimated treatment ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.72; P<0.001). Serious adverse events were reported in 35 participants (13.3%) in the semaglutide group and 71 (26.7%) in the placebo group., Conclusions: In patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and obesity, treatment with semaglutide (2.4 mg) led to larger reductions in symptoms and physical limitations, greater improvements in exercise function, and greater weight loss than placebo. (Funded by Novo Nordisk; STEP-HFpEF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04788511.)., (Copyright © 2023 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Background: Ventricular arrhythmia is an important cause of mortality in patients with ischemic left ventricular dysfunction. Revascularization with coronary artery bypass graft or percutaneous coronary intervention is often recommended for these patients before implantation of a cardiac defibrillator because it is assumed that this may reduce the incidence of fatal and potentially fatal ventricular arrhythmias, although this premise has not been evaluated in a randomized trial to date., Methods: Patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction, extensive coronary disease, and viable myocardium were randomly assigned to receive either percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) plus optimal medical and device therapy (OMT) or OMT alone. The composite primary outcome was all-cause death or aborted sudden death (defined as an appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy or a resuscitated cardiac arrest) at a minimum of 24 months, analyzed as time to first event on an intention-to-treat basis. Secondary outcomes included cardiovascular death or aborted sudden death, appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy or sustained ventricular arrhythmia, and number of appropriate ICD therapies., Results: Between August 28, 2013, and March 19, 2020, 700 patients were enrolled across 40 centers in the United Kingdom. A total of 347 patients were assigned to the PCI+OMT group and 353 to the OMT alone group. The mean age of participants was 69 years; 88% were male; 56% had hypertension; 41% had diabetes; and 53% had a clinical history of myocardial infarction. The median left ventricular ejection fraction was 28%; 53.1% had an implantable defibrillator inserted before randomization or during follow-up. All-cause death or aborted sudden death occurred in 144 patients (41.6%) in the PCI group and 142 patients (40.2%) in the OMT group (hazard ratio, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.82-1.30]; P =0.80). There was no between-group difference in the occurrence of any of the secondary outcomes., Conclusions: PCI was not associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality or aborted sudden death. In patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy, PCI is not beneficial solely for the purpose of reducing potentially fatal ventricular arrhythmias., Registration: URL: https://www., Clinicaltrials: gov; Unique identifier: NCT01920048., Competing Interests: Disclosures None.

In the STEP-HFpEF trial, semaglutide improved symptoms, physical limitations and exercise function and reduced body weight in patients with obesity phenotype of heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). This prespecified analysis examined the effects of semaglutide on dual primary endpoints (change in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-Clinical Summary Score (KCCQ-CSS) and body weight) and confirmatory secondary endpoints (change in 6-minute walk distance (6MWD), hierarchical composite (death, HF events, change in KCCQ-CSS and 6MWD) and change in C-reactive protein (CRP)) across obesity classes I-III (body mass index (BMI) 30.0-34.9 kg m - 2 , 35.0-39.9 kg m - 2 and ≥40 kg m - 2 ) and according to body weight reduction with semaglutide after 52 weeks. Semaglutide consistently improved all outcomes across obesity categories (P value for treatment effects × BMI interactions = not significant for all). In semaglutide-treated patients, improvements in KCCQ-CSS, 6MWD and CRP were greater with larger body weight reduction (for example, 6.4-point (95% confidence interval (CI): 4.1, 8.8) and 14.4-m (95% CI: 5.5, 23.3) improvements in KCCQ-CSS and 6MWD for each 10% body weight reduction). In participants with obesity phenotype of HFpEF, semaglutide improved symptoms, physical limitations and exercise function and reduced inflammation and body weight across obesity categories. In semaglutide-treated patients, the magnitude of benefit was directly related to the extent of weight loss. Collectively, these data support semaglutide-mediated weight loss as a key treatment strategy in patients with obesity phenotype of HFpEF. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04788511 ., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background Prolonged activation of angiotensin II is the main mediator that contributes to the development of heart diseases, so converting angiotensin II into angiotensin 1-7 has emerged as a new strategy to attenuate detrimental effects of angiotensin II. Prolylcarboxypeptidase is a lysosomal pro-X carboxypeptidase that is able to cleave angiotensin II at a preferential acidic pH optimum. However, insufficient attention has been given to the cardioprotective functions of prolylcarboxylpeptidase. Methods and Results We established a CRISPR/CRISPR-associated protein 9-mediated global prolylcarboxylpeptidase-knockout and adeno-associated virus serotype 9-mediated cardiac prolylcarboxylpeptidase overexpression mouse models, which were challenged with the angiotensin II infusion (2 mg/kg per day) for 4 weeks, aiming to investigate the cardioprotective effect of prolylcarboxylpeptidase against hypertensive cardiac hypertrophy. Prolylcarboxylpeptidase expression was upregulated after 2 weeks of angiotensin II infusion and then became downregulated afterward in wild-type mouse myocardium, suggesting its compensatory function against angiotensin II stress. Moreover, angiotensin II-treated prolylcarboxylpeptidase-knockout mice showed aggravated cardiac remodeling and dampened cardiac contractility independent of hypertension. We also found that prolylcarboxylpeptidase localizes in cardiomyocyte lysosomes, and loss of prolylcarboxylpeptidase led to excessive angiotensin II levels in myocardial tissue. Further screening demonstrated that hypertrophic prolylcarboxylpeptidase-knockout hearts showed upregulated extracellular signal-regulated kinases 1/2 and downregulated protein kinase B activities. Importantly, adeno-associated virus serotype 9-mediated restoration of prolylcarboxylpeptidase expression in prolylcarboxylpeptidase-knockout hearts alleviated angiotensin II-induced hypertrophy, fibrosis, and cell death. Interestingly, the combination of adeno-associated virus serotype 9-mediated prolylcarboxylpeptidase overexpression and an antihypertensive drug, losartan, likely conferred more effective protection than a single treatment protocol to mitigate angiotensin II-induced cardiac dysfunction. Conclusions Our data demonstrate that prolylcarboxylpeptidase protects the heart from angiotensin II-induced hypertrophic remodeling by controlling myocardial angiotensin II levels.

Research examining the utility of cardiac device data to manage patients with heart failure (HF) is rapidly evolving. COVID-19 has reignited interest in remote monitoring, with manufacturers each developing and testing new ways to detect acute HF episodes, risk stratify patients and support self-care. As standalone diagnostic tools, individual physiological metrics and algorithm-based systems have demonstrated utility in predicting future events, but the integration of remote monitoring data with existing clinical care pathways for device HF patients is not well described. This narrative review provides an overview of device-based HF diagnostics available to care providers in the UK, and describes the current state of play with regard to how these systems fit in with current HF management., Competing Interests: Disclosure: FZA has previously received a research grant funded by Medtronic and has received consultancy fees from AstraZeneca, Medtronic, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Servier and Vifor. JKT has previously filled a research post funded by Medtronic. JKT is funded by the British Heart Foundation (FS/19/8/34163), and receives support as a Peter Mount awardee at Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust. Funding: No direct funding received, (Copyright © 2023, Radcliffe Cardiology.)

Background: For patients with heart failure, reduced left ventricular ejection fraction and iron deficiency, intravenous ferric carboxymaltose administration improves quality of life and exercise capacity in the short-term and reduces hospital admissions for heart failure up to 1 year. We aimed to evaluate the longer-term effects of intravenous ferric derisomaltose on cardiovascular events in patients with heart failure., Methods: IRONMAN was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint trial done at 70 hospitals in the UK. Patients aged 18 years or older with heart failure (left ventricular ejection fraction ≤45%) and transferrin saturation less than 20% or serum ferritin less than 100 μg/L were eligible. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using a web-based system to intravenous ferric derisomaltose or usual care, stratified by recruitment context and trial site. The trial was open label, with masked adjudication of the outcomes. Intravenous ferric derisomaltose dose was determined by patient bodyweight and haemoglobin concentration. The primary outcome was recurrent hospital admissions for heart failure and cardiovascular death, assessed in all validly randomly assigned patients. Safety was assessed in all patients assigned to ferric derisomaltose who received at least one infusion and all patients assigned to usual care. A COVID-19 sensitivity analysis censoring follow-up on Sept 30, 2020, was prespecified. IRONMAN is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02642562., Findings: Between Aug 25, 2016, and Oct 15, 2021, 1869 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 1137 were randomly assigned to receive intravenous ferric derisomaltose (n=569) or usual care (n=568). Median follow-up was 2·7 years (IQR 1·8-3·6). 336 primary endpoints (22·4 per 100 patient-years) occurred in the ferric derisomaltose group and 411 (27·5 per 100 patient-years) occurred in the usual care group (rate ratio [RR] 0·82 [95% CI 0·66 to 1·02]; p=0·070). In the COVID-19 analysis, 210 primary endpoints (22·3 per 100 patient-years) occurred in the ferric derisomaltose group compared with 280 (29·3 per 100 patient-years) in the usual care group (RR 0·76 [95% CI 0·58 to 1·00]; p=0·047). No between-group differences in deaths or hospitalisations due to infections were observed. Fewer patients in the ferric derisomaltose group had cardiac serious adverse events (200 [36%]) than in the usual care group (243 [43%]; difference -7·00% [95% CI -12·69 to -1·32]; p=0·016)., Interpretation: For a broad range of patients with heart failure, reduced left ventricular ejection fraction and iron deficiency, intravenous ferric derisomaltose administration was associated with a lower risk of hospital admissions for heart failure and cardiovascular death, further supporting the benefit of iron repletion in this population., Funding: British Heart Foundation and Pharmacosmos., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests PRK reports research grants from British Heart Foundation and Pharmacosmos; consulting fees from Ackea, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Pharmacosmos, Servier, and Vifor Pharma; payment for lectures from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Novartis, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, and Vifor Pharma; support for attending meetings from Pharmacosmos; is a data safety monitoring board member for the STOP-ACE trial; and has served as Chair of the British Society for Heart Failure. JGFC reports research grants from Amgen, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, British Heart Foundation, Johnson & Johnson, Medtronic, Myokardia, Pharmacosmos, Pharma Nord, and Vifor Pharma; payment for lectures from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Innolife, NI Medical, Novartis, Servier, and Torrent; support for attending meetings from Boehringer Ingelheim and Pharmacosmos; is a data safety monitoring board member for Idorsia and Medtronic; has stock with Heartfelt Limited; and has been provided with equipment by Heartfelt Limited and NI Medical. MCP reports research grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Roche, and SQ Innovations; consulting fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardiorentis, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pharmacosmos, Siemens, and Takeda; payment for lectures from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pharmacosmos, Siemens, and Vifor Pharma; support for attending meetings from AstraZeneca; is a data safety monitoring board or advisory board member for AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novo Nordisk, Pharmacosmos, Teikoku, and Vifor Pharma; and is a director of Global Clinical Trials Partners. EAT, MR, and IF report research grants from British Heart Foundation and Pharmacosmos. PAK reports research grant support from Astellas, Evotec, Pharmacosmos, Unicyte, and Vifor Pharma; consulting fees from AstraZeneca, UCB, Unicyte, and Vifor Pharma; payment for lectures from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Napp, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, and Vifor Pharma; and support for attending meetings from Pharmacosmos and Vifor Pharma. IBS reports a research grant from British Heart Foundation. FZA reports a research grant from Medtronic; consulting fees and payment for lectures from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Medtronic, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Servier, and Vifor Pharma; and support for attending meetings from AstraZeneca, Medtronic, and Pharmacosmos. AA-M reports payment for lectures from AstraZeneca, Janssen, Pharmacosmos, and Takeda; is on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AstraZeneca, Novartis, and Pharmacosmos; and reports a grant for equipment from AstraZeneca. PWXF reports a research grant, consulting fees, and other support from Medtronic; payment for lectures from Pharmacosmos and Vifor Pharma; and is a council member of British Heart Rhythm Society charity. FJG reports a research grant from British Heart Foundation. AGJ reports payment for lectures from AstraZeneca, Novartis, and Vifor Pharma; and is the clinical lead of the Scottish Heart Failure Hub. REL reports consulting fees from Abbott. NNL reports research grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, British Heart Foundation, and Roche Diagnostics; consulting fees from AstraZeneca; payment for lectures from Novartis and Roche Pharma; and is on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Pharmacosmos. AJL reports payment for lectures from AstraZeneca; support for attending meetings from Daiichi Sankyo; is on an advisory board for Daiichi Sankyo and Vifor Pharma; and is Chair of the British Cardiovascular Society Guidelines and Practice Committee. ICM reports consulting fees from GlaxoSmithKline and Vifor Pharma. PP reports consulting fees from Pharmacosmos and Vifor Pharma; and support for attending meetings from Bristol Myers Squibb, Pharmacosmos, and Vifor Pharma. RR reports consulting fees from Pharmacosmos; payment for lectures from Pfizer; is on the data monitoring committee for the Lift study; and has a leadership role in the HFA Education Committee. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Heart failure (HF) is a global problem responsible for significant morbidity and mortality., Methods: This review describes the patient pathways and missed opportunities related to treatment for patients with HF., Results: The contemporary management strategies in HF, including medical therapies, device therapy, transplant, and palliative care. Despite the strong evidence base for therapies that improve prognosis and symptoms, there remains a large number of patients that are not optimally managed. The treatment of patients with HF is highly influenced by those who are caring for them and varies widely across geographical regions. HF patients can be broadly classified into two key groups: those who have known HF, and those who are incidentally found to have reduced left ventricular systolic dysfunction or other cardiac abnormality when an echocardiogram is performed. While all patients are under the care of a general practitioner or family doctor, in other instances, non-cardiologist physicians, cardiologists, and specialist HF nurses-each will have varying levels of expertise in managing HF-are part of the broader team involved in the specialist management of patients with HF., Conclusions: There are many potential missed opportunities in HF treatment, which include general opportunities, medications, etiology-specific therapy, device therapy, therapies when initial treatments fail, and palliative care.

Aims: In people at risk of heart failure (HF) enrolled in the Heart 'OMics' in AGEing (HOMAGE) trial, spironolactone reduced circulating markers of collagen synthesis, natriuretic peptides, and blood pressure and improved cardiac structure and function. In the present report, we explored factors associated with dyskalaemia., Methods and Results: The HOMAGE trial was an open-label study comparing spironolactone (up to 50 mg/day) versus standard care in people at risk for HF. After randomization, serum potassium was assessed at 1 and 9 months and was defined as low when ≤3.5 mmol/L (hypokalaemia) and high when ≥5.5 mmol/L (hyperkalaemia). Multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to identify clinical predictors of dyskalaemia. A total of 513 participants (median age 74 years, 75% men, median estimated glomerular filtration rate 71 mL/min/1.73 m 2 ) had serum potassium available and were included in this analysis. At randomization, 88 had potassium < 4.0 mmol/L, 367 had potassium 4.0-5.0 mmol/L, and 58 had potassium > 5.0 mmol/L. During follow-up, on at least one occasion, a serum potassium < 3.5 mmol/L was observed in 6 (1.2%) and <4.0 mmol/L in 46 (9%) participants, while a potassium > 5.0 mmol/L was observed in 38 (8%) and >5.5 mmol/L in 5 (1.0%) participants. The median (percentile 25-75 ) increase in serum potassium with spironolactone during the study was 0.23 (0.16; 0.29) mmol/L. Because of the low incidence of dyskalaemia, for regression analysis, hypokalaemia and hyperkalaemia thresholds were set at <4.0 and >5.0 mmol/L, respectively. The occurrence of a serum potassium > 5.0 mmol/L during follow-up was positively associated with the presence of diabetes mellitus {odds ratio [OR]: 1.21 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.14; 3.79]} and randomization to spironolactone (OR: 2.83 [95% CI 1.49; 5.37]). Conversely, the occurrence of a potassium concentration < 4.0 mmol/L was positively associated with the use of thiazides (OR: 2.39 [95% CI 1.32; 4.34]), blood urea concentration (OR: 2.15 [95% CI 1.34; 3.39] per 10 mg/dL), and history of hypertension (OR: 2.32 [95% CI 1.02; 5.29]) and negatively associated with randomization to spironolactone (OR: 0.30 [95% CI 0.18; 0.52])., Conclusions: In people at risk for developing HF and with relatively normal renal function, spironolactone reduced the risk of hypokalaemia and, at the doses used, was not associated with the occurrence of clinically meaningful hyperkalaemia., (© 2022 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Objectives: For patients with a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and iron deficiency, administration of intravenous iron improves symptoms, exercise capacity and may in the following 12 months, reduce hospitalisations for heart failure. The Effectiveness of I nt r avenous ir on treat m ent versus standard care in p a tie n ts with heart failure and iron deficiency (IRONMAN) trial evaluated whether the benefits of intravenous iron persist in the longer term and impact on morbidity and mortality., Methods: IRONMAN is a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint (PROBE) event-driven trial. Patients aged ≥18 years with HFrEF (LVEF ≤45%) and evidence of iron deficiency (ferritin <100 µg/L and/or TSAT <20%) were enrolled if they had either a current or recent hospitalisation for heart failure or elevated plasma concentrations of a natriuretic peptide. Participants were randomised to receive, or not to receive, intravenous ferric derisomaltose in addition to guideline-recommended therapy for HFrEF. Every 4 months, intravenous iron was administered if either ferritin was <100 µg/L or, provided ferritin was ≤400 µg/L, TSAT was <25%. The primary endpoint is a composite of total hospitalisations for heart failure and cardiovascular death. Hospitalisation and deaths due to infection are safety endpoints., Results: Trial recruitment was completed across 70 UK hospital sites in October 2021. Participants were followed until the end of March 2022. We plan to report the results by November 2022., Conclusions: IRONMAN will determine whether repeated doses of intravenous ferric derisomaltose are beneficial and safe for the long-term treatment of a broad range of patients with HFrEF and iron deficiency., Trial Registration Number: NCT02642562., Competing Interests: Competing interests: PRK: research grant support from British Heart Foundation, Pharmacosmos and Vifor; consultancy fees from Ackea, Amgem, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Napp, Novartis, Pharmacosmos, Servier and Vifor; payment for lectures from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Novartis, Pharmacosmos and Vifor; support for attending meetings from Pharmacosmos; has served as Chair of the British Society for Heart Failure. JGC: research grant support from Amgen, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Vifor, Pharmacosmos, Cytokinetics, Johnson & Johnson, MyoKardia, Stealth Biopharmaceuticals and Viscardia; honoraria from Abbott, Amgen, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Medtronic, Idorsia, Vifor, Pharmacosmos, Cytokinetics, Servier, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Innolife, Torrent, Johnson & Johnson, MyoKardia, Respicardia, Stealth Biopharmaceuticals, Viscardia and NI Medical. MCP: research funding from Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, SQ Innovations, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Medtronic, Boston Scientific and Pharmacosmos. Consultancy, payment for lectures and clinical trials committees: Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Novo Nordisk, Medtronic, Abbvie, Bayer, Takeda, Cardiorentis, Pharmacosmos, Siemens, SQ Innovations and Vifor; MCP is supported by the British Heart Foundation (BHF) Centre of Research Excellence Award (RE/13/5/30177 and RE/18/6/34217+). FA: Research funding from Medtronic; consultancy fees from AstraZeneca, Medtronic, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Servier and Vifor; support for attending meetings from AstraZeneca, Medtronic, Pharmacosmos and Vifor. PF: payment for lectures from Vifor and Pharmacosmos; support for attending meetings from Pharmacosmos. PAK: research grant support from Pharmacosmos, Vifor, Astellas, Unicyte and Evotec; consultancy fees from Vifor, Pharmacosmos, AstraZeneca, Napp, Pfizer and Bayer; support for attending meetings from Pharmacosmos and Vifor. NNL: research grant support from Roche Diagnostics, British Heart Foundation, AstraZeneca, Tenovus Scotland and Boehringer Ingelheim; consultancy fees from AstraZeneca; payment for lectures from Roche Pharma, Pfizer and Novartis; participation on a DSM/advisory board for Pharmacosmos; Associate Editor of Circulation: Heart Failure. RL: payment for lectures from Boston Scientific. ICM: consultancy fees from GlaxoSmithKline and Vifor; steering committee member for GlaxoSmithKline trials. PP: research grant support from British Heart Foundation; consultancy fees from Pharmacosmos, Novartis, Vifor and AstraZeneca; support for attending meetings from Boehringer Ingelheim and Vifor. MTBP: none. MR: research grant support from British Heart Foundation, Pharmacosmos. IBS: payment for lectures from Novartis, Merck, AstraZeneca and Boehringer Ingelheim; expert advisory role on NICE COVID RAPID Guidelines Committee. EAT: research grant support from British Heart Foundation and Pharmacosmos. IF: research grant support from British Heart Foundation, Pharmacosmos and Vifor., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Intravenous (IV) iron is the preferred treatment for patients with iron deficiency anemia (IDA) who require rapid replenishment of iron stores or in whom oral iron is not tolerated or effective. Data from two large-scale randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have recently been published reporting the incidence of adjudicated cardiovascular events after ferric derisomaltose (FDI) and iron sucrose (IS). The objective was to calculate the relative incidence of cardiovascular events with FDI and IS, and to conduct an indirect comparison with ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) based on previously published studies of cardiovascular risk., Methods: RCTs reporting the incidence of blindly adjudicated cardiovascular events in IDA patients treated with IV iron were identified by systematic literature review (SLR). Pairwise random effects meta-analyses of FDI versus IS, and FCM versus IS were conducted for the pre-specified adjudicated composite cardiovascular endpoint of: death due to any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, unstable angina requiring hospitalization, congestive heart failure, arrhythmia, and protocol-defined hypertensive and hypotensive events. Analyses were also conducted for the composite endpoint excluding blood pressure events. Meta-analysis results were combined in an adjusted indirect comparison to provide an indirect estimate of cardiovascular risk with FDI versus FCM., Results: The SLR retrieved 694 unique articles, of which four were RCTs reporting the incidence of the composite cardiovascular endpoint; two studies comparing FCM (N = 1529) with IS (N = 1505), and two studies comparing FDI (N = 2008) with IS (N = 1000). The odds ratios of the composite CV endpoint were 0.59 (95% confidence interval: 0.39-0.90) for FDI versus IS, 1.12 (95% CI 0.90-1.40) for FCM versus IS, and the indirect OR for FDI versus FCM was 0.53 (95% CI 0.33-0.85)., Conclusions: Pooling data from four large-scale RCTs suggested that FDI was associated with significantly lower incidence of cardiovascular adverse events compared to both FCM and IS., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background Unplanned hospitalizations are common in patients with cardiovascular disease. The "Triage Heart Failure Risk Status" (Triage-HFRS) algorithm in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices uses data from up to 9 device-derived physiological parameters to stratify patients as low/medium/high risk of 30-day heart failure (HF) hospitalization, but its use to predict all-cause hospitalization has not been explored. We examined the association between Triage-HFRS and risk of all-cause, cardiovascular, or HF hospitalization. Methods and Results A prospective observational study of 435 adults (including patients with and without HF) with a Medtronic Triage-HFRS-enabled cardiac implantable electronic device (cardiac resynchronization therapy device, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, or pacemaker). Cox proportional hazards models explored association between Triage-HFRS and time to hospitalization; a frailty term at the patient level accounted for repeated measures. A total of 274 of 435 patients (63.0%) transmitted ≥1 high HFRS transmission before or during the study period. The remaining 161 patients never transmitted a high HFRS. A total of 153 (32.9%) patients had ≥1 unplanned hospitalization during the study period, totaling 356 nonelective hospitalizations. A high HFRS conferred a 37.3% sensitivity and an 86.2% specificity for 30-day all-cause hospitalization; and for HF hospitalizations, these numbers were 62.5% and 85.6%, respectively. Compared with a low Triage-HFRS, a high HFRS conferred a 4.2 relative risk of 30-day all-cause hospitalization (8.5% versus 2.0%), a 5.0 relative risk of 30-day cardiovascular hospitalization (3.6% versus 0.7%), and a 7.7 relative risk of 30-day HF hospitalization (2.0% versus 0.3%). Conclusions In patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices, remotely monitored Triage-HFRS data discriminated between patients at high and low risk of all-cause hospitalization (cardiovascular or noncardiovascular) in real time.

Background: Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) significantly decrease mortality but courts rarely refer participants with opioid use disorder to MOUD providers. Previous qualitative work suggests routine court referrals to MOUD providers are more likely if court team members perceive providers as "trustworthy." Court team members may also be less likely to refer participants to MOUD if they consider MOUD unaffordable, particularly in Florida, which has not expanded Medicaid. Our aims were to explore court team members' 1) perceptions of availability of local trustworthy MOUD providers, 2) characteristics associated with perceptions of availability of local trustworthy MOUD providers, including beliefs about MOUD efficacy, and 3) perceptions of MOUD affordability., Methods: An online survey was distributed to all criminal problem-solving court and dependency court team members in Florida in 2019 and 2020. Likert scale questions assessed respondent agreement with statements about the availability of any MOUD providers, the availability of trustworthy MOUD providers, and the affordability of MOUD for court participants. An open-ended question explored MOUD barriers. Spearman's rho, Friedman, Kruskal Wallis, and Mann-Whitney U tests were used for analyzing quantitative data and iterative categorization for qualitative data., Results: One hundred fifty-one respondents completed quantitative questions (26% response rate), and 42 completed the qualitative question. Respondents were more likely to agree that local MOUD providers are more available than trustworthy MOUD providers. Perceptions of trustworthy provider availability differed significantly by MOUD type and were associated with MOUD efficacy beliefs. Qualitative results suggest that MOUD providers offering counseling and individualized treatment are more trustworthy., Conclusions: Court team MOUD beliefs may influence their perceptions of providers, or negative experiences with providers may influence court team MOUD beliefs. Improving court team perceptions of local MOUD providers may be critical for facilitating court participant treatment access., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Aims: Uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) increases the risk of developing heart failure (HF). The effect of spironolactone on BP of patients at risk of developing HF is yet to be determined. To evaluate the effect of spironolactone on the BP of patients at risk for HF and whether renin can predict spironolactone's effect., Methods and Results: HOMAGE (Heart OMics in Aging) was a prospective multicentre randomized open-label blinded endpoint (PROBE) trial including 527 patients at risk for developing HF randomly assigned to either spironolactone (25-50 mg/day) or usual care alone for a maximum of 9 months. Sitting BP was assessed at baseline, Months 1 and 9 (or last visit). Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), mixed effects models, and structural modelling equations was used. The median (percentile25-75) age was 73 (69-79) years, 26% were female, and >75% had history of hypertension. Overall, the baseline BP was 142/78 mmHg. Patients with higher BP were older, more likely to have diabetes and less likely to have coronary artery disease, had greater left ventricular mass (LVM), and left atrial volume (LAV). Compared with usual care, by last visit, spironolactone changed SBP by -10.3 (-13.0 to -7.5) mmHg and DBP by -3.2 (-4.8 to -1.7) mmHg (P < 0.001 for both). A higher proportion of patients on spironolactone had controlled BP <130/80 mmHg (36 vs. 26%; P = 0.014). Lower baseline renin levels predicted a greater response to spironolactone (interactionP = 0.041)., Conclusion: Spironolactone had a clinically important BP-lowering effect. Spironolactone should be considered for lowering blood pressure in patients who are at risk of developing HF., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2021. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aims: To determine if remotely monitored physiological data from cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) can be used to identify patients at high risk of mortality., Methods and Results: This study evaluated whether a risk score based on CIED physiological data (Triage-Heart Failure Risk Status, 'Triage-HFRS', previously validated to predict heart failure (HF) events) can identify patients at high risk of death. Four hundred and thirty-nine adults with CIEDs were prospectively enrolled. Primary observed outcome was all-cause mortality (median follow-up: 702 days). Several physiological parameters [including heart rate profile, atrial fibrillation/tachycardia (AF/AT) burden, ventricular rate during AT/AF, physical activity, thoracic impedance, therapies for ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation] were continuously monitored by CIEDs and dynamically combined to produce a Triage-HFRS every 24 h. According to transmissions patients were categorized into 'high-risk' or 'never high-risk' groups. During follow-up, 285 patients (65%) had a high-risk episode and 60 patients (14%) died (50 in high-risk group; 10 in never high-risk group). Significantly more cardiovascular deaths were observed in the high-risk group, with mortality rates across groups of high vs. never-high 10.3% vs. <4.0%; P = 0.03. Experiencing any high-risk episode was associated with a substantially increased risk of death [odds ratio (OR): 3.07, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.57-6.58, P = 0.002]. Furthermore, each high-risk episode ≥14 consecutive days was associated with increased odds of death (OR: 1.26, 95% CI: 1.06-1.48; P = 0.006)., Conclusion: Remote monitoring data from CIEDs can be used to identify patients at higher risk of all-cause mortality as well as HF events. Distinct from other prognostic scores, this approach is automated and continuously updated., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: This study aims to establish the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of outpatient intravenous (IV) diuretic treatment for the management of decompensated heart failure (HF) for patients enrolled in the HeartFailure@Home service., Methods and Results: We retrospectively analysed the clinical episodes of decompensated HF for patients enrolled in the HeartFailure@Home service, managed by ambulatory IV diuretic treatment either at home or on a day-case unit. A control group consisting of HF patients admitted to hospital for IV diuretics (standard-of-care) was also evaluated. In total, 203 episodes of decompensated HF (n = 154 patients) were evaluated. One hundred and fourteen episodes in 79 patients were managed exclusively by the ambulatory IV diuretic service-78 (68.4%) on a day-case unit and 36 (31.6%) domiciliary; 84.1% of patient episodes under the HF@Home service were successfully managed entirely in an out-patient setting without hospitalization. Eleven patients required admission in order to administer higher doses of IV diuretics than could be provided in the ambulatory setting. During follow-up, there were 20 (17.5%) 30 day re-admissions with HF or death in the ambulatory IV group and 29 (32.6%) in the standard-of-care arm (P = 0.02). There was no difference in 30 day HF readmissions between the two groups (14.9% ambulatory vs. 13.5% inpatients, P = 0.8), but 30 day mortality was significantly lower in the ambulatory group (3.5% vs. 21.3% inpatients, P < 0.001)., Conclusions: Outpatient ambulatory management of decompensated HF with IV diuretics given either on a day case unit or in a domiciliary setting is feasible, safe, and effective in selected patients with decompensated HF. This should be explored further as a model in delivering HF services in the outpatient setting during COVID-19., (© 2021 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in heart failure patients has been shown to improve patient outcomes in some but not all patients. A few studies have identified that septal flash on imaging is associated with response to CRT, but there has yet to be systematic review to evaluate the consistency of the finding across the literature. A search of MEDLINE and EMBASE was conducted to identify studies, which evaluate septal flash and its association with CRT response. Studies that met the inclusion criteria were statistically pooled with random-effects meta-analysis and heterogeneity was assessed using the I 2 statistic. A total of nine studies were included with 2307 participants (mean age 76 years, 67% male). Septal flash on imaging before CRT implantation was seen in 53% of patients and the proportion of CRT responders from the included studies varied from 52% to 77%. In patients who were CRT responders, septal flash was seen in 40% of patients compared to 10% in those deemed to be CRT nonresponders. Meta-analysis of eight of the nine included studies suggests that the presence of septal flash at preimplant was associated with an increased likelihood of CRT response (relative risk 2.55 95% confidence interval 2.04-3.19, P < 0.001, I 2 = 51%). Septal flash was also reported to be associated with left ventricular reverse remodeling, but the association with survival and symptomatic improvement was less clear. Septal flash is a well-defined and distinctive contraction pattern that is easily recognizable on cardiac imaging. Septal flash may be associated with CRT response and should be evaluated in the patients that are considered for CRT devices., Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of interest., (Copyright: © 2022 Journal of Cardiovascular Echography.)

Aim: The Prevention of Arrhythmia Device Infection Trial (PADIT) infection risk score, developed based on a large prospectively collected data set, identified five independent predictors of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection. We performed an independent validation of the risk score in a data set extracted from U.S. healthcare claims., Methods and Results: Retrospective identification of index CIED procedures among patients aged ≥18 years with at least one record of a CIED procedure between January 2011 and September 2014 in a U.S health claims database. PADIT risk factors and major CIED infections (with system removal, invasive procedure without system removal, or infection-attributable death) were identified through diagnosis and procedure codes. The data set was randomized by PADIT score into Data Set A (60%) and Data Set B (40%). A frailty model allowing multiple procedures per patient was fit using Data Set A, with PADIT score as the only predictor, excluding patients with prior CIED infection. A data set of 54 042 index procedures among 51 623 patients with 574 infections was extracted. Among patients with no history of prior CIED infection, a 1 unit increase in the PADIT score was associated with a relative 28% increase in infection risk. Prior CIED infection was associated with significant incremental predictive value (HR 5.66, P < 0.0001) after adjusting for PADIT score. A Harrell's C-statistic for the PADIT score and history of prior CIED infection was 0.76., Conclusion: The PADIT risk score predicts increased CIED infection risk, identifying higher risk patients that could potentially benefit from targeted interventions to reduce the risk of CIED infection. Prior CIED infection confers incremental predictive value to the PADIT score., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Heart failure (HF) is a chronic disease associated with a significant burden to patients, families, and health services. The diagnosis of HF can be easily missed owing to similar symptoms with other conditions especially respiratory diseases., Methods and Results: We conducted a systematic review to determine the rates of HF and cardiomyopathy misdiagnosis and explored the potential causes. The included studies were narratively synthesized. Ten studies were identified including a total of 223,859 patients. There was a lack of definition of HF misdiagnosis in the studies and inconsistent diagnostic criteria were used. The rates of HF misdiagnosis ranged from 16.1% in hospital setting to 68.5% when general practitioner referred patients to specialist setting. The most common cause for misdiagnosis was chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). One study using a COPD cohort showed that HF was unrecognized in 20.5% of patients and 8.1% had misdiagnosis of HF as COPD. Another study suggests that anemia and chronic kidney disease are associated with an increase in the odds of unrecognized left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Other comorbidities such as obesity, old age, atrial fibrillation, and ischemic heart disease are prevalent in patients with a misdiagnosis of HF., Conclusions: The misdiagnosis of HF is an unfortunate part of everyday clinical practice that occurs with a variable rate depending on the population studied. HF is frequently misdiagnosed as COPD. More research is needed to better understand the missed opportunities to correctly diagnose HF so that harm to patients can be avoided and effective treatments can be implemented., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest None., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

In heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), the occurrence of myocardial fibrosis is associated with adverse outcome. Whether pirfenidone, an oral antifibrotic agent without hemodynamic effect, is efficacious and safe for the treatment of HFpEF is unknown. In this double-blind, phase 2 trial ( NCT02932566 ), we enrolled patients with heart failure, an ejection fraction of 45% or higher and elevated levels of natriuretic peptides. Eligible patients underwent cardiovascular magnetic resonance and those with evidence of myocardial fibrosis, defined as a myocardial extracellular volume of 27% or greater, were randomly assigned to receive pirfenidone or placebo for 52 weeks. Forty-seven patients were randomized to each of the pirfenidone and placebo groups. The primary outcome was change in myocardial extracellular volume, from baseline to 52 weeks. In comparison to placebo, pirfenidone reduced myocardial extracellular volume (between-group difference, -1.21%; 95% confidence interval, -2.12 to -0.31; P = 0.009), meeting the predefined primary outcome. Twelve patients (26%) in the pirfenidone group and 14 patients (30%) in the placebo group experienced one or more serious adverse events. The most common adverse events in the pirfenidone group were nausea, insomnia and rash. In conclusion, among patients with HFpEF and myocardial fibrosis, administration of pirfenidone for 52 weeks reduced myocardial fibrosis. The favorable effects of pirfenidone in patients with HFpEF will need to be confirmed in future trials., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature America, Inc.)

Aims: We hypothesized that a decline in admissions with heart failure during COVID-19 pandemic would lead to a reciprocal rise in mortality for patients with heart failure in the community., Methods and Results: We used National Heart Failure Audit data to identify 36 974 adults who had a hospital admission with a primary diagnosis of heart failure between February and May in either 2018, 2019, or 2020. Hospital admissions for heart failure in 2018/19 averaged 160/day but were much lower in 2020, reaching a nadir of 64/day on 27 March 2020 [incidence rate ratio (IRR): 0.40, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.38-0.42]. The proportion discharged on guideline-recommended pharmacotherapies was similar in 2018/19 compared to the same period in 2020. Between 1 February-2020 and 31 May 2020, there was a 29% decrease in hospital deaths related to heart failure (IRR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.67-0.75; estimated decline of 448 deaths), a 31% increase in heart failure deaths at home (IRR: 1.31, 95% CI: 1.24-1.39; estimated excess 539), and a 28% increase in heart failure deaths in care homes and hospices (IRR: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.18-1.40; estimated excess 189). All-cause, inpatient death was similar in the COVID-19 and pre-COVID-19 periods [odds ratio (OR): 1.02, 95% CI: 0.94-1.10]. After hospital discharge, 30-day mortality was higher in 2020 compared to 2018/19 (OR: 1.57, 95% CI: 1.38-1.78)., Conclusion: Compared with the rolling daily average in 2018/19, there was a substantial decline in admissions for heart failure but an increase in deaths from heart failure in the community. Despite similar rates of prescription of guideline-recommended therapy, mortality 30 days from discharge was higher during the COVID-19 pandemic period., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Objectives: To model the cost-effectiveness of the TYRX Absorbable Antibacterial Envelope when used in patients at increased risk of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection in the context of 3 European healthcare systems: Germany, Italy, and England., Methods: A decision tree model with a lifetime horizon was populated using data from the Worldwide Randomized Antibiotic Envelope Infection Prevention Trial, a large multicenter randomized controlled trial. Use of the antibacterial envelope adjunctive to standard of care was compared to standard of care infection prevention alone. Patients in the model were divided into subgroups based on presence of factors known to increase infection risk., Results: The antibacterial envelope had the most favorable cost-effectiveness profile when patients had previously experienced CIED infection, had a history of immunosuppressive therapy, or had a Prevention of Arrhythmia Device Infection Trial (PADIT) score indicating high risk of infection (scores ≥6) at cost-effectiveness thresholds of €50 000 in Germany (assumed in the absence of an official threshold), €40 000 in Italy, and £30 000 in England. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that the antibacterial envelope was likely to be cost-effective in patients with other risk factors (including replacement of high power CIEDs, generator replacement with lead modification, and PADIT scores indicating intermediate risk of infection) when used with some device types and in some countries., Conclusions: The absorbable antibacterial envelope was associated with cost-effectiveness ratios below European benchmarks in selected patients at increased risk of infection, suggesting the envelope provides value for European healthcare systems by reducing CIED infections., (Copyright © 2021 ISPOR–The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study sought to further understand the mechanisms underlying effect of spironolactone and assessed its impact on multiple plasma protein biomarkers and their respective underlying biologic pathways., Background: In addition to their beneficial effects in established heart failure (HF), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists may act upstream on mechanisms, preventing incident HF. In people at risk for developing HF, the HOMAGE (Heart OMics in AGEing) trial showed that spironolactone treatment could provide antifibrotic and antiremodeling effects, potentially slowing the progression to HF., Methods: Baseline, 1-month, and 9-month (or last visit) plasma samples of HOMAGE participants were measured for protein biomarkers (n = 276) by using Olink Proseek-Multiplex cardiovascular and inflammation panels (Olink, Uppsala, Sweden). The effect of spironolactone on biomarkers was assessed by analysis of covariance and explored by knowledge-based network analysis., Results: A total of 527 participants were enrolled; 265 were randomized to spironolactone (25 to 50 mg/day) and 262 to standard care ("control"). The median (interquartile range) age was 73 years (69 to 79 years), and 26% were female. Spironolactone reduced biomarkers of collagen metabolism (e.g., COL1A1, MMP-2); brain natriuretic peptide; and biomarkers related to metabolic processes (e.g., PAPPA), inflammation, and thrombosis (e.g., IL17A, VEGF, and urokinase). Spironolactone increased biomarkers that reflect the blockade of the mineralocorticoid receptor (e.g., renin) and increased the levels of adipokines involved in the anti-inflammatory response (e.g., RARRES2) and biomarkers of hemostasis maintenance (e.g., tPA, UPAR), myelosuppressive activity (e.g., CCL16), insulin suppression (e.g., RETN), and inflammatory regulation (e.g., IL-12B)., Conclusions: Proteomic analyses suggest that spironolactone exerts pleiotropic effects including reduction in fibrosis, inflammation, thrombosis, congestion, and vascular function improvement, all of which may mediate cardiovascular protective effects, potentially slowing progression toward heart failure. (HOMAGE [Bioprofiling Response to Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists for the Prevention of Heart Failure]; NCT02556450)., Competing Interests: FUNDING SUPPORT AND AUTHOR DISCLOSURES HOMAGE was funded by a grant from the European Union 7th Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development (HEALTH-F7-305507 HOMAGE (EU FP7 305507 http://www.homage-hf.eu). Drs. Ferreira, Rossignol, Girerd, and Zannad are supported by the RHU Fight-HF, a public grant overseen by the French National Research Agency (ANR) as part of the second “Investissements d’Avenir” program (reference: ANR-15-RHUS-0004); the French PIA project “Lorraine Université d’Excellence” (reference: ANR-15-IDEX-04-LUE); Contrat de Plan Etat Lorraine IT2MP; and FEDER Lorraine. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has created significant challenges to healthcare globally, necessitating rapid restructuring of service provision. This questionnaire survey was conducted amongst adult heart failure (HF) patients in the United Kingdom (UK), to understand the impact of COVID-19 upon HF services., Methods and Results: The survey was conducted by the Pumping Marvellous Foundation, a UK HF patient charity. 'Survey Monkey' was used to disseminate the questionnaire in the Pumping Marvellous Foundation 's online patient group and in 10 UK hospitals (outpatient hospital and community HF clinics). There were 1050 responses collected (693/1050-66% women); 55% (579/1050) were aged over 60 years. Anxiety level was significantly higher regarding COVID-19 (mean 7 ± 2.5 on anxiety scale of 0 to 10) compared with anxiety regarding HF (6.1 ± 2.4; P < 0.001). Anxiety was higher amongst patients aged ≤60 years about HF (6.3 ± 2.2 vs. 5.9 ± 2.5 in those aged >60 years; P = 0.005) and COVID-19 (7.3 ± 2.3 vs. 6.7 ± 2.6 those aged >60 years; P < 0.001). Sixty-five per cent of respondents (686/1050) reported disruption to HF appointments (cancellation or postponement) during the lockdown period. Thirty-seven per cent reported disruption to medication prescription services, and Thirty-four per cent reported inability to access their HF teams promptly. Thirty-two per cent expressed reluctance to attend hospital (25% stated they would only attend hospital if there was no alternative, and 7% stated that they would not attend hospital at all)., Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused significant anxiety amongst HF patients regarding COVID-19 and HF. Cancellation or postponement of scheduled clinic appointments, investigations, procedures, prescription, and monitoring services were implicated as sources of anxiety., (© 2021 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: To investigate the effects of spironolactone on fibrosis and cardiac function in people at increased risk of developing heart failure., Methods and Results: Randomized, open-label, blinded-endpoint trial comparing spironolactone (50 mg/day) or control for up to 9 months in people with, or at high risk of, coronary disease and raised plasma B-type natriuretic peptides. The primary endpoint was the interaction between baseline serum galectin-3 and changes in serum procollagen type-III N-terminal pro-peptide (PIIINP) in participants assigned to spironolactone or control. Procollagen type-I C-terminal pro-peptide (PICP) and collagen type-1 C-terminal telopeptide (CITP), reflecting synthesis and degradation of type-I collagen, were also measured. In 527 participants (median age 73 years, 26% women), changes in PIIINP were similar for spironolactone and control [mean difference (mdiff): -0.15; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.44 to 0.15 μg/L; P = 0.32] but those receiving spironolactone had greater reductions in PICP (mdiff: -8.1; 95% CI -11.9 to -4.3 μg/L; P < 0.0001) and PICP/CITP ratio (mdiff: -2.9; 95% CI -4.3 to -1.5; <0.0001). No interactions with serum galectin were observed. Systolic blood pressure (mdiff: -10; 95% CI -13 to -7 mmHg; P < 0.0001), left atrial volume (mdiff: -1; 95% CI -2 to 0 mL/m2; P = 0.010), and NT-proBNP (mdiff: -57; 95% CI -81 to -33 ng/L; P < 0.0001) were reduced in those assigned spironolactone., Conclusions: Galectin-3 did not identify greater reductions in serum concentrations of collagen biomarkers in response to spironolactone. However, spironolactone may influence type-I collagen metabolism. Whether spironolactone can delay or prevent progression to symptomatic heart failure should be investigated., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Purpose: This study aims to evaluate the anti-inflammatory and antioxidant effects of N. gaditana on streptozotocin (STZ)-induced diabetes mellitus in Wistar rats., Methods: Diabetes was induced in male Wistar rats by single intraperitoneal injection of STZ (45 mg/kg). Male rats were fed on control diet supplemented or not with N. gaditana (10%) for a period of 2 months. At the end of the experiment, biochemical parameters and oxidant/antioxidant markers in liver and pancreas tissues, as well as mitochondria isolated from liver of rats, were determined., Results: It was notice that levels of glucose, glycated hemoglobin (HbA 1c ), lipid profile, kidney functions and liver enzymes in addition to markers of the inflammatory reactions interleukin-6 (IL-6) and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) increased significantly ( P  < 0.05) in diabetic rats. Moreover, undesirable alterations of oxidative stress markers of tissue and mitochondria isolated from the liver were noted in these rats. N. gaditana supplementation was shown effective in lowering the levels of glucose, HbA 1c and improving the renal and hepatic function and also in attenuating the oxidative stress and inflammation in diabetic rats., Conclusion: N. gaditana possesses antioxidant properties that might have beneficial effect in treatment of diabetes., Competing Interests: Conflict of interestThe authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020.)

Background: The patient characteristics, therapy received and outcomes after one or more implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) generator changes from contemporary practice is not well known., Methods: We conducted a health service evaluation of patients who underwent ICD implantation and generator change. Patients who had generator changes from February 2016 to October 2019 were identified from our database and electronic records were reviewed for patient characteristics, number of generator changes, receipt of therapy and death., Results: Our database included 88 patients with a generator change. A total of 22 patients (25.0%) received dual chamber ICD, 10 patients (11.4%) received single chamber ICD, 54 patients (61.3%) received cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator and 2 patients (2.3%) received subcutaneous ICD. A second generator change occurred in 18 patients and a third generator changes was performed in 6 patients. There were 29 deaths and a follow up period of 9.4 ± 2.9 years. From implant to initial generator change 39 patients had appropriate antitachycardia pacing (ATP), 6 patient had inappropriate ATP, 29 patients had appropriate shocks and 5 patients had an inappropriate shock. Between the 1st and 2nd generator change and the 2nd and 3rd there were no cases of inappropriate ATP or shock. Overall, 42 patients out of the 88 had appropriate therapy (47.7%) and 7 patients had inappropriate therapy (8.0%)., Conclusions: Most patients with ICDs do not receive therapy and a minority have inappropriate therapy which typically occur before the first generator change as we observed no inappropriate therapy beyond the first generator change., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2020 Indian Heart Rhythm Society. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Asymptomatic patients with coronary artery disease (CAD), hypertension and/or type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are at greater risk of developing heart failure (HF). Fibrosis, leading to myocardial and vascular dysfunction, might be an important pathway of progression. The Heart OMics in AGing (HOMAGE) trial aims to investigate the effects of spironolactone on serum markers of collagen metabolism and on cardiovascular structure and function in people at risk of developing HF and potential interactions with a marker of fibrogenic activity, galectin-3., Methods and Results: The HOMAGE trial is a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint (PROBE) study comparing spironolactone (up to 50 mg/day) and standard care over 9 months in people with clinical risk factors for developing HF, including hypertension, CAD and T2DM, and elevated plasma concentrations of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP, 125 to 1000 ng/L) or B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP, 35 to 280 ng/L). Exclusion criteria included left ventricular ejection fraction < 45%, atrial fibrillation, severe renal dysfunction, or treatment with loop diuretics. The primary endpoint was the interaction between change in serum concentrations of procollagen type III N-terminal propeptide (PIIINP) and treatment with spironolactone according to median plasma concentrations of galectin-3 at baseline. For the 527 participants enrolled, median (interquartile range) age was 73 (69-79) years, 135 (26%) were women, 412 (78%) had hypertension, 377 (72%) CAD, and 212 (40%) T2DM. At baseline, medians (interquartile ranges) were for left ventricular ejection fraction 63 (58-67) %, for left atrial volume index 31 (26-37) mL/m 2 , for plasma NT-proBNP 214 (137-356) ng/L, for serum PIIINP 3.9 (3.1-5.0) ng/mL, and for galectin-3 16.1 (13.5-19.7) ng/mL., Conclusions: The HOMAGE trial will provide insights on the effect of spironolactone on pathways that might drive progression to HF., Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02556450., (© 2020 European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Remote monitoring of patients with physiological data derived from cardiac implanted electronic devices (CIEDs) offers potential to reconfigure clinical services. The 'Heart Failure Risk Score' (HFRS) uses input from integrated device physiological monitoring to risk-stratify patients as low-risk, medium-risk, or high-risk of a heart failure event in the next 30 days. This study aimed to evaluate a novel clinical pathway utilizing a combination of CIED risk-stratification and telephone triage to identify patients with worsening heart failure (WHF)., Methods and Results: A prospective, single-centre, real-world evaluation of the 'Triage-HF Plus' clinical pathway (HFRS in combination with telephone triage) over a 27 month period. One hundred and fifty-seven high-risk HFRS transmissions were referred for telephone triage assessment. Interventions were at the discretion of the clinical assessor acting in accordance with clinical guidelines. An additional 3month consecutive sample of low and medium HFRS transmissions (control group) were also contacted for telephone triage assessment (n = 98). Successful telephone contact was made in 127 (81%) of referred high-risk HFRS cases: 71 (55.9%) were confirmed to have WHF requiring intervention; 19 (14.9%) had an alternative acute medical problem; one patient had been recently discharged from hospital with WHF; and 36 (28.0%) had no apparent cause for the high score. In the control group, only one patient had symptoms of WHF. The sensitivity and specificity of CIED-based remote monitoring to identify WHF 98.6% (92.5-100.0%) and 63.4% (55.2-71.0%), respectively., Conclusions: The Triage-HF Plus clinical pathway is a potentially useful remote monitoring tool for patients with heart failure and in situ CIEDs., (© 2019 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)