Search

Background/aim: The study aims to describe the role of diabetes in patients with heart failure., Methods: In all, 1052 chronic heart failure patients were included in the FARmacology and NeuroHumoral Activation (FAR NHL) multicenter prospective registry. They had ejection fraction below 50% and were on stable medication for at least 1 month., Results: More than one-third (38.9%) of the patients had diabetes mellitus (DM). Diabetic patients (N = 409) were older (median 67 vs. 64, p < 0.001), had higher body mass index (BMI) (30 vs. 28 kg/m 2 , p < 0.001), much more frequently had ischemic heart disease (71 vs. 47%, p < 0.001), hypertension (80 vs. 67%, p < 0.001), dyslipidemia (89 vs. 69%, p < 0.001), worse renal function (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] median 63 vs. 73 mL/min/1.73 m 2 , p < 0.001), and higher N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) (median 681 vs. 463 pg/mL, p = 0.003). All-cause death, left ventricle assist device implantation, and orthotopic heart transplantation were set as the combined primary end point, which was present in 15.5% (163 patients) within the 2-year follow-up. In the 2-year follow-up, 81.0% of patients with diabetes survived without a primary end point, while 85.4% of the patients without diabetes survived, the difference being on the verge of statistical significance (p = 0.089). DM is a statistically significant predictor of NT-proBNP value in univariate analysis, but it is not an independent predictor in a multivariate analysis. When the NT-proBNP level was high, the presence of DM did not influence the prognosis., Conclusion: The combination of diabetes and NT-proBNP levels may better stratify the prognosis of patients with chronic heart failure., (© 2024 The Author(s). Journal of Diabetes published by Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Objective: This work was aimed at analyzing in-hospital, 30-day and 1-year mortality rates, impact of selected cardiovascular factors on mortality of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) manifested on electrocardiogram (ECG) and treated by the percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) at our cardiac center, comparing the subgroup of non-shock (survivors and deceased) patients after STEMI and evaluating how these patients differ from each other., Methods: In total, 270 patients with STEMI manifested on ECG and treated by PCI were enrolled between April 1, 2018, and March 31, 2019, at our cardiologic center. Our study sought to determine the risk of death after acute myocardial infarction with carefully selected factors and parameters such as the presence of cardiogenic shock, ischemic time, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), post‑PCI TIMI (thrombolysis in myocardial infarction) flow and serum levels of cardio‑specific markers, namely troponin T, creatine kinase and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP). Further evaluation included in-hospital, 30-day and 1-year mortality rates in shock and non-shock patients and determination of factors that influence the survival separately in each subgroup. The follow-up was carried out for 12 months after the myocardial infarction in form of outpatient examinations. After 12 months of follow-up, the collected data were statistically evaluated., Results: Shock and non-shock patients differed in mortality and several other parameters including NT-proBNP values, ischemic time, TIMI flow defect and LVEF. In all outcomes (in-hospital, 30-day and 1-year mortality rates) the shock patients did worse than non-shock patients (p < 0.001). In addition, age, gender, LVEF, NT-proBNP and post‑PCI TIMI flow less than 3 were found to be important factors influencing the overall survival. In shock patients, the survival was associated with age, LVEF and TIMI flow, while in non-shock patients, the factors predicting survival were age, LVEF, level of NT-proBNP and troponin levels., Conclusion: Shock patients differed in terms of mortality in post-PCI TIMI flow, while non-shock patients varied in troponin and NT-proBNP levels. Despite early intervention, certain risk factors might affect the clinical outcome and prognosis of patients with STEMI treated by PCI (Tab. 5, Fig. 1, Ref. 30). Text in PDF www.elis.sk Keywords: myocardial infarction, primary coronary intervention, shock, mortality, cardio‑specific markers.

Background: The identification of high-risk heart failure (HF) patients makes it possible to intensify their treatment. Our aim was to determine the prognostic value of a newly developed, high-sensitivity troponin I assay (Atellica®, Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics) for patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF; LVEF < 40%) and HF with mid-range EF (HFmrEF) (LVEF 40%-49%)., Methods and Results: A total of 520 patients with HFrEF and HFmrEF were enrolled in this study. Two-year all-cause mortality, heart transplantation, and/or left ventricular assist device implantation were defined as the primary endpoints (EP). A logistic regression analysis was used for the identification of predictors and development of multivariable models. The EP occurred in 14% of the patients, and these patients had higher NT-proBNP (1,950 vs. 518 ng/l; p < 0.001) and hs-cTnI (34 vs. 17 ng/l, p < 0.001) levels. C-statistics demonstrated that the optimal cut-off value for the hs-cTnI level was 17 ng/l (AUC 0.658, p < 0.001). Described by the AUC, the discriminatory power of the multivariable model (NYHA > II, NT-proBNP, hs-cTnI and urea) was 0.823 (p < 0.001). Including heart failure hospitalization as the component of the combined secondary endpoint leads to a diminished predictive power of increased hs-cTnI., Conclusion: hs-cTnI levels ≥ 17 ng/l represent an independent increased risk of an adverse prognosis for patients with HFrEF and HFmrEF. Determining a patient's hs-cTnI level adds prognostic value to NT-proBNP and clinical parameters., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: According to guidelines, the prognosis of patients with chronic heart failure can be predicted by determining the levels of natriuretic peptides, the NYHA classification and comorbidities. The aim our work was to develop a prognostic score in chronic heart failure patients that would take account of patients' comorbidities, NYHA and NT-proBNP levels., Methods and Results: A total of 1,088 patients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) (LVEF<40%) and mid-range EF (HFmrEF) (LVEF 40-49%) were enrolled consecutively. Two-year all-cause mortality, heart transplantation and/or LVAD implantation were defined as the primary endpoint (EP). The occurrence of EP was 14.9% and grew with higher NYHA, namely 4.9% (NYHA I), 11.4% (NYHA II) and 27.8% (NYHA III-IV) (p<0.001). The occurrence of EP was 3%, 10% and 15-37% in patients with NT-proBNP levels ≤125 ng/L, 126-1000 ng/L and >1000 ng/L respectively. Discrimination abilities of NYHA and NT-proBNP were AUC 0.670 (p<0.001) and AUC 0.722 (p<0.001) respectively. The predictive value of the developed clinical model, which took account of older age, advanced heart failure (NYHA III+IV), anaemia, hyponatraemia, hyperuricaemia and being on a higher dose of furosemide (>40 mg daily) (AUC 0.773; p<0.001) was increased by adding the NT-proBNP level (AUC 0.790)., Conclusion: The use of prediction models in patients with chronic heart failure, namely those taking account of natriuretic peptides, should become a standard in routine clinical practice. It might contribute to a better identification of a high-risk group of patients in which more intense treatment needs to be considered, such as heart transplantation or LVAD implantation., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.