Search

With advances in heart failure (HF) treatment, patients are living longer, putting further emphasis on quality of life (QOL) and the role of palliative care principles in their care. Spirituality is a core domain of palliative care, best defined as a dynamic, multidimensional aspect of oneself for which 1 dimension is that of finding meaning and purpose. There are substantial data describing the role of spirituality in patients with cancer but a relative paucity of studies in HF. In this review article, we explore the current knowledge of spirituality in patients with HF; describe associations among spirituality, QOL, and HF outcomes; and propose clinical applications and future directions regarding spiritual care in this population. Studies suggest that spirituality serves as a potential target for palliative care interventions to improve QOL, caregiver support, and patient outcomes including rehospitalization and mortality. We suggest the development of a spirituality-screening tool, similar to the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 used to screen for depression, to identify patients with HF at risk for spiritual distress. Novel tools are soon to be validated by members of our group. Given spirituality in HF remains less well studied compared with other patient populations, further controlled trials and uniform measures of spirituality are needed to understand its impact better.

The GUIDE-IT trial was, a multicenter, randomized, parallel group, unblinded study that randomized patients to having heart failure therapy titrated to achieve an NT-proBNP1000 pg/mL or to usual clinical care.We performed pre-specified subgroup analysis to look for the race and ethnicity-based differences in clinical outcomes of patients who were able to achieve GDMT or target NT-proBNP concentration of ≤1000 pg/mL at 90 days of follow-up. There were 894 patients enrolled in GUIDE-IT study. Of these, 733 participants had available data on 90-day guideline directed triple therapy and 616 on NT-proBNP. 35% of the patients were Black and 6% were Hispanic. Black patients were younger, had more comorbidities, lower EF, and higher NYHA class compared with non-Black. Adjusting for 90-day NT-proBNP and important baseline covariates, Black patients were at a higher risk than non-Black patients for HF hospitalization [HR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.51-3.17; p0.0001], but at a similar risk for mortality [HR, 0.85.; 95% CI, 0.44-1.66; p = 0.64]. Similar results were seen adjusting for 90-day GDMT [HF hospitalization: Black vs non-Black, HR: 1.97; 1.41-2.77, P0.0001; mortality: HR: 0.70; 0.39-1.26, p = 0.23]. There were no significant differences between Hispanic and non-Hispanic patients with respect to heart failure hospitalization, cardiovascular or all-cause mortality. Over the study period, Black and Hispanic patients experienced smaller changes in physical function and quality of life as measured by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall score.Compared to non-Black patients, Black patients in GUIDE-IT study had a higher risk of heart failure hospitalization, but a comparable risk of mortality, despite improved use of GDMT and achievement of similar biomarker targets.

INTRODUCTION: Black patients have a higher incidence of heart failure (HF) and worse outcomes than white patients. Guidelines recommend palliative care for patients with advanced HF, but no studies have examined outcomes in a black patient cohort. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of the Palliative Care in Heart Failure trial, which randomized patients to usual care plus a palliative care intervention (UC+PAL) or usual care (UC). Quality of life (QoL) was measured using Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Palliative Care scale (FACIT-Pal). RESULTS: Black patients represented 41% of the 148 patients. At six months, QoL improved more in UC+PAL than UC for both racial subgroups. The difference was greater for black than white patients (difference: KCCQ 10.8 vs. 2.5; FACIT-Pal: 14.8 vs. 3.9). However, the findings were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Larger studies are needed to assess the benefits of palliative care for black patients with HF. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01589601.

BACKGROUND: As heart failure therapeutic care becomes increasingly complex, a composite medical therapy score could be useful to conveniently summarize background medical therapy. We applied the composite medical therapy score developed by the Heart Failure Collaboratory (HFC) to the Danish heart failure with reduced ejection fraction population to evaluate its external validation including assessing the distribution of the score and its association with survival. METHODS: In a retrospective nationwide cohort study, we identified all Danish heart failure with reduced ejection fraction patients alive on July 1, 2018, and assessed their treatment doses. Patients were excluded if they did not have at least 365 days for up-titration of medical therapy prior to identification. The HFC score (range 0–8) accounts for use and dosing of multiple therapies prescribed to each patient. Risk-adjusted association between the composite score and all-cause mortality was examined. RESULTS: In total, 26 779 patients (mean age 71.9 years; 32% women) were identified. At baseline, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker was used in 77%, β-blocker in 81%, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist in 30%, angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor in 2%, and ivabradine in 2%. The median HFC score was 4. After multivariable adjustment, higher HFC scores were independently associated with lower mortality (≥median versus P P CONCLUSIONS: Nationwide assessment of therapeutic optimization in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction using the HFC score was feasible and the score was strongly and independently associated with survival.

Aims N‐terminal pro‐b‐type natriuretic peptide (NT‐proBNP) values may be influenced by patient factors beyond the severity of illness, including atrial fibrillation (AF), renal dysfunction, or increased body mass index (BMI). We hypothesized that these factors may influence the achievement of NT‐proBNP targets and clinical outcomes. Methods A total of 894 patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction were enrolled in The Guiding Evidence‐Based Therapy Using Biomarker Intensified Treatment trial. NT‐proBNP was analysed every 3 months. Results Forty per cent of patients had AF, the median estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was 59 mL/min/1.73 m2 [interquartile range (IQR) 43–76], and median BMI was 29 kg/m2 (IQR 25–34). Patients with AF, eGFR 60 mL/min/1.73 m2, P

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor therapy is well suited for initiation during the heart failure hospitalization, owing to clinical benefits that accrue rapidly within days to weeks, a strong safety and tolerability profile, minimal to no effects on blood pressure, and no excess risk of adverse kidney events. There is no evidence to suggest that deferring initiation to the outpatient setting accomplishes anything beneficial. Instead, there is compelling evidence that deferring in-hospital initiation exposes patients to excess risk of early postdischarge clinical worsening and death. Lessons from other heart failure with reduced ejection fraction therapies highlight that deferring initiation of guideline-recommended medications to the U.S. outpatient setting carries a >75% chance they will not be initiated within the next year. Recognizing that 1 in 4 patients hospitalized for worsening heart failure die or are readmitted within 30 days, clinicians should embrace the in-hospital period as an optimal time to initiate sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor therapy and treat this population with the urgency it deserves.

Heart failure (HF) and end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) frequently coexist; 1 comorbidity worsens the prognosis of the other. HF is responsible for almost half the deaths of patients on dialysis. Despite patients' with ESKD composing an extremely high-risk population, they have been largely excluded from landmark clinical trials of HF, and there is, thus, a paucity of data regarding the management of HF in patients on dialysis, and most of the available evidence is observational. Likewise, in clinical practice, guideline-directed medical therapy for HF is often down-titrated or discontinued in patients with ESKD who are undergoing dialysis; this is due to concerns about safety and tolerability. In this state-of-the-art review, we discuss the available evidence for each of the foundational HF therapies in ESKD, review current challenges and barriers to managing patients with HF on dialysis, and outline future directions to optimize the management of HF in these high-risk patients.

Clinical guidelines recommend titration of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and beta-blockers among patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) to maximally tolerated doses. Patient characteristics associated with dose titration and clinical outcomes subsequent to dose titration remain poorly characterized.Among 1999 ambulatory patients with chronic HFrEF in the HF-ACTION trial, use and dosing of ACEi and evidence-based beta-blockers were examined at baseline and 6-month follow-up. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess factors associated with dose escalation (medication initation or dosing increase) or dose de-escalation (medication discontinuation or dosing decrease). Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to examine associations between dose trajectory group (stable target, stable sub-target, dose escalation, and dose de-escalation) and subsequent mortality and hospitalization outcomes.For both ACEi and beta-blockers, hospitalization for heart failure in the 6 months prior to enrollment (odds ratio [OR] 2.32 [95% confidence interval 1.58-3.42]) for ACEi; 1.42 [1.05-1.9] for beta-blockers) and higher systolic blood pressure (OR 1.01 [1.00-1.03] per 1 mmHg increase for ACEi; 1.01 [1.00-1.02] for beta-blockers) were associated with dose escalation. Hospitalization 6 months prior to enrollment for any cause (including HF or non-HF causes) was associated with dose de-escalation (OR 1.60 [1.14-2.25] for ACEi; 1.67 [1.20-2.33] for beta-blockers). After adjustment for patient characteristics, compared with stable target dosing, dose de-escalation of either medication was associated with greater all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.64 [1.11-2.42] for ACEi; 1.62 [1.04-2.53] for beta-blockers). Compared with stable target dosing, both dose de-escalation (aHR 1.98 [1.36-2.87]) and stable sub-target dosing (aHR 1.49 [1.18-1.87]) of beta-blockers were associated with greater cardiovascular mortality or hospitalization for heart failure.Among outpatients with chronic HFrEF, patient characteristics including recent hospitalization status and blood pressure were associated with odds of subsequent escalation and de-escalation of ACEi and beta-blocker therapy. Compared with patients receiving guildeline-recommended target doses, dose de-escalation of either medication and sub-target dosing of beta-blockers were associated with greater morbidity and mortality over long-term follow-up.

Introduction: The Heart Failure Collaboratory consortium (HFC) has developed a score to quantify background guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). One potential use of this score is to test the incremental value of new therapies. We evaluated the effect of dapagliflozin according to a modified HFC score in the DAPA-HF trial. Methods: The key inclusion criteria in DAPA-HF were: 1) NYHA class II-IV, 2) LVEF ≤40%, and 3) elevated plasma NT-proBNP and 4) eGFR ≥30 ml/min/1.73m2. The primary outcome was a composite of a first episode of worsening HF (hospitalization for HF or an urgent HF visit requiring iv therapy) or cardiovascular death. The HFC score is calculated based on the use of GDMT and dose of GDMT. The modified HFC score used here also accounted for race (Black/non-Black) and ECG rhythm/rate with a maximum possible score of 100 (percent) for any patient (Panel A). Results: Among the 4744 patients (mean age 66 years; 23% women) randomized, an ACEi/ARB was used in 84%, beta-blocker 96%, MRA 71%, ARNI 11%, ivabradine 4.8%, and hydralazine 4.3%. During a median follow-up of 18.2 months, the primary outcome occurred in 386 of 2373 patients (16.3%) in the dapagliflozin group and 502 of 2371 patients (21.2%) in the placebo group (HR, 0.74; 95%CI 0.65 to 0.85; P60) gave HRs for the effect of dapagliflozin, compared with placebo, of 0.75 (0.61-0.93), 0.77 (0.61-0.98), and 0.71 (0.55-0.90), respectively (P-interaction 0.87). Conclusions: A composite score for GDMT of the type developed by the HFC can be easily calculated in clinical trials and used to evaluate the incremental effect of new therapies.

Introduction: As heart failure (HF) therapeutic care becomes increasingly complex, determining optimal medical therapy (OMT) can be challenging. The HF Collaboratory consortium developed a scoring system to assist with standardization of comparing OMT within and across trials. We evaluated the score in the Danish HF population. Methods: In a retrospective nationwide cohort study, we identified all Danish HF patients alive on July 1, 2018. Patients were excluded if they were diagnosed after July 1, 2017 to allow a minimum of 365 days for up-titration of medical therapy. Treatment doses were estimated by analysis of consecutive claimed prescriptions. An integer-based composite medical therapy score (range 0-10) was designed to consider use and dosing of multiple therapies prescribed to each patient ( Panel A ). Risk-adjusted association was assessed between the composite score and subsequent death. Results: In total, 26,779 patients (median age 73y; 32% women) were identified. At baseline, ACEi/ARB was used in 77%, β-blocker in 81%, MRA in 30%, ARNi in 2%, SGLT2i in 2%, and ivabradine in 2%. The median composite medical therapy score was 4 (and was consistently 4 from January 2016-July 2018). During median follow-up of 1.5 years, 3,326 deaths occurred. After accounting for demographics, comorbidities, loop diuretic use, HF diagnosis setting, and time since HF diagnosis, higher composite scores were independently associated with lower mortality (≥median vs Panel B ). Conclusions: Nationwide assessment of therapeutic optimization in HF using a composite medical therapy score was feasible and the score was independently associated with survival. These data suggest that most patients can achieve a score of 4 or more in current clinical care.