Search

Background: Cognitive impairment is common in patients with heart failure (HF) and impacts patients' life. Sex differences in HF-characteristics are well-established. We hypothesized that women and men with HF also differ in cognitive functioning and that this may be related to sex differences in HF-characteristics and vascular brain injury., Methods: In the Heart-Brain Connection Study, 162 clinically stable HF patients (mean age 69.7 ± 10.0, 33 % women) underwent neuropsychological assessments and brain-MRI. Test results were standardized into z-scores for memory, language, attention/speed, executive functioning, and global cognition. Using linear models adjusted for age and education, we calculated sex differences (women-to-men: W-M∆) in cognitive functioning and examined effects of HF- and vascular brain injury-characteristics on these differences., Results: Men more often had an ischemic cause of HF and lower NYHA-classes, whereas women more often had preserved left ventricular ejection fractions (LVEF). Women had a higher volume of white matter hyperintensities (WMHs) whereas non-lacunar infarcts and microbleeds were more prevalent in men. Women performed better on global cognition than men (W-M∆ in z-score 0.20, 95 %CI 0.03-0.37), predominantly on memory (0.40, 0.02-0.78). These differences were associated with ischemic HF-etiology, as adjustment attenuated these sex differences. After adjustment for non-lacunar infarcts, global cognition difference persisted, but the difference in memory functioning attenuated. Adjustments for NYHA-class, LVEF, WMHs, and microbleeds did not change the results., Conclusion: Women and men with HF differ in cognitive functioning, predominantly in memory functioning, these differences were related to some sex differences in HF-characteristics and vascular brain injury, but not to all., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None declared., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background and Objectives: We aimed to develop a checklist to aid guideline developers in determining which scientific or societal cause ("triggers") are relevant when considering to initiate a rapid recommendation procedure., Methods: We conducted a two-round modified Delphi procedure with a panel of Dutch guideline experts, clinicians, and patient representatives. A previously conducted systematic literature review and semistructured interviews with four science journalists were used to generate a list of potential items. This item list was submitted to the panel for discussion, reduction and refinement into a checklist., Results: Thirteen experts took part. Two questionnaires were completed in which participants scored an initial list of 64 items based on relevance. During two online meetings, the scores were discussed, irrelevant items were removed, and relevant items were reformulated into seven questions. The final "quickscan assessment of the need for a rapid recommendation" covers user perspective, scientific evidence, clinical relevance, clinical practice variation, applicability, quality of care and public health outcomes, and ethical/legal considerations., Conclusion: The quickscan aids guideline developers in systematically assessing whether a trigger expresses a valid need for developing a rapid recommendation. Future research could focus on the applicability and validity of the checklist within guideline development programs., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In management decisions on saccular unruptured intracranial aneurysms (UIAs) the risk of rupture is an important factor. The PHASES score, introduced in 2014, provides absolute 5-year risks of rupture based on six easily retrievable patient and aneurysm characteristics. We assessed whether management decisions on UIAs changed after implementation of the PHASES score., Patient and Methods: We included all patients with UIAs who were referred to two Dutch tertiary referral centers for aneurysm care in the Netherlands (University Medical Center Utrecht (UMCU) and Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC)) between 2011 and 2017. Analyses were done on an aneurysm level. We calculated the overall proportion of UIAs with a decision to treat before and after PHASES implementation and studied the influence of age and center on post-implementation management changes., Results: We included 623 patients with 803 UIAs. The proportion of UIAs with a decision to treat was 123/360 (34.2%) before and 117/443 (26.4%) after PHASES implementation (absolute risk difference: -7.8%; 95% CI: -14.1 to -1.4). The decision to treat was made at a higher median PHASES score after implementation (7 points (IQR 5;10) pre- versus 8 points (IQR 5;10) post-implementation; p = 0.14). The reduced proportion with a treatment decision after implementation was most pronounced in patients <50 years (-22.3%; 95% CI: -39.2 to -3.4) and was restricted to treatment decisions made at the UMCU (-10.6%; 95% CI: -18.5 to -2.5)., Discussion and Conclusions: Management of UIAs changed following implementation of the PHASES score, but the impact of PHASES implementation on treatment decisions differed across age subgroups and centers., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study sought to investigate the extent of hypertensive exposure as assessed by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in relation to cerebral small vessel disease (CSVD) and cognitive impairment, with the aim of understanding the role of hypertension in the early stages of deteriorating brain health., Background: Preserving brain health into advanced age is one of the great challenges of modern medicine. Hypertension is thought to induce vascular brain injury through exposure of the cerebral microcirculation to increased pressure/pulsatility. Cardiovascular MRI provides markers of (subclinical) hypertensive exposure, such as aortic stiffness by pulse wave velocity (PWV), left ventricular (LV) mass index (LVMi), and concentricity by mass-to-volume ratio., Methods: A total of 559 participants from the Heart-Brain Connection Study (431 patients with manifest cardiovascular disease and 128 control participants), age 67.8 ± 8.8 years, underwent 3.0-T heart-brain MRI and extensive neuropsychological testing. Aortic PWV, LVMi, and LV mass-to-volume ratio were evaluated in relation to presence of CSVD and cognitive impairment. Effect modification by patient group was investigated by interaction terms; results are reported pooled or stratified accordingly., Results: Aortic PWV (odds ratio [OR]: 1.17; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05 to 1.30 in patient groups only), LVMi (in carotid occlusive disease, OR: 5.69; 95% CI: 1.63 to 19.87; in other groups, OR: 1.30; 95% CI: 1.05 to 1.62]) and LV mass-to-volume ratio (OR: 1.81; 95% CI: 1.46 to 2.24) were associated with CSVD. Aortic PWV (OR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.02 to 1.13) and LV mass-to-volume ratio (OR: 1.27; 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.51) were also associated with cognitive impairment. Relations were independent of sociodemographic and cardiac index and mostly persisted after correction for systolic blood pressure or medical history of hypertension. Causal mediation analysis showed significant mediation by presence of CSVD in the relation between hypertensive exposure markers and cognitive impairment., Conclusions: The extent of hypertensive exposure is associated with CSVD and cognitive impairment beyond clinical blood pressure or medical history. The mediating role of CSVD suggests that hypertension may lead to cognitive impairment through the occurrence of CSVD., Competing Interests: Author Disclosures The Heart-Brain Connection Study group was supported by the Netherlands Cardiovascular Research Initiative: the Dutch Heart Foundation (CVON 2012-06 Heart-Brain Connection), Dutch Federation of University Medical Centers, the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development, and the Royal Netherlands Academy of Sciences. None of the authors have direct or indirect relationships with the Netherlands CardioVascular Research Initiative. The authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: As proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK9) monoclonal antibodies are entering the market, we assessed the cost-effectiveness of PCSK9 inhibition added to standard lipid-lowering therapy in patient groups at high risk for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE)., Methods: A lifetime Markov Model was designed to estimate healthcare costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for PCSK9 inhibition added to standard therapy in patients with Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH), patients with vascular disease at high MACE recurrence risk, and patients with vascular disease with diabetes mellitus. The balance between costs and health outcomes was established for a broad range of potential relative risk reductions and drug costs., Results: The expected QALY gain per patient and ICER in the main scenario were 1.4 QALYs for €78,485/QALY gained in patients with FH, 0.22 QALYs for €176,735/QALY gained in those with vascular disease and a predicted risk of MACE ≥30% in 10years, and 0.22 QALYs for €295,543/QALY gained in those with vascular disease and diabetes. Results were sensitive to assumptions on PCSK9 inhibitor treatment efficacy, and vascular event risks., Conclusion: The costs and effects of PCSK9 inhibition added to standard lipid-lowering treatment in patient groups at high risk for MACE can be estimated and adapted to a specific clinical setting. PCSK9 inhibition could be cost-effective in patients with FH. In patients with vascular disease PCSK9 inhibition is less cost-effective, however, a price development may change clinical practice. This model may aid treatment and reimbursement decisions regarding PCSK9 inhibitors., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Unlabelled: ESSENTIALS: Prediction models may help to identify patients at high risk of bleeding on antiplatelet therapy. We identified existing prediction models for bleeding and validated them in patients with cerebral ischemia. Five prediction models were identified, all of which had some methodological shortcomings. Performance in patients with cerebral ischemia was poor., Summary: Background Antiplatelet therapy is widely used in secondary prevention after a transient ischemic attack (TIA) or ischemic stroke. Bleeding is the main adverse effect of antiplatelet therapy and is potentially life threatening. Identification of patients at increased risk of bleeding may help target antiplatelet therapy., Objective: This study sought to identify existing prediction models for intracranial hemorrhage or major bleeding in patients on antiplatelet therapy and evaluate their performance in patients with cerebral ischemia., Methods: We systematically searched PubMed and Embase for existing prediction models up to December 2014. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed with the CHARMS checklist. Prediction models were externally validated in the European Stroke Prevention Study 2, comprising 6602 patients with a TIA or ischemic stroke. We assessed discrimination and calibration of included prediction models., Results: Five prediction models were identified, of which two were developed in patients with previous cerebral ischemia. Three studies assessed major bleeding, one studied intracerebral hemorrhage and one gastrointestinal bleeding. None of the studies met all criteria of good quality. External validation showed poor discriminative performance, with c-statistics ranging from 0.53 to 0.64 and poor calibration., Conclusion: A limited number of prediction models is available that predict intracranial hemorrhage or major bleeding in patients on antiplatelet therapy. The methodological quality of the models varied, but was generally low. Predictive performance in patients with cerebral ischemia was poor. In order to reliably predict the risk of bleeding in patients with cerebral ischemia, development of a prediction model according to current methodological standards is needed., (© 2015 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.)