Search

Background: Although frailty is known to be an important prognostic factor in heart failure (HF), HF risk-adjustment models do not incorporate frailty measures and the interplay between frailty, age and pharmacotherapy is unclear.Objectives: To explore the relationships between frailty, pharmacotherapy and outcomes in heart failure (HF).Methods: Retrospective cohort study of all adults in Alberta, Canada hospitalized for the first time for HF between 2004 and 2016. Frailty was defined using the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS).Results: In 26 626 patients (mean age 77.4 years), the 8887 (33.4%) defined as frail (HFRS ≥ 5) were older, had higher Charlson scores and more prior emergency department visits or hospitalizations. The HFRS and the Charlson Score were only weakly correlated (r = 0.35). Whilst more common in older patients (41.4% of patients 80 or older), frailty was present in 22.4% of patients younger than 65. Frail patients had longer lengths of stay and worse outcomes postdischarge, but adding the HFRS to age, sex and Charlson score did not improve prediction of events (c-statistics 0.69 for 30-day mortality after admission, and 0.54 for 30-day readmission/ED visit/or death after discharge). Frail patients younger than 65 were significantly more likely than nonfrail patients 80 or older to be prescribed high-dose evidence-based HF therapies (27.1% vs. 22.2%, P = 0.003).Conclusion: Although the HFRS reflects aspects of frailty that patient age and Charlson scores do not, the addition of the HFRS to standard risk prediction equations provides little additional information. Prescribing practices correlate more with patient age than frailty status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Anaemia is common among patients with heart failure (HF) and is an important prognostic marker. Aim: We sought to determine the prognostic importance of anaemia in a large multinational pooled dataset of prospectively enrolled HF patients, with the specific aim to determine the prognostic role of anaemia in HF with preserved and reduced ejection fraction (HF-PEF and HF-REF, respectively). Design: Individual person data meta-analysis. Methods: Patients with haemoglobin (Hb) data fromthe MAGGIC dataset were used. Anaemia was defined as Hb<120 g/l in women and <130 g/l in men. HF-PEF was defined as EF≥50%; HF-REF was EF<50%. Cox proportional hazard modelling, with adjustment for clinically relevant variables, was undertaken to investigate factors associated with 3-year all-cause mortality. Results: Thirteen thousand two hundred and ninety-five patients with HF from 19 studies (9887 with HF-REF and 3408 with HF-PEF). The prevalence of anaemia was similar among those with HF-REF and HF-PEF (42.8 and 41.6% respectively). Compared with patients with normal Hb values, those with anaemia were older, were more likely to have diabetes, ischaemic aetiology, New York Heart Association class IV symptoms, lower estimated glomerular filtration rate and were more likely to be taking diuretic and less likely to be taking a beta-blocker. Patients with anaemia had higher all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.25-1.51), independent of EF group: aHR 1.67 (1.39-1.99) in HF-PEF and aHR 2.49 (2.13-2.90) in HF-REF. Conclusions: Anaemia is an adverse prognostic factor in HF irrespective of EF. The prognostic importance of anaemia was greatest in patients with HF-REF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) are at risk for stroke, and progress in anticoagulation has led to new options for these patients. Patients in sinus rhythm may benefit from antiplatelet agents or anticoagulants, but much work remains to establish efficacy and safety. Additional progress is needed, including better tools for risk stratification and clarity regarding the need for antiplatelet agents in combination with anticoagulants for those with other vascular diseases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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; PcO.OOl). 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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; PcO.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; PcO.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; PcO.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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]