Search

Resumen Introduccion y objetivos Se presentan las caracteristicas clinicas y los resultados de los trasplantes cardiacos realizados en Espana con la actualizacion correspondiente a 2019. Metodos Se describen las caracteristicas clinicas y los resultados de los trasplantes cardiacos realizados en 2019, asi como las tendencias de estos en el periodo 2010-2018. Resultados En 2019 se realizaron 300 trasplantes (8.794 desde 1984; 2.745 entre 2010 y 2019). Respecto a anos previos, los cambios mas llamativos son el descenso hasta el 38% de los trasplantes realizados en codigo urgente, y la consolidacion en el cambio de asistencia circulatoria pretrasplante, con la practica desaparicion del balon de contrapulsacion (0,7%), la estabilizacion del uso del oxigenador extracorporeo de membrana (9,6%) y el aumento de los dispositivos de asistencia ventricular (29%). La supervivencia en el trienio 2016-2018 es similar a la del trienio 2013-2015 (p = 0,34), y ambas mejores que la del trienio 2010-2012 (p = 0,002 y p = 0,01 respectivamente). Conclusiones Se mantienen estables tanto la actividad del trasplante cardiaco en Espana como los resultados en supervivencia en los ultimos 2 trienios. Hay una tendencia a realizar menos trasplantes urgentes, la mayoria con dispositivos de asistencia ventricular.

Telemonitoring through multiple variables measured on cardiac devices has the potential to improve the follow-up of patients with heart failure. The HeartLogic algorithm (Boston Scientific), implemented in some implantable cardiac defibrillators and cardiac resynchronisation therapy, allows monitoring of the nocturnal heart rate, respiratory movements, thoracic impedance, physical activity and the intensity of heart tones, with the aim of predicting major clinical events. Although HeartLogic has demonstrated high sensitivity for the detection of heart failure decompensations, its effects on hospitalisation and mortality in randomised clinical trials has not yet been corroborated. This review details how the HeartLogic algorithm works, compiles available evidence from clinical studies, and discusses its application in daily clinical practice.

Background: Poor natriuresis has been associated with a poorer response to diuretic treatment and worse prognosis in acute heart failure. Recommendations on how and when to measure urinary sodium (UNa) are lacking. We aim to evaluate UNa quantification after a furosemide stress test (FST) capacity to predict appropriate decongestion during acute heart failure hospitalization. Methods: Patients underwent an FST on day-1 of admission, and UNa was measured 2 hours after, dividing patients into low or high UNa based on the sample median value. A semiquantitative composite congestive score (CCS; 0–9) and NT pro-BNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide) quantification were assessed before the FST and at day 5 after the FST. Results: Median UNa after FST in the 65 patients included was 113 (97–122) mmol/L. At day 5, a lower proportion of patients with a low UNa reached a 30% decrease in NT-proBNP levels (21 [66%] for low UNa versus 31 [94%] for high UNa; P =0.005) and an appropriate grade of decongestion (CCSP 83 mmol/L 2 hours after FST had a 96% sensitivity to predict an NT-proBNP reduction ≥30% and 95% to predict a CCS Conclusions: Low natriuresis after an FST identified patients at a higher risk of an inadequate diuretic response and an inappropriate decongestion. FST-guided diuretic treatment might help to improve decongestion, shorten hospitalizations, and to reduce adverse outcomes.

Aims Sacubitril/valsartan is safe when initiated during hospitalization in a clinical trial setting. Its safety in real‐life population is not stablished. We compared the initiation of sacubitril/valsartan during hospitalization in a non‐selected population, in the PIONEER‐HF trial, and in non‐selected outpatients. Methods and results Multicentre registry included 527 patients: 100 were started on sacubitril/valsartan during hospitalization (19.0%) and 427 as outpatients (81.0%). Compared with those in the pivotal trial, inpatients in our cohort were older (71 ± 12 vs. 61 ± 14 years; P < 0.001); had more frequently Functional Class II (41 [41.0%] vs. 100 [22.7%]; P < 0.001), higher levels of N‐terminal pro‐B type natriuretic peptide (4044 [1630–8680] vs. 2013 [1002–4132] pg/mL; P < 0.001), better glomerular filtration rate (63.5 [51.0–80.0] vs. 58.4 [47.5–71.5] mL/min; P = 0.01), and higher systolic blood pressure (121 [110–136] vs. 118 [110–133] mmHg; P = 0.03); and received angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers more frequently (92 [92.0%] vs. 208 [52.7%]; P < 0.001). Compared with non‐selected outpatients, inpatients were older (71 ± 12 vs. 68 ± 12 years, P = 0.02), had more frequent Functional Class III–IV (58 [58.0%] vs. 129 [30.3%], P < 0.001), had higher levels of N‐terminal pro‐B type natriuretic peptide (4044 [1630–8680] vs. 2182 [1134–4172]; P < 0.001), and were receiving angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers target dose less frequently (55 [55.0%] vs. 335 [78.5%]; P < 0.001). They also started sacubitril/valsartan with a low dose (50 mg/12 h) more frequently (80 [80.0%] vs. 209 [48.8%], P < 0.001). The initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in outpatients was an independent predictor of high‐dose use (OR 3.1; 95% confidence interval 1.7–5.6, P < 0.001). The follow‐up time in both cohorts, including all patients enrolled, was similar (7.0 ± 0.1 vs. 7.2 ± 2.6 months, P = 0.72). All‐cause admissions during follow‐up were more frequent in inpatients (30 [30.0%] vs. 68 outpatients [15.9%], P = 0.001), with no relevant differences in all‐cause mortality. There was no significant difference in sacubitril/valsartan withdrawal rate (17 inpatients [17.0%] vs. 49 outpatients [11.5%], P = 0.13). The incidence of adverse effects was also similar: hypotension (16 inpatients [16.0%] vs. 71 outpatients [16.7%], P = 0.88), worsening renal function (7 inpatients [7.0%] vs. 29 outpatients [6.8%], P = 0.94), and hyperkalaemia (1 inpatient [1.0%] vs. 21 outpatients [4.9%], P = 0.09). We did not register any case of angioedema. Conclusions It is safe to initiate sacubitril/valsartan during hospitalization in daily clinical practice. Inpatients have a higher risk profile and receive low starting doses more frequently than outpatients. Sin financiación 3.902 JCR (2019) Q2, 44/138 Cardiac & Cardiovascular Systems 0.640 SJR (2019) Q2, 145/362 Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine No data IDR 2019 UEM