Global Differences in Burden and Treatment of Ischemic Heart Disease in Acute Heart Failure REPORT-HF

OBJECTIVES The primary aim of the current study was to investigate global differences in prevalence, association with outcome, and treatment of ischemic heart disease (IHD) in patients with acute heart failure (AHF) in the REPORT-HF (International Registry to Assess Medical Practice With Longitudinal Observation for Treatment of Heart Failure) registry. BACKGROUND Data on IHD in patients with AHF are primarily from Western Europe and North America. Little is known about global differences in treatment and prognosis of patients with IHD and AHF. METHODS A total of 18,539 patients with AHF were prospectively enrolled from 44 countries and 365 centers in the REPORT-HF registry. Patients with a history of coronary artery disease, an ischemic event causing admission for AHF, or coronary revascularization were classified as IHD. Clinical characteristics, treatment, and outcomes of patients with and without IHD were explored. RESULTS Compared with 8,766 (47%) patients without IHD, 9,773 (53%) patients with IHD were older, more likely to have a left ventricular ejection fraction < 40% (heart failure with reduced ejection fraction [HFrEF]), and reported more comorbidities. IHD was more common in lower income compared with high-income countries (61% vs. 48%). Patients with IHD from countries with low health care expenditure per capita or without health insurance less likely underwent coronary revascularization or used anticoagulants at discharge. IHD was independently associated with worse cardiovascular death (hazard ratio: 1.21; 95% confidence interval: 1.09 to 1.35). The association between IHD and cardiovascular death was stronger in HFrEF compared with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (p(interaction) <0.001). CONCLUSIONS In this large global contemporary cohort of patients with AHF, IHD was more common in low-income countries and conveyed worse 1-year mortality, especially in HFrEF. Patients in regions with the greatest burden of IHD were less
Funding Agencies|NovartisNovartis; National Medical Research Council of SingaporeNational Medical Research Council, Singapore; Boston ScientificBoston Scientific; BayerBayer AG; Roche Diagnostics; AstraZenecaAstraZeneca; MedtronicMedtronic; Vifor Pharma; German Ministry for Education and ResearchFederal Ministry of Education & Research (BMBF); PfizerPfizer; Vifor; National Institutes of HealthUnited States Department of Health & Human ServicesNational Institutes of Health (NIH) - USA; Agency for Healthcare Research and QualityUnited States Department of Health & Human ServicesAgency for Healthcare Research & Quality; American Heart AssociationAmerican Heart Association; Patient-Centered Outcomes Research InstitutePatient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute - PCORI; Olink Proteomics; European UnionEuropean Commission; ServierServier; Boehringer IngelheimBoehringer Ingelheim