Mild Depression Predicts Long-Term Mortality After Acute Myocardial Infarction: A 25-Year Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND: Past studies have found that depression is an independent predictor of death in patients after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Our aim was to investigate whether the adverse effect upon mortality of depression, including mild levels, persisted up to 25 years. METHODS: We used an historical design to study patients who had been consecutively admitted to hospital after transmural AMI during the 1980s and enrolled in an exercise training trial. The Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) was administered to 188 patients in the third week after hospital admission. Scores were trichotomised and classified as low (0-5), mild (6-9) or moderate to severe (≥10) depression. The Australian National Death Index was used to determine mortality status. Cox proportional-hazards modelling was undertaken to determine the relationship between the trichotomised BDI-I scores and all-cause mortality over five time periods up to 25 years. RESULTS: The mean age of patients was 54.15 years. One hundred fourteen (114) (60.4%) had low or no depression, 47 (25.2%) mild depression and 27 (14.3%) moderate to severe depression. The mortality status of 185 (98.4%) patients was established. Depression was a significant predictor of death, independently of age and severity of myocardial infarction, at 5, 10 and 15 years but not at 20 or 25 years. Patients with mild depression had greater mortality than those with low or moderate to severe depression. CONCLUSIONS: Early identification of depression, including milder levels, is important since patients remain at increased risk for many years. They require ongoing monitoring and appropriate treatment.

Preoperative cardiac evaluation and management of patients undergoing elective non-cardiac surgery.

Perioperative cardiac complications are a common cause of death and major morbidity in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery. Preoperative evaluation and medical optimisation can improve outcomes, although the evidence base is limited. Evidence of effectiveness is strongest for prophylactic use of ß-blockers in high-risk patients and aspirin in patients with coronary artery disease. Particular challenges arise among patients with heart failure or valvular heart disease or those receiving antithrombotic therapy for coronary artery stents or atrial fibrillation. Close liaison between general practitioners, surgeons, anaesthetists and cardiologists is needed for optimising preoperative management and subsequent clinical outcomes in high-risk patients.

2011 update to National Heart Foundation of Australia and Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand Guidelines for the prevention, detection and management of chronic heart failure in Australia, 2006.

Chronic heart failure (CHF) is a complex and lethal clinical syndrome accounting for an increasing number of Australian hospital separations and more than 2700 Australian deaths in 2008. In 2006, the National Heart Foundation of Australia and Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand published Guidelines for the prevention, detection and management of chronic heart failure in Australia, 2006. Results from recently published clinical trials provide additional information to be considered in the prevention, detection and management of CHF. In some cases, this new evidence strengthens recommendations previously made in the 2006 guidelines; in others, it provides new approaches to current recommended practice. Areas in which there have been significant new developments include: Use of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) or N-terminal proBNP plasma level measurement in guiding treatment of CHF; New pharmacological approaches to the treatment of systolic heart failure; Drugs to avoid or use with caution in CHF; Treatment of cardiac arrhythmias in patients with CHF; Multidisciplinary care and post-discharge management programs. While patient circumstances and clinical judgement should guide the interpretation of these findings in the clinical context, this update, together with the 2006 guidelines, provides current clinical guidance on CHF.

Age-specific diastolic dysfunction improves prediction of symptomatic heart failure by Stage B heart failure.

AIMS: We investigated whether addition of diastolic dysfunction (DD) and longitudinal strain (LS) to Stage B heart failure (SBHF) criteria (structural or systolic abnormality) improves prediction of symptomatic HF in participants of the SCReening Evaluation of the Evolution of New Heart Failure study, a self-selected population at increased cardiovascular disease risk recruited from members of a health insurance fund in Melbourne and Shepparton, Australia. Both American Society of Echocardiography and European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (ASE/EACVI) criteria and age-specific Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study criteria, for SBHF and DD, and ARIC criteria for abnormal LS, were examined. METHODS AND RESULTS: Inclusion criteria were age ≥60 years with one or more of self-reported ischaemic or other heart disease, irregular or rapid heart rhythm, cerebrovascular disease, renal impairment, or treatment for hypertension or diabetes for ≥2 years. Exclusion criteria were known HF, or ejection fraction <50% or >mild valve abnormality detected on previous echocardiography or other imaging. Echocardiography was performed in 3190 participants who were followed for a median of 3.9 (interquartile range: 3.4, 4.5) years after echocardiography. Symptomatic HF was diagnosed in 139 participants at a median of 3.1 (interquartile range: 2.1, 3.9) years after echocardiography. ARIC structural, systolic, and diastolic abnormalities predicted HF in univariate and multivariable proportional hazards analyses, whereas ASE/EACVI structural and systolic, but not diastolic, abnormalities predicted HF. ARIC and ASE/EACVI SBHF criteria predicted HF with sensitivities of 81% and 55%, specificities of 39% and 76%, and C statistics of 0.60 (95% confidence interval: 0.57, 0.64) and 0.66 (0.61, 0.71), respectively. Adding ARIC DD to SBHF increased sensitivity to 94% with specificity of 24% and C statistic of 0.59 (0.57, 0.61), whereas addition of ASE/EACVI DD to SBHF increased sensitivity to 97% but reduced specificity to 9% and the C statistic to 0.52 (0.50, 0.54, P < 0.0001). Addition of LS to ARIC or ASE/EACVI SBHF criteria had minimal impact on prediction of HF. CONCLUSIONS: Age-specific ARIC DD criteria, but not ASE/EACVI DD criteria, predicted symptomatic HF, and addition of age-specific ARIC DD criteria to ARIC SBHF criteria improved prediction of symptomatic HF in asymptomatic individuals with cardiovascular disease risk factors. Addition of LS to ASE/EACVI or ARIC SBHF criteria did not improve prediction of symptomatic HF.

Prediction of incident heart failure by serum amino-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide level in a community-based cohort.

AIMS: We investigated which serum amino-terminal pro-B-type-natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels inform heart failure (HF) risk in a community-based population at increased cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. METHODS AND RESULTS: Inclusion criteria were age ≥ 60 years with one or more of self-reported hypertension, diabetes, heart disease, abnormal heart rhythm, cerebrovascular disease, or renal impairment. Exclusion criteria were known HF, ejection fraction (EF) < 50%, or more than mild valve abnormality. NT-proBNP levels were measured in 3842 participants on enrolment. HF was diagnosed in 162 participants at a median of 4.5 (interquartile range 2.7-5.4) years after enrolment, 73 with HF with preserved EF (HFpEF), 53 with HF with reduced EF (HFrEF), and 36 with valvular HF (VHF). Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for 5-year prediction of total HF were similar for NT-proBNP alone (0.79, 95% confidence interval 0.74-0.83) and a 7-parameter multivariable model (0.82, 0.77-0.86, P = 0.035). NT-proBNP cut-points of 11, 16, and 25 pmol/L for individuals aged 60-69, 70-79, and ≥ 80 years, respectively, achieved sensitivities > 76% and specificities of 47-69% for 5-year prediction of total HF in men and women in all three age groups. Sensitivities were ≥ 75% in most subgroups according to body mass index, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and the presence or absence of atrial fibrillation, pacemaker, or CVD, and for the prediction of HFpEF, HFrEF and VHF. CONCLUSION: Age-specific serum NT-proBNP levels inform prognosis, and hence therapeutic decisions, regarding HF risk in individuals at increased CVD risk.

Threshold body mass index and sex-specific waist circumference for increased risk of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.

BACKGROUND: Body mass index †Deceased. (BMI) is a risk factor for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). DESIGN: We investigated the threshold BMI and sex-specific waist circumference associated with increased HFpEF incidence in the SCReening Evaluation of the Evolution of New Heart Failure (SCREEN-HF) study, a cohort study of a community-based population at increased cardiovascular disease risk. METHODS: Inclusion criteria were age ≥60 years with one or more of self-reported hypertension, diabetes, heart disease, abnormal heart rhythm, cerebrovascular disease or renal impairment. Exclusion criteria were known heart failure, ejection fraction <50% or more than mild valve abnormality. Among 3847 SCREEN-HF participants, 73 were diagnosed with HFpEF at a median of 4.5 (interquartile range: 2.9-5.5) years after enrolment. RESULTS: HFpEF incidence rates were higher for BMI ≥27.5 kg/m2 than for BMI < 25 kg/m2, and for waist circumference >100 cm (men) or > 90 cm (women) than for waist circumference ≤94 cm (men) or ≤ 83 cm (women) in Poisson regression analysis. Semiparametric proportional hazards analyses confirmed these BMI and waist circumference thresholds, and exceeding these thresholds was associated with an attributable risk of HFpEF of 44-49%. CONCLUSIONS: Both central obesity and overweight were associated with increased HFpEF incidence. Although a randomised trial of weight control would be necessary to establish a causal relationship between obesity/overweight and HFpEF incidence, these data suggest that maintenance of BMI and waist circumference below these thresholds in a community similar to that of the SCREEN-HF cohort may reduce the HFpEF incidence rate by as much as 50%.

Coaching Patients Saves Lives and Money.

BACKGROUND: The Coaching On Achieving Cardiovascular Health (COACH) Program has been proven to improve biomedical and lifestyle cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors. The objective of this study was to evaluate the long-term impact of The COACH Program on overall survival, hospital utilization, and costs from the perspective of a private health insurer (payor), in patients with CVD. METHODS: A prospective parallel-group case-control study design with controls randomly matched to patients based on propensity score. There were 512 participants with CVD engaged in a structured disease management program of 6 months duration (The COACH Program) who were matched to 512 patients with CVD who were allocated to the control group. The independent variables that estimated the propensity score were preprogram hospital admissions, age, and sex. The primary outcome was overall survival with secondary outcomes, including hospital utilization and cost incurred by the private health insurer. Mean follow-up was 6.35 years. Difference in overall survival between the 2 groups was estimated using a Cox proportional hazard ratio (HR) with difference in total cost estimated using a generalized linear model. RESULTS: The COACH Program achieved a significant reduction in overall mortality (HR 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53-0.93; P = .014). There was an apparent dose-response effect: those who received up to 3 coaching sessions had no decrease in mortality (HR 1.02; 95% CI, 0.69-1.49; P = .926); those who received 4 or more coaching sessions had a substantial decrease in mortality (HR 0.58; 95% CI, 0.42-0.81; P = .001). Total cost to the health insurer was substantially lower in the intervention group ($12,707 per person lower; P = .078). The reduction in total cost was significantly greater in those who received 4 or more sessions ($19,418 per person; P = .006) and in males ($18,947 per person; P = .029). CONCLUSIONS: Those enrolled in The COACH program achieved a statistically significant decrease in overall mortality compared with usual care at 6.35 years. A substantive reduction in hospital costs was also observed among those who received The COACH program compared with those who did not, particularly in those who received 4 or more sessions and in males.

Risk factors for incident heart failure with preserved or reduced ejection fraction, and valvular heart failure, in a community-based cohort.

Background: The lack of effective therapies for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) reflects an incomplete understanding of its pathogenesis. Design: We analysed baseline risk factors for incident HFpEF, heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and valvular heart failure (VHF) in a community-based cohort. Methods: We recruited 2101 men and 1746 women ≥60 years of age with hypertension, diabetes, ischaemic heart disease (IHD), abnormal heart rhythm, cerebrovascular disease or renal impairment. Exclusion criteria were known heart failure, left ventricular ejection fraction <50% or valve abnormality >mild in severity. Median follow-up was 5.6 (IQR 4.6-6.3) years. Results: Median time to heart failure diagnosis in 162 participants was 4.5 (IQR 2.7-5.4) years, 73 with HFpEF, 53 with HFrEF and 36 with VHF. Baseline age and amino-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels were associated with HFpEF, HFrEF and VHF. Pulse pressure, IHD, waist circumference, obstructive sleep apnoea and pacemaker were associated with HFpEF and HFrEF; atrial fibrillation (AF) and warfarin therapy were associated with HFpEF and VHF and peripheral vascular disease and low platelet count were associated with HFrEF and VHF. Additional risk factors for HFpEF were body mass index (BMI), hypertension, diabetes, renal dysfunction, low haemoglobin, white cell count and ß-blocker, statin, loop diuretic, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory and clopidogrel therapies, for HFrEF were male gender and cigarette smoking and for VHF were low diastolic blood pressure and alcohol intake. BMI, diabetes, low haemoglobin, white cell count and warfarin therapy were more strongly associated with HFpEF than HFrEF, whereas male gender and low platelet count were more strongly associated with HFrEF than HFpEF. Conclusions: Our data suggest a major role for BMI, hypertension, diabetes, renal dysfunction, and inflammation in HFpEF pathogenesis; strategies directed to prevention of these risk factors may prevent a sizeable proportion of HFpEF in the community. Trial registration number: NCT00400257, NCT00604006 and NCT01581827.

A Review of the External Validity of Clinical Trials with Beta-Blockers in Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Beta-blockers (BBs) are the mainstay prognostic medication for all stages of chronic heart failure (CHF). There are many classes of BBs, each of which has varying levels of evidence to support its efficacy in CHF. However, most CHF patients have one or more comorbid conditions such as diabetes, renal impairment, and/or atrial fibrillation. Patient enrollment to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) often excludes those with certain comorbidities, particularly if the symptoms are severe. Consequently, the extent to which evidence drawn from RCTs is generalizable to CHF patients has not been well described. Clinical guidelines also underrepresent this point by providing generic advice for all patients. The aim of this review is to examine the evidence to support the use of BBs in CHF patients with common comorbid conditions. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, PubMed, and the reference lists of reviews for RCTs, post hoc analyses, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses that report on use of BBs in CHF along with patient demographics and comorbidities. RESULTS: In total, 38 studies from 28 RCTs were identified, which provided data on six BBs against placebo or head to head with another BB agent in ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathies. Several studies explored BBs in older patients. Female patients and non-Caucasian race were underrepresented in trials. End points were cardiovascular hospitalization and mortality. Comorbid diabetes, renal impairment, or atrial fibrillation was detailed; however, no reference to disease spectrum or management goals as a focus could be seen in any of the studies. In this sense, enrollment may have limited more severe grades of these comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: RCTs provide authoritative information for a spectrum of CHF presentations that support guidelines. RCTs may provide inadequate information for more heterogeneous CHF patient cohorts. Greater Phase IV research may be needed to fill this gap and inform guidelines for a more global patient population.

Coaching patients On Achieving Cardiovascular Health (COACH): a multicenter randomized trial in patients with coronary heart disease.

BACKGROUND: Disease management programs in which drugs are prescribed by dietitians or nurses have been shown to improve the coronary risk factor profile in patients with coronary heart disease. However, those disease management programs in which drugs are not prescribed by allied health professionals have not improved coronary risk factor status. The objective of the Coaching patients On Achieving Cardiovascular Health (COACH) study was to determine whether dietitians or nurses who did not prescribe medications could coach patients with coronary heart disease to work with their physicians to achieve the target levels for their total cholesterol (TC) and other risk factors. METHODS: Multicenter randomized controlled trial in which 792 patients from 6 university teaching hospitals underwent a stratified randomization by cardiac diagnosis within each hospital: 398 were assigned to usual care plus The COACH Program and 394 to usual care alone. Patients in The COACH Program group received regular personal coaching via telephone and mailings to achieve the target levels for their particular coronary risk factors. There was one coach per hospital. The primary outcome was the change in TC (DeltaTC) from baseline (in hospital) to 6 months after randomization. Secondary outcomes included measurement of a wide range of physical, nutritional, and psychological factors. The analysis was performed by intention to treat. RESULTS: The COACH Program achieved a significantly greater DeltaTC than usual care alone: the mean DeltaTC was 21 mg/dL (0.54 mmol/L) (95% confidence interval [CI], 16-25 mg/dL [0.42-0.65 mmol/L]) in The COACH Program vs 7 mg/dL (0.18 mmol/L) (95% CI, 3-11 mg/dL [0.07-0.29 mmol/L]) in the usual care group (P<.0001). Thus, the reduction in TC from baseline to 6 months after randomization was 14 mg/dL (0.36 mmol/L) (95% CI, 8-20 mg/dL [0.20-0.52 mmol/L]) greater in The COACH Program group than in the usual care group. Coaching produced substantial improvements in most of the other coronary risk factors and in patient quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Coaching, delivered as The COACH Program, is a highly effective strategy in reducing TC and many other coronary risk factors in patients with coronary heart disease. Coaching has potential effectiveness in the whole area of chronic disease management.

40 years of cardiac rehabilitation and secondary prevention in post-cardiac ischaemic patients. Are we still in the wilderness?

Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is the sum of interventions required to ensure the best physical, psychological and social conditions so that patients with cardiac disease may assume their place in society and slow the progression of the disease. Exercise testing (ET) early after MI has been shown to result in earlier return to work than the non-performance of ET. Research quality CR has resulted in lower cardiovascular mortality and lower recurrent hospitalisation and has been shown to be cost-effective. However, the content of cardiac rehabilitation programmes varies considerably. The only randomised trial of CR as usually performed in the 'real world' showed that CR had no impact on cardiac death rates or any other outcome. Only 20-50% of eligible patients attend CR programmes and attendance at CR has not improved in the last 20 years despite major attempts to increase participation in CR. Alternative methods for provision of CR have been sought. These include home-based CR, case management approaches, and nurse coordinated prevention programmes. Telephone based programmes, such as The COACH Program, have been introduced to coach patients and improve behavioural and biomedical risk factors. These have been shown to improve risk factors better than usual patient care and to reduce recurrences of cardiac events after discharge from hospital due to MI. Expansion of novel approaches such as The COACH Program may help to counteract the non-attendance at CR.

Coaching patients with coronary heart disease to achieve the target cholesterol: a method to bridge the gap between evidence-based medicine and the "real world"--randomized controlled trial.

Community studies have demonstrated suboptimal achievement of lipid targets in the management of patients with coronary heart disease (CHD). An effective strategy is required for the application of evidence-based prevention therapy for CHD. The objective of this study was to test coaching as a technique to assist patients in achieving the target cholesterol level of <4.5 mmol/L. Patients with established CHD (n = 245) underwent a stratified randomization by cardiac procedure (coronary artery bypass graft surgery or percutaneous coronary intervention) to receive either the coaching intervention (n = 121) or usual medical care (n = 124). The primary outcome measure was fasting serum total cholesterol (TC), serum triglyceride (TG), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and calculated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level, measured at 6 months post-randomization. At 6 months, the serum TC and LDL-C levels were significantly lower in the coaching intervention group (n = 107) than the usual care group (n = 112): mean TC (95%CI) 5.00 (4.82-5.17) mmol/L versus 5.54 (5.36-5.72) mmol/L (P <.0001); mean LDL-C (95%CI) 3.11 (2.94-3.29) mmol/L versus 3.57 (3.39-3.75) mmol/L (P <.0004), respectively. Coaching had no impact on TG or on HDL-C levels. Multivariate analysis showed that being coached (P <.001) had an effect of equal magnitude to being prescribed lipid-lowering drug therapy (P <.001). The effectiveness of the coaching intervention is best explained by both adherence to drug therapy and to dietary advice given. Coaching may be an appropriate method to reduce the treatment gap in applying evidence-based medicine to the "real world."

Reversing social disadvantage in secondary prevention of coronary heart disease.

BACKGROUND: To compare and contrast the coronary heart disease (CHD) risk factors of lower socio-economic status public hospital patients with those of privately insured CHD patients before and after six months of telephone delivered coaching using The COACH Program. METHODS: A retrospective observational study which contrasts the lifestyle and biomedical coronary risk factor status of 2256 public hospital patients with the same risk factors of 3278 patients who had private health insurance. All patients received an average of 5 coach sessions over 6 months. RESULTS: The public hospital patients were four years younger and had multiple measures confirming their lower socio-economic status than their private hospital counterparts. At entry to the program, the public hospital patients had worse risk factor levels than the privately insured patients for total and LDL-cholesterol, triglycerides, fasting glucose, smoking and physical activity levels (P<0.0001) but better status for systolic and diastolic blood pressures and alcohol intake. At exit from the program, many of these differences had diminished or disappeared. The public hospital patients had greater improvements in their risk factor status for total and LDL-cholesterol, fasting glucose, body weight, smoking status and physical activity level than did the privately insured patients (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This paper demonstrates that a program of initiating contact with patients with CHD, identifying treatment gaps in their management and coaching to achieve guideline recommended risk factor targets can help reduce health inequalities in such patients and thus benefit all patients in the context of ongoing secondary prevention.

Guidelines for the prevention, detection and management of people with chronic heart failure in Australia 2006.

Chronic heart failure (CHF) is found in 1.5%-2.0% of Australians. Considered rare in people aged less than 45 years, its prevalence increases to over 10% in people aged >/= 65 years. CHF is one of the most common reasons for hospital admission and general practitioner consultation in the elderly (>/= 70 years). Common causes of CHF are ischaemic heart disease (present in > 50% of new cases), hypertension (about two-thirds of cases) and idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy (around 5%-10% of cases). Diagnosis is based on clinical features, chest x-ray and objective measurement of ventricular function (eg, echocardiography). Plasma levels of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) may have a role in diagnosis, primarily as a test for exclusion. Diagnosis may be strengthened by a beneficial clinical response to treatment(s) directed towards amelioration of symptoms. Management involves prevention, early detection, amelioration of disease progression, relief of symptoms, minimisation of exacerbations, and prolongation of survival.

How many patients with coronary heart disease are not achieving their risk-factor targets? Experience in Victoria 1996-1998 versus 1999-2000.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the proportion of patients with established coronary heart disease (CHD) in two Australian studies (VIC-I in 1996-1998, and VIC-II in 1999-2000) who achieved their risk-factor targets as recommended by the National Heart Foundation of Australia, and to compare this proportion with those in studies from the United Kingdom (ASPIRE), Europe (EUROASPIRE I and II) and the United States (L-TAP). DESIGN AND SETTING: Prospective cohort study with VIC-I set in a single Melbourne university teaching hospital and VIC-II set in six university teaching hospitals in Melbourne, Victoria. PARTICIPANTS: 460 patients (112 in VIC-I, 348 in VIC-II) who completed follow-up in the control groups of two randomised controlled trials of a coaching intervention in patients with established CHD. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The treatment gap (100%, minus the percentage of patients achieving the target level for a particular modifiable risk factor) at six months after hospitalisation. RESULTS: The treatment gap declined from 96.4% (95% CI, 91%-99%) to 74.1% (95% CI, 69%-79%) for total cholesterol concentration (TC) < 4.0 mmol/L (P = 0.0001) and from 90.2% (95% CI, 83%-95%) to 54.0% (95% CI, 49%-59%) for TC < 4.5 mmol/L (P = 0.0001). This reduction in the treatment gap between VIC-I and VIC-II appears to be entirely explained by an increase in the number of patients prescribed lipid-lowering drugs. The treatment gaps in the UK and two European studies were substantially greater. The treatment gap for blood pressure (systolic > or = 140 mmHg and/or diastolic > or = 90 mmHg) in VIC-II was 39.5%, again less than corresponding European data. There were 8.1% of patients who had unrecognised diabetes in VIC-II (fasting glucose level > or = 7 mmol/L), making a total of 25.6% of VIC-II patients with diabetes, self-reported or unrecognised. The proportion of patients in VIC-II who were obese (body mass index > or = 30 kg/m2) was similar to the overseas studies, while fewer patients in VIC-II smoked compared with those in the UK and European studies. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial treatment gap exists in Victorian patients with established CHD. The treatment gap compares well with international surveys and, at least in the lipid area, is diminishing.