The American Heart Association at 100: A Century of Scientific Progress and the Future of Cardiovascular Science: A Presidential Advisory From the American Heart Association.

In 1924, the founders of the American Heart Association (AHA) envisioned an international society focused on the heart and aimed at facilitating research, disseminating information, increasing public awareness, and developing public health policy related to heart disease. This presidential advisory provides a comprehensive review of the past century of cardiovascular and stroke science, with a focus on the AHA's contributions, as well as informed speculation about the future of cardiovascular science into the next century of the organization's history. The AHA is a leader in fundamental, translational, clinical, and population science, and it promotes the concept of the "learning health system," in which a continuous cycle of evidence-based practice leads to practice-based evidence, permitting an iterative refinement in clinical evidence and care. This advisory presents the AHA's journey over the past century from instituting professional membership to establishing extraordinary research funding programs; translating evidence to practice through clinical practice guidelines; affecting systems of care through quality programs, certification, and implementation; leading important advocacy efforts at the federal, state and local levels; and building global coalitions around cardiovascular and stroke science and public health. Recognizing an exciting potential future for science and medicine, the advisory offers a vision for even greater impact for the AHA's second century in its continued mission to be a relentless force for longer, healthier lives.

Concomitant Tricuspid Repair in Patients with Degenerative Mitral Regurgitation.

BACKGROUND: Tricuspid regurgitation is common in patients with severe degenerative mitral regurgitation. However, the evidence base is insufficient to inform a decision about whether to perform tricuspid-valve repair during mitral-valve surgery in patients who have moderate tricuspid regurgitation or less-than-moderate regurgitation with annular dilatation. METHODS: We randomly assigned 401 patients who were undergoing mitral-valve surgery for degenerative mitral regurgitation to receive a procedure with or without tricuspid annuloplasty (TA). The primary 2-year end point was a composite of reoperation for tricuspid regurgitation, progression of tricuspid regurgitation by two grades from baseline or the presence of severe tricuspid regurgitation, or death. RESULTS: Patients who underwent mitral-valve surgery plus TA had fewer primary-end-point events than those who underwent mitral-valve surgery alone (3.9% vs. 10.2%) (relative risk, 0.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.16 to 0.86; P = 0.02). Two-year mortality was 3.2% in the surgery-plus-TA group and 4.5% in the surgery-alone group (relative risk, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.25 to 1.88). The 2-year prevalence of progression of tricuspid regurgitation was lower in the surgery-plus-TA group than in the surgery-alone group (0.6% vs. 6.1%; relative risk, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.69). The frequencies of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, functional status, and quality of life were similar in the two groups at 2 years, although the incidence of permanent pacemaker implantation was higher in the surgery-plus-TA group than in the surgery-alone group (14.1% vs. 2.5%; rate ratio, 5.75; 95% CI, 2.27 to 14.60). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing mitral-valve surgery, those who also received TA had a lower incidence of a primary-end-point event than those who underwent mitral-valve surgery alone at 2 years, a reduction that was driven by less frequent progression to severe tricuspid regurgitation. Tricuspid repair resulted in more frequent permanent pacemaker implantation. Whether reduced progression of tricuspid regurgitation results in long-term clinical benefit can be determined only with longer follow-up. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the German Center for Cardiovascular Research; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02675244.).

Research Goes Red: Early Experience With a Participant-Centric Registry.

RATIONALE: Cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of death in women. To address its determinants including persisting cardiovascular risk factors amplified by sex and race inequities, novel personalized approaches are needed grounded in the engagement of participants in research and prevention. OBJECTIVE: To report on a participant-centric and personalized dynamic registry designed to address persistent gaps in understanding and managing cardiovascular disease in women. METHODS AND RESULTS: The American Heart Association and Verily launched the Research Goes Red registry (RGR) in 2019, as an online research platform available to consenting individuals over the age of 18 years in the United States. RGR aims to bring participants and researchers together to expand knowledge by collecting data and providing an open-source longitudinal dynamic registry for conducting research studies. As of July 2021, 15 350 individuals have engaged with RGR. Mean age of participants was 48.0 48.0±0.2 years with a majority identifying as female and either non-Hispanic White (75.7%) or Black (10.5%). In addition to 6 targeted health surveys, RGR has deployed 2 American Heart Association-sponsored prospective clinical studies based on participants' areas of interest. The first study focuses on perimenopausal weight gain, developed in response to a health concerns survey. The second study is designed to test the use of social media campaigns to increase awareness and participation in cardiovascular disease research among underrepresented millennial women. CONCLUSIONS: RGR is a novel online participant-centric platform that has successfully engaged women and provided critical data on women's heart health to guide research. Priorities for the growth of RGR are centered on increasing reach and diversity of participants, and engaging researchers to work within their communities to leverage the platform to address knowledge gaps and improve women's health.

Rapid, accurate publication and dissemination of clinical trial results: benefits and challenges.

Large-scale clinical trials are essential in cardiology and require rapid, accurate publication, and dissemination. Whereas conference presentations, press releases, and social media disseminate information quickly and often receive considerable coverage by mainstream and healthcare media, they lack detail, may emphasize selected data, and can be open to misinterpretation. Preprint servers speed access to research manuscripts while awaiting acceptance for publication by a journal, but these articles are not formally peer-reviewed and sometimes overstate the findings. Publication of trial results in a major journal is very demanding but the use of existing checklists can help accelerate the process. In case of rejection, procedures such as easing formatting requirements and possibly carrying over peer-review to other journals could speed resubmission. Secondary publications can help maximize benefits from clinical trials; publications of secondary endpoints and subgroup analyses further define treatment effects and the patient populations most likely to benefit. These rely on data access, and although data sharing is becoming more common, many challenges remain. Beyond publication in medical journals, there is a need for wider knowledge dissemination to maximize impact on clinical practice. This might be facilitated through plain language summary publications. Social media, websites, mainstream news outlets, and other publications, although not peer-reviewed, are important sources of medical information for both the public and for clinicians. This underscores the importance of ensuring that the information is understandable, accessible, balanced, and trustworthy. This report is based on discussions held on December 2021, at the 18th Global Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists meeting, involving a panel of editors of some of the top medical journals, as well as members of the lay press, industry, and clinical trialists.

Rationale and design of a randomized trial evaluating an external support device for saphenous vein coronary grafts.

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is the most common revascularization approach for the treatment of multi-vessel coronary artery disease. While the internal mammary artery is nearly universally used to bypass the left anterior descending coronary artery, autologous saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) are still the most frequently used conduits to grafts the remaining coronary artery targets. Long-term failure of these grafts, however, continues to limit the benefits of surgery. METHODS: The Cardiothoracic Surgical Trials Network trial of the safety and effectiveness of a Venous External Support (VEST) device is a randomized, multicenter, within-patient trial comparing VEST-supported versus unsupported saphenous vein grafts in patients undergoing CABG. Key inclusion criteria are the need for CABG with a planned internal mammary artery to the left anterior descending and two or more saphenous vein grafts to other coronary arteries. The primary efficacy endpoint of the trial is SVG intimal hyperplasia (plaque + media) area assessed by intravascular ultrasound at 12 months post randomization. Occluded grafts are accounted for in the analysis of the primary endpoint. Secondary confirmatory endpoints are lumen diameter uniformity and graft failure (>50% stenosis) assessed by coronary angiography at 12 months. The safety endpoints are the occurrence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events and hospitalization within 5 years from randomization. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the VEST trial will determine whether the VEST device can safely limit SVG intimal hyperplasia in patients undergoing CABG as treatment for coronary atherosclerotic disease.

Heart Failure End Points in Cardiovascular Outcome Trials of Sodium Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Critical Evaluation of Clinical and Regulatory Issues.

Following regulatory guidance set forth in 2008 by the US Food and Drug Administration for new drugs for type 2 diabetes mellitus, many large randomized, controlled trials have been conducted with the primary goal of assessing the safety of antihyperglycemic medications on the primary end point of major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. Heart failure (HF) was not specifically mentioned in the US Food and Drug Administration guidance and therefore it was not a focus of these studies when planned. Several trials subsequently showed the impact of antihyperglycemic drugs on HF outcomes, which were not originally specified as the primary end point of the trials. The most impressive finding has been the substantial and consistent risk reduction in HF hospitalization seen across 4 trials of sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors. However, to date, these results have not led to regulatory approval of any of these drugs for a HF indication or a recommendation for use by US HF guidelines. It is therefore important to explore to what extent persuasive treatment effects on nonprimary end points can be used to support regulatory claims and guideline recommendations. This topic was discussed by researchers, clinicians, industry sponsors, regulators, and representatives from professional societies, who convened on the US Food and Drug Administration campus on March 6, 2019. This report summarizes these discussions and the key takeaway messages from this meeting.

Clinical utility of surveillance and clinically prompted right heart catheterization in patients listed for heart transplantation.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The 2016 ISHLT guidelines recommend that patients listed for orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT) undergo periodic surveillance right heart catheterization (RHC) to re-assess hemodynamics (Class I, level of evidence C). However, the impact of RHC on management remains unclear. The aim of this study was to determine the utility of both surveillance and clinically prompted RHCs in patients listed for OHT. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted in adult patients listed for OHT at our hospital from 2006 through 2014. Each patient included had at least one RHC after being listed for OHT. The primary outcome was management change: hospitalization, surgery (OHT or mechanical circulatory support [MCS]), change in United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) status, or initiation/modification of vasoactive drugs, diuretics or neurohormonal blockade. RESULTS: Of the 194 patients included, 85 (43%) patients had more than one RHC. The median time between listing and transplantation was 115 days. Of the 376 RHCs performed, 187 (50%) were prompted by a clinical change; 189 (50%) were performed for surveillance. In 90.4% of clinically prompted RHCs and 42.9% of surveillance RHCs, a clinically important management change was implemented. Initiation/modification of vasoactive drugs, placement of MCS and/or change in UNOS transplant status occurred in 61 (33%) of the clinically prompted RHCs and 26 (14%) of the surveillance RHCs. Patients who underwent management change were more likely to receive a heart transplant (HR 1.58; CI 1.15-2.18) without an increased rate of death over the study period compared to those who did not have a management change. Multivariable analysis revealed that a hemoglobin level <12.2 g/dL (OR 2.96; CI 1.36-6.42) and a total bilirubin level >0.9 mg/dL (OR 5.07; CI 2.09-12.3) were predictors of management change. CONCLUSIONS: In patients awaiting OHT, RHCs prompted by clinical instability or routine surveillance resulted in frequent management changes, including earlier heart transplant and MCS implant. Our study supports the Class I recommendation to perform surveillance RHC in patients listed for OHT and suggests that centers should consider maintaining a low threshold for repeat RHC during the formal waiting time.

Neprilysin Inhibitors: Emerging Therapy for Heart Failure.

Biologically active natriuretic peptides (NPs) are an integral part of cardiac homeostasis as they help to maintain sodium and fluid balance. When homeostasis is perturbed by neurohormonal activation in heart failure, levels of NPs rise in response. Neprilysin (NEP) is a naturally occuring enzyme that breaks down NPs. Scientists have recently discovered a novel pharmacologic agent that combines a NEP inhibitor and an angiotensin receptor blocker. In a large clinical trial, this new drug was found to reduce hospitalization and mortality in systolic heart failure. The challenges of implementing this therapy include patient selection, cost, and risk of side effects including angioedema and Alzheimer's disease.

New Management Strategies in Heart Failure.

Despite >100 clinical trials, only 2 new drugs had been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of chronic heart failure in more than a decade: the aldosterone antagonist eplerenone in 2003 and a fixed dose combination of hydralazine-isosorbide dinitrate in 2005. In contrast, 2015 has witnessed the Food and Drug Administration approval of 2 new drugs, both for the treatment of chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: ivabradine and another combination drug, sacubitril/valsartan or LCZ696. Seemingly overnight, a range of therapeutic possibilities, evoking new physiological mechanisms, promise great hope for a disease that often carries a prognosis worse than many forms of cancer. Importantly, the newly available therapies represent a culmination of basic and translational research that actually spans many decades. This review will summarize newer drugs currently being used in the treatment of heart failure, as well as newer strategies increasingly explored for their utility during the stages of the heart failure syndrome.

Brain-Type Natriuretic Peptide and Amino-Terminal Pro-Brain-Type Natriuretic Peptide Discharge Thresholds for Acute Decompensated Heart Failure: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) requiring hospitalization is associated with high postdischarge mortality and readmission rates. PURPOSE: To examine the association between achieving predischarge natriuretic peptide (NP) thresholds and mortality and readmission rates in adults hospitalized for ADHF. DATA SOURCES: Multiple databases from 1947 to October 2016 (English-language studies only). STUDY SELECTION: Trials and observational studies that compared mortality and readmission outcomes between patients with ADHF achieving a specific predischarge NP goal and those not achieving the goal. DATA EXTRACTION: Two investigators independently extracted study characteristics and assessed study risk of bias. One author graded the overall strength of evidence, with review by a second author. DATA SYNTHESIS: One randomized trial, 3 quasi-experimental studies, and 40 observational studies were identified. The most commonly used thresholds were a brain-type NP (BNP) level of 250 pg/mL or less or an amino-terminal pro-brain-type NP (NT-proBNP) decrease of at least 30%. Achievement of absolute BNP thresholds reduced postdischarge all-cause mortality (7 of 8 studies) and the composite outcome of mortality and readmission (12 of 14 studies). Achievement of percentage-change BNP thresholds reduced the composite outcome (5 of 6 studies), and achievement of percentage-change NT-proBNP thresholds reduced all-cause and cardiovascular mortality (2 of 4 studies) and the composite outcome (9 of 9 studies). All findings were low-strength. The randomized trial, assessed as having high risk of bias, suggested that a predischarge decrease in NT-proBNP level was associated with lower risk for the composite outcome. Two quasi-experimental studies and 5 observational studies had low risk of bias. Low-risk-of-bias studies had outcome estimates similar in magnitude and direction to estimates from high-risk-of-bias studies. LIMITATION: Most studies failed to adjust for critical confounders and had inadequate definition or assessment of exposures and outcomes. CONCLUSION: Low-strength evidence suggests an association between achieving NP predischarge thresholds and reduced ADHF mortality and readmission. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None.

Understanding Heart Failure.

Heart failure (HF) is a growing global health concern that affects more than 20 million people worldwide. With an ever-growing segment of the population over the age of 65, the prevalence of HF and its associated costs are expected to increase exponentially over the next decade. Advances in the understanding of the pathophysiology and treatment of HF have resulted in the ability to enhance both the quantity and the quality of life of patients with HF. This article reviews the current understanding of the pathophysiology, cause, classification, and treatment of HF and describes areas of uncertainty that demand future study.

Long-term effects of AAV1/SERCA2a gene transfer in patients with severe heart failure: analysis of recurrent cardiovascular events and mortality.

RATIONALE: The Calcium Up-Regulation by Percutaneous Administration of Gene Therapy In Cardiac Disease (CUPID 1) study was a phase 1/phase 2 first-in-human clinical gene therapy trial using an adeno-associated virus serotype 1 (AAV1) vector carrying the sarcoplasmic reticulum calcium ATPase gene (AAV1/SERCA2a) in patients with advanced heart failure. The study explored potential benefits of the therapy at 12 months, and results were previously reported. OBJECTIVE: To report long-term (3-year) clinical effects and transgene expression in the patients in CUPID 1. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 39 patients with advanced heart failure who were on stable, optimal heart failure therapy were randomized to receive intracoronary infusion of AAV1/SERCA2a in 1 of 3 doses (low-dose, 6×10(11) DNase-resistant particles; mid-dose, 3×10(12) DNase-resistant particles; and high-dose, 1×10(13) DNase-resistant particles) versus placebo. The following recurrent cardiovascular and terminal events were tracked for 3 years in all groups: myocardial infarction, worsening heart failure, heart failure-related hospitalization, ventricular assist device placement, cardiac transplantation, and death. The number of cardiovascular events, including death, was highest in the placebo group, high but delayed in the low- and mid-dose groups, and lowest in the high-dose group. Evidence of long-term transgene presence was also observed in high-dose patients. The risk of prespecified recurrent cardiovascular events was reduced by 82% in the high-dose versus placebo group (P=0.048). No safety concerns were noted during the 3-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: After a single intracoronary infusion of AAV1/SERCA2a in patients with advanced heart failure, positive signals of cardiovascular events persist for years.

Clinical Trial Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion: Roadmap of the Cardiothoracic Surgical Trials Network.

BACKGROUND: There is a recognized lack of diversity among patients enrolled in cardiovascular interventional and surgical trials. Diverse patient representation in clinical trials is necessary to enhance generalizability of findings, which may lead to better outcomes across broader populations. The Cardiothoracic Surgical Trials Network (CTSN) recently developed a plan of action to increase diversity among participating investigators and trial participants and is the focus of this review. METHODS: A review of literature and enrollment data from CTSN trials was conducted. RESULTS: CTSN completed more than a dozen major clinical trials (2008-2022), enrolling >4000 patients, of whom 30% were women, 11% were non-White, and 5.6% were Hispanic. CTSN also completed trials of hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019, wherein enrollment was more diverse, with 42% women, and 58% were Asian, Black, Hispanic, or from another underrepresented racial group. The discrepancy in diversity of enrollment between cardiac surgery trials and coronavirus disease trials highlights the need for a more comprehensive understanding of (1) the prevalence of underlying disease requiring cardiac interventions across broad populations, (2) differences in access to care and referral for cardiac surgery, and (3) barriers to enrollment in cardiac surgery trials. CONCLUSIONS: Committed to diversity, CTSN's multifaceted action plan includes developing site-specific enrollment targets, collecting social determinants of health data, understanding reasons for nonparticipation, recruiting sites that serve diverse populations, emphasizing greater diversity among clinical trial teams, and implicit bias training. The CTSN will prospectively assess how these interventions influence enrollment as we work to ensure trial participants are more representative of the communities we serve.

Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction and the Future of Heart Failure Phenotyping.

Heart failure (HF) is a complex syndrome traditionally classified by left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) cutpoints. Although LVEF is prognostic for risk of events and predictive of response to some HF therapies, LVEF is a continuous variable and cutpoints are arbitrary, often based on historical clinical trial enrichment decisions rather than physiology. Holistic evaluation of the treatment effects for therapies throughout the LVEF range suggests the standard categorization paradigm for HF merits modification. The multidisciplinary Heart Failure Collaboratory reviewed data from large-scale HF clinical trials and found that many HF therapies have demonstrated therapeutic benefit across a large range of LVEF, but specific treatment effects vary across that range. Therefore, HF should practically be classified by association with an LVEF that is reduced or not reduced, while acknowledging uncertainty around the precise LVEF cutpoint, and future research should evaluate new therapies across the continuum of LVEF.

American Heart Association Cardiogenic Shock Registry: Design and Implementation.

BACKGROUND: Cardiogenic shock is a morbid complication of heart disease that claims the lives of more than 1 in 3 patients presenting with this syndrome. Supporting a unique collaboration across clinical specialties, federal regulators, payors, and industry, the American Heart Association volunteers and staff have launched a quality improvement registry to better understand the clinical manifestations of shock phenotypes, and to benchmark the management patterns, and outcomes of patients presenting with cardiogenic shock to hospitals across the United States. METHODS: Participating hospitals will enroll consecutive hospitalized patients with cardiogenic shock, regardless of etiology or severity. Data are collected through individual reviews of medical records of sequential adult patients with cardiogenic shock. The electronic case record form was collaboratively designed with a core minimum data structure and aligned with Shock Academic Research Consortium definitions. This registry will allow participating health systems to evaluate patient-level data including diagnostic approaches, therapeutics, use of advanced monitoring and circulatory support, processes of care, complications, and in-hospital survival. Participating sites can leverage these data for onsite monitoring of outcomes and benchmarking versus other institutions. The registry was concomitantly designed to provide a high-quality longitudinal research infrastructure for pragmatic randomized trials as well as translational, clinical, and implementation research. An aggregate deidentified data set will be made available to the research community on the American Heart Association's Precision Medicine Platform. On March 31, 2022, the American Heart Association Cardiogenic Shock Registry received its first clinical records. At the time of this submission, 100 centers are participating. CONCLUSIONS: The American Heart Association Cardiogenic Shock Registry will serve as a resource using consistent data structure and definitions for the medical and research community to accelerate scientific advancement through shared learning and research resulting in improved quality of care and outcomes of shock patients.

Sodium, blood pressure, and cardiovascular disease: further evidence supporting the American Heart Association sodium reduction recommendations.

Recent reports of selected observational studies and a meta-analysis have stirred controversy and have become the impetus for calls to abandon recommendations for reduced sodium intake by the US general population. A detailed review of these studies documents substantial methodological concerns that limit the usefulness of these studies in setting, much less reversing, dietary recommendations. Indeed, the evidence base supporting recommendations for reduced sodium intake in the general population remains robust and persuasive. The American Heart Association is committed to improving the health of all Americans through implementation of national goals for health promotion and disease prevention, including its recommendation to reduce dietary sodium intake to <1500 mg/d.