Atrial arrhythmias and heart failure: A "modern view" of an old paradox.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) and atrial arrhythmias (AAs) are two clinical conditions that characterize the daily clinical practice of cardiologists. In this perspective review, we analyze the shared etiopathogenetic pathways of atrial arrhythmias, which are the most common cause of atrial arrhythmias-induced cardiomyopathy (AACM) and HF. HYPOTHESIS: The aim is to explore the pathophysiology of these two conditions considering them as a "unicum", allowing the definition of a cardiovascular continuum where it is possible to predict the factors and to identify the patient phenotype most at risk to develop HF due to atrial arrhythmias. METHODS: Potentially eligible articles, identified from the Electronic database (PubMed), and related references were used for a literature search that was conducted between January 2022 and January 2023. Search strategies were designed to identify articles that reported atrial arrhythmias in association with heart failure and vice versa. For the search we used the following keywords: atrial arrhythmias, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy, tachycardiomyopathy. We identified 620 articles through the electronic database search. Out of the 620 total articles we removed 320 duplicates, thus selecting 300 eligible articles. About 150 titles/abstracts were excluded for the following reasons: no original available data, no mention of atrial arrhythmias and heart failure crosstalk, very low quality analysis or evidence. We excluded also non-English articles. When multiple articles were published on the same topic, the articles with the most complete set of data were considered. We preferentially included all papers that could provide the best evidence in the field. As a result, the present review article is based on a final number of 104 references. RESULTS: While the pathophysiology of AACM and Heart Failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has been studied in detail over the years, the causal link between atrial arrhythmias and heart failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF) has been often subject of interest. HFpEF is strictly related to AAs, which has always been considered significant risk factor. In this review we described the pathophysiological links between atrial fibrillation and heart failure. Furthermore, we illustrated and discussed the preclinical and clinical predicting factors of AF and HFpEF, and the corresponding targets of the available therapeutic agents. Finally, we outlined the patient phenotype at risk of developing AF and HFpEF (Central Illustration). CONCLUSIONS: In this review, we underline how these two clinical conditions (AF and HFpEF) represent a "unicum" and, therefore, should be considered as a single disease that can manifest itself in the same phenotype of patients but at different times. Furthermore, considering that today we have few therapeutic strategies to treat these patients, it would be good to make an early diagnosis in the initial stages of the disease or intervene even before the development of signs and symptoms of HF. This is possible only by paying greater attention to patients with predisposing factors and carrying out a targeted screening with the correct diagnostic methods. A systemic approach aimed at improving the immuno-metabolic profile of these patients by lowering the body mass index, threatening the predisposing factors, lowering the mean heart rate and reducing the sympathetic nervous system activation is the key strategy to reduce the clinical impact of this disease.

Prognostic value of tricuspid regurgitation.

Tricuspid regurgitation (TR) has a considerable prevalence in the overall population, that further increases in selected categories of patients. Three morphologic types of TR prevail, namely primary, secondary and atrial TR, mostly, but not always, occurring in different subsets of patients. Recent evidences demonstrate a negative impact of TR on outcomes, irrespective of etiology and even when less than severe in grading. Unfortunately, current surgical standards are void of strong prospective evidence of positive impact on clinical outcomes. While on one hand recent advances in diagnosis and risk stratification of patients with TR are shedding light onto the population that may benefit from intervention and its appropriate timing, on the other hand the arrival on stage of percutaneous treatment options is widening even more the therapeutic options for such population. In this review we will address and discuss the available evidence on the prognostic impact of TR in different clinical contexts encountered in practice.

Left atrial strain: a new parameter for assessment of left ventricular filling pressure.

In order to obtain accurate diagnosis, treatment and prognostication in many cardiac conditions, there is a need for assessment of left ventricular (LV) filling pressure. While systole depends on ejection function of LV, diastole and its disturbances influence filling function and pressures. The commonest condition that represents the latter is heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in which LV ejection is maintained, but diastole is disturbed and hence filling pressures are raised. Significant diastolic dysfunction results in raised LV end-diastolic pressure, mean left atrial (LA) pressure and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, all referred to as LV filling pressures. Left and right heart catheterization has traditionally been used as the gold standard investigation for assessing these pressures. More recently, Doppler echocardiography has taken over such application because of its noninvasive nature and for being patient friendly. A number of indices are used to achieve accurate assessment of filling pressures including: LV pulsed-wave filling velocities (E/A ratio, E wave deceleration time), pulmonary venous flow (S wave and D wave), tissue Doppler imaging (E' wave and E/E' ratio) and LA volume index. LA longitudinal strain derived from speckle tracking echocardiography (STE) is also sensitive in estimating intracavitary pressures. It is angle-independent, thus overcomes Doppler limitations and provides highly reproducible measures of LA deformation. This review examines the application of various Doppler echocardiographic techniques in assessing LV filling pressures, in particular the emerging role of STE in assessing LA pressures in various conditions, e.g., HF, arterial hypertension and atrial fibrillation.

[Metabolic therapy for heart failure]. / Terapia metabolica per l'insufficienza cardiaca.

Heart failure may promote metabolic changes such as insulin resistance, in part through neurohumoral activation, and determining an increased utilization of non-carbohydrate substrates for energy production. In fact, fasting blood ketone bodies as well as fat oxidation have been shown to be increased in patients with heart failure. The result is depletion of myocardial ATP, phosphocreatine and creatine kinase with decreased efficiency of mechanical work. A direct approach to manipulate cardiac energy metabolism consists in modifying substrate utilization by the failing heart. To date, the most effective metabolic treatments include several pharmacological agents that directly inhibit fatty acid oxidation. The results of current research are supporting the concept that shifting the energy substrate preference away from fatty acid metabolism and toward glucose metabolism could be an effective adjunctive treatment in patients with heart failure. Trimetazidine is the most studied drug in this context. Several small studies have evidenced the usefulness of such additional therapeutic tools for heart failure. More specifically, recent meta-analyses and a multicenter retrospective study have shown that additional use of trimetazidine in patients with heart failure, along with symptoms and cardiac function improvement, also provides a significant protective effect on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular events and hospitalization due to cardiac causes. Nevertheless, the exact role of metabolic therapy in heart failure is yet to be established, and a large multicenter randomized trial is necessary.

Prognostic role of mitral regurgitation in patients with advanced heart failure.

AIM: The impact of mitral regurgitation (MR) in patients with advanced heart failure (HF) is poorly known. We aimed to evaluate the impact of MR on clinical outcomes of a real-world, contemporary, multicentre population with advanced HF. METHODS: The HELP-HF registry enrolled patients with HF and at least one "I NEED HELP" criterion, at four Italian centres between January 2020 and November 2021. The population was stratified by none/mild MR vs. moderate MR vs. severe MR. Outcomes of interest were all-cause, cardiovascular (CV) death, the composite of all-cause death or first HF hospitalization, first HF hospitalization and recurrent HF hospitalizations. RESULTS: Among 1079 patients, 429 (39.8%) had none/mild MR, 443 (41.1%) had moderate MR and 207 (19.2%) had severe MR. Patients with severe MR were most likely to be inpatients, present with cardiogenic shock, need intravenous loop diuretics and inotropes/vasopressors, have lower ejection fraction and higher natriuretic peptides. Estimated rates of all-cause death, CV death, and the composite of all-cause death or first HF hospitalization at 1 year increased with increasing MR severity. Compared with no/mild MR, severe MR was independently associated with an increased risk of CV death (adjusted HR 1.61, 95% CI 1.04-2.51, p = 0.033) and recurrent HF hospitalizations (adjusted HR 1.49, 95% CI 1.08-2.06, p = 0.015), but not with and increased risk of all-cause death, first HF hospitalization and composite outcome. CONCLUSIONS: In unselected patients with advanced HF, severe MR was common and independently associated with an increased risk of CV death and of recurrent HF hospitalizations.

Left ventricular fibrosis as a main determinant of filling pressures and left atrial function in advanced heart failure.

AIMS: Advanced heart failure (AdHF) is characterized by variable degrees of left ventricular (LV) dysfunction, myocardial fibrosis, and raised filling pressures which lead to left atrial (LA) dilatation and cavity dysfunction. This study investigated the relationship between LA peak atrial longitudinal strain (PALS), assessed by speckle-tracking echocardiography (STE), and invasive measures of LV filling pressures and fibrosis in a group of AdHF patients undergoing heart transplantation (HTX). METHODS AND RESULTS: We consecutively enrolled patients with AdHF who underwent HTX at our Department. Demographic and basic echocardiographic data were registered, then invasive intracardiac pressures were obtained from right heart catheterization, and STE was also performed. After HTX, biopsy specimens from explanted hearts were collected to quantify the degree of LV myocardial fibrosis. Sixty-four patients were included in the study (mean age 62.5 ± 11 years, 42% female). The mean LV ejection fraction (LVEF) was 26.7 ± 6.1%, global PALS was 9.65 ± 4.5%, and mean pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) was 18.8 ± 4.8 mmHg. Seventy-three % of patients proved to have severe LV fibrosis. Global PALS was inversely correlated with PCWP (R = -0.83; P < 0.0001) and with LV fibrosis severity (R = -0.78; P < 0.0001) but did not correlate with LVEF (R = 0.15; P = 0.2). Among echocardiographic indices of LV filling pressures, global PALS proved the strongest [area under the curve 0.955 (95% confidence interval 0.87-0.99)] predictor of raised (>18 mmHg) PCWP. CONCLUSION: In patients with AdHF, reduced global PALS strongly correlated with the invasively assessed LV filling pressure and degree of LV fibrosis. Such relationship could be used as non-invasive indicator for optimum patient stratification for therapeutic strategies.

Clinical burden and predictors of non-cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in advanced heart failure.

BACKGROUND: The changing demographic of heart failure (HF) increases the exposure to non-cardiovascular (non-CV) events. We investigated the distribution of non-CV mortality/morbidity and the characteristics associated with higher risk of non-CV events in patients with advanced HF. METHODS: Patients from the HELP-HF registry were stratified according to the number of 2018 HFA-ESC criteria for advanced HF. Endpoints were non-CV mortality and non-CV hospitalization. Competing risk analyses were performed assessing the association between HFA-ESC criteria and study outcomes and the additional predictors of non-CV endpoints. RESULTS: One thousand one hundred and forty-nine patients were included (median age 77 years-IQR 69-83). At 6, 12, 18 and 22 months, cumulative incidence of CV vs non-CV mortality was 13% vs 5%, 17% vs 8%, 20% vs 12%, 23% vs 12%, and of CV vs non-CV hospitalization was 26% vs 11%, 38% vs 17%, 45% vs 20%, 50% vs 21%. HFA-ESC criteria were associated with increasing adjusted risk of CV death, whereas no association was observed for CV hospitalization, non-CV death and non-CV hospitalization. Predictors of non-CV death were age, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dementia, preserved ejection fraction, >1 HF hospitalization and hemoglobin. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with advanced HF are exposed to high, even though not predominant, burden of non-CV outcomes. HFA-ESC criteria aid to stratify the risk of CV death, but are not associated with lower competing risk of non-CV outcomes. Alternative factors can be useful to define the patients with advanced HF at risk of non-CV events in order to better select patients for treatments specifically reducing CV risk.

Role of ejection fraction in patients at risk for advanced heart failure: insights from the HELP-HF registry.

AIMS: Patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (EF) (HFrEF), mildly reduced EF (HFmrEF), and preserved EF (HFpEF) may all progress to advanced HF, but the impact of EF in the advanced setting is not well established. Our aim was to assess the prognostic impact of EF in patients with at least one 'I NEED HELP' marker for advanced HF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with HF and at least one high-risk 'I NEED HELP' criterion from four centres were included in this analysis. Outcomes were assessed in patients with HFrEF (EF ≤ 40%), HFmrEF (EF 41-49%), and HFpEF (EF ≥ 50%) and with EF analysed as a continuous variable. The prognostic impact of medical therapy for HF in patients with EF < 50% and EF > 50% was also evaluated. All-cause death was the primary endpoint, and cardiovascular death was a secondary endpoint. Among 1149 patients enrolled [mean age 75.1 ± 11.5 years, 67.3% males, 67.6% hospitalized, median follow-up 260 days (inter-quartile range 105-390 days)], HFrEF, HFmrEF, and HFpEF were observed in 699 (60.8%), 122 (10.6%), and 328 (28.6%) patients, and 1 year mortality was 28.3%, 26.2%, and 20.1, respectively (log-rank P = 0.036). As compared with HFrEF patients, HFpEF patients had a lower risk of all-cause death [adjusted hazard ratio (HRadj ) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48-0.94, P = 0.022], whereas no difference was noted for HFmrEF patients. After multivariable adjustment, a lower risk of all-cause death (HRadj for 5% increase 0.94, 95% CI 0.89-0.99, P = 0.017) and cardiovascular death (HRadj for 5% increase 0.94, 95% CI 0.88-1.00, P = 0.049) was observed at higher EF values. Beta-blockers and renin-angiotensin system inhibitors or sacubitril/valsartan were associated with lower mortality in both EF < 50% and EF ≥ 50% groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with HF and at least one 'I NEED HELP' marker for advanced HF, left ventricular EF is still of prognostic value.

Characteristics and outcomes of patients with tricuspid regurgitation and advanced heart failure.

AIMS: To evaluate the role of tricuspid regurgitation in advanced heart failure. METHODS: The multicenter observational HELP-HF registry enrolled consecutive patients with heart failure and at least one 'I NEED HELP' criterion evaluated at four Italian centers between January 2020 and November 2021. Patients with no data on tricuspid regurgitation and/or receiving tricuspid valve intervention during follow-up were excluded. The population was stratified by no/mild tricuspid regurgitation vs. moderate tricuspid regurgitation vs. severe tricuspid regurgitation. Variables independently associated with tricuspid regurgitation, as well as the association between tricuspid regurgitation and clinical outcomes were investigated. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Among the 1085 patients included in this study, 508 (46.8%) had no/mild tricuspid regurgitation, 373 (34.4%) had moderate tricuspid regurgitation and 204 (18.8%) had severe tricuspid regurgitation. History of atrial fibrillation, any prior valve surgery, high dose of furosemide, preserved left ventricular ejection fraction, moderate/severe mitral regurgitation and pulmonary hypertension were found to be independently associated with an increased likelihood of severe tricuspid regurgitation. Estimated rates of 1-year all-cause death were of 21.4, 24.5 and 37.1% in no/mild tricuspid regurgitation, moderate tricuspid regurgitation and severe tricuspid regurgitation, respectively (log-rank P  < 0.001). As compared with nonsevere tricuspid regurgitation, severe tricuspid regurgitation was independently associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 1.38, 95% confidence interval 1.01-1.88, P  = 0.042), whereas moderate tricuspid regurgitation did not. CONCLUSION: In a contemporary, real-world cohort of patients with advanced heart failure, several clinical and echocardiographic characteristics are associated with an increased likelihood of severe tricuspid regurgitation. Patients with severe tricuspid regurgitation have an increased risk of mortality.

Guideline-directed medical therapy in severe heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: An analysis from the HELP-HF registry.

AIM: Persistent symptoms despite guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) and poor tolerance of GDMT are hallmarks of patients with advanced heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, real-world data on GDMT use, dose, and prognostic implications are lacking. METHODS AND RESULTS: We included 699 consecutive patients with HFrEF and at least one 'I NEED HELP' marker for advanced HF enrolled in a multicentre registry. Beta-blockers (BB) were administered to 574 (82%) patients, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers or angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ACEi/ARB/ARNI) were administered to 381 (55%) patients and 416 (60%) received mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA). Overall, ≥50% of target doses were reached in 41%, 22%, and 56% of the patients on BB, ACEi/ARB/ARNI and MRA, respectively. Hypotension, bradycardia, kidney dysfunction and hyperkalaemia were the main causes of underprescription and/or underdosing, but up to a half of the patients did not receive target doses for unknown causes (51%, 41%, and 55% for BB, ACEi/ARB/ARNI and MRA, respectively). The proportions of patients receiving BB and ACEi/ARB/ARNI were lower among those fulfilling the 2018 HFA-ESC criteria for advanced HF. Treatment with BB and ACEi/ARB/ARNI were associated with a lower risk of death or HF hospitalizations (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48-0.84, and HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58-0.95, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In a large, real-world, contemporary cohort of patients with severe HFrEF, with at least one marker for advanced HF, prescription and uptitration of GDMT remained limited. A significant proportion of patients were undertreated due to unknown reasons suggesting a potential role of clinical inertia either by the prescribing healthcare professional or by the patient. Treatment with BB and ACEi/ARB/ARNI was associated with lower mortality/morbidity.

Clinical and prognostic implications of heart failure hospitalization in patients with advanced heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalization is associated with poor outcomes in patients with heart failure, but its prognostic role in advanced heart failure is still unsettled. We evaluated the prognostic role of heart failure hospitalization in patients with advanced heart failure. METHODS: The multicenter HELP-HF registry enrolled consecutive patients with heart failure and at least one high-risk 'I NEED HELP' marker. Characteristics and outcomes were compared between patients who were hospitalized for decompensated heart failure (inpatients) or not (outpatients) at the time of enrolment. The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause mortality or first heart failure hospitalization. RESULTS: Among the 1149 patients included [mean age 75.1 ±â€Š11.5 years, 67.3% men, median left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 35% (IQR 25-50%)], 777 (67.6%) were inpatients at the time of enrolment. As compared with outpatients, inpatients had lower LVEF, higher natriuretic peptides and a worse clinical profile. The 1-year rate of the primary endpoint was 50.9% in inpatients versus 36.8% in outpatients [crude hazard ratio 1.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.39-2.07, P < 0.001]. At multivariable analysis, inpatient status was independently associated with a higher risk of the primary endpoint (adjusted hazard ratio 1.54, 95% CI 1.23-1.93, P < 0.001). Among inpatients, the independent predictors of the primary endpoint were older age, lower SBP, heart failure association criteria for advanced heart failure and glomerular filtration rate 30 ml/min/1.73 m2 or less. CONCLUSION: Hospitalization for heart failure in patients with at least one high-risk 'I NEED HELP' marker is associated with an extremely poor prognosis supporting the need for specific interventions, such as mechanical circulatory support or heart transplantation.

Impact of malnutrition in patients with severe heart failure.

AIM: The role of malnutrition among patients with severe heart failure (HF) is not well established. We evaluated the incidence, predictors, and prognostic impact of malnutrition in patients with severe HF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Nutritional status was measured using the geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI), based on body weight, height and serum albumin concentration, with malnutrition defined as GNRI ≤98. It was assessed in consecutive patients with severe HF, defined by at least one high-risk 'I NEED HELP' marker, enrolled at four Italian centres between January 2020 and November 2021. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. A total of 510 patients with data regarding nutritional status were included in the study (mean age 74 ± 12 years, 66.5% male). Among them, 179 (35.1%) had GNRI ≤98 (malnutrition). At multivariable logistic regression, lower body mass index (BMI) and higher levels of natriuretic peptides (B-type natriuretic peptide [BNP] > median value [685 pg/ml] or N-terminal proBNP > median value [5775 pg/ml]) were independently associated with a higher likelihood of malnutrition. Estimated rates of all-cause death at 1 year were 22.4% and 41.1% in patients without and with malnutrition, respectively (log-rank p < 0.001). The impact of malnutrition on all-cause mortality was confirmed after multivariable adjustment for relevant covariates (adjusted hazard ratio 2.03, 95% confidence interval 1.43-2.89, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In a contemporary, real-world, multicentre cohort of patients with severe HF, malnutrition (defined as GNRI ≤98) was common and independently associated with an increased risk of mortality. Lower BMI and higher natriuretic peptides were identified as predictors of malnutrition in these patients.

Frailty according to the 2019 HFA-ESC definition in patients at risk for advanced heart failure: Insights from the HELP-HF registry.

AIMS: Frailty is highly prevalent in patients with heart failure (HF), but a concordant definition of this condition is lacking. The Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology (HFA-ESC) proposed in 2019 a new multi-domain definition of frailty, but it has never been validated. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients from the HELP-HF registry were stratified according to the number of HFA-ESC frailty domains fulfilled and to the cumulative deficits frailty index (FI) quintiles. Prevalence of frailty and of each domain was reported, as well as the rate of the composite of all-cause death and HF hospitalization, its single components, and cardiovascular death in each group and quintile. Among 854 included patients, 37 (4.3%), 206 (24.1%), 365 (42.8%), 217 (25.4%), and 29 (3.4%) patients fulfilled zero, one, two, three, or four domains, respectively, while 179 patients had a FI < 0.21 and were considered not frail. The 1-year risk of adverse events increased proportionally to the number of domains fulfilled (for each criterion increase, all-cause death or HF hospitalization: hazard ratio [HR] 1.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.27-1.62; all-cause death: HR 1.72, 95% CI 1.46-2.02, HF hospitalizations: subHR 1.21, 95% CI 1.04-1.31; cardiovascular death: HR 1.77, 95% CI 1.45-2.15). Consistent results were found stratifying the cohort for FI quintiles. The FI as a continuous variable demonstrated higher discriminative ability than the number of domains fulfilled (area under the curve = 0.68 vs. 0.64, p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: Frailty in patients at risk for advanced HF, assessed via a multi-domain approach and the FI, is highly prevalent and identifies those at increased risk of adverse events. The FI was found to be slightly more effective in identifying patients at increased risk of mortality.

[Cardiovascular involvement in Erdheim-Chester syndrome: clinical and therapeutic implications]. / Coinvolgimento cardiovascolare nella sindrome di Erdheim-Chester: aspetti clinici e terapeutici.

Erdheim-Chester disease (ECD) is a rare form of non-Langerhans' cell histiocytosis of unknown etiology and its incidence is constantly increasing. ECD is characterized by a xantomatous or xanthogranulomatous infiltration of various tissues by foamy histiocytes surrounded by fibrosis. ECD is characterized by multi-organ involvement and is generally associated with a poor prognosis with a median survival of 32 months after diagnosis. Cardiovascular involvement concerns mainly the thoraco-abdominal aorta and pericardium. Less frequently, infiltration affects the myocardial tissue, especially the right atrium, and the valvular endocardium. Recently, the involvement of the vena cava has also been described. The diagnosis of ECD is made by the identification of foamy histiocytes CD68 positive and CD1a/S100 negative embedded in a polymorphic inflammatory tissue on biopsy. Despite the adoption of several therapeutic strategies until now prognosis has remained poor. Interferon-α can be considered the first line therapy, but its effects on central nervous system and cardiovascular localization have been shown to be often poor. In this context a combined treatment with the anti-TNFα monoclonal antibody infliximab and methotrexate seems to be effective and well tolerated.

Ischemic Etiology in Advanced Heart Failure: Insight from the HELP-HF Registry.

In patients with advanced heart failure (HF), defined according to the presence of at least one I-NEED-HELP criterium, the updated 2018 Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology (HFA-ESC) criteria for advanced HF identify a subgroup of patients with HF with worse prognosis, but whether ischemic etiology has a relevant prognostic impact in this very high-risk cohort is unknown. Patients from the HELP-HF registry were stratified according to ischemic etiology and presence of advanced HF based on 2018 HFA-ESC criteria. The primary end point was a composite of all-cause death and HF hospitalization at 1 year. Secondary end points were all-cause death, HF hospitalization, and cardiovascular death at 1 year. Ischemic etiology was a leading cause of HF, in both patients with advanced and nonadvanced HF (46.1% and 42.4%, respectively, p = 0.337). The risk of the primary end point (hazard ratio [HR] 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09 to 1.58) and all-cause mortality (HR 1.37, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.76) was increased in ischemic as compared with nonischemic patients. The risk of the primary end point was consistently higher in ischemic patients in both patients with advanced and nonadvanced HF (advanced HF, HR 1.50 95% CI 1.04 to 2.16; nonadvanced HF, HR 1.25 95% CI 1.01 to 1.56, pinteraction = 0.333), driven by an increased risk of mortality, mainly because of cardiovascular causes. In conclusion, ischemic etiology is the most common cause of HF in patients with at least one I-NEED-HELP marker and with or without advanced HF as defined by the 2018 HFA-ESC definition. In both patients with advanced and not-advanced HF, ischemic etiology carried an increased risk of worse prognosis.

Detailed Assessment of the "I Need Help" Criteria in Patients With Heart Failure: Insights From the HELP-HF Registry.

BACKGROUND: The "I Need Help" markers have been proposed to identify patients with advanced heart failure (HF). We evaluated the prognostic impact of these markers on clinical outcomes in a real-world, contemporary, multicenter HF population. METHODS: We included consecutive patients with HF and at least 1 high-risk "I Need Help" marker from 4 centers. The impact of the cumulative number of "I Need Help" criteria and that of each individual "I Need Help" criterion was evaluated. The primary end point was the composite of all-cause mortality or first HF hospitalization. RESULTS: Among 1149 patients enrolled, the majority had 2 (30.9%) or 3 (22.6%) "I Need Help" criteria. A higher cumulative number of "I Need Help" criteria was independently associated with a higher risk of the primary end point (adjusted hazard ratio for each criterion increase, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.11-1.27]; P<0.001), and patients with >5 criteria had the worst prognosis. Need of inotropes, persistently high New York Heart Association classes III and IV or natriuretic peptides, end-organ dysfunction, >1 HF hospitalization in the last year, persisting fluid overload or escalating diuretics, and low blood pressure were the individual criteria independently associated with a higher risk of the primary end point. CONCLUSIONS: In our HF population, a higher number of "I Need Help" criteria was associated with a worse prognosis. The individual criteria with an independent impact on mortality or HF hospitalization were need of inotropes, New York Heart Association class or natriuretic peptides, end-organ dysfunction, multiple HF hospitalizations, persisting edema or escalating diuretics, and low blood pressure.

Prognostic impact of the updated 2018 HFA-ESC definition of advanced heart failure: results from the HELP-HF registry.

AIMS: The Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology (HFA-ESC) proposed a definition of advanced heart failure (HF) that has not been validated, yet. We assessed its prognostic impact in a consecutive series of patients with high-risk HF. METHODS AND RESULTS: The HELP-HF registry enrolled consecutive patients with HF and at least one high-risk 'I NEED HELP' marker, evaluated at four Italian centres between 1st January 2020 and 30th November 2021. Patients meeting the HFA-ESC advanced HF definition were compared to patients not meeting this definition. The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause mortality or first HF hospitalization. Out of 4753 patients with HF screened, 1149 (24.3%) patients with at least one high-risk 'I NEED HELP' marker were included (mean age 75.1 ± 11.5 years, 67.3% male, median left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] 35% [interquartile range 25%-50%]). Among them, 193 (16.8%) patients met the HFA-ESC advanced HF definition. As compared to others, these patients were younger, had lower LVEF, higher natriuretic peptides and a worse clinical profile. The 1-year rate of the primary endpoint was 69.3% in patients with advanced HF according to the HFA-ESC definition versus 41.8% in the others (hazard ratio [HR] 2.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.82-2.74, p < 0.001). The prognostic impact of the HFA-ESC advanced HF definition was confirmed after multivariable adjustment for relevant covariates (adjusted HR 1.98, 95% CI 1.57-2.50, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The HFA-ESC advanced HF definition had a strong prognostic impact in a contemporary, real-world, multicentre high-risk cohort of patients with HF.

Lung ultrasound-guided therapy reduces acute decompensation events in chronic heart failure.

OBJECTIVE: Pulmonary congestion is the main cause of hospital admission in patients with heart failure (HF). Lung ultrasound (LUS) is a useful tool to identify subclinical pulmonary congestion. We evaluated the usefulness of LUS in addition to physical examination (PE) in the management of outpatients with HF. METHODS: In this randomised multicentre unblinded study, patients with chronic HF and optimised medical therapy were randomised in two groups: 'PE+LUS' group undergoing PE and LUS and 'PE only' group. Diuretic therapy was modified according to LUS findings and PE, respectively. The primary endpoint was the reduction in hospitalisation rate for acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) at 90-day follow-up. Secondary endpoints were reduction in NT-proBNP, quality-of-life test (QLT) and cardiac mortality at 90-day follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 244 patients with chronic HF and optimised medical therapy were enrolled and randomised in 'PE+LUS' group undergoing PE and LUS, and in 'PE only' group. Thirty-seven primary outcome events occurred. The hospitalisation for ADHF at 90 day was significantly reduced in 'PE+LUS' group (9.4% vs 21.4% in 'PE only' group; relative risk=0.44; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.84; p=0.01), with a reduction of risk for hospitalisation for ADHF by 56% (p=0.01) and a number needed to treat of 8.4 patients (95% CI 4.8 to 34.3). At day 90, NT-proBNP and QLT score were significantly reduced in 'PE+LUS' group, whereas in 'PE only' group both were increased. There were no differences in mortality between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: LUS-guided management reduces hospitalisation for ADHF at mid-term follow-up in outpatients with chronic HF.

Validation of a new score for outcome prediction in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

BACKGROUND: Most models for outcome prediction in heart failure are under-utilized because complex or including non-routine clinical use variables. We aimed to develop a prognostic score for patients with stable heart failure, including only easily obtainable parameters. METHODS: In 376 outpatients with heart failure (ejection fraction ≤40%), twelve variables were individually correlated with 5-year mortality. Those resulted significant predictors of cardiac and overall mortality were used to obtain a risk score. It was validated on a different sample of 325 patients previously enrolled in other clinical studies, according to tertiles of score. RESULTS: Previous acute decompensated heart failure, atrial fibrillation, ejection fraction <30%, not-taking beta-blockers, chronic renal failure were the variables included in the final model. There was a significant difference in 5-year cardiac (P=0.004) and all-cause (P=0.003) mortality risk. Compared to the first tertile of the score, the second tertile and the third tertile had an increasing risk for cardiac cause admission (respectively, HR: 2.7; 95% CI: 1.5-4.9 and HR: 3.2; 95% CI: 1.7-6.1) and for heart failure worsening hospitalization (HR:4.3; 95% CI: 1.3-14.5 and HR: 3.8; 95% CI: 1.03-14.1) as well as the third tertile (respectively, HR:3.2; 95% CI: 1.7-6.1 and HR:3.8; 95% CI: 1.03-14.1.). CONCLUSIONS: Our prognostic model, named OSR HF Risk Score, is a simple, quick, inexpensive tool for predicting patient outcome in 5 years. It might be used as an adjunctive tool in outpatients evaluation alongside more complex scores.