Sustained Reduction in Pulmonary Artery Pressures and Hospitalizations During 2 Years of Ambulatory Monitoring.

BACKGROUND: Therapy guided by pulmonary artery (PA) pressure monitoring reduces PA pressures and heart failure hospitalizations (HFH) during the first year, but the durability of efficacy and safety through 2 years is not known. METHODS AND RESULTS: The CardioMEMS Post-Approval Study investigated whether benefit and safety were generalized and sustained. Enrollment at 104 centers in the United States included 1200 patients with NYHA Class III symptoms on recommended HF therapies with prior HFH. Therapy was adjusted toward PA diastolic pressure 8-20 mmHg. Intervention frequency and PA pressure reduction were most intense during first 90 days, with sustained reduction of PA diastolic pressure from baseline 24.7 mmHg to 21.0 at 1 year and 20.8 at 2 years for all patients. Patients completing two year follow-up (n = 710) showed similar 2-year reduction (23.9 to 20.8 mmHg), with reduction in PA mean pressure (33.7 to 29.4 mmHg) in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection. The HFH rate was 1.25 events/patient/year prior to sensor implant, 0.54 at 1 year, and 0.37 at 2 years, with 59% of patients free of HFH during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Reduction in PA pressures and hospitalizations were early and sustained during 2 years of PA pressure-guided management, with no signal of safety concerns regarding the implanted sensor.

The GUIDE-HF trial of pulmonary artery pressure monitoring in heart failure: impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

AIMS: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, important changes in heart failure (HF) event rates have been widely reported, but few data address potential causes for these changes; several possibilities were examined in the GUIDE-HF study. METHODS AND RESULTS: From 15 March 2018 to 20 December 2019, patients were randomized to haemodynamic-guided management (treatment) vs. control for 12 months, with a primary endpoint of all-cause mortality plus HF events. Pre-COVID-19, the primary endpoint rate was 0.553 vs. 0.682 events/patient-year in the treatment vs. control group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.81, P = 0.049]. Treatment difference was no longer evident during COVID-19 (HR 1.11, P = 0.526), with a 21% decrease in the control group (0.536 events/patient-year) and no change in the treatment group (0.597 events/patient-year). Data reflecting provider-, disease-, and patient-dependent factors that might change the primary endpoint rate during COVID-19 were examined. Subject contact frequency was similar in the treatment vs. control group before and during COVID-19. During COVID-19, the monthly rate of medication changes fell 19.2% in the treatment vs. 10.7% in the control group to levels not different between groups (P = 0.362). COVID-19 was infrequent and not different between groups. Pulmonary artery pressure area under the curve decreased -98 mmHg-days in the treatment group vs. -100 mmHg-days in the controls (P = 0.867). Patient compliance with the study protocol was maintained during COVID-19 in both groups. CONCLUSION: During COVID-19, the primary event rate decreased in the controls and remained low in the treatment group, resulting in an effacement of group differences that were present pre-COVID-19. These outcomes did not result from changes in provider- or disease-dependent factors; pulmonary artery pressure decreased despite fewer medication changes, suggesting that patient-dependent factors played an important role in these outcomes. Clinical Trials.gov: NCT03387813.

Haemodynamic-guided management of heart failure (GUIDE-HF): a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have suggested that haemodynamic-guided management using an implantable pulmonary artery pressure monitor reduces heart failure hospitalisations in patients with moderately symptomatic (New York Heart Association [NYHA] functional class III) chronic heart failure and a hospitalisation in the past year, irrespective of ejection fraction. It is unclear if these benefits extend to patients with mild (NYHA functional class II) or severe (NYHA functional class IV) symptoms of heart failure or to patients with elevated natriuretic peptides without a recent heart failure hospitalisation. This trial was designed to evaluate whether haemodynamic-guided management using remote pulmonary artery pressure monitoring could reduce heart failure events and mortality in patients with heart failure across the spectrum of symptom severity (NYHA funational class II-IV), including those with elevated natriuretic peptides but without a recent heart failure hospitalisation. METHODS: The randomised arm of the haemodynamic-GUIDEed management of Heart Failure (GUIDE-HF) trial was a multicentre, single-blind study at 118 centres in the USA and Canada. Following successful implantation of a pulmonary artery pressure monitor, patients with all ejection fractions, NYHA functional class II-IV chronic heart failure, and either a recent heart failure hospitalisation or elevated natriuretic peptides (based on a-priori thresholds) were randomly assigned (1:1) to either haemodynamic-guided heart failure management based on pulmonary artery pressure or a usual care control group. Patients were masked to their study group assignment. Investigators were aware of treatment assignment but did not have access to pulmonary artery pressure data for control patients. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality and total heart failure events (heart failure hospitalisations and urgent heart failure hospital visits) at 12 months assessed in all randomly assigned patients. Safety was assessed in all patients. A pre-COVID-19 impact analysis for the primary and secondary outcomes was prespecified. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03387813. FINDINGS: Between March 15, 2018, and Dec 20, 2019, 1022 patients were enrolled, with 1000 patients implanted successfully, and follow-up was completed on Jan 8, 2021. There were 253 primary endpoint events (0·563 per patient-year) among 497 patients in the haemodynamic-guided management group (treatment group) and 289 (0·640 per patient-year) in 503 patients in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·88, 95% CI 0·74-1·05; p=0·16). A prespecified COVID-19 sensitivity analysis using a time-dependent variable to compare events before COVID-19 and during the pandemic suggested a treatment interaction (pinteraction=0·11) due to a change in the primary endpoint event rate during the pandemic phase of the trial, warranting a pre-COVID-19 impact analysis. In the pre-COVID-19 impact analysis, there were 177 primary events (0·553 per patient-year) in the intervention group and 224 events (0·682 per patient-year) in the control group (HR 0·81, 95% CI 0·66-1·00; p=0·049). This difference in primary events almost disappeared during COVID-19, with a 21% decrease in the control group (0·536 per patient-year) relative to pre-COVID-19, virtually no change in the treatment group (0·597 per patient-year), and no difference between groups (HR 1·11, 95% CI 0·80-1·55; p=0·53). The cumulative incidence of heart failure events was not reduced by haemodynamic-guided management (0·85, 0·70-1·03; p=0·096) in the overall study analysis but was significantly decreased in the pre-COVID-19 impact analysis (0·76, 0·61-0·95; p=0·014). 1014 (99%) of 1022 patients had freedom from device or system-related complications. INTERPRETATION: Haemodynamic-guided management of heart failure did not result in a lower composite endpoint rate of mortality and total heart failure events compared with the control group in the overall study analysis. However, a pre-COVID-19 impact analysis indicated a possible benefit of haemodynamic-guided management on the primary outcome in the pre-COVID-19 period, primarily driven by a lower heart failure hospitalisation rate compared with the control group. FUNDING: Abbott.

Pulmonary Artery Proportional Pulse Pressure (PAPP) Index Identifies Patients With Improved Survival From the CardioMEMS Implantable Pulmonary Artery Pressure Monitor.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary artery proportional pulse pressure (PAPP) was recently shown to have prognostic value in heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and pulmonary hypertension. We tested the hypothesis that PAPP would be predictive of adverse outcomes in patients with implantable pulmonary artery pressure monitor (CardioMEMS™ HF System, St. Jude Medical [now Abbott], Atlanta, GA, USA). METHODS: Survival analysis with Cox proportional hazards regression was used to evaluate all-cause deaths and HF hospitalisation (HFH) in CHAMPION trial1 patients who received treatment with the CardioMEMS device based on the PAPP. RESULTS: Among 550 randomised patients, 274 had PAPP ≤ the median value of 0.583 while 276 had PAPP>0.583. Patients with PAPP≤0.583 (versus PAPP>0.583) had an increased risk of HFH (HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.16-1.68, p=0.0004) and experienced a significant 46% reduction in annualised risk of death with CardioMEMS treatment (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.31-0.92) during 2-3 years of follow-up. This survival benefit was attributable to the treatment benefit in patients with HFrEF and PAPP≤0.583 (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.28-0.90, p<0.05). Patients with PAPP>0.583 or HF with preserved EF (HFpEF) had no significant survival benefit with treatment (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: Lower PAPP in HFrEF patients with CardioMEMS constitutes a higher mortality risk status. More studies are needed to understand clinical applications of PAPP in implantable pulmonary artery pressure monitors.

Sustained efficacy of pulmonary artery pressure to guide adjustment of chronic heart failure therapy: complete follow-up results from the CHAMPION randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: In the CHAMPION trial, significant reductions in admissions to hospital for heart failure were seen after 6 months of pulmonary artery pressure guided management compared with usual care. We examine the extended efficacy of this strategy over 18 months of randomised follow-up and the clinical effect of open access to pressure information for an additional 13 months in patients formerly in the control group. METHODS: The CHAMPION trial was a prospective, parallel, single-blinded, multicentre study that enrolled participants with New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class III heart failure symptoms and a previous admission to hospital. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by centre in block sizes of four by a secure validated computerised randomisation system to either the treatment group, in which daily uploaded pulmonary artery pressures were used to guide medical therapy, or to the control group, in which daily uploaded pressures were not made available to investigators. Patients in the control group received all standard medical, device, and disease management strategies available. Patients then remained masked in their randomised study group until the last patient enrolled completed at least 6 months of study follow-up (randomised access period) for an average of 18 months. During the randomised access period, patients in the treatment group were managed with pulmonary artery pressure and patients in the control group had usual care only. At the conclusion of randomised access, investigators had access to pulmonary artery pressure for all patients (open access period) averaging 13 months of follow-up. The primary outcome was the rate of hospital admissions between the treatment group and control group in both the randomised access and open access periods. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00531661. FINDINGS: Between Sept 6, 2007, and Oct 7, 2009, 550 patients were randomly assigned to either the treatment group (n=270) or to the control group (n=280). 347 patients (177 in the former treatment group and 170 in the former control group) completed the randomised access period in August, 2010, and transitioned to the open access period which ended April 30, 2012. Over the randomised access period, rates of admissions to hospital for heart failure were reduced in the treatment group by 33% (hazard ratio [HR] 0·67 [95% CI 0·55-0·80]; p<0·0001) compared with the control group. After pulmonary artery pressure information became available to guide therapy during open access (mean 13 months), rates of admissions to hospital for heart failure in the former control group were reduced by 48% (HR 0·52 [95% CI 0·40-0·69]; p<0·0001) compared with rates of admissions in the control group during randomised access. Eight (1%) device-related or system related complications and seven (1%) procedure-related adverse events were reported. INTERPRETATION: Management of NYHA Class III heart failure based on home transmission of pulmonary artery pressure with an implanted pressure sensor has significant long-term benefit in lowering hospital admission rates for heart failure. FUNDING: St Jude Medical Inc.

Biventricular pacing for atrioventricular block and systolic dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: Right ventricular pacing restores an adequate heart rate in patients with atrioventricular block, but high percentages of right ventricular apical pacing may promote left ventricular systolic dysfunction. We evaluated whether biventricular pacing might reduce mortality, morbidity, and adverse left ventricular remodeling in such patients. METHODS: We enrolled patients who had indications for pacing with atrioventricular block; New York Heart Association (NYHA) class I, II, or III heart failure; and a left ventricular ejection fraction of 50% or less. Patients received a cardiac-resynchronization pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) (the latter if the patient had an indication for defibrillation therapy) and were randomly assigned to standard right ventricular pacing or biventricular pacing. The primary outcome was the time to death from any cause, an urgent care visit for heart failure that required intravenous therapy, or a 15% or more increase in the left ventricular end-systolic volume index. RESULTS: Of 918 patients enrolled, 691 underwent randomization and were followed for an average of 37 months. The primary outcome occurred in 190 of 342 patients (55.6%) in the right-ventricular-pacing group, as compared with 160 of 349 (45.8%) in the biventricular-pacing group. Patients randomly assigned to biventricular pacing had a significantly lower incidence of the primary outcome over time than did those assigned to right ventricular pacing (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% credible interval, 0.60 to 0.90); results were similar in the pacemaker and ICD groups. Left ventricular lead-related complications occurred in 6.4% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Biventricular pacing was superior to conventional right ventricular pacing in patients with atrioventricular block and left ventricular systolic dysfunction with NYHA class I, II, or III heart failure. (Funded by Medtronic; BLOCK HF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00267098.).

Health Economic Impact of a Pulmonary Artery Pressure Sensor for Heart Failure Telemonitoring: A Dynamic Simulation.

AIMS: Recently, a permanently implantable wireless system, designed to monitor and manage pulmonary artery (PA) pressures remotely, demonstrated significant reductions in heart failure (HF) hospitalizations in high-risk symptomatic patients, regardless of ejection fraction. The objectives of this study were to simulate the estimated clinical and economic impact in Germany of generalized use of this PA pressure monitoring system considering reductions of HF hospitalizations and the improvement in Quality of Life. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on the Prospective Health Technology Assessment approach, we simulated the potential of the widespread application of PA pressure monitoring on the German healthcare system for the period 2009-2021. RESULTS: This healthcare economic simulation formulated input assumptions based on results from the CHAMPION Trial, a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled U.S. trial that demonstrated a 37% reduction of hospitalizations in persistently symptomatic previous HF patients. Based on these results, an estimated 114,800 hospitalizations would expected to be avoided. This effect would potentially save an estimated €522 million, an equivalent of $575 million, during the entire simulation period. CONCLUSION: This healthcare economic modeling of the PA pressure monitoring system's impact demonstrates substantial clinical and economic benefits in the German healthcare system.

Heart failure and respiratory hospitalizations are reduced in patients with heart failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with the use of an implantable pulmonary artery pressure monitoring device.

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a frequent comorbidity in patients with heart failure (HF). Elevated pulmonary arterial (PA) pressure can be seen in both conditions and has been shown to predict morbidity and mortality. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 550 subjects with New York Heart Association functional class III HF were randomly assigned to the treatment (n = 270) and control (n = 280) groups in the CHAMPION Trial. Physicians had access to the PA pressure measurements in the treatment group only, in which HF therapy was used to lower the elevated pressures. HF and respiratory hospitalizations were compared in both groups. A total of 187 subjects met criteria for classification into the COPD subgroup. In the entire cohort, the treatment group had a 37% reduction in HF hospitalization rates (P < .0001) and a 49% reduction in respiratory hospitalization rates (P = .0061). In the COPD subgroup, the treatment group had a 41% reduction in HF hospitalization rates (P = .0009) and a 62% reduction in respiratory hospitalization rates (P = .0023). The rate of respiratory hospitalizations in subjects without COPD was not statistically different (P = .76). CONCLUSIONS: HF management incorporating hemodynamic information from an implantable PA pressure monitor significantly reduces HF and respiratory hospitalizations in HF subjects with comorbid COPD compared with standard care.

Rationale and Design of the Left Atrial Pressure Monitoring to Optimize Heart Failure Therapy Study (LAPTOP-HF).

BACKGROUND: Daily measurements of left atrial pressure (LAP) may be useful for guiding adjustments in medical therapy that prevent clinical decompensation in patients with severe heart failure (HF). STUDY DESIGN: LAPTOP-HF is a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial in ambulatory patients with advanced heart failure in which the safety and clinical effectiveness of a physician-directed patient self-management therapeutic strategy based on LAP measured twice daily by means of an implantable sensor will be compared with a control group receiving optimal medical therapy. The trial will enroll up to 730 patients with New York Heart Association functional class III symptoms and either a hospitalization for HF during the previous 12 months or an elevated B-type natriuretic peptide level, regardless of ejection fraction, at up to 75 investigational centers. Randomization to the treatment group or control group will be at a 1:1 ratio in 3 strata based on the ejection fraction (EF > or ≤35%) and the presence of a de novo CRT device indication. SUMMARY: LAPTOP-HF will provide essential information about the role of implantable LAP monitoring in conjunction with a new HF treatment paradigm across the spectrum of HF patients.

Collaborative practice model between cardiologists and clinical pharmacists for management of patients with cardiovascular disease in an outpatient clinic.

The increasing prevalence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) has prompted leading cardiovascular organizations to advocate utilization of a team approach to patient care that includes nonphysician providers. In spite of that, the American College of Cardiology reported that nonphysician providers are underutilized in the management of patients with CVD. A survey of cardiologists revealed that the underutilization is a result of lack of understanding of how best to involve nonphysician providers in the health care team. Clinical pharmacists are one category of nonphysician providers that have recognized effectiveness in managing patients with CVD. No example of a comprehensive model of collaboration between cardiologists and clinical pharmacists is described in the literature that could serve to close this gap in understanding. The objective of this report is to describe a model of cardiologist-clinical pharmacist collaboration in the longitudinal management of patients with CVD that has been successfully implemented in 2 diverse settings. The implementation, evolution, scope of practice, required pharmacist training, logistical elements needed for success, and implementation barriers are reviewed. A summary of the patients referred to the clinic are examined as well.

CS1, a controlled-release formulation of valproic acid, for the treatment of patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension: Rationale and design of a Phase 2 clinical trial.

Although rare, pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is associated with substantial morbidity and a median survival of approximately 7 years, even with treatment. Current medical therapies have a primarily vasodilatory effect and do not modify the underlying pathology of the disease. CS1 is a novel oral, controlled-release formulation of valproic acid, which exhibits a multi-targeted mode of action (pulmonary pressure reduction, reversal of vascular remodeling, anti-inflammatory, anti-fibrotic, and anti-thrombotic) and therefore potential for disease modification and right ventricular modeling in patients with PAH. A Phase 1 study conducted in healthy volunteers indicated favorable safety and tolerability, with no increased risk of bleeding and significant reduction of plasminogen activator inhibitor 1. In an ongoing randomized Phase 2 clinical trial, three doses of open-label CS1 administered for 12 weeks is evaluating the use of multiple outcome measures. The primary endpoint is safety and tolerability, as measured by the occurrence of adverse events. Secondary outcome measures include the use of the CardioMEMS™ HF System, which provides a noninvasive method of monitoring pulmonary artery pressure, as well as cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and echocardiography. Other outcomes include changes in risk stratification (using the REVEAL 2.0 and REVEAL Lite 2 tools), patient reported outcomes, functional capacity, 6-min walk distance, actigraphy, and biomarkers. The pharmacokinetic profile of CS1 will also be evaluated. Overall, the novel design and unique, extensive clinical phenotyping of participants in this trial will provide ample evidence to inform the design of any future Phase 3 studies with CS1.

Implantable Hemodynamic Monitors Improve Survival in Patients With Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: Trials evaluating implantable hemodynamic monitors to manage patients with heart failure (HF) have shown reductions in HF hospitalizations but not mortality. Prior meta-analyses assessing mortality have been limited in construct because of an absence of patient-level data, short-term follow-up duration, and evaluation across the combined spectrum of ejection fractions. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to determine whether management with implantable hemodynamic monitors reduces mortality in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and to confirm the effect of hemodynamic-monitoring guided management on HF hospitalization reduction reported in previous studies. METHODS: The patient-level pooled meta-analysis used 3 randomized studies (GUIDE-HF [Hemodynamic-Guided Management of Heart Failure], CHAMPION [CardioMEMS Heart Sensor Allows Monitoring of Pressure to Improve Outcomes in NYHA Class III Heart Failure Patients], and LAPTOP-HF [Left Atrial Pressure Monitoring to Optimize Heart Failure Therapy]) of implantable hemodynamic monitors (2 measuring pulmonary artery pressures and 1 measuring left atrial pressure) to assess the effect on all-cause mortality and HF hospitalizations. RESULTS: A total of 1,350 patients with HFrEF were included. Hemodynamic-monitoring guided management significantly reduced overall mortality with an HR of 0.75 (95% CI: 0.57-0.99); P = 0.043. HF hospitalizations were significantly reduced with an HR of 0.64 (95% CI: 0.55-0.76); P < 0.0001. CONCLUSIONS: Management of patients with HFrEF using an implantable hemodynamic monitor significantly reduces both mortality and HF hospitalizations. The reduction in HF hospitalizations is seen early in the first year of monitoring and mortality benefits occur after the first year.

Clinical Trial Inclusion and Impact on Early Adoption of Medical Innovation in Diverse Populations.

BACKGROUND: Inadequate inclusion in clinical trial enrollment may contribute to health inequities by evaluating interventions in cohorts that do not fully represent target populations. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine if characteristics of patients with heart failure (HF) enrolled in a pivotal trial are associated with who receives an intervention after approval. METHODS: Demographics from 2,017,107 Medicare patients hospitalized for HF were compared with those of the first 10,631 Medicare beneficiaries who received implantable pulmonary artery pressure sensors. Characteristics of the population studied in the pivotal CHAMPION (CardioMEMS Heart Sensor Allows Monitoring of Pressure to Improve Outcomes in NYHA Class III Heart Failure Patients) clinical trial (n = 550) were compared with those of both groups. All demographic data were analyzed nationally and in 4 U.S. regions. RESULTS: The Medicare HF cohort included 80.9% White, 13.3% African American, 1.9% Hispanic, 1.3% Asian, and 51.5% female patients. Medicare patients <65 years of age were more likely to be African American (33%) and male (58%), whereas older patients were mostly White (84%) and female (53%). Forty-one percent of U.S. HF hospitalizations occurred in the South; demographic characteristics varied significantly across all U.S. regions. The CHAMPION trial adequately represented African Americans (23% overall, 35% <65 years of age), Hispanic Americans (2%), and Asian Americans (1%) but underrepresented women (27%). The trial's population characteristics were similar to those of the first patients who received pulmonary artery sensors (82% White, 13% African American, 1% Asian, 1% Hispanic, and 29% female). CONCLUSIONS: Demographics of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services beneficiaries hospitalized with HF vary regionally and by age, which should be considered when defining "adequate" representation in clinical studies. Enrollment diversity in clinical trials may affect who receives early application of recently approved innovations.

Real-time pulmonary artery pressure monitoring in heart failure patients: an updated cost-effectiveness analysis.

AIMS: Previous cost-effectiveness analysis suggests that CardioMEMS is cost-effective compared with usual care for patients with persistent New York Heart Association class III symptoms and at least one heart failure (HF) hospitalization within 12 months. The aim of the paper is to perform an update of the cost-effectiveness analysis of CardioMEMS using the most recent data from the published literature. METHODS AND RESULTS: A Microsoft Excel Markov model from a previous UK cost-effectiveness study of CardioMEMS was updated using the clinical effectiveness of pulmonary artery pressure (PAP)-guided treatment derived from the pivotal trials. The model included the device costs (and the implantation procedure and related complications), costs of remote monitoring, costs of HF-related hospitalizations, and costs of usual care. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated based on utilities from pivotal trials and published literature. Cost-effectiveness results were estimated as incremental cost per QALY gained of CardioMEMS compared with usual care. Scenario analyses were also performed using data from real-world studies that showed a significant decrease in HF-related hospitalizations. In the base case analysis over a time horizon of 10 years, PAP-guided HF therapy increased cost compared with usual care by £6337 (i.e. from £22 770 in usual care to £29 107 in PAP-guided HF therapy) and the QALYs per patient for usual care and PAP-guided patients were 2.62 and 2.94, respectively, reflecting an increase of 0.32 QALYs with PAP-guided treatment. The resultant incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), the ratio between incremental costs and the QALYs, is estimated at £19 761/QALY. Scenario analyses suggest that the ICER for CardioMEMS can range from being dominant to £27 910/QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses suggested that PAP-guided HF therapy has 81.9% probability of being cost-effective at a threshold of £30 000/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Our model suggests that CardioMEMS is likely to be cost-effective in the United Kingdom, at the currently considered thresholds of £20 000-30 000/QALY.

Pulmonary Artery Pressure-Guided Heart Failure Management Reduces Hospitalizations in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease.

BACKGROUND: Hemodynamic-guided heart failure management is a superior strategy to prevent decompensation leading to hospitalization compared with traditional clinical methods. It remains unstudied if hemodynamic-guided care is effective across severities of comorbid renal insufficiency or if this strategy impacts renal function over time. METHODS: In the CardioMEMS US PAS (Post-Approval Study), heart failure hospitalizations were compared from 1 year before and after pulmonary artery sensor implantation in 1200 patients with New York Heart Association class III symptoms and a previous hospitalization. Hospitalization rates were evaluated in all patients grouped into baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) quartiles. Chronic kidney disease progression was evaluated in patients with renal function follow-up data (n=911). RESULTS: Patients with stage 2 or greater chronic kidney disease at baseline exceeded 80%. Heart failure hospitalization risk was lower in all eGFR quartiles ranging from a hazard ratio of 0.35 (0.27-0.46; P<0.0001) in patients with eGFR >65 mL/min per 1.73 m2 to 0.53 (0.45-0.62; P<0.0001) in patients with eGFR ≤37 mL/min per 1.73 m2. Renal function was preserved or improved in most patients. Survival was different between quartiles and lower in quartiles with more advanced chronic kidney disease. CONCLUSIONS: Hemodynamic-guided heart failure management using remotely obtained pulmonary artery pressures is associated with lower hospitalization rates and general preservation of renal function in all eGFR quartiles or chronic kidney disease stages.

Hemodynamic-Guided Heart Failure Management in Patients With Either Prior HF Hospitalization or Elevated Natriuretic Peptides.

BACKGROUND: In patients with symptomatic heart failure (HF) and previous heart failure hospitalization (HFH), hemodynamic-guided HF management using a wireless pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) sensor reduces HFH, but it is unclear whether these benefits extend to patients who have not been recently hospitalized but remain at risk because of elevated natriuretic peptides (NPs). OBJECTIVES: This study assessed the efficacy and safety of hemodynamic-guided HF management in patients with elevated NPs but no recent HFH. METHODS: In the GUIDE-HF (Hemodynamic-Guided Management of Heart Failure) trial, 1,000 patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class II to IV HF and either previous HFH or elevated NP levels were randomly assigned to hemodynamic-guided HF management or usual care. The authors evaluated the primary study composite of all-cause mortality and total HF events at 12 months according to treatment assignment and enrollment stratum (HFH vs elevated NPs) by using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Of 999 evaluable patients, 557 were enrolled on the basis of a previous HFH and 442 on the basis of elevated NPs alone. Those patients enrolled by NP criteria were older and more commonly White persons with lower body mass index, lower NYHA class, less diabetes, more atrial fibrillation, and lower baseline PAP. Event rates were lower among those patients in the NP group for both the full follow-up (40.9 per 100 patient-years vs 82.0 per 100 patient-years) and the pre-COVID-19 analysis (43.6 per 100 patient-years vs 88.0 per 100 patient-years). The effects of hemodynamic monitoring were consistent across enrollment strata for the primary endpoint over the full study duration (interaction P = 0.71) and the pre-COVID-19 analysis (interaction P = 0.58). CONCLUSIONS: Consistent effects of hemodynamic-guided HF management across enrollment strata in GUIDE-HF support consideration of hemodynamic monitoring in the expanded group of patients with chronic HF and elevated NPs without recent HFH. (Hemodynamic-Guided Management of Heart Failure [GUIDE-HF]; NCT03387813).

Wireless pulmonary artery haemodynamic monitoring in chronic heart failure: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Results of previous studies support the hypothesis that implantable haemodynamic monitoring systems might reduce rates of hospitalisation in patients with heart failure. We undertook a single-blind trial to assess this approach. METHODS: Patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III heart failure, irrespective of the left ventricular ejection fraction, and a previous hospital admission for heart failure were enrolled in 64 centres in the USA. They were randomly assigned by use of a centralised electronic system to management with a wireless implantable haemodynamic monitoring (W-IHM) system (treatment group) or to a control group for at least 6 months. Only patients were masked to their assignment group. In the treatment group, clinicians used daily measurement of pulmonary artery pressures in addition to standard of care versus standard of care alone in the control group. The primary efficacy endpoint was the rate of heart-failure-related hospitalisations at 6 months. The safety endpoints assessed at 6 months were freedom from device-related or system-related complications (DSRC) and freedom from pressure-sensor failures. All analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00531661. FINDINGS: In 6 months, 83 heart-failure-related hospitalisations were reported in the treatment group (n=270) compared with 120 in the control group (n=280; rate 0·31 vs 0·44, hazard ratio [HR] 0·70, 95% CI 0·60-0·84, p<0·0001). During the entire follow-up (mean 15 months [SD 7]), the treatment group had a 39% reduction in heart-failure-related hospitalisation compared with the control group (153 vs 253, HR 0·64, 95% CI 0·55-0·75; p<0·0001). Eight patients had DSRC and overall freedom from DSRC was 98·6% (97·3-99·4) compared with a prespecified performance criterion of 80% (p<0·0001); and overall freedom from pressure-sensor failures was 100% (99·3-100·0). INTERPRETATION: Our results are consistent with, and extend, previous findings by definitively showing a significant and large reduction in hospitalisation for patients with NYHA class III heart failure who were managed with a wireless implantable haemodynamic monitoring system. The addition of information about pulmonary artery pressure to clinical signs and symptoms allows for improved heart failure management. FUNDING: CardioMEMS.

Effects of remote haemodynamic-guided heart failure management in patients with different subtypes of pulmonary hypertension: insights from the MEMS-HF study.

AIM: The CardioMEMS European Monitoring Study for Heart Failure (MEMS-HF) investigated safety and efficacy of pulmonary artery pressure (PAP)-guided remote patient management (RPM) in New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III outpatients with at least one heart failure hospitalization (HFH) during the previous 12 months. This pre-specified subgroup analysis investigated whether RPM effects depended on presence and subtype of pulmonary hypertension (PH). METHODS AND RESULTS: In 106/234 MEMS-HF participants, Swan-Ganz catheter tracings obtained during sensor implant were available for off-line manual analysis jointly performed by two experts. Patients were classified into subgroups according to current PH definitions. Isolated post-capillary PH (IpcPH) and combined post- and pre-capillary PH (CpcPH) were present in 38 and 36 patients, respectively, whereas 31 patients had no PH. Clinical characteristics were comparable between subgroups, but among patients with PH pulmonary vascular resistance was higher (p = 0.029) and pulmonary artery compliance lower (p = 0.003) in patients with CpcPH. During 12 months of PAP-guided RPM, all PAPs declined in IpcPH and CpcPH subgroups (all p < 0.05), whereas only mean and diastolic PAP decreased in patients without PH (both p < 0.05). Improvements in post- versus pre-implant HFH rates were similar in CpcPH (0.639 events/patient-year; hazard ratio [HR] 0.37) and IpcPH (0.72 events/patient-year; HR 0.45) patients. Participants without PH benefited most (0.26 events/patient-year; HR 0.17, p = 0.04 vs. IpcPH/CpcPH patients). Quality of life and NYHA class improved significantly in all subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Outpatients with NYHA class III symptoms with at least one HFH during 1 year pre-implant benefitted significantly from PAP-guided RPM during post-implant follow-up irrespective of presence or subtype of PH at baseline.

Less loop diuretic use in patients on sacubitril/valsartan undergoing remote pulmonary artery pressure monitoring.

AIMS: Control of pulmonary pressures monitored remotely reduced heart failure hospitalizations mainly by lowering filling pressures through the use of loop diuretics. Sacubitril/valsartan improves heart failure outcomes and increases the kidney sensitivity for diuretics. We explored whether sacubitril/valsartan is associated with less utilization of loop diuretics in patients guided with haemodynamic monitoring in the CardioMEMS European Monitoring Study for Heart Failure (MEMS-HF). METHODS AND RESULTS: The MEMS-HF population (n = 239) was separated by the use of sacubitril/valsartan (n = 68) or no use of it (n = 164). Utilization of diuretics and their doses was prespecified in the protocol and was monitored in both groups. Multivariable regression, ANCOVA, and a generalized linear model were used to fit baseline covariates with furosemide equivalents and changes for 12 months. MEMS-HF participants (n = 239) were grouped in sacubitril/valsartan users [n = 68, 64 ± 11 years, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 25 ± 9%, cardiac index (CI) 1.89 ± 0.4 L/min/m2 ] vs. non-users (n = 164, 70 ± 10 years, LVEF 36 ± 16%, CI 2.11 ± 0.58 L/min/m2 , P = 0.0002, P < 0.0001, and P = 0.0015, respectively). In contrast, mean pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) values were comparable between groups (29 ± 11 vs. 31 ± 11 mmHg, P = 0.127). Utilization of loop diuretics was lower in patients taking sacubitril/valsartan compared with those without (P = 0.01). Significant predictor of loop diuretic use was a history of renal failure (P = 0.005) but not age (P = 0.091). After subjects were stratified by sacubitril/valsartan or other diuretic use, PAP was nominally, but not significantly lower in sacubitril/valsartan-treated patients (baseline: P = 0.52; 6 months: P = 0.07; 12 months: P = 0.53), while there was no difference in outcome or PAP changes. This difference was observed despite lower CI (P = 0.0015). Comparable changes were not observed for other non-loop diuretics (P = 0.21). CONCLUSIONS: In patients whose treatment was guided by remote PAP monitoring, concomitant use of sacubitril/valsartan was associated with reduced utilization of loop diuretics, which could potentially be relevant for outcomes.