Prognostic Value of the Severity of Clinical Congestion in Patients Hospitalized for Decompensated Heart Failure: Findings From the Japanese KCHF Registry.

BACKGROUND: Congestion is a leading cause of hospitalization and a major therapeutic target in patients with heart failure (HF). Clinical practice in Japan is characterized by a long hospital stay, which facilitates more extensive decongestion during hospitalization. We herein examined the time course and prognostic impact of clinical congestion in a large contemporary Japanese cohort of HF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Peripheral edema, jugular venous pressure, and orthopnea were graded on a standardized 4-point scale (0-3) in 3787 hospitalized patients in a Japanese cohort of HF. Composite Congestion Scores (CCS) on admission and at discharge were calculated by summing individual scores. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause death or HF hospitalization. The median admission CCS was 4 (interquartile range, 3-6). Overall, 255 patients died during the median hospitalization length of 16 days, and 1395 died or were hospitalized for HF over a median postdischarge follow-up of 396 days. The cumulative 1-year incidence of the primary outcome increased at higher tertiles of congestion on admission (32.5%, 39.3%, and 41.0% in the mild [CCS ≤3], moderate [CCS = 4 or 5], and severe [CCS ≥6] congestion groups, respectively, log-rank P < .001). The adjusted hazard ratios of moderate and severe congestion relative to mild congestion were 1.205 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.065-1.365; P = .003) and 1.247 (95% CI, 1.103-1.410; P < .001), respectively. Among 3445 patients discharged alive, 85% had CCS of 0 (complete decongestion) and 15% had a CCS of 1 or more (residual congestion) at discharge. Although residual congestion predicted a risk of postdischarge death or HF hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.314 [1.145-1.509]; P < .001), the admission CCS correlated with the risk of postdischarge death or HF hospitalization, even in the complete decongestion group. No correlation was observed for postdischarge death or HF hospitalization between residual congestion at discharge and admission CCS (P for the interaction = .316). CONCLUSIONS: In total, 85% of patients were discharged with complete decongestion in Japanese clinical practice. Clinical congestion, on admission and at discharge, was of prognostic value. The severity of congestion on admission was predictive of adverse outcomes, even in the absence of residual congestion. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02334891 (NCT02334891) https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000017241 (UMIN000015238).

Starting Neurohormonal Antagonists in Patients With Acute Heart Failure With Mid-Range and Preserved Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: The clinical benefits of neurohormonal antagonists for patients with heart failure (HF) with mid-range and preserved ejection fraction (HFmrEF and HFpEF) are uncertain.Methods and Results: This study analyzed 858 consecutive patients with HFmrEF (EF: 40-49%) or HFpEF (EF ≥50%), who were hospitalized for acute HF, and who were discharged alive, and were not taking angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE)-I/ angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) or ß-blockers at admission. The study population was classified into 4 groups according to the status of prescription of ACE-I/ARB and ß-blocker at discharge: no neurohormonal antagonist (n=342, 39.9%), ACE-I/ARB only (n=128, 14.9%), ß-blocker only (n=189, 22.0%), and both ACE-I/ARB and ß-blocker (n=199, 23.2%) groups. The primary outcome measure was a composite of all-cause death or HF hospitalization. The cumulative 1-year incidence of the primary outcome measure was 41.2% in the no neurohormonal antagonist group, 34.0% in the ACE-I/ARB only group, 28.6% in the ß-blocker only group, and 16.4% in the both ACE-I/ARB and ß-blocker group (P<0.001). Compared with the no neurohormonal antagonist group, both the ACE-I/ARB and ß-blocker groups were associated with a significantly lower risk for a composite of all-cause death or HF hospitalization (HR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.28-0.76, P=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalized patients with HFmrEF and HFpEF, starting both ACE-I/ARB and a ß-blocker was associated with a reduced risk of the composite of all-cause death or HF hospitalization compared with patients not starting on an ACE-I/ARB or ß-blocker.

Concomitant Mitral Regurgitation in Severe Aortic Stenosis　- A Report From the CURRENT AS Registry.

BACKGROUND: The clinical significance of concomitant mitral regurgitation (MR) has not been well addressed in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS).Methods and Results:We analyzed 3,815 patients from a retrospective multicenter registry of severe AS in Japan (CURRENT AS registry). We compared the clinical outcomes between patients with moderate/severe MR and with none/mild MR according to the initial treatment strategy (initial aortic valve replacement [AVR] or conservative strategy). The primary outcome measure was a composite of aortic valve-related death or heart failure hospitalization. At baseline, moderate/severe MR was present in 227/1,197 (19%) patients with initial AVR strategy and in 536/2,618 (20%) patients with a conservative strategy. The crude cumulative 5-year incidence of the primary outcome measure was significantly higher in patients with moderate/severe MR than in those with none/mild MR, regardless of the initial treatment strategy (25.2% vs. 14.4%, P<0.001 in the initial AVR strategy, and 63.3% vs. 40.7%, P<0.001 in the conservative strategy). After adjusting confounders, moderate/severe MR was not independently associated with higher risk for the primary outcome measure in the initial AVR strategy (hazard ratio [HR] 1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67-1.83, P=0.69), and in the conservative strategy (HR 1.13, 95% CI 0.93-1.37, P=0.22). CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant moderate/severe MR was not independently associated with higher risk for the primary outcome measure regardless of the initial treatment strategy.

Trends in prognosis after hospitalization for acute heart failure in Kurashiki Central hospital 2015-2018: single-center prospective study.

Recently, we have been working on enhancing the effectiveness of treatment for acute heart failure (HF) through team-based care. This study was designed to assess the benefits of this initiative by quantifying the prognostic impact on HF patients receiving treatment at our hospital. We identified 1977 consecutive HF patients (mean age 78.3 ± 11.9 years) being discharged from our hospital between February 2015 and December 2018, divided them by admission year, and tracked changes over time, with 2015 as a reference. The postdischarge clinical outcome measures were defined as a composite of all-cause death or rehospitalization for HF, all-cause death, and rehospitalization for HF. The risk of a composite of all-cause death or rehospitalization for HF was lower in 2017 (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval: 0.57 to 0.91; p = 0.005) and 2018 (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval: 0.61 to 0.99; p = 0.045) than in 2015, and that of all-cause death was lower in 2017 (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval: 0.53 to 0.98; p = 0.04) and 2018 (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval: 0.43 to 0.85; p = 0.004) than in 2015, but that of rehospitalization for HF was not significantly different through the study period. The mortality rate decreased at the end of the study period, but the rate of rehospitalization for HF did not. The benefits of team-based care were difficult to evaluate by quantification.

Long-Term Impact of Diabetes Mellitus on Initially Conservatively Managed Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Although diabetes mellitus (DM) is a common comorbidity of aortic stenosis (AS), clinical evidence about the long-term effect of DM on patients with AS is insufficient.Methods and Results:Data were acquired from CURRENT AS, a large Japanese multicenter registry that enrolled 3,815 patients with severe AS. Patients without initial valve replacement were defined as the conservative group; among them, 621 (23.4%) had DM, whereas 1997 did not. The DM group was further divided into 2 groups according to insulin treatment (insulin-treated DM, n=130; non-insulin treated DM, n=491). The primary outcome was a composite of aortic valve (AV)-related death and heart failure (HF) hospitalization. Secondary outcomes were AV-related death, HF hospitalization, all-cause death, cardiovascular death, sudden death, and surgical or transcatheter AV replacement during follow up. As a result, DM was associated with higher risk for the primary outcome (52.8% vs. 42.9%, P<0.001), with a statistically significant adjusted hazard ratio (HR 1.33, 95% confidence interval: 1.14-1.56, P<0.001). All secondary outcomes were not significantly different between DM and non-DM patients after adjusting for confounding factors, except for HF hospitalization. Insulin use was not associated with higher incidence of primary or secondary outcome. CONCLUSIONS: In initially conservatively managed patients with AS, DM was independently associated with higher risk for a composite of AV-related death or HF hospitalization; however, insulin use was not associated with poor outcomes.

Elective Non-Cardiac Surgery in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis　- Observations From the CURRENT AS Registry.

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) might be at high risk for adverse cardiovascular events at the time of non-cardiac surgery.Methods and Results:The current study population included 348 patients who underwent elective non-cardiac surgery under general or spinal anesthesia during the follow up of 3,815 patients in the CURRENT AS (Contemporary outcomes after sURgery and medical tREatmeNT in patients with severe Aortic Stenosis) registry. There were 187 patients with untreated severe AS at time of surgery (untreated severe AS group) and 161 patients who had undergone aortic valve replacement (AVR) before surgery (prior AVR group), including 23 patients with prophylactic AVR. The primary outcome measure was 30-day mortality after non-cardiac surgery. At 30 days after non-cardiac surgery, 8 patients (4.3%) died in the untreated severe AS group, while no patients died in the prior AVR group (P=0.008). The causes of death were cardiovascular in 6 out of 8 patients. Mortality at 30 days was higher in untreated severe AS patients with AS-related symptoms before surgery than in those without AS-related symptoms (7.2% vs. 3.1%). Higher surgical risk estimates of the non-cardiac surgery incrementally increased the risk of 30-day mortality in patients with untreated severe AS, though the difference was not statistically significant (low-risk: 0%, intermediate-risk: 4.3%, and high-risk: 6.6 %, P=0.46). CONCLUSIONS: Symptomatic and asymptomatic severe AS might be associated with higher risk of 30-day mortality if untreated before elective intermediate- and high-risk non-cardiac surgery, while no patient with prior AVR died after elective non-cardiac surgery.

Age-Related Differences in the Effects of Initial Aortic Valve Replacement vs. Conservative Strategy on Long-Term Outcomes in Asymptomatic Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of the initial aortic valve replacement (AVR) strategy relative to a conservative strategy on long-term outcomes stratified by age among asymptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS).Methods and Results:Among 1,808 asymptomatic severe AS patients in the CURRENT AS registry, there were 1,166 patients aged ≥75 years (initial AVR: n=124, and conservative: n=1,042), and 642 patients with age <75 years (initial AVR: n=167, and conservative: n=475). Median follow-up interval was 1,280 (interquartile range [IQR]: 1,012-1,611) days, and 1461 (IQR: 1,132-1,886) days in patients aged ≥ and <75 years, respectively. The favorable effect of the initial AVR strategy relative to conservative strategy for heart failure (HF) hospitalization was seen regardless of the age stratum (≥75 years: adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.05-0.34, and <75 years: HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.14-0.99, interaction P=0.35). However, the lower mortality risk of the initial AVR strategy relative to conservative strategy was significant in patients aged ≥75 years, but not in patients <75 years, with significant interaction (HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.20-0.61, and HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.41-1.16, interaction P=0.016). CONCLUSIONS: The benefit of initial AVR in reducing HF hospitalization in asymptomatic patients with severe AS was consistently seen regardless of age. The magnitude of mortality benefit of initial AVR was greater in super-elder patients than in non-super-elder patients.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation vs. Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement for Severe Aortic Stenosis in Real-World Clinical Practice.

BACKGROUND: There are no data comparing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) outcomes in real clinical practice in Japan. METHODS AND RESULTS: We combined 2 independent registries, the K-TAVI Registry (a 6-center prospective registry of consecutive patients who underwent TAVI) and the CURRENT AS Registry (a large, 27-center registry of 3,815 consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis [AS]). In the K-TAVI Registry, 338 patients underwent TAVI with SAPIEN XT balloon-expandable valves from October 2013 to January 2016, whereas in the CURRENT AS Registry 237 patients with severe AS underwent SAVR from January 2003 to December 2011. Propensity score matching was conducted, with final cohort comprising 306 patients. The cumulative 2-year incidence of all-cause death and heart failure (HF) hospitalization did not differ significantly between the TAVI and SAVR groups (13.7% vs. 12.4% [P=0.81] and 7.9% vs 3.9% [P=0.13], respectively). After adjusting for residual confounders, there were no significant differences between the TAVI and SAVR groups in the risk for all-cause death (hazard ratio [HR] 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.35-1.58; P=0.43) or HF hospitalization (HR 1.27; 95% CI 0.40-4.59; P=0.69). CONCLUSIONS: These findings from 2 independent Japanese registries suggest that the 2-year risk of all-cause mortality and HF does not differ significantly between TAVI and SAVR groups in real-world practice in Japan.

Reasons for Choosing Conservative Management in Symptomatic Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis　- Observations From the CURRENT AS Registry.

BACKGROUND: There has not been a previous report on the long-term outcomes of those patients who refuse aortic valve replacement (AVR) despite physicians' recommendations.Methods and Results:Among 3,815 consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) enrolled in the CURRENT AS registry, the study population comprised 2,005 symptomatic patients, who were subdivided into 3 groups by their treatment strategy and the reasons for conservative strategy (Initial AVR group: n=905; Patient rejection group: n=256; Physician judgment group, n=844). The primary outcome measure was a composite of aortic valve-related death and heart failure hospitalization. Patients in the patient rejection group as compared with those in the physician judgment group were younger, and had less comorbidities, and lower surgical risk scores. The cumulative 5-year incidence of the primary outcome measure in the patient rejection group was markedly higher than that in the initial AVR group, and was similar to that in the physician judgment group (60.7%, 19.0%, and 66.4%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Patient rejection was the reason for non-referral to AVR in nearly one-quarter of the symptomatic patients with severe AS who were managed conservatively. The dismal outcome in patients who refused AVR was similar to that in patients who were not referred to AVR based on physician judgment despite less comorbidities and lower surgical risk scores in the former than in the latter.

Effects of Carperitide on Degree of Pulmonary Congestion in Treatment of Acute Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Carperitide is used to treat acute heart failure (AHF) in Japan. Whether the degree of pulmonary congestion is associated with the effects of carperitide on AHF is unclear.Methods and Results:We retrospectively investigated the in-hospital outcomes and prognoses of 742 patients hospitalized for AHF between February 2015 and January 2017 and classified them into carperitide and non-carperitide groups, stratified according to the degree of pulmonary congestion. The median follow-up duration after admission was 231 days. In patients with moderate-severe pulmonary congestion, the rate of remaining congestion on chest X-ray at discharge was lower in the carperitide group than in the non-carperitide group (1.5% vs. 9.0%, P=0.004). Also, the carperitide group had significant reduction in a composite of all-cause death or rehospitalization for HF (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% CI: 0.41-0.93; P=0.02). In patients with no-mild pulmonary congestion, carperitide was not associated with better clinical outcome. CONCLUSIONS: In the treatment of AHF with moderate-severe pulmonary congestion, carperitide is associated with more effective decongestion in the short term and better prognosis in the long term.

Demographics, Management, and In-Hospital Outcome of Hospitalized Acute Heart Failure Syndrome Patients in Contemporary Real Clinical Practice in Japan　- Observations From the Prospective, Multicenter Kyoto Congestive Heart Failure (KCHF) Registry.

BACKGROUND: There is a scarcity of reports on the clinical characteristics and management practice in contemporary all-comer patients with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). Methods and Results: The Kyoto Congestive Heart Failure (KCHF) registry is a prospective observational cohort study enrolling 4,056 consecutive patients who had hospital admission due to ADHF without any exclusion criteria between October 2014 and March 2016 in the 19 participating hospitals in Japan. Baseline characteristics, clinical presentations, management, and in-hospital outcomes were compared between heart failure (HF) with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF; HFrEF, LVEF <40%), HF with mid-range LVEF (HFmrEF, LVEF 40-49%), and HF with preserved LVEF (HFpEF, LVEF ≥50%). Of the 4,041 patients with documented LVEF, 1,744 (43%) had HFpEF; 746 (19%), HFmrEF; and 1,551 (38%), HFrEF. The median age was 80 years (IQR, 72-86 years) in the entire population, and was higher with increasing LVEF (P<0.001). The in-hospital mortality rate was higher in the HFrEF than in the HFmrEF and HFpEF groups (9.2%, 4.8%, and 5.1%, respectively, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This registry elucidated the clinical features and clinically relevant in-hospital outcomes in contemporary consecutive patients with ADHF in real-world clinical practice in Japan. When classified by LVEF, significant differences in characteristics and in-hospital outcomes existed between patients with HFrEF, HFmrEF, and HFpEF.

Acute Heart Failure in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis　- Insights From the CURRENT AS Registry.

BACKGROUND: Clinical profiles of acute heart failure (AHF) complicating severe aortic stenosis (AS) remain unclear.Methods and Results:From a Japanese multicenter registry enrolling consecutive patients with severe AS, 3,813 patients were categorized into the 3 groups according to the symptom of heart failure (HF); No HF (n=2,210), chronic HF (CHF) (n=813) and AHF defined as hospitalized HF at enrolment (n=790). Median follow-up was 1,123 days with 93% follow-up rate at 2 years. Risk factors for developing AHF included age, female sex, lower body mass index, untreated coronary artery stenosis, anemia, history of HF, left ventricular ejection fraction <50%, presence of any combined valvular disease, peak aortic jet velocity ≥5 m/s and tricuspid regurgitation pressure gradient ≥40 mmHg, and negative risk factors included dyslipidemia, history of percutaneous coronary intervention and hemodialysis. Respective cumulative 5-year incidences of all-cause death and HF hospitalization in No HF, CHF and AHF groups were 37.1%, 41.8% and 61.8% (P<0.001) and 20.7%, 33.8% and 52.3% (P<0.001). Even in the initial aortic valve replacement (AVR) stratum, AHF was associated with excess 5-year mortality risk relative to No HF and CHF (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.64; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.14-2.36, P=0.008; adjusted HR 1.47; 95% CI: 1.03-2.11, P=0.03, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: AHF complicating severe AS was associated with an extremely dismal prognosis, which could not be fully resolved by AVR. Careful management to avoid the development of AHF is crucial.

Five-Year Clinical Outcome of Asymptomatic vs. Symptomatic Severe Aortic Stenosis After Aortic Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: There is discordance regarding the effect of symptom status before aortic valve replacement (AVR) on long-term outcome after AVR in severe aortic stenosis (AS).Methods and Results:The CURRENT AS registry is a multicenter retrospective registry enrolling 3,815 consecutive patients with severe AS. Among 1,196 patients managed with the initial AVR strategy, long-term clinical outcomes were compared between the symptomatic patients (n=905), and asymptomatic patients (n=291). Median follow-up interval was 1337 days with a 91% follow-up rate at 2 years. AVR was performed in 886 patients (98%) in the symptomatic group and in 287 patients (99%) in the asymptomatic group. Symptomatic patients were older and more often had comorbidities than asymptomatic patients with similar echocardiographic AS severity. The cumulative 5-year incidences of all-cause death and heart failure (HF) hospitalization were significantly higher in symptomatic patients than in asymptomatic patients (25.6% vs. 15.4%, P=0.001, and 14.2% vs. 3.8%, P<0.001, respectively). On landmark analysis at 30 days after AVR, the differences in mortality and HF hospitalization between the 2 groups were mainly observed beyond 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: When managed with the initial AVR strategy, the long-term outcomes of symptomatic severe AS were worse than those of asymptomatic severe AS. Early AVR strategy might be recommended in some selected asymptomatic severe AS patients with reasonable operative risk.

Sex Differences in Severe Aortic Stenosis　- Clinical Presentation and Mortality.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data on the sex differences in the prevalence, clinical presentation, and prognosis of aortic stenosis (AS).Methods and Results:A total of 3,815 consecutive patients with severe AS were enrolled in the multicenter CURRENT AS registry between January 2003 and December 2011. The registry included 1,443 men (38%) and 2,372 women (62%). Women were much older than men (79±10 vs. 75±10 years, P<0.0001), and the ratio of women to men increased with age. The cumulative 5-year incidence of all-cause death was significantly higher in men than in women (47% vs. 41%, P=0.003), although women were more symptomatic and much older. The 5-year mortality was similar between men and women at age <65 years (16% vs. 15%, P=0.99), whereas it was significantly higher in men than in women at age ≥65 years (65-74 years, 38% vs. 19%, P<0.0001; 75-84 years, 55% vs. 34%, P<0.0001; ≥85 years: 82% vs. 72%, P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: A large Japanese multicenter registry of consecutive patients with severe AS included a much higher proportion of women than men, with the female:male sex ratio increasing with age. The 5-year mortality rate of women was lower than that of men. Lower 5-year mortality rates in women were consistently seen across all age groups >65 years.

Relationship between n-3 Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids and Extent of Vessel Disease in Patients with ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

A relationship between serum polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) and cardiovascular disease has been reported; however, the existence of a relationship between serum PUFAs and extent of vessel disease (VD) in patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remains unclear.Between July 2011 and June 2015, 866 consecutive STEMI patients underwent emergent percutaneous coronary intervention, 507 of whom were enrolled and classified into three groups according to the initial angiograms: 1VD, 294 patients; 2VD, 110 patients; and 3VD/left main trunk disease (LMTD), 103 patients. Serum levels of PUFAs, including eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), and arachidonic acid, and other laboratory data during hospitalization were evaluated.The serum EPA level in the 3VD/LMTD group was significantly lower than that in the 1VD group (55.5 ± 22.1 versus 66.2 ± 28.7, P = 0.002) and was slightly lower than that in the 2VD group (55.5 ± 22.1 versus 65.2 ± 28.9, P = 0.0167). Multivariate adjustment analysis revealed that age ≥ 70 years (odds ratio, 1.72; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-2.89; P = 0.038) and a low serum EPA level (odds ratio, 0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.99-1.00; P = 0.023) were independent risk factors for 3VD/LMTD, while a low serum DHA level was not.A low serum EPA level may be more strongly related than a low serum DHA level to the extent of VD in STEMI patients. Age ≥ 70 years and a low serum EPA level may be independent risk factors for 3VD/LMTD.

Predictors of Worsening Renal Function in Patients With Acute Decompensated Heart Failure Treated by Low-Dose Carperitide.

BACKGROUND: Predictors of worsening renal function (WRF: increase in serum creatinine ≥ 0.3 mg/dl from the value on admission) in patients with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) treated by low-dose carperitide (0.01-0.05 µg/kg/min) are unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively investigated predictors of WRF within the first 24 h of low-dose carperitide therapy in 205 patients (mean age, 75.6 ± 12.1 years) hospitalized for ADHF and treated with low-dose carperitide between January 2006 and April 2014. WRF occurred in 14 patients (7%). A multivariate adjustment analysis showed that independent predictors of WRF within 24 h were hypotension (systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg) within 12 h (odds ratio, 8.7; 95% confidence interval, 2.38-35.88; P=0.0012) and serum creatinine on admission (odds ratio, 3.64; 95% confidence interval, 1.84-7.67; P=0.0003). In patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <60 ml/min/1.73 m(2), the rate of WRF occurrence was higher in those complicated by hypotension than in those without hypotension (22.6% [7/31 patients] vs. 4.4% [5/113 patients], P=0.0041). In contrast, in patients with eGFR ≥ 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2), hypotension did not influence the occurrence of WRF (0% [0/9 patients] vs. 3.9% [2/51 patients], P=NS). CONCLUSIONS: Hypotension within 12 h and renal dysfunction on admission are independent predictors of WRF within 24 h in patients with ADHF treated by low-dose carperitide. Hypotension may not cause WRF in patients with eGFR ≥ 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2).

Low systolic blood pressure on admission predicts mortality in patients with acute decompensated heart failure due to moderate to severe aortic stenosis.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the relationship between admission systolic blood pressure (SBP) and all-cause mortality in patients hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) because of aortic stenosis (AS). METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively reviewed the data for 71 consecutive patients (mean age 85±7 years) who had been hospitalized for ADHF because of AS between January 2006 and August 2012. The primary endpoint of the study was the 1-year all-cause mortality. Clinical outcomes of patients who survived and those who died during a 1-year period were compared. Low admission SBP was defined as <120 mmHg. During the 1-year period, 26 (37%) of the 71 patients died, including 16 (57%) of 28 patients with low SBP and 10 (23%) of 43 patients with normal or high SBP (log-rank P=0.0065). In both the patients who survived and those who died, there were significant differences in admission SBP (152±43 vs. 116±32 mmHg, P<0.001), estimated glomerular filtration rate on admission (43.2±20.3 vs. 28.2±22.2 ml·min(-1)·1.73 m(-2), P=0.005), and left ventricular ejection fraction <50% (33% [15/45] vs. 65% [17/26], P=0.013). Low admission SBP independently predicted 1-year all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio: 2.41, 95% confidence interval: 1.04-5.57, P=0.033). CONCLUSIONS: Low admission SBP is associated with significantly higher 1-year all-cause mortality in patients hospitalized for ADHF because of AS.

Effectiveness and safety of morphine administration for refractory dyspnoea among hospitalised patients with advanced heart failure: the Morphine-HF study.

OBJECTIVES: Morphine is effective in alleviating dyspnoea in patients with cancer. We aimed to investigate the effectiveness and safety of morphine administration for refractory dyspnoea in patients with advanced heart failure (HF). METHODS: We conducted a multicentre, prospective, observational study of hospitalised patients with advanced HF in whom morphine was administered for refractory dyspnoea. Morphine effectiveness was evaluated by dyspnoea intensity changes, assessed regularly by both a quantitative subjective scale (Visual Analogue Scale (VAS; graded from 0 to 100 mm)) and an objective scale (Support Team Assessment Schedule-Japanese (STAS-J; graded from 0 to 4 points)). Safety was assessed by vital sign changes and new-onset severe adverse events, including nausea, vomiting, constipation and delirium based on the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. RESULTS: From 15 Japanese institutions between September 2020 and August 2022, we included 28 hospitalised patients with advanced HF in whom morphine was administered (mean age: 83.8±8.7 years, male: 15 (54%), New York Heart Association class IV: 26 (93%) and mean left ventricular ejection fraction: 38%±19%). Both VAS and STAS-J significantly improved from baseline to day 1 (VAS: 67±26 to 50±31 mm; p=0.02 and STAS-J: 3.3±0.8 to 2.6±1.1 points; p=0.006, respectively), and thereafter the improvements sustained through to day 7. After morphine administration, vital signs including blood pressure, pulse rate and oxygen saturation did not change, and no new-onset severe adverse events occurred through to day 7. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggested acceptable effectiveness and safety for morphine administration in treating refractory dyspnoea in hospitalised patients with advanced HF.

Development of interpretable machine learning models to predict in-hospital prognosis of acute heart failure patients.

AIMS: In recent years, there has been remarkable development in machine learning (ML) models, showing a trend towards high prediction performance. ML models with high prediction performance often become structurally complex and are frequently perceived as black boxes, hindering intuitive interpretation of the prediction results. We aimed to develop ML models with high prediction performance, interpretability, and superior risk stratification to predict in-hospital mortality and worsening heart failure (WHF) in patients with acute heart failure (AHF). METHODS AND RESULTS: Based on the Kyoto Congestive Heart Failure registry, which enrolled 4056 patients with AHF, we developed prediction models for in-hospital mortality and WHF using information obtained on the first day of admission (demographics, physical examination, blood test results, etc.). After excluding 16 patients who died on the first or second day of admission, the original dataset (n = 4040) was split 4:1 into training (n = 3232) and test datasets (n = 808). Based on the training dataset, we developed three types of prediction models: (i) the classification and regression trees (CART) model; (ii) the random forest (RF) model; and (iii) the extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) model. The performance of each model was evaluated using the test dataset, based on metrics including sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), Brier score, and calibration slope. For the complex structure of the XGBoost model, we performed SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis, classifying patients into interpretable clusters. In the original dataset, the proportion of females was 44.8% (1809/4040), and the average age was 77.9 ± 12.0. The in-hospital mortality rate was 6.3% (255/4040) and the WHF rate was 22.3% (900/4040) in the total study population. In the in-hospital mortality prediction, the AUC for the XGBoost model was 0.816 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.815-0.818], surpassing the AUC values for the CART model (0.683, 95% CI: 0.680-0.685) and the RF model (0.755, 95% CI: 0.753-0.757). Similarly, in the WHF prediction, the AUC for the XGBoost model was 0.766 (95% CI: 0.765-0.768), outperforming the AUC values for the CART model (0.688, 95% CI: 0.686-0.689) and the RF model (0.713, 95% CI: 0.711-0.714). In the XGBoost model, interpretable clusters were formed, and the rates of in-hospital mortality and WHF were similar among each cluster in both the training and test datasets. CONCLUSIONS: The XGBoost models with SHAP analysis provide high prediction performance, interpretability, and reproducible risk stratification for in-hospital mortality and WHF for patients with AHF.