The evolution of guideline-directed medical therapy among decompensated HFrEF patients in sacubitril/valsartan era: Medical expenses and clinical effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: Over recent years, new evolution in guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) contributes to clinical benefits in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). The additional medical expenditure may be a concern due to the current financial constraint. This study aimed to investigate the medical costs and clinical effectiveness of contemporary GDMT in recently hospitalized HFrEF patients. METHODS: Acutely decompensated hospitalized HFrEF patients from two multicenter cohorts of different periods were retrospectively analyzed. A propensity score matching was performed to adjust the baseline characteristics. Annual medication costs, risks of mortality, and recurrent heart failure hospitalizations (HFH) were compared. RESULTS: Following 1:2 propensity score matching, there were 426 patients from the 2017-2018 cohort using sacubitril/valsartan, while 852 patients from 2013 to 2014 did not use so at discharge. Baseline characteristics were similar, whereas the sacubitril/valsartan users were more likely to receive beta-blockers, ivabradine and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists at discharge (79.3% vs 60.4%, 23.2% vs 0%, and 64.1% vs 49.8%, p < 0.001). The 2017-2018 cohort produced more medication costs by 1277 United States dollar (USD) per person per year, while it resulted in lower rates of HFH and all-cause mortality (10.3 vs 20.3 and 48.8 vs 79.9 per 100 person-year, p < 0.001). Costs of preventing a mortality event and a HFH event with contemporary treatments were 15 758 USD (95% confidence interval [CI] 10 436-29 244) and 5317 USD (95% CI 3388-10 098), respectively. CONCLUSION: The higher adoption of GDMT was associated with greater medical expenses but better clinical outcomes in recently decompensated HFrEF patients.

Real-world geographic variations in the use of cardiac implantable electronic devices-The PANORAMA 2 observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Currently, several geographies around the world remain underrepresented in medical device trials. The PANORAMA 2 study was designed to assess contemporary region-specific differences in clinical practice patterns of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). METHODS: In this prospective, multicenter, observational, multinational study, baseline and implant data of 4,706 patients receiving Medtronic CIEDs (Medtronic plc, Minneapolis, MN, USA; either de novo device implants, replacements, or upgrades) were analyzed, consisting of: 54% implantable pulse generators (IPGs), 20.3% implantable cardiac defibrillators (ICDs), 15% cardiac resynchronization therapy -defibrillators, and 5.1% cardiac resynchronization therapy -pacemakers, from 117 hospitals in 23 countries across four geographical regions between 2012 and 2016. RESULTS: For all device types, in all regions, there were fewer females than males enrolled, and women were less likely to have ischemic cardiomyopathy. Implant procedure duration differed significantly across the geographies for all device types. Subjects from emerging countries, women, and older patients were less likely to receive a magnetic resonance imaging-compatible device. Defibrillation testing differed significantly between the regions. European patients had the highest rates of atrial fibrillation (AF), and the lowest number of implanted single-chamber IPGs. Evaluation of stroke history suggested that the general embolic risk is more strongly associated with stroke than AF. CONCLUSIONS: We provide comprehensive descriptive data on patients receiving Medtronic CIEDs from several geographies, some of which are understudied in randomized controlled trials. We found significant variations in patient characteristics. Several medical decisions appear to be affected by socioeconomic factors. Long-term follow-up data will help evaluate if these variations require adjustments to outcome expectations.