Suitable Dose of Long-Term Tolvaptan to Reduce Heart Failure Rehospitalizations.

The short-term effectiveness of tolvaptan (TLV) for heart failure (HF) has been established, but the long-term effects are controversial. We investigated HF patients who could not discontinue both loop diuretics and TLV at discharge from AURORA (Acute Heart Failure Registry in Osaka Rosai Hospital). We compared the following factors at discharge between the RH group, consisting of patients with rehospitalizations due to worsening HF within 1 year after discharge (RH group), and non-RH group: age, gender, blood pressure, history of HF admission, electrocardiogram and echocardiographic parameters, atherosclerotic risk factors, laboratory data, and medications. Furthermore, we compared the effects of long-term low-dose TLV (≤ 7.5 mg/day) and high-dose TLV on HF rehospitalizations. The RH group consisted of 81 patients (58.7%). A multivariate analysis revealed that a history of HF admission and the TLV dose were independently and significantly associated with 1-year HF rehospitalizations. A receiver operating characteristic curve revealed that 7.5 mg of TLV was a suitable cutoff value for 1-year HF rehospitalizations. The Kaplan-Meier curves demonstrated that the HF rehospitalization free ratio was significantly higher in the low-dose TLV group (≤ 7.5 mg/day) than in high-dose TLV group over 1 year.In conclusion, the TLV dose, in addition to a history of HF admission, was associated with 1-year HF rehospitalizations in diuretic-dependent HF patients. In these patients, long-term low-dose TLV (≤ 7.5 mg/day) may be favorable for reducing HF rehospitalizations.

Higher Serum Phosphorus Is Not an Independent Risk Factor of Mortality in Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction.

Higher serum phosphorus has detrimental health effects. Even high-normal rage sP is associated with worse outcomes. The relationship of serum phosphorus with prognostic markers in heart failure remains unclear. We investigated the association of serum phosphorus with heart failure prognostic factors and risk of mortality related to serum phosphorus. In 1029 stable heart failure patients, we investigated the distribution of markers of more advanced heart failure stage across quintiles of serum phosphorus and estimated the relative risk of mortality in comparison to reference. Higher serum phosphorus levels sP were associated with markers of a worse outcome. The best survival was observed in low-normal serum levels. The unadjusted hazard ratio for mortality increased toward higher phosphorus quintiles but not to lower levels of sP. The correction for age, sex, BMI, percent weight loss, inflammation, kidney function, and LVEF did not modify the risk profile substantially. The adjustment for NYHA, natriuretic peptides, serum sodium, and treatment characteristics broke down the risk relationship completely. A higher serum phosphorus is associated with markers of a more risky profile of heart failure. Elevated serum levels of phosphorus sP does not provide independent prognostic information beyond the strongest markers of the severity of the syndrome. The potential involvement of higher serum phosphorus as a mediator in the pathophysiology of heart failure warrants further study.

The association between serum selenium concentration and prognosis in patients with heart failure in a Chinese population.

Whether Selenium (Se) deficiency relates with adverse prognosis in Chinese patients with heart failure (HF) is still unknown. This study aimed to investigate the association of serum Se level and the outcomes of patients with HF in a Chinese population. Patients with HF and serum Se examination were retrospectively included. Baseline information were collected at patient's first admission. The primary and secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality and rehospitalization for HF during follow-up, respectively. The study participants were divided into quartiles according to their serum Se concentrations. The Cox proportional hazard models were adopted to estimate the association of serum Se levels with observed outcomes. A total of 411 patients with HF with a mean age of 62.5 years were included. The mean serum level of Se was 68.3 ± 27.7 µg/L. There was nonsignificant difference of baseline characterizes between the four quartile groups. In comparison with patients in the highest quartile, those with the lowest quartile (17.40-44.35 µg/L) were associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality [adjusted hazard ratios (95% CI) 2.32 (1.43-3.77); Ptrend = 0.001]. Our study suggested that a lower serum Se level was significantly associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality in patients with HF.

Anticoagulation versus placebo for heart failure in sinus rhythm.

BACKGROUND: People with chronic heart failure (HF) are at risk of thromboembolic events, including stroke, pulmonary embolism, and peripheral arterial embolism; coronary ischaemic events also contribute to the progression of HF. The use of long-term oral anticoagulation is established in certain populations, including people with HF and atrial fibrillation (AF), but there is wide variation in the indications and use of oral anticoagulation in the broader HF population. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether long-term oral anticoagulation reduces total deaths and stroke in people with heart failure in sinus rhythm. SEARCH METHODS: We updated the searches in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase in March 2020. We screened reference lists of papers and abstracts from national and international cardiovascular meetings to identify unpublished studies. We contacted relevant authors to obtain further data. We did not apply any language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing oral anticoagulants with placebo or no treatment in adults with HF, with treatment duration of at least one month. We made inclusion decisions in duplicate, and resolved any disagreements between review authors by discussion, or a third party. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, and assessed the risks and benefits of antithrombotic therapy by calculating odds ratio (OR), accompanied by the 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN RESULTS: We identified three RCTs (5498 participants). One RCT compared warfarin, aspirin, and no antithrombotic therapy, the second compared warfarin with placebo in participants with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy, and the third compared rivaroxaban with placebo in participants with HF and coronary artery disease. We pooled data from the studies that compared warfarin with a placebo or no treatment. We are uncertain if there is an effect on all-cause death (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.18; 2 studies, 324 participants; low-certainty evidence); warfarin may increase the risk of major bleeding events (OR 5.98, 95% CI 1.71 to 20.93, NNTH 17). 2 studies, 324 participants; low-certainty evidence). None of the studies reported stroke as an individual outcome. Rivaroxaban makes little to no difference to all-cause death compared with placebo (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.13; 1 study, 5022 participants; high-certainty evidence). Rivaroxaban probably reduces the risk of stroke compared to placebo (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.95; NNTB 101; 1 study, 5022 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and probably increases the risk of major bleeding events (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.33; NNTH 79; 1 study, 5008 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on the three RCTs, there is no evidence that oral anticoagulant therapy modifies mortality in people with HF in sinus rhythm. The evidence is uncertain if warfarin has any effect on all-cause death compared to placebo or no treatment, but it may increase the risk of major bleeding events. There is no evidence of a difference in the effect of rivaroxaban on all-cause death compared to placebo. It probably reduces the risk of stroke, but probably increases the risk of major bleedings. The available evidence does not support the routine use of anticoagulation in people with HF who remain in sinus rhythm.

Temporal trends in heart failure mortality in an integrated healthcare delivery system, California, and the US, 2001-2017.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, decreases in mortality rates attributable to cardiovascular diseases have slowed but mortality attributable to heart failure (HF) has increased. METHODS: Between 2001-2017, trends in age-adjusted mortality with HF as an underlying cause for Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC) members were derived through linkage with state death files and compared with trends among California residents and the US. Average annual percent change (AAPC) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using Joinpoint regression. Analyses were repeated examining HF as a contributing cause of death. RESULTS: In KPSC, the age-adjusted HF mortality rates were comparable to California but lower than the US, increasing from 23.9 per 100,000 person-years (PY) in 2001 to 44.7 per 100,000 PY in 2017, representing an AAPC of 1.3% (95% CI 0.0%, 2.6%). HF mortality also increased in California from 33.9 to 46.5 per 100,000 PY (AAPC 1.5%, 95% CI 0.3%, 2.7%), while remaining unchanged in the US at 57.9 per 100,000 PY in 2001 and 2017 (AAPC 0.0%, 95% CI - 0.5%, 0.5%). Trends among KPSC members ≥ 65 years old were similar to the overall population, while trends among members 45-64 years old were flat between 2001-2017. Small changes in mortality with HF as a contributing cause were observed in KPSC members between 2001 and 2017, which differed from California and the US. CONCLUSION: Lower rates of HF mortality were observed in KPSC compared to the US. Given the aging of the US population and increasing prevalence of HF, it will be important to examine individual and care-related factors driving susceptibility to HF mortality.

Shenfu injection alleviates the clinical symptoms of heart failure patients combined with conventional treatment: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Shenfu Injection (SFI) is a promising alternative treatment for heart failure (HF) in China. Many complete clinical trials have examined the efficacy of SFI combined use with conventional treatment (CT) vs CT alone. This study is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials to evaluate the benefits and risks of using SFI in addition to CT for the treatment of HF. METHOD: All the trials will be searched through 4 English databases (MEDLINE via PubMed, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science) and 4 Chinese databases (the China Science and Technology Journal Database, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, Wan-fang Database, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure.) from October 2005 to June 2019. Conference articles or articles with incomplete data will be removed. The primary outcome was the New York Heart Association, 6-minute walk test, hospitalization or rehospitalization. Left ventricular ejection fraction percentage, left ventricular end-diastolic dimension, Cardiac index, heart rate, N-terminal pronatriuretic peptide and other indicators were also assessed. RevMan V.5.3 Software and Stata 13.0 Statistics Software were used to calculate the data synthesis and conduct meta-analysis according to the guideline of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Protocols 2015. RESULTS: Mortality, New York Heart Association function classification, heart rate, 6-minute walk test, hospitalization or rehospitalization, Heart rate, systolic blood pressure, DBP, Cardiac minute volume, left ventricular ejection fractions percentage, left ventricular end-diastolic dimension (mm), N-terminal pronatriuretic peptide, etc. and adverse effects will be comprehensively assessed to evaluate the adjunctive effect of SFI through different aspects. We will perform a meta-analysis of each outcome with subgroup analysis based on the type of HF, treatment methods, and course of disease. Sensitivity analysis will be conducted with clinical factors, treatment methods, methodological characteristics, and statistical heterogeneity (if applicable). CONCLUSION: This study will assess the adjunctive effect of SFI and its safety on HF with clinical evidence. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42020151856.

Association between Vitamin D and Heart Failure Mortality in 10,974 Hospitalized Individuals.

A broad range of chronic conditions, including heart failure (HF), have been associated with vitamin D deficiency. Existing clinical trials involving vitamin D supplementation in chronic HF patients have been inconclusive. We sought to evaluate the outcomes of patients with vitamin D supplementation, compared with a matched cohort using real-world big data of HF hospitalization. This study was based on the Diagnosis Procedure Combination database in the Japanese Registry of All Cardiac and Vascular Datasets (JROAD-DPC). After exclusion criteria, we identified 93,692 patients who were first hospitalized with HF between April 2012 and March 2017 (mean age was 79 ± 12 years, and 52.2% were male). Propensity score (PS) was estimated with logistic regression model, with vitamin D supplementation as the dependent variable and clinically relevant covariates. On PS-matched analysis with 10,974 patients, patients with vitamin D supplementation had lower total in-hospital mortality (6.5 vs. 9.4%, odds ratio: 0.67, p < 0.001) and in-hospital mortality within 7 days and 30 days (0.9 vs. 2.5%, OR, 0.34, and 3.8 vs. 6.5%, OR: 0.56, both p < 0.001). In the sub-group analysis, mortalities in patients with age < 75, diabetes, dyslipidemia, atrial arrhythmia, cancer, renin-angiotensin system blocker, and ß-blocker were not affected by vitamin D supplementation. Patients with vitamin D supplementation had a lower in-hospital mortality for HF than patients without vitamin D supplementation in the propensity matched cohort. The identification of specific clinical characteristics in patients benefitting from vitamin D may be useful for determining targets of future randomized control trials.

Efficacy and safety of Qishen Yiqi dripping pills as a complementary treatment for Heart Failure: A protocol of updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) has become a serious global public health issue due to its high incidence, high mortality and extremely low quality of life. According to several clinical trials, Qishen Yiqi Dripping pills (QSYQ) combined with routine western medicine treatment can further enhance the curative effect of HF patients. However, most of the trials are small in sample size and poor in quality, which can only provide limited evidence-based medicine. The existing systematic reviews of efficacy and safety has provided evidence for the clinical application of QSYQ to a certain extent, but there are still 3 major defects. Here, we will perform a systematic review and meta-analysis that include the randomized clinical trial (RCT) of CACT-IHF, apply meta-regression and subgroup analysis to cope with multiple confounding factors, and add the clinical efficacy standards of TCM, all-cause death and readmission rates as reliable efficacy evaluation indicators. The purpose of this study was to rigorously evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of QSYQ in the complementary treatment of HF with a well-designed systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: Following the strict search strategy, 9 databases will be searched to ensure a comprehensive search. We search the database from the establishment until November 30, 2020. This study will include RCTs of QSYQ in HF patients' complementary treatment. Two searchers will independently draft and carry out the search strategy, and the third member will further complete it. Two members independently screen literature, extract data and cross-check, and solve different opinions through discussion or negotiation with the third member. The risk bias will be evaluated based on Cochrane tool of risk of bias. Meta-regression and subgroup analysis are used to check and deal with the heterogeneity. The data analysis will be conducted by the statistical software Stata 16.0. RESULTS: The results of this research will be delivered in a peer-reviewed journal. CONCLUSION: This study expects to provide credible and scientific evidence for the efficacy and safety of QSYQ in HF's complementary treatment, and at the same time provide a convenient and effective choice for decision-makers and patients. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER: INPLASY 2020120106. ETHICAL APPROVAL: Since this study is on the basis of published or registered RCTs, ethical approval and informed consent of patients are not required.

French annual national observational study of 2015 outpatient and inpatient healthcare utilization by approximately half a million patients with previous heart failure diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure management guidelines have been published, but the degree of adherence to these guidelines remains unknown. AIMS: To study in 2015 healthcare utilization and causes of death for people previously identified with heart failure. METHODS: The national health data system was used to identify adult general scheme (86% of the French population) hospitalized for heart failure between 2011 and 2014 or with only a long-term chronic disease allowance for heart failure. The frequency and median (interquartile range) of at least one healthcare use among those still alive in 2015 was calculated. RESULTS: A total of 499,296 adults (1.4% of the population) were included, and 429,853 were alive in 2015; median age 79 (68-86) years. At least one utilization was observed for a general practitioner in 95% of patients (median 8 [interquartile range 5-13] consultations), a cardiologist in 42% (2 [1-3]), a nurse in 78% (16 [4-100]), a loop diuretic in 64% (11 [8-12] dispensations), an aldosterone antagonist in 21% (8 [5-11]), a thiazide in 15% (7 [4-11]), a renin-angiotensin system inhibitor in 68% (11 [8-13]), a beta-blocker in 65% (11 [7-13]), a beta-blocker plus a renin-angiotensin system inhibitor in 57%, and a beta-blocker plus a renin-angiotensin system inhibitor plus an aldosterone antagonist in 37%. Hospitalization for heart failure was present for 8% (1 [1,2]). Higher levels of healthcare utilization were observed in the presence of hospitalization for heart failure before 2015. Among the 13.9% of people who died in 2015, heart failure accounted for 8% of causes, cardiovascular disease accounted for 39%. CONCLUSIONS: General practitioners and nurses are the main actors in the regular follow-up of patients with heart failure, whereas cardiologist consultations and dispensing of first-line treatments are insufficient with respect to guidelines.

Effect of an Emergency Department Care Bundle on 30-Day Hospital Discharge and Survival Among Elderly Patients With Acute Heart Failure: The ELISABETH Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Clinical guidelines for the early management of acute heart failure in the emergency department (ED) setting are based on only moderate levels of evidence, with subsequent low adherence to these guidelines. Objective: To test the effect of an early guideline-recommended care bundle on short-term prognosis in older patients with acute heart failure in the ED. Design, Setting, and Participants: Stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial in 15 EDs in France of 503 patients 75 years and older with a diagnosis of acute heart failure in the ED from December 2018 to September 2019 and followed up for 30 days until October 2019. Interventions: A care bundle that included early intravenous nitrate boluses; management of precipitating factors, such as acute coronary syndrome, infection, or atrial fibrillation; and moderate dose of intravenous diuretics (n = 200). In the control group, patient care was left to the discretion of the treating emergency physician (n = 303). Each center was randomized to the order in which they switched to the "intervention period." After the initial 4-week control period for all centers, 1 center entered in the intervention period every 2 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the number of days alive and out of hospital at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included 30-day all-cause mortality, 30-day cardiovascular mortality, unscheduled readmission, length of hospital stay, and kidney impairment. Results: Among 503 patients who were randomized (median age, 87 years; 298 [59%] women), 502 were analyzed. In the intervention group, patients received a median (interquartile range) of 27.0 (9-54) mg of intravenous nitrates in the first 4 hours vs 4.0 (2.0-6.0) mg in the control group (adjusted difference, 23.8 [95% CI, 13.5-34.1]). There was a significantly higher percentage of patients in the intervention group treated for their precipitating factors than in the control group (58.8% vs 31.9%; adjusted difference, 31.1% [95% CI, 14.3%-47.9%]). There was no statistically significant difference in the primary end point of the number of days alive and out of hospital at 30 days (median [interquartile range], 19 [0- 24] d in both groups; adjusted difference, -1.9 [95% CI, -6.6 to 2.8]; adjusted ratio, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.64-1.21]). At 30 days, there was no significant difference between the intervention and control groups in mortality (8.0% vs 9.7%; adjusted difference, 4.1% [95% CI, -17.2% to 25.3%]), cardiovascular mortality (5.0% vs 7.4%; adjusted difference, 2.1% [95% CI, -15.5% to 19.8%]), unscheduled readmission (14.3% vs 15.7%; adjusted difference, -1.3% [95% CI, -26.3% to 23.7%]), median length of hospital stay (8 d in both groups; adjusted difference, 2.5 [95% CI, -0.9 to 5.8]), and kidney impairment (1% in both groups). Conclusions and Relevance: Among older patients with acute heart failure, use of a guideline-based comprehensive care bundle in the ED compared with usual care did not result in a statistically significant difference in the number of days alive and out of the hospital at 30 days. Further research is needed to identify effective treatments for acute heart failure in older patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03683212.

Predicting heart failure events in patients with coronary heart disease and impaired glucose tolerance: Insights from the Acarbose Cardiovascular Evaluation (ACE) trial.

AIMS: Heart failure is a fatal complication of type 2 diabetes but little is known about its incidence in people with impaired glucose tolerance (IGT). We used Acarbose Cardiovascular Evaluation (ACE) trial data to identify predictors of hospitalisation for heart failure (hHF) or cardiovascular (CV) death in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) and IGT randomised to acarbose or placebo. METHODS: Independent hHF/CV death risk factors were determined using Cox proportional hazards models, with participants censored at first hHF event, CV death, or end of follow-up. RESULTS: During median 5-year follow-up, the composite outcome of hHF/CV death occurred in 393 (6.0%) participants. Significant hHF/CV death multivariate predictors were higher age and plasma creatinine, and prior heart failure (HF), myocardial infarction (MI), atrial fibrillation (AF) and stroke. Acarbose, compared with placebo, did not reduce hHF/CV death (hazard ratio [HR] 0.89, 95% CI 0.64-1.24, P = 0.48) or hHF (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.74-1.10, P = 0.32). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CHD and IGT at greater risk of hHF/CV death were older with higher plasma creatinine, prior HF, MI, AF or stroke. Addition of acarbose to optimised CV therapy to reduce post-prandial glucose excursions did not reduce the risk of hHF/CV death or hHF. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00829660, and the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number registry, number ISRCTN91899513.

Risk of Acute Myocardial Infarction, Heart Failure, and Death in Migraine Patients Treated with Triptans.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study is to determine the strength of association between treatment with triptans and acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, and death. BACKGROUND: Case reports in the literature have raised concerns over an association between treatment of migraine headaches with triptans and cardiovascular events. This study aims to systematically evaluate this association in a contemporary population-based cohort. We hypothesized that triptan exposure is not associated with increased cardiovascular events. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted within an integrated healthcare delivery system in Southern California. From January 2009 to December 2018, 189,684 patients age ≥18 years had a diagnosis of migraine. In this group, 130,656 were exposed to triptans. Patients treated with triptans were matched 1:1 to those not exposed to triptans by using a propensity score. The primary outcome was acute myocardial infarction; secondary outcomes were heart failure, all-cause death, and combined acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, and death. RESULTS: The incidence rate of acute myocardial infarction was 0.67 per 1000 person-year in triptan-exposed vs 1.44 per 1000 person-year in not exposed patients. In propensity-matched analyses, the adjusted hazard ratio for triptan exposure was 0.95 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-1.08) for acute myocardial infarction; 1.00 (95% CI 0.93-1.08) for all-cause death; 0.93 (95% CI 0.81-1.08) for heart failure; and 0.99 (95% CI 0.93-1.06) for a composite of acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, or death. Sensitivity analyses focusing on stratified subgroups based on age, gender, ethnicity, and several cardiac risk factors also revealed no significant association between triptan exposure and cardiovascular events. CONCLUSIONS: No association was found between exposure to triptans and an increased risk of cardiovascular events. These data provide reassurance regarding the cardiovascular safety of utilizing triptans for the medical management of migraine headaches.

Selenium supplementation in patients with peripartum cardiomyopathy: a proof-of-concept trial.

BACKGROUND: We studied the efficacy and safety of selenium supplementation in patients who had peripartum cardiomyopathy (PPCM) and selenium deficiency. METHODS: We randomly assigned 100 PPCM patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 45% and selenium deficiency (< 70 µg/L) to receive either oral Selenium (L-selenomethionine) 200 µg/day for 3 months or nothing, in addition to recommended therapy, in an open-label randomised trial. The primary outcome was a composite of persistence of heart failure (HF) symptoms, unrecovered LV systolic function (LVEF < 55%) or death from any cause. RESULTS: Over a median of 19 months, the primary outcome occurred in 36 of 46 patients (78.3%) in the selenium group and in 43 of 54 patients (79.6%) in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.43-1.09; p = 0.113). Persistence of HF symptoms occurred in 18 patients (39.1%) in the selenium group and in 37 patients (68.5%) in the control group (HR 0.53; 95% CI 0.30-0.93; p = 0.006). LVEF < 55% occurred in 33 patients (71.7%) in the selenium group and in 38 patients (70.4%) in the control group (HR 0.91; 95% CI 0.57-1.45; p = 0.944). Death from any cause occurred in 3 patients (6.5%) in the selenium group and in 9 patients (16.7%) in the control group (HR 0.37; 95% CI 0.10-1.37; p = 0.137). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, selenium supplementation did not reduce the risk of the primary outcome, but it significantly reduced HF symptoms, and there was a trend towards a reduction of all-cause mortality. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03081949.

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of hospital-based specialist palliative care for adults with advanced illness and their caregivers.

BACKGROUND: Serious illness is often characterised by physical/psychological problems, family support needs, and high healthcare resource use. Hospital-based specialist palliative care (HSPC) has developed to assist in better meeting the needs of patients and their families and potentially reducing hospital care expenditure. There is a need for clarity on the effectiveness and optimal models of HSPC, given that most people still die in hospital and also to allocate scarce resources judiciously. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of HSPC compared to usual care for adults with advanced illness (hereafter patients) and their unpaid caregivers/families. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, CDSR, DARE and HTA database via the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; Embase; CINAHL; PsycINFO; CareSearch; National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) and two trial registers to August 2019, together with checking of reference lists and relevant systematic reviews, citation searching and contact with experts to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the impact of HSPC on outcomes for patients or their unpaid caregivers/families, or both. HSPC was defined as specialist palliative care delivered by a palliative care team that is based in a hospital providing holistic care, co-ordination by a multidisciplinary team, and collaboration between HSPC providers and generalists. HSPC was provided to patients while they were admitted as inpatients to acute care hospitals, outpatients or patients receiving care from hospital outreach teams at home. The comparator was usual care, defined as inpatient or outpatient hospital care without specialist palliative care input at the point of entry into the study, community care or hospice care provided outside of the hospital setting. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We assessed risk of bias and extracted data. To account for use of different scales across studies, we calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous data. We used an inverse variance random-effects model. For binary data, we calculated odds ratio (ORs) with 95% CIs. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table. Our primary outcomes were patient health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and symptom burden (a collection of two or more symptoms). Key secondary outcomes were pain, depression, satisfaction with care, achieving preferred place of death, mortality/survival, unpaid caregiver burden, and cost-effectiveness. Qualitative data was analysed where available. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 42 RCTs involving 7779 participants (6678 patients and 1101 caregivers/family members). Twenty-one studies were with cancer populations, 14 were with non-cancer populations (of which six were with heart failure patients), and seven with mixed cancer and non-cancer populations (mixed diagnoses). HSPC was offered in different ways and included the following models: ward-based, inpatient consult, outpatient, hospital-at-home or hospital outreach, and service provision across multiple settings which included hospital. For our main analyses, we pooled data from studies reporting adjusted endpoint values. Forty studies had a high risk of bias in at least one domain. Compared with usual care, HSPC improved patient HRQoL with a small effect size of 0.26 SMD over usual care (95% CI 0.15 to 0.37; I2 = 3%, 10 studies, 1344 participants, low-quality evidence, higher scores indicate better patient HRQoL). HSPC also improved other person-centred outcomes. It reduced patient symptom burden with a small effect size of -0.26 SMD over usual care (95% CI -0.41 to -0.12; I2 = 0%, 6 studies, 761 participants, very low-quality evidence, lower scores indicate lower symptom burden). HSPC improved patient satisfaction with care with a small effect size of 0.36 SMD over usual care (95% CI 0.41 to 0.57; I2 = 0%, 2 studies, 337 participants, low-quality evidence, higher scores indicate better patient satisfaction with care). Using home death as a proxy measure for achieving patient's preferred place of death, patients were more likely to die at home with HSPC compared to usual care (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.16; I2 = 0%, 7 studies, 861 participants, low-quality evidence). Data on pain (4 studies, 525 participants) showed no evidence of a difference between HSPC and usual care (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.01; I2 = 0%, very low-quality evidence). Eight studies (N = 1252 participants) reported on adverse events and very low-quality evidence did not demonstrate an effect of HSPC on serious harms. Two studies (170 participants) presented data on caregiver burden and both found no evidence of effect of HSPC (very low-quality evidence). We included 13 economic studies (2103 participants). Overall, the evidence on cost-effectiveness of HSPC compared to usual care was inconsistent among the four full economic studies. Other studies that used only partial economic analysis and those that presented more limited resource use and cost information also had inconsistent results (very low-quality evidence). Quality of the evidence The quality of the evidence assessed using GRADE was very low to low, downgraded due to a high risk of bias, inconsistency and imprecision. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Very low- to low-quality evidence suggests that when compared to usual care, HSPC may offer small benefits for several person-centred outcomes including patient HRQoL, symptom burden and patient satisfaction with care, while also increasing the chances of patients dying in their preferred place (measured by home death). While we found no evidence that HSPC causes serious harms, the evidence was insufficient to draw strong conclusions. Although these are only small effect sizes, they may be clinically relevant at an advanced stage of disease with limited prognosis, and are person-centred outcomes important to many patients and families. More well conducted studies are needed to study populations with non-malignant diseases and mixed diagnoses, ward-based models of HSPC, 24 hours access (out-of-hours care) as part of HSPC, pain, achieving patient preferred place of care, patient satisfaction with care, caregiver outcomes (satisfaction with care, burden, depression, anxiety, grief, quality of life), and cost-effectiveness of HSPC. In addition, research is needed to provide validated person-centred outcomes to be used across studies and populations.

COVID-19 infections and outcomes in a live registry of heart failure patients across an integrated health care system.

BACKGROUND: Patients with comorbid conditions have a higher risk of mortality with SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) infection, but the impact on heart failure patients living near a disease hotspot is unknown. Therefore, we sought to characterize the prevalence and outcomes of COVID-19 in a live registry of heart failure patients across an integrated health care system in Connecticut. METHODS: In this retrospective analysis, the Yale Heart Failure Registry (NCT04237701) that includes 26,703 patients with heart failure across a 6-hospital integrated health care system in Connecticut was queried on April 16th, 2020 for all patients tested for COVID-19. Sociodemographic and geospatial data as well as, clinical management, respiratory failure, and patient mortality were obtained via the real-time registry. Data on COVID-19 specific care was extracted by retrospective chart review. RESULTS: COVID-19 testing was performed on 900 symptomatic patients, comprising 3.4% of the Yale Heart Failure Registry (N = 26,703). Overall, 206 (23%) were COVID- 19+. As compared to COVID-19-, these patients were more likely to be older, black, have hypertension, coronary artery disease, and were less likely to be on renin angiotensin blockers (P<0.05, all). COVID-19- patients tended to be more diffusely spread across the state whereas COVID-19+ were largely clustered around urban centers. 20% of COVID-19+ patients died, and age was associated with increased risk of death [OR 1.92 95% CI (1.33-2.78); P<0.001]. Among COVID-19+ patients who were ≥85 years of age rates of hospitalization were 87%, rates of death 36%, and continuing hospitalization 62% at time of manuscript preparation. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world snapshot of COVID-19 infection among a large cohort of heart failure patients, we found that a small proportion had undergone testing. Patients found to be COVID-19+ tended to be black with multiple comorbidities and clustered around lower socioeconomic status communities. Elderly COVID-19+ patients were very likely to be admitted to the hospital and experience high rates of mortality.

Trends in Readmission and Mortality Rates Following Heart Failure Hospitalization in the Veterans Affairs Health Care System From 2007 to 2017.

Importance: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and the Veterans Affairs Health Care System provide incentives for hospitals to reduce 30-day readmission and mortality rates. In contrast with the large body of evidence describing readmission and mortality in the Medicare system, it is unclear how heart failure readmission and mortality rates have changed during this period in the Veterans Affairs Health Care System. Objectives: To evaluate trends in readmission and mortality after heart failure admission in the Veterans Affairs Health Care System, which had no financial penalties, in a decade involving focus on heart failure readmission reduction (2007-2017). Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used data from all Veterans Affairs-paid heart failure admissions from January 2007 to September 2017. All Veterans Affairs-paid hospital admissions to Veterans Affairs and non-Veterans Affairs facilities for a primary diagnosis of heart failure were included, when the admission was paid for by the Veterans Affairs. Data analyses were conducted from October 2018 to March 2020. Exposures: Admission for a primary diagnosis of heart failure at discharge. Main Outcomes and Measures: Thirty-day all-cause readmission and mortality rates. Results: A total of 164 566 patients with 304 374 hospital admissions were included. Among the 304 374 hospital admissions between 2007 and 2017, 298 260 (98.0%) were for male patients, and 195 205 (64.4%) were for white patients. The mean (SD) age was 70.8 (11.5) years. The adjusted odds ratio of 30-day readmission declined throughout the study period to 0.85 (95% CI, 0.83-0.88) in 2015 to 2017 compared with 2007 to 2008. The adjusted odds ratio of 30-day mortality remained stable, with an adjusted odds ratio of 1.01 (95% CI, 0.96-1.06) in 2015 to 2017 compared with 2007 to 2008. Stratification by left ventricular ejection fraction showed similar readmission reduction trends and no significant change in mortality, regardless of strata. Conclusions and Relevance: In this analysis of an integrated health care system that provided guidance and nonfinancial incentives for reducing readmissions, such as public reporting of readmission rates, risk-adjusted 30-day readmission declined despite inclusion of clinical variables in risk adjustment, but mortality did not decline. Future investigations should focus on evaluating the effectiveness of specific approaches to readmission reduction to inform efficient and effective application in individual health systems, hospitals, and practices.

Atherectomy for peripheral arterial disease.

BACKGROUND: Symptomatic peripheral arterial disease (PAD) has several treatment options, including angioplasty, stenting, exercise therapy, and bypass surgery. Atherectomy is an alternative procedure, in which atheroma is cut or ground away within the artery. This is the first update of a Cochrane Review published in 2014. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of atherectomy for peripheral arterial disease compared to other established treatments. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED) databases, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 12 August 2019. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials that compared atherectomy with other established treatments. All participants had symptomatic PAD with either claudication or critical limb ischaemia and evidence of lower limb arterial disease. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors screened studies for inclusion, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and used GRADE criteria to assess the certainty of the evidence. We resolved any disagreements through discussion. Outcomes of interest were: primary patency (at six and 12 months), all-cause mortality, fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular events, initial technical failure rates, target vessel revascularisation rates (TVR; at six and 12 months); and complications. MAIN RESULTS: We included seven studies, with a total of 527 participants and 581 treated lesions. We found two comparisons: atherectomy versus balloon angioplasty (BA) and atherectomy versus BA with primary stenting. No studies compared atherectomy with bypass surgery. Overall, the evidence from this review was of very low certainty, due to a high risk of bias, imprecision and inconsistency. Six studies (372 participants, 427 treated lesions) compared atherectomy versus BA. We found no clear difference between atherectomy and BA for the primary outcomes: six-month primary patency rates (risk ratio (RR) 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 1.20; 3 studies, 186 participants; very low-certainty evidence); 12-month primary patency rates (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.84; 2 studies, 149 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or mortality rates (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.10 to 2.66, 3 studies, 210 participants, very low-certainty evidence). One study reported cardiac failure and acute coronary syndrome as causes of death at 24 months but it was unclear which arm the participants belonged to, and one study reported no cardiovascular events. There was no clear difference when examining: initial technical failure rates (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.08; 6 studies, 425 treated vessels; very low-certainty evidence), six-month TVR (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.06 to 4.42; 2 studies, 136 treated vessels; very low-certainty evidence) or 12-month TVR (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.42; 3 studies, 176 treated vessels; very low-certainty evidence). All six studies reported complication rates (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.68; 6 studies, 387 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and embolisation events (RR 2.51, 95% CI 0.64 to 9.80; 6 studies, 387 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Atherectomy may be less likely to cause dissection (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.54; 4 studies, 290 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and may be associated with a reduction in bailout stenting (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.74; 4 studies, 315 treated vessels; very low-certainty evidence). Four studies reported amputation rates, with only one amputation event recorded in a BA participant. We used subgroup analysis to compare the effect of plain balloons/stents and drug-eluting balloons/stents, but did not detect any differences between the subgroups. One study (155 participants, 155 treated lesions) compared atherectomy versus BA and primary stenting, so comparison was extremely limited and subject to imprecision. This study did not report primary patency. The study reported one death (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.23; 155 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and three complication events (RR 7.04, 95% CI 0.80 to 62.23; 155 participants; very low-certainty evidence) in a very small data set, making conclusions unreliable. We found no clear difference between the treatment arms in cardiovascular events (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.23; 155 participants; very low-certainty evidence). This study found no initial technical failure events, and TVR rates at six and 24 months showed little difference between treatment arms (RR 2.27, 95% CI 0.95 to 5.46; 155 participants; very low-certainty evidence and RR 2.05, 95% CI 0.96 to 4.37; 155 participants; very low-certainty evidence, respectively). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review update shows that the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of atherectomy on patency, mortality and cardiovascular event rates compared to plain balloon angioplasty, with or without stenting. We detected no clear differences in initial technical failure rates or TVR, but there may be reduced dissection and bailout stenting after atherectomy although this is uncertain. Included studies were small, heterogenous and at high risk of bias. Larger studies powered to detect clinically meaningful, patient-centred outcomes are required.

The Heart Failure Readmission Intervention by Variable Early Follow-up (THRIVE) Study: A Pragmatic Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: In-person clinic follow-up within 7 days after discharge from a heart failure hospitalization is associated with lower 30-day readmission. However, health systems and patients may find it difficult to complete an early postdischarge clinic visit, especially during the current pandemic. We evaluated the effect on 30-day readmission and death of follow-up within 7 days postdischarge guided by an initial structured nonphysician telephone visit compared with follow-up guided by an initial clinic visit with a physician. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a pragmatic randomized trial in a large integrated healthcare delivery system. Adults being discharged home after hospitalization for heart failure were randomly assigned to either an initial telephone visit with a nurse or pharmacist to guide follow-up or an initial in-person clinic appointment with primary care physicians providing usual care within the first 7 days postdischarge. Telephone appointments included a structured protocol enabling medication titration, laboratory ordering, and booking urgent clinic visits as needed under physician supervision. Outcomes included 30-day readmissions and death and frequency and type of completed follow-up within 7 days of discharge. Among 2091 participants (mean age 78 years, 44% women), there were no significant differences in 30-day heart failure readmission (8.6% telephone, 10.6% clinic, P=0.11), all-cause readmission (18.8% telephone, 20.6% clinic, P=0.30), and all-cause death (4.0% telephone, 4.6% clinic, P=0.49). Completed 7-day follow-up was higher in 1027 patients randomized to telephone follow-up (92%) compared with 1064 patients assigned to physician clinic follow-up (79%, P<0.001). Overall frequency of clinic visits during the first 7 days postdischarge was lower in participants assigned to nonphysician telephone guided follow-up (48%) compared with physician clinic-guided follow-up (77%, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Early, structured telephone follow-up after hospitalization for heart failure can increase 7-day follow-up and reduce in-person visits with comparable 30-day clinical outcomes within an integrated care delivery framework. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03524534.

Estimating the number of preventable cardiovascular disease events in the United States using the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial results and National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.

AIM: We examined eligibility and preventable cardiovascular disease events in US adults with diabetes mellitus from the Empagliflozin Cardiovascular Outcome Event Trial in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients (EMPA-REG OUTCOME). METHODS: We identified adults with diabetes mellitus eligible for EMPA-REG OUTCOME based on trial eligibility criteria available from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys, 2007-2016. We estimated composite cardiovascular disease endpoints, as well as all-cause deaths, death from cardiovascular disease and hospitalizations for heart failure from trial treatment and placebo event rates, the difference indicating the preventable events. RESULTS: Among 29,629 US adults aged ⩾18 years (representing 231.9 million), 4672 (27.3 million) had diabetes mellitus, with 342 (1.86 million) meeting eligibility criteria of EMPA-REG OUTCOME. We estimated from trial primary endpoint event rates of 10.5% and 12.1% in the empagliflozin and placebo groups, respectively, that based on the 'treatment' of our 1.86 million estimated EMPA-REG OUTCOME eligible subjects, 12,066 (95% confidence interval: 10,352-13,780) cardiovascular disease events could be prevented annually. Estimated annual preventable deaths from any cause, cardiovascular causes and hospitalizations from heart failure were 17,078 (95% confidence interval: 14,652-19,504), 14,479 (95% confidence interval: 12,422-16,536) and 9467 (95% confidence interval: 8122-10,812), respectively. CONCLUSION: Empagliflozin, if provided to EMPA-REG OUTCOME eligible US adults, may prevent many cardiovascular disease events, cardiovascular and total deaths, as well as heart failure hospitalizations.