Early Apixaban Use Following Stroke in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: Results of the AREST Trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: It is unknown when to start anticoagulation after acute ischemic stroke (AIS) from atrial fibrillation (AF). Early anticoagulation may prevent recurrent infarctions but may provoke hemorrhagic transformation as AF strokes are typically larger and hemorrhagic transformation-prone. Later anticoagulation may prevent hemorrhagic transformation but increases risk of secondary stroke in this time frame. Our aim was to compare early anticoagulation with apixaban in AF patients with stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) versus warfarin administration at later intervals. METHODS: AREST (Apixaban for Early Prevention of Recurrent Embolic Stroke and Hemorrhagic Transformation) was an open-label, randomized controlled trial comparing the safety of early use of apixaban at day 0 to 3 for TIA, day 3 to 5 for small-sized AIS (<1.5 cm), and day 7 to 9 for medium-sized AIS (≥1.5 cm, excluding full cortical territory), to warfarin, in a 1:1 ratio at 1 week post-TIA, or 2 weeks post-AIS. RESULTS: Although AREST ended prematurely after a national guideline focused update recommended direct oral anticoagulants over warfarin for AF, it revealed that apixaban had statistically similar yet generally numerically lower rates of recurrent strokes/TIA (14.6% versus 19.2%, P=0.78), death (4.9% versus 8.5%, P=0.68), fatal strokes (2.4% versus 8.5%, P=0.37), symptomatic hemorrhages (0% versus 2.1%), and the primary composite outcome of fatal stroke, recurrent ischemic stroke, or TIA (17.1% versus 25.5%, P=0.44). One symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage occurred on warfarin, none on apixaban. Five asymptomatic hemorrhagic transformation occurred in each arm. CONCLUSIONS: Early initiation of anticoagulation after TIA, small-, or medium-sized AIS from AF does not appear to compromise patient safety. Potential efficacy of early initiation of anticoagulation remains to be determined from larger pivotal trials. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/; Unique identifier: NCT02283294.

Assessing Competence in Critical Care Echocardiography: Development and Initial Results of an Examination and Certification Processes.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the development and initial results of an examination and certification process assessing competence in critical care echocardiography. DESIGN: A test writing committee of content experts from eight professional societies invested in critical care echocardiography was convened, with the Executive Director representing the National Board of Echocardiography. Using an examination content outline, the writing committee was assigned topics relevant to their areas of expertise. The examination items underwent extensive review, editing, and discussion in several face-to-face meetings supervised by National Board of Medical Examiners editors and psychometricians. A separate certification committee was tasked with establishing criteria required to achieve National Board of Echocardiography certification in critical care echocardiography through detailed review of required supporting material submitted by candidates seeking to fulfill these criteria. SETTING: The writing committee met twice a year in person at the National Board of Medical Examiner office in Philadelphia, PA. SUBJECTS: Physicians enrolled in the examination of Special Competence in Critical Care Electrocardiography (CCEeXAM). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 524 physicians sat for the examination, and 426 (81.3%) achieved a passing score. Of the examinees, 41% were anesthesiology trained, 33.2% had pulmonary/critical care background, and the majority had graduated training within the 10 years (91.6%). Most candidates work full-time at an academic hospital (46.9%). CONCLUSIONS: The CCEeXAM is designed to assess a knowledge base that is shared with echocardiologists in addition to that which is unique to critical care. The National Board of Echocardiography certification establishes that the physician has achieved the ability to independently perform and interpret critical care echocardiography at a standard recognized by critical care professional societies encompassing a wide spectrum of backgrounds. The interest shown and the success achieved on the CCEeXAM by practitioners of critical care echocardiography support the standards set by the National Board of Echocardiography for testamur status and certification in this imaging specialty area.

Pulse pressure and prognosis in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

BACKGROUND: A high pulse pressure (PP) is associated with adverse cardiovascular (CV) outcomes; however, this relationship may be reversed in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFREF). METHODS: Patients from the WARCEF trial with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% were included. PP was divided into tertiles: ≤42, 42-54 and >54 mm Hg. Age and ejection fraction adjusted Kaplan-Meier curves were generated to evaluate the relationship between PP and outcomes [mortality, CV mortality, stroke and HF hospitalizations (HFH)]. Cox proportional hazards models were created incorporating PP as a continuous variable. The interaction of PP with New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class was examined. Linear and restricted cubic splines were used to study nonlinear association between PP and outcomes. RESULTS: We included 2,299 patients with a mean(±SD) follow-up of 3.5 ± 1.8 years. The lowest tertile of PP (≤42 mm Hg) was associated with significantly higher CV mortality and HFH. Cox proportional hazards models showed a reduction in CV death and HFH with higher PP, with adjusted hazard ratios (HR) of 0.91 (P = 0.02) and 0.93 (P = 0.04) per 10 mm Hg increase in PP. This relationship was more pronounced in subjects with NYHA functional class III-IV. Spline analysis showed that the association between PP and CV mortality and HFH was only seen at PP values lower than 40 mm Hg. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with advanced HFREF, a low PP (<40 mm Hg) portends a worse prognosis, whereas a high PP (>50 mm Hg) predicts a relatively favourable prognosis.

Resting Heart Rate and Ischemic Stroke in Patients with Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Although high resting heart rate (RHR) is known to be associated with an increased risk of mortality and hospital admission in patients with heart failure, the relationship between RHR and ischemic stroke remains unclear. This study is aimed at investigating the relationship between RHR and ischemic stroke in patients with heart failure in sinus rhythm. METHODS: We examined 2,060 patients with systolic heart failure in sinus rhythm from the Warfarin versus Aspirin in Reduced Cardiac Ejection Fraction trial. RHR was determined from baseline electrocardiogram, and was examined as both a continuous variable and a categorical variable using quartiles. Ischemic strokes were identified during follow-up and adjudicated by physician review. RESULTS: During 3.5 ± 1.8 years of follow-up, 77 patients (5.3% from Kaplan-Meier [KM] curve) experienced an ischemic stroke. The highest incidence of ischemic stroke (21/503 [KM 6.9%]) was observed in the lowest RHR quartile (RHR <64 beats/min) compared to other groups; 22/573 (KM 5.3%) in 64-70 beats/min, 13/465 (KM 3.5%) in 71-79 beats/min, and 21/519 (KM 5.4%) in RHR >79 beats/min (p = 0.693). Multivariable Cox proportional hazards analysis revealed that RHR was significantly associated with ischemic stroke (hazard ratio per unit decrease: 1.07, 95% CI 1.02-1.13, when RHR <64/beats/min; p = 0.038), along with a history of stroke or transient ischemic attack and left ventricular ejection fraction. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to its beneficial effect on mortality and hospital re-admissions, lower RHR may increase the risk of ischemic stroke in patients with systolic heart failure in sinus rhythm.

Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction and Risk of Stroke and Cardiac Events in Heart Failure: Data From the Warfarin Versus Aspirin in Reduced Ejection Fraction Trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In heart failure (HF), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is inversely associated with mortality and cardiovascular outcomes. Its relationship with stroke is controversial, as is the effect of antithrombotic treatment. We studied the relationship of LVEF with stroke and cardiovascular events in patients with HF and the effect of different antithrombotic treatments. METHODS: In the Warfarin Versus Aspirin in Reduced Ejection Fraction (WARCEF) trial, 2305 patients with systolic HF (LVEF≤35%) and sinus rhythm were randomized to warfarin or aspirin and followed for 3.5±1.8 years. Although no differences between treatments were observed on primary outcome (death, stroke, or intracerebral hemorrhage), warfarin decreased the stroke risk. The present report compares the incidence of stroke and cardiovascular events across different LVEF and treatment subgroups. RESULTS: Baseline LVEF was inversely and linearly associated with primary outcome, mortality and its components (sudden and cardiovascular death), and HF hospitalization, but not myocardial infarction. A relationship with stroke was only observed for LVEF of <15% (incidence rates: 2.04 versus 0.95/100 patient-years; P=0.009), which more than doubled the adjusted stroke risk (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.125; 95% CI, 1.182-3.818; P=0.012). In warfarin-treated patients, each 5% LVEF decrement significantly increased the stroke risk (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.346; 95% CI, 1.044-1.737; P=0.022; P value for interaction=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with systolic HF and sinus rhythm, LVEF is inversely associated with death and its components, whereas an association with stroke exists for very low LVEF values. An interaction with warfarin treatment on stroke risk may exist. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00041938.

Clinical and Echocardiographic Factors Associated With New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in Heart Failure　- Subanalysis of the WARCEF Trial.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) patients have a high incidence of new-onset AF. Given the adverse prognostic influence of AF in HF, identifying patients at high risk of developing AF is important. METHODS AND RESULTS: The incidence and factors associated with new-onset AF were investigated in patients in sinus rhythm with reduced LVEF enrolled in the Warfarin versus Aspirin in Reduced Cardiac Ejection Fraction (WARCEF) trial. Analyses involved clinical factors alone (n=2,219), and clinical plus echocardiographic findings (n=1,125). During 3.5±1.8 years of follow-up, 212 patients (9.6% of total cohort) developed AF. In both samples, new-onset AF was associated with age, male sex, White race, and IHD. Among echocardiographic variables, only LAD predicted AF. On multivariate Cox modeling, age (HR, 1.02; 95% CI: 1.00-1.03, P=0.008), IHD (HR, 1.37; 95% CI: 1.02-1.84, P=0.036) and LAD (HR, 1.48; 95% CI: 1.15-1.91, P=0.003) remained associated with AF onset. Patients with IHD, LAD>4.5 cm and age>50 years had a 2.5-fold higher risk of AF than patients without any of these characteristics (HR, 2.52; 95% CI: 1.72-3.69, P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Age, IHD and LAD independently predict new-onset AF in HF patients in sinus rhythm, at younger age and smaller LAD than generally believed. This information may be useful to risk-stratify HF patients for AF development, allowing close monitoring and possibly early detection. (Circ J 2016; 80: 619-626).

Warfarin and aspirin in patients with heart failure and sinus rhythm.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether warfarin or aspirin therapy is superior for patients with heart failure who are in sinus rhythm. METHODS: We designed this trial to determine whether warfarin (with a target international normalized ratio of 2.0 to 3.5) or aspirin (at a dose of 325 mg per day) is a better treatment for patients in sinus rhythm who have a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). We followed 2305 patients for up to 6 years (mean [±SD], 3.5±1.8). The primary outcome was the time to the first event in a composite end point of ischemic stroke, intracerebral hemorrhage, or death from any cause. RESULTS: The rates of the primary outcome were 7.47 events per 100 patient-years in the warfarin group and 7.93 in the aspirin group (hazard ratio with warfarin, 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.10; P=0.40). Thus, there was no significant overall difference between the two treatments. In a time-varying analysis, the hazard ratio changed over time, slightly favoring warfarin over aspirin by the fourth year of follow-up, but this finding was only marginally significant (P=0.046). Warfarin, as compared with aspirin, was associated with a significant reduction in the rate of ischemic stroke throughout the follow-up period (0.72 events per 100 patient-years vs. 1.36 per 100 patient-years; hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.82; P=0.005). The rate of major hemorrhage was 1.78 events per 100 patient-years in the warfarin group as compared with 0.87 in the aspirin group (P<0.001). The rates of intracerebral and intracranial hemorrhage did not differ significantly between the two treatment groups (0.27 events per 100 patient-years with warfarin and 0.22 with aspirin, P=0.82). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with reduced LVEF who were in sinus rhythm, there was no significant overall difference in the primary outcome between treatment with warfarin and treatment with aspirin. A reduced risk of ischemic stroke with warfarin was offset by an increased risk of major hemorrhage. The choice between warfarin and aspirin should be individualized. (Funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; WARCEF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00041938.).

Stroke in heart failure in sinus rhythm: the Warfarin versus Aspirin in Reduced Cardiac Ejection Fraction trial.

BACKGROUND: The Warfarin versus Aspirin in Reduced Cardiac Ejection Fraction trial found no difference between warfarin and aspirin in patients with low ejection fraction in sinus rhythm for the primary outcome: first to occur of 84 incident ischemic strokes (IIS), 7 intracerebral hemorrhages or 531 deaths. Prespecified secondary analysis showed a 48% hazard ratio reduction (p = 0.005) for warfarin in IIS. Cardioembolism is likely the main pathogenesis of stroke in heart failure. We examined the IIS benefit for warfarin in more detail in post hoc secondary analyses. METHODS: We subtyped IIS into definite, possible and noncardioembolic using the Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation method. Statistical tests, stratified by prior ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack, were the conditional binomial for independent Poisson variables for rates, the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test for stroke subtype and the van Elteren test for modified Rankin Score (mRS) and National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) distributions, and an exact test for proportions. RESULTS: Twenty-nine of 1,142 warfarin and 55 of 1,163 aspirin patients had IIS. The warfarin IIS rate (0.727/100 patient-years, PY) was lower than for aspirin (1.36/100 PY, p = 0.003). Definite cardioembolic IIS was less frequent on warfarin than aspirin (0.22 vs. 0.55/100 PY, p = 0.012). Possible cardioembolic IIS tended to be less frequent on warfarin than aspirin (0.37 vs. 0.67/100 PY, p = 0.063) but noncardioembolic IIS showed no difference: 5 (0.12/100 PY) versus 6 (0.15/100 PY, p = 0.768). Among patients experiencing IIS, there were no differences by treatment arm in fatal IIS, baseline mRS, mRS 90 days after IIS, and change from baseline to post-IIS mRS. The warfarin arm showed a trend to a lower proportion of severe nonfatal IIS [mRS 3-5; 3/23 (13.0%) vs. 16/48 (33.3%), p = 0.086]. There was no difference in NIHSS at the time of stroke (p = 0.825) or in post-IIS mRS (p = 0.948) between cardioembolic, possible cardioembolic and noncardioembolic stroke including both warfarin and aspirin groups. CONCLUSIONS: The observed benefits in the reduction of IIS for warfarin compared to aspirin are most significant for cardioembolic IIS among patients with low ejection fraction in sinus rhythm. This is supported by trends to lower frequencies of severe IIS and possible cardioembolic IIS in patients on warfarin compared to aspirin.

Risk of hemorrhagic transformation with early use of direct oral anticoagulants after acute ischemic stroke: A pooled analysis of prospective studies and randomized trials.

INTRODUCTION: Precise risk of hemorrhagic transformation (HT) in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) remains unknown, leading to delays in anticoagulation initiation for secondary stroke prevention. We sought to assess the rate of HT associated with direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) initiation within and beyond 48 h post-AIS. METHODS: A pooled analysis of DOAC initiation within 14 days of AIS or transient ischemic attack (TIA) was conducted with six studies (four prospective open label treatment, blinded outcome studies and two randomized trials; NCT02295826 and NCT02283294). The primary endpoint was incident radiographic HT on follow-up imaging (days 7-30). Secondary endpoints included symptomatic HT, new parenchymal hemorrhage, recurrent ischemic events, extracranial hemorrhage, study period mortality, and follow-up modified Rankin Scale score. The results were reported as odds ratio (OR) or hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: We evaluated 509 patients; median infarct volume was 1.5 (0.1-7.8) ml, and median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale was 2 (0-3). Incident radiographic HT was seen on follow-up scan in 34 (6.8%) patients. DOAC initiation within 48 h from index event was not associated with incident HT (adjusted OR 0.67, [0.30-1.50] P = 0.32). No patients developed symptomatic HT. Conversely, 31 (6.1%) patients developed recurrent ischemic events, 64% of which occurred within 14 days. Initiating a DOAC within 48 h of onset was associated with similar recurrent ischemic event rates compared with those in which treatment was delayed (HR: 0.42, [0.17-1.008] P = 0.052). In contrast to HT, recurrent ischemic events were associated with poor functional outcomes (OR = 6.8, [2.84-16.24], p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this pooled analysis, initiation of DOAC within 48 h post-stroke was not associated with increased incident risk of HT, and none developed symptomatic HT. The analysis was underpowered to determine the effect of early DOAC use upon recurrent ischemic events.

ACCF/ASE/ACEP/AHA/ASNC/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR 2008 appropriateness criteria for stress echocardiography: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriateness Criteria Task Force, American Society of Echocardiography, American College of Emergency Physicians, American Heart Association, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, and Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance: endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society and the Society of Critical Care Medicine.

The American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF) and the American Society of Echocardiography (ASE) together with key specialty and subspecialty societies, conducted an appropriateness review for stress echocardiography. The review assessed the risks and benefits of stress echocardiography for several indications or clinical scenarios and scored them on a scale of 1 to 9 (based upon methodology developed by the ACCF to assess imaging appropriateness). The upper range (7 to 9) implies that the test is generally acceptable and is a reasonable approach, and the lower range (1 to 3) implies that the test is generally not acceptable and is not a reasonable approach. The midrange (4 to 6) indicates a clinical scenario for which the indication for a stress echocardiogram is uncertain. The indications for this review were drawn from common applications or anticipated uses, as well as from current clinical practice guidelines. Use of stress echocardiography for risk assessment in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) was viewed favorably, while routine repeat testing and general screening in certain clinical scenarios were viewed less favorably. It is anticipated that these results will have a significant impact on physician decision making and performance, reimbursement policy, and will help guide future research.

Comparison of myocardial contrast echocardiography derived myocardial perfusion reserve with invasive determination of coronary flow reserve.

AIMS: Invasive measurements of coronary flow reserve (CFR) by Doppler flow wire are an established method for determining coronary blood flow physiology. Myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) is a potential non-invasive method for quantifying myocardial blood flow (MBF). However, few studies have compared MCE-derived myocardial perfusion reserve (MPR) with Doppler flow wire-derived CFR, measured simultaneously in human subjects. This study aimed to correlate MCE-derived MPR with Doppler flow wire-derived CFR. METHODS AND RESULTS: Ten patients with at least two angiographically normal coronary arteries underwent simultaneous invasive Doppler flow wire measurements and MCE imaging at rest and at peak hyperaemia. Hyperaemia was induced by intravenous adenosine infusion. Doppler-derived CFR was calculated as the ratio of hyperaemic to baseline average peak red blood cell velocity. MPR was calculated as the hyperaemic to baseline ratio of the following parameters: myocardial blood volume (MBV), myocardial microbubble velocity (MMV), and MBF. MCE was performed using real-time and triggered imaging with contrast infused intravenously by bolus and continuous methods. Regardless of whether the contrast was infused by bolus or continuous methods, Doppler flow wire-derived CFR had a stronger correlation with MPR derived by MBV (r=0.8, P=0.05) than with MPR derived by microbubble velocity (r=0.3, P>0.05) or MBF (r=0.4, P>0.05). Real-time imaging with continuous infusion provided better correlation with CFR than triggered imaging methods or bolus administration. CONCLUSION: Myocardial perfusion reserve derived by real-time infusion MBV measurements correlates with Doppler flow wire-derived CFR. Therefore, MPR may be a potential surrogate for Doppler flow wire-derived CFR in patients with angiographically normal coronary arteries.

Prevention of Diabetes Mellitus in Patients With Prediabetes.

Cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of death in patients with diabetes. Consequently, as antidiabetic medications have demonstrated cardiovascular benefit, cardiologists have been asked to weigh in regarding antidiabetic therapy. The cardiologist's role will continue to grow as antidiabetic agents with cardiovascular benefit are being studied in prediabetes as part of an evolving clinical environment. Still, current guidelines primarily recommend high-intensity lifestyle intervention or metformin for diabetes prevention. Considering that many patients cared for by a cardiologist will have prediabetes, we propose herein that cardiologists can also facilitate diabetes prevention through direct intervention, referring patients to community-based high-intensity lifestyle interventions, and through advocacy, policy, and additional guideline development. The most important messaging for a patient is that avoiding new-onset diabetes can reduce microvascular disease, reduce healthcare cost, and improve health-related quality of life. Moreover, as the mortality risk of patients with a history of myocardial infarction and diabetes is almost double that of patients with a history of myocardial infarction who are free of diabetes, there is even more potential benefit in delaying and/or avoiding diabetes in patients with cardiovascular disease. Despite these important health advantages, the implementation of diabetes prevention strategies is lagging. The under implementation may be exaggerated by published opinions conflicting major guidelines in addition to conflicting guideline recommendations. In conclusion, we propose cardiologists can play a key role in preventing diabetes and aligning practice patterns with guideline recommendations among endocrinology, cardiology, and primary care stake holders.

Protocol for AREST: Apixaban for Early Prevention of Recurrent Embolic Stroke and Hemorrhagic Transformation-A Randomized Controlled Trial of Early Anticoagulation After Acute Ischemic Stroke in Atrial Fibrillation.

Background: Optimal timing to initiate anticoagulation after acute ischemic stroke (AIS) from atrial fibrillation (AF) is currently unknown. Compared to other stroke etiologies, AF typically provokes larger infarct volumes and greater concern of hemorrhagic transformation, so seminal randomized trials waited weeks to months to begin anticoagulation after initial stroke. Subsequent data are limited and non-randomized. Guidelines suggest anticoagulation initiation windows between 3 and 14 days post-stroke, with Class IIa recommendations, and level of evidence B in the USA and C in Europe. Aims: This open-label, parallel-group, multi-center, randomized controlled trial AREST (Apixaban for Early Prevention of Recurrent Embolic Stroke and Hemorrhagic Transformation) is designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of early anticoagulation, based on stroke size, secondary prevention of ischemic stroke, and risks of subsequent hemorrhagic transformation. Methods: Subjects are randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive early apixaban at day 0-3 for transient ischemic attack (TIA), 3-5 for small-sized AIS (<1.5 cm), and 7-9 for medium-sized AIS (1.5 cm or greater but less than a full cortical territory), or warfarin at 1 week post-TIA or 2 weeks post-stroke. Large AISs are excluded. Study Outcomes: Primary: recurrent ischemic stroke, TIA, and fatal stroke; secondary: intracranial hemorrhage (ICH); hemorrhagic transformation (HT) of ischemic stroke; cerebral microbleeds (CMBs); neurologic disability [e.g., modified Rankin Scores (mRS), National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), Stroke Specific Quality of Life scale (SS-QOL)]; and cardiac biomarkers [e.g., AF burden, transthoracic echo (TTE)/transesophageal echo (TEE) abnormalities]. Sample Size Estimates: Enrollment goal was 120 for 80% power (two-sided type I error rate of 0.05) to detect an absolute risk reduction of 16.5% postulated to occur with apixaban in the primary composite outcome of fatal stroke/recurrent ischemic stroke/TIA within 180 days. Enrollment was suspended at 91 subjects in 2019 after a focused guideline update recommended direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) over warfarin in AF, excepting valvular disease (Class I, level of evidence A). Discussion: AREST will offer randomized controlled trial data about timeliness and safety of anticoagulation in AIS patients with AF. Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT02283294.

Association between mortality and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators by aetiology of heart failure: a propensity-matched analysis of the WARCEF trial.

AIMS: There is debate on whether the beneficial effect of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) is attenuated in patients with non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (NICM). We assess whether any ICD benefit differs between patients with NICM and those with ischaemic cardiomyopathy (ICM), using data from the Warfarin versus Aspirin in Reduced Cardiac Ejection Fraction (WARCEF) trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a post hoc analysis using WARCEF (N = 2293; ICM, n = 991 vs. NICM, n = 1302), where participants received optimal medical treatment. We developed stratified propensity scores for having an ICD at baseline using 41 demographic and clinical variables and created 1:2 propensity-matched cohorts separately for ICM patients with ICD (N = 223 with ICD; N = 446 matched) and NICM patients (N = 195 with ICD; N = 390 matched). We constructed a Cox proportional hazards model to assess the effect of ICD status on mortality for patients with ICM and those with NICM and tested the interaction between ICD status and aetiology of heart failure. During mean follow-up of 3.5 ± 1.8 years, 527 patients died. The presence of ICD was associated with a lower risk of all-cause death among those with ICM (hazard ratio: 0.640; 95% confidence interval: 0.448 to 0.915; P = 0.015) but not among those with NICM (hazard ratio: 0.984; 95% confidence interval: 0.641 to 1.509; P = 0.941). There was weak evidence of interaction between ICD status and the aetiology of heart failure (P = 0.131). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of ICD is associated with a survival benefit in patients with ICM but not in those with NICM.

Cognitive Decline Over Time in Patients With Systolic Heart Failure: Insights From WARCEF.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to characterize cognitive decline (CD) over time and its predictors in patients with systolic heart failure (HF). BACKGROUND: Despite the high prevalence of CD and its impact on mortality, predictors of CD in HF have not been established. METHODS: This study investigated CD in the WARCEF (Warfarin versus Aspirin in Reduced Ejection Fraction) trial, which performed yearly Mini-Mental State Examinations (MMSE) (higher scores indicate better cognitive function; e.g., normal score: 24 or higher). A longitudinal time-varying analysis was performed among pertinent covariates, including baseline MMSE and MMSE scores during follow-up, analyzed both as a continuous variable and a 2-point decrease. To account for a loss to follow-up, data at the baseline and at the 12-month visit were analyzed separately (sensitivity analysis). RESULTS: A total of 1,846 patients were included. In linear regression, MMSE decrease was independently associated with higher baseline MMSE score (p < 0.0001), older age (p < 0.0001), nonwhite race/ethnicity (p < 0.0001), and lower education (p < 0.0001). In logistic regression, CD was independently associated with higher baseline MMSE scores (odds ratio [OR]: 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.07 to 1.20]; p < 0.001), older age (OR: 1.37; 95% CI: 1.24 to 1.50; p < 0.001), nonwhite race/ethnicity (OR: 2.32; 95% CI: 1.72 to 3.13 for black; OR: 1.94; 95% CI: 1.40 to 2.69 for Hispanic vs. white; p < 0.001), lower education (p < 0.001), and New York Heart Association functional class II or higher (p = 0.03). Warfarin and other medications were not associated with CD. Similar trends were seen in the sensitivity analysis (n = 1,439). CONCLUSIONS: CD in HF is predicted by baseline cognitive status, demographic variables, and NYHA functional class. The possibility of intervening on some of its predictors suggests the need for the frequent assessment of cognitive function in patients with HF. (Warfarin versus Aspirin in Reduced Cardiac Ejection Fraction [WARCEF]; NCT00041938).

ACCF/ASE/ACEP/AHA/ASNC/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR 2008 Appropriateness Criteria for Stress Echocardiography. A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriateness Criteria Task Force, American Society of Echocardiography, American College of Emergency Physicians, American Heart Association, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, and Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society and the Society of Critical Care Medicine.

The American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF) and the American Society of Echocardiography (ASE) together with key specialty and subspecialty societies, conducted an appropriateness review for stress echocardiography. The review assessed the risks and benefits of stress echocardiography for several indications or clinical scenarios and scored them on a scale of 1 to 9 (based upon methodology developed by the ACCF to assess imaging appropriateness). The upper range (7 to 9) implies that the test is generally acceptable and is a reasonable approach, and the lower range (1 to 3) implies that the test is generally not acceptable and is not a reasonable approach. The midrange (4 to 6) indicates a clinical scenario for which the indication for a stress echocardiogram is uncertain. The indications for this review were drawn from common applications or anticipated uses, as well as from current clinical practice guidelines. Use of stress echocardiography for risk assessment in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) was viewed favorably, while routine repeat testing and general screening in certain clinical scenarios were viewed less favorably. It is anticipated that these results will have a significant impact on physician decision making and performance, reimbursement policy, and will help guide future research.

Three Episodes of Takotsubo Cardiomyopathy with Variant Ballooning Patterns in 2 Elderly Women.

Takotsubo cardiomyopathy can present with transient apical, midventricular, or basal left ventricular ballooning patterns. Reported recurrences of this cardiomyopathy are few. We present the cases of 2 elderly women who each had 3 episodes of takotsubo cardiomyopathy in various ballooning patterns. We explore the potential pathophysiologic mechanisms, and we discuss the best treatment approach for this disease, which carries a substantial risk of in-hospital complications.

Heart Failure Severity and Quality of Warfarin Anticoagulation Control (From the WARCEF Trial).

Previous studies in patients with atrial fibrillation showed that a history of heart failure (HF) could negatively impact anticoagulation quality, as measured by the average time in therapeutic range (TTR). Whether additional markers of HF severity are associated with TTR has not been investigated thoroughly. We aimed to examine the potential role of HF severity in the quality of warfarin control in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction. Data from the Warfarin versus Aspirin in Reduced Cardiac Ejection Fraction Trial were used to investigate the association between TTR and HF severity. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine the association of markers of HF severity, including New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, Minnesota Living with HF (MLWHF) score, and frequency of HF hospitalization, with TTR ≥70% (high TTR). We included 1,067 participants (high TTR, N = 413; low TTR, N = 654) in the analysis. In unadjusted analysis, patients with a high TTR were older and less likely to have had strokes or receive other antiplatelet agents. Those patients also had lower NYHA class, better MLWHF scores, greater 6-minute walk distance, and lower frequency of HF hospitalizations. Multivariable analysis showed that NYHA class III and/or IV (Odds ratio [OR] 0.68 [95% confidence intervals [CIs] 0.49 to 0.94]), each 10-point increase in MLWHF score (i.e., worse health-related quality of life) (OR 0.92 [0.86 to 0.99]), and higher number of HF hospitalization per year (OR0.45 [0.30 to 0.67]) were associated with decreased likelihood of having high TTR. In HF patients with systolic dysfunction, NYHA class III and/or IV, poor health-related quality of life, and a higher rate of HF hospitalization were independently associated with suboptimal quality of warfarin anticoagulation control. These results affirm the need to assess the new approaches, such as direct oral anticoagulants, to prevent thromboembolism in this patient population.

Left atrial volume and cardiovascular outcomes in systolic heart failure: effect of antithrombotic treatment.

AIMS: Left atrium (LA) dilation is associated with adverse cardiovascular (CV) outcomes. Blood stasis, thrombus formation and atrial fibrillation may occur, especially in heart failure (HF) patients. It is not known whether preventive antithrombotic treatment may decrease the incidence of CV events in HF patients with LA enlargement. We investigated the relationship between LA enlargement and CV outcomes in HF patients and the effect of different antithrombotic treatments. METHODS AND RESULTS: Two-dimensional echocardiography with LA volume index (LAVi) measurement was performed in 1148 patients with systolic HF from the Warfarin versus Aspirin in Reduced Ejection Fraction (WARCEF) trial. Patients were randomized to warfarin or aspirin and followed for 3.4 ± 1.7 years. While the primary aim of the trial was a composite of ischaemic stroke, death, and intracerebral haemorrhage, the present report focuses on the individual CV events, whose incidence was compared across different LAVi and treatment subgroups. After adjustment for demographics and clinical covariates, moderate or severe LA enlargement was significantly associated with total death (hazard ratio 1.6 and 2.7, respectively), CV death (HR 1.7 and 3.3), and HF hospitalization (HR 2.3 and 2.6) but not myocardial infarction (HR 1.0 and 1.4) or ischaemic stroke (1.1 and 1.5). The increased risk was observed in both patients treated with warfarin or aspirin. In warfarin-treated patients, a time in therapeutic range >60% was associated with lower event rates, and an interaction between LAVi and time in therapeutic range was observed for death (P = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with systolic HF, moderate or severe LA enlargement is associated with death and HF hospitalization despite treatment with antithrombotic medications. The possibility that achieving a more consistent therapeutic level of anticoagulation may decrease the risk of death requires further investigation.