New York Heart Association functional class and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in non-ischaemic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: Extended follow-up of the DANISH trial.

AIMS: Current guidelines recommend implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy in patients with heart failure, a left ventricular ejection fraction of ≤35%, and New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II-III. However, the evidence regarding the benefit of primary prevention ICD is less consistent in patients with NYHA class III. We investigated the long-term effects of primary prevention ICD implantation according to NYHA class in an extended follow-up study of the DANISH trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: The DANISH trial randomized 1116 patients with non-ischaemic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) to ICD implantation or usual care. Outcomes were analysed according to NYHA class at baseline (NYHA class II and III/IV). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Of the 1116 patients randomized in the DANISH trial, 597 (53.5%) were in NYHA class II at baseline, 505 (45.3%) in NYHA class III, and 14 (1.3%) in NYHA class IV. During a median follow-up of 9.5 years, NYHA class III/IV, compared with NYHA class II, were associated with a greater long-term rate of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 1.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.20-1.93) and cardiovascular death (HR 1.95 [1.47-2.60]). ICD implantation, compared with usual care, did not reduce the long-term rate of all-cause mortality (all participants: HR 0.89 [95% CI 0.74-1.08]; NYHA class II: HR 0.85 [0.64-1.13]; NYHA class III/IV: HR 0.89 [0.69-1.14]; pinteraction = 0.78) or cardiovascular death (all participants: HR 0.87 [95% CI 0.70-1.09]; NYHA class II: HR 0.78 [0.54-1.12]; NYHA class III/IV: HR 0.89 [0.67-1.19]; pinteraction = 0.58), irrespective of NYHA class. Similarly, NYHA class did not modify the beneficial effects of ICD implantation on sudden cardiovascular death (all participants: HR 0.60 [95% CI 0.40-0.92]; NYHA class II: HR 0.73 [0.40-1.36]; NYHA class III/IV: HR 0.52 [0.29-0.94]; pinteraction = 0.39). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with non-ischaemic HFrEF, ICD implantation, compared with usual care, did not reduce the overall mortality rate, but it did reduce sudden cardiovascular death, regardless of baseline NYHA class. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00542945.

Validation of the newly developed Sleep Screening Questionnaire Children and Adolescents (SSQ-CA) with objective sleep measures.

OBJECTIVES: Objectively validated pediatric sleep questionnaires covering a broader age range and different sleep disturbances are lacking, therefore we developed the Sleep Screening Questionnaire Children and Adolescents (SSQ-CA) and compared it with objective sleep parameters. METHODS: This child-reported questionnaire was developed by a multidisciplinary panel and face validated. In a cross-sectional prospective design, participants aged 6-17, answered the questionnaire twice with 21-28 days in between, wore actigraphy (AG) and kept a sleep diary for seven nights and home-polysomnography (PSG) for one of these nights. Exploratory factor analyses (EFA), reliability and validity assessments were performed. RESULTS: Of the 139 participants, 128 (F:47.7%, AG: n = 128, PSG: n = 59), were included in the analyses. Mean age: 11.3 years (SD: 2.9). EFA revealed 11 factors and 40 items loading above r = 0.4. Subscale internal consistency: 0.54-0.92. Subscale test-retest reliability: r = 0.71-0.87. Total sleep time (TST) from SSQ-CA on weekdays correlated with PSG (r = 0.48, p = 0.001) and with AG (r = 0.75, p < 0.001). The subscale total score for "Sleep duration and latency" correlated with TST from AG (r = -0.19, p = 0.03) and sleep latency (r = 0.31, p < 0.001), but not for PSG variables. The subscale "Awakenings" showed no correlation with objective measures whereas "Circadian rhythm" correlated to AG-derived mid-sleep time (r = 0.34, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The SSQ-CA shows adequate reliability for the 6-17-year-olds and acceptable criterion validity for two subscales. It appears to be a useful tool for screening for sleep disturbances in combination with objective tools as the subjective and objective parameters seem to uncover different aspects of sleep.