Redefining the molecular rejection states in 3230 heart transplant biopsies: Relationships to parenchymal injury and graft survival.

The first-generation Molecular Microscope (MMDx) system for heart transplant endomyocardial biopsies used expression of rejection-associated transcripts (RATs) to diagnose not only T cell-mediated rejection (TCMR) and antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) but also acute injury. However, the ideal system should detect rejection without being influenced by injury, to permit analysis of the relationship between rejection and parenchymal injury. To achieve this, we developed a new rejection classification in an expanded cohort of 3230 biopsies: 1641 from INTERHEART (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02670408), plus 1589 service biopsies added to improve the power of the machine learning algorithms. The new system used 6 rejection classifiers instead of RATs and generated 7 rejection archetypes: No rejection, 48%; Minor, 24%; TCMR1, 2.3%; TCMR2, 2.7%; TCMR/mixed, 2.7%; early-stage ABMR, 3.9%; and fully developed ABMR, 16%. Using rejection classifiers eliminated cross-reactions with acute injury, permitting separate assessment of rejection and injury. TCMR was associated with severe-recent injury and late atrophy-fibrosis and rarely had normal parenchyma. ABMR was better tolerated, seldom producing severe injury, but in later biopsies was often associated with atrophy-fibrosis, indicating long-term risk. Graft survival and left ventricular ejection fraction were reduced not only in hearts with TCMR but also in hearts with severe-recent injury and atrophy-fibrosis, even without rejection.

Molecular states associated with dysfunction and graft loss in heart transplants.

BACKGROUND: We explored the changes in gene expression correlating with dysfunction and graft failure in endomyocardial biopsies. METHODS: Genome-wide microarrays (19,462 genes) were used to define mRNA changes correlating with dysfunction (left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] ≤ 55) and risk of graft loss within 3 years postbiopsy. LVEF data was available for 1,013 biopsies and survival data for 779 patients (74 losses). Molecular classifiers were built for predicting dysfunction (LVEF ≤ 55) and postbiopsy 3-year survival. RESULTS: Dysfunction is correlated with dedifferentiation-decreased expression of normal heart transcripts, for example, solute carriers, along with increased expression of inflammation genes. Many genes with reduced expression in dysfunction were matrix genes such as fibulin 1 and decorin. Gene ontology (GO) categories suggested matrix remodeling and inflammation, not rejection. Genes associated with the risk of failure postbiopsy overlapped dysfunction genes but also included genes affecting microcirculation, for example, arginase 2, which reduces NO production, and endothelin 1. GO terms also reflected increased glycolysis and response to hypoxia, but decreased VEGF and angiogenesis pathways. T cell-mediated rejection was associated with reduced survival and antibody-mediated rejection with relatively good survival, but the main determinants of survival were features of parenchymal injury. Both dysfunction and graft loss were correlated with increased biopsy expression of BNP (gene NPPB). Survival probability classifiers divided hearts into risk quintiles, with actuarial 3-year postbiopsy survival >95% for the highest versus 50% for the lowest. CONCLUSIONS: Dysfunction in transplanted hearts reflects dedifferentiation, decreased matrix genes, injury, and inflammation. The risk of short-term loss includes these changes but is also associated with microcirculation abnormalities, glycolysis, and response to hypoxia.

Assessing the Relationship Between Molecular Rejection and Parenchymal Injury in Heart Transplant Biopsies.

BACKGROUND: The INTERHEART study (ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT02670408) used genome-wide microarrays to detect rejection in endomyocardial biopsies; however, many heart transplants with no rejection have late dysfunction and impaired survival. We used the microarray measurements to develop a molecular classification of parenchymal injury. METHODS: In 1320 endomyocardial biopsies from 645 patients previously studied for rejection-associated transcripts, we measured the expression of 10 injury-induced transcript sets: 5 induced by recent injury; 2 reflecting macrophage infiltration; 2 normal heart transcript sets; and immunoglobulin transcripts, which correlate with time. We used archetypal clustering to assign injury groups. RESULTS: Injury transcript sets correlated with impaired function. Archetypal clustering based on the expression of injury transcript sets assigned each biopsy to 1 of 5 injury groups: 87 Severe-injury, 221 Late-injury, and 3 with lesser degrees of injury, 376 No-injury, 526 Mild-injury, and 110 Moderate-injury. Severe-injury had extensive loss of normal transcripts (dedifferentiation) and increase in macrophage and injury-induced transcripts. Late-injury was characterized by high immunoglobulin transcript expression. In Severe- and Late-injury, function was depressed, and short-term graft failure was increased, even in hearts with no rejection. T cell-mediated rejection almost always had parenchymal injury, and 85% had Severe- or Late-injury. In contrast, early antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) had little injury, but late AMR often had the Late-injury state. CONCLUSIONS: Characterizing heart transplants for their injury state provides new understanding of dysfunction and outcomes and demonstrates the differential impact of T cell-mediated rejection versus AMR on the parenchyma. Slow deterioration from AMR emerges as a major contributor to late dysfunction.

Many heart transplant biopsies currently diagnosed as no rejection have mild molecular antibody-mediated rejection-related changes.

BACKGROUND: The Molecular Microscope (MMDx) system classifies heart transplant endomyocardial biopsies as No-rejection (NR), Early-injury, T cell-mediated (TCMR), antibody-mediated (ABMR), mixed, and possible rejection (possible TCMR, possible ABMR). Rejection-like gene expression patterns in NR biopsies have not been described. We extended the MMDx methodology, using a larger data set, to define a new "Minor" category characterized by low-level inflammation in non-rejecting biopsies. METHODS: Using MMDx criteria from a previous study, molecular rejection was assessed in 1,320 biopsies (645 patients) using microarray expression of rejection-associated transcripts (RATs). Of these biopsies, 819 were NR. A new archetypal analysis model in the 1,320 data set split the NRs into NR-Normal (N = 462) and NR-Minor (N = 359). RESULTS: Compared to NR-Normal, NR-Minor were more often histologic TCMR1R, with a higher prevalence of donor-specific antibody (DSA). DSA positivity increased in a gradient: NR-Normal 24%; NR-Minor 34%; possible ABMR 42%; ABMR 66%. The top 20 transcripts distinguishing NR-Minor from NR-Normal were all ABMR-related and/or IFNG-inducible, and also exhibited a gradient of increasing expression from NR-Normal through ABMR. In random forest analysis, TCMR and Early-injury were associated with reduced LVEF and increased graft loss, but NR-Minor and ABMR scores were not. Surprisingly, hearts with MMDx ABMR showed comparatively little graft loss. CONCLUSIONS: Many heart transplants currently diagnosed as NR by histologic or molecular assessment have minor increases in ABMR-related and IFNG-inducible transcripts, associated with DSA positivity and mild histologic inflammation. These results suggest that low-level ABMR-related molecular stress may be operating in many more hearts than previously estimated. (ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT02670408).

Assessment of Omecamtiv Mecarbil for the Treatment of Patients With Severe Heart Failure: A Post Hoc Analysis of Data From the GALACTIC-HF Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction is a progressive clinical syndrome, and many patients' condition worsen over time despite treatment. Patients with more severe disease are often intolerant of available medical therapies. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of omecamtiv mecarbil for the treatment of patients with severe heart failure (HF) enrolled in the Global Approach to Lowering Adverse Cardiac Outcomes Through Improving Contractility in Heart Failure (GALACTIC-HF) randomized clinical trial. Design, Setting, and Participants: The GALACTIC-HF study was a global double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 randomized clinical trial that was conducted at multiple centers between January 2017 and August 2020. A total of 8232 patients with symptomatic HF (defined as New York Heart Association symptom class II-IV) and left ventricular ejection fraction of 35% or less were randomized to receive omecamtiv mecarbil or placebo and followed up for a median of 21.8 months (range, 15.4-28.6 months). The current post hoc analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of omecamtiv mecarbil therapy among patients classified as having severe HF compared with patients without severe HF. Severe HF was defined as the presence of all of the following criteria: New York Heart Association symptom class III to IV, left ventricular ejection fraction of 30% or less, and hospitalization for HF within the previous 6 months. Interventions: Participants were randomized at a 1:1 ratio to receive either omecamtiv mecarbil or placebo. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was time to first HF event or cardiovascular (CV) death. Secondary end points included time to CV death and safety and tolerability. Results: Among 8232 patients enrolled in the GALACTIC-HF clinical trial, 2258 patients (27.4%; mean [SD] age, 64.5 [11.6] years; 1781 men [78.9%]) met the specified criteria for severe HF. Of those, 1106 patients were randomized to the omecamtiv mecarbil group and 1152 to the placebo group. Patients with severe HF who received omecamtiv mecarbil experienced a significant treatment benefit for the primary end point (hazard ratio [HR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71-0.90), whereas patients without severe HF had no significant treatment benefit (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.91-1.08; P = .005 for interaction). For CV death, the results were similar (HR for patients with vs without severe HF: 0.88 [95% CI, 0.75-1.03] vs 1.10 [95% CI, 0.97-1.25]; P = .03 for interaction). Omecamtiv mecarbil therapy was well tolerated in patients with severe HF, with no significant changes in blood pressure, kidney function, or potassium level compared with placebo. Conclusions and Relevance: In this post hoc analysis of data from the GALACTIC-HF clinical trial, omecamtiv mecarbil therapy may have provided a clinically meaningful reduction in the composite end point of time to first HF event or CV death among patients with severe HF. These data support a potential role of omecamtiv mecarbil therapy among patients for whom current treatment options are limited. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02929329.

Guidance on the management of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) supported patients for the non-LVAD specialist healthcare provider: executive summary.

The accepted use of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) technology as a good alternative for the treatment of patients with advanced heart failure together with the improved survival of patients on the device and the scarcity of donor hearts has significantly increased the population of LVAD supported patients. Device-related, and patient-device interaction complications impose a significant burden on the medical system exceeding the capacity of LVAD implanting centres. The probability of an LVAD supported patient presenting with medical emergency to a local ambulance team, emergency department medical team and internal or surgical wards in a non-LVAD implanting centre is increasing. The purpose of this paper is to supply the immediate tools needed by the non-LVAD specialized physician - ambulance clinicians, emergency ward physicians, general cardiologists, and internists - to comply with the medical needs of this fast-growing population of LVAD supported patients. The different issues discussed will follow the patient's pathway from the ambulance to the emergency department, and from the emergency department to the internal or surgical wards and eventually back to the general practitioner.

Levosimendan Efficacy and Safety: 20 Years of SIMDAX in Clinical Use.

Levosimendan was first approved for clinical use in 2000, when authorization was granted by Swedish regulatory authorities for the hemodynamic stabilization of patients with acutely decompensated chronic heart failure (HF). In the ensuing 20 years, this distinctive inodilator, which enhances cardiac contractility through calcium sensitization and promotes vasodilatation through the opening of adenosine triphosphate-dependent potassium channels on vascular smooth muscle cells, has been approved in more than 60 jurisdictions, including most of the countries of the European Union and Latin America. Areas of clinical application have expanded considerably and now include cardiogenic shock, takotsubo cardiomyopathy, advanced HF, right ventricular failure, pulmonary hypertension, cardiac surgery, critical care, and emergency medicine. Levosimendan is currently in active clinical evaluation in the United States. Levosimendan in IV formulation is being used as a research tool in the exploration of a wide range of cardiac and noncardiac disease states. A levosimendan oral form is at present under evaluation in the management of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. To mark the 20 years since the advent of levosimendan in clinical use, 51 experts from 23 European countries (Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and Ukraine) contributed to this essay, which evaluates one of the relatively few drugs to have been successfully introduced into the acute HF arena in recent times and charts a possible development trajectory for the next 20 years.

Levosimendan Efficacy and Safety: 20 years of SIMDAX in Clinical Use.

Levosimendan was first approved for clinic use in 2000, when authorisation was granted by Swedish regulatory authorities for the haemodynamic stabilisation of patients with acutely decompensated chronic heart failure. In the ensuing 20 years, this distinctive inodilator, which enhances cardiac contractility through calcium sensitisation and promotes vasodilatation through the opening of adenosine triphosphate-dependent potassium channels on vascular smooth muscle cells, has been approved in more than 60 jurisdictions, including most of the countries of the European Union and Latin America. Areas of clinical application have expanded considerably and now include cardiogenic shock, takotsubo cardiomyopathy, advanced heart failure, right ventricular failure and pulmonary hypertension, cardiac surgery, critical care and emergency medicine. Levosimendan is currently in active clinical evaluation in the US. Levosimendan in IV formulation is being used as a research tool in the exploration of a wide range of cardiac and non-cardiac disease states. A levosimendan oral form is at present under evaluation in the management of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. To mark the 20 years since the advent of levosimendan in clinical use, 51 experts from 23 European countries (Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, UK and Ukraine) contributed to this essay, which evaluates one of the relatively few drugs to have been successfully introduced into the acute heart failure arena in recent times and charts a possible development trajectory for the next 20 years.

Prevalence and Correlates of Cost-Related Medication Nonadherence to Immunosuppressive Drugs After Heart Transplantation: The International Multicenter Cross-sectional Bright Study.

BACKGROUND: Cost-related medication nonadherence (CRMNA) refers to not taking medications as prescribed because of difficulties paying for them. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were (1) to assess the prevalence of CRMNA to immunosuppressants in heart transplant recipients internationally and (2) to determine multilevel correlates (patient, center, and healthcare system levels) of CRMNA. METHODS: Using data from the cross-sectional international BRIGHT study, applying multistaged sampling, CRMNA was assessed via 3 self-report items in 1365 patients from 36 heart transplant centers in 11 countries. Cost-related medication nonadherence was defined as any positive answer on any of the 3 items. Healthcare system-level (ie, insurance coverage, out-of-pocket expenditures) and patient-level (ie, intention, perceived financial burden, cost as a barrier, a health belief regarding medication benefits, cost-related self-efficacy, and demographic factors) CRMNA correlates were assessed. Correlates were examined using mixed logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Across all study countries, CRMNA had an average prevalence of 2.6% (range, 0% [Switzerland/Brazil] to 9.8% [Australia]) and was positively related to being single (odds ratio, 2.29; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-4.47), perceived financial burden (odds ratio, 2.15; 95% confidence interval, 1.55-2.99), and cost as a barrier (odds ratio, 2.60; 95% confidence interval, 1.66-4.07). Four protective factors were identified: white ethnicity (odds ratio, 0.37; 95% confidence interval, 0.19-0.74), intention to adhere (odds ratio, 0.44; 95% confidence interval, 0.31-0.63), self-efficacy (odds ratio, 0.54; 95% confidence interval, 0.43-0.67), and belief about medication benefit (odds ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.57-0.87). Regarding variability, 81.3% was explained at the patient level; 13.8%, at the center level; and 4.8%, at the country level. CONCLUSION: In heart transplant recipients, the CRMNA prevalence varies across countries but is lower than in other chronically ill populations. Identified patient-level correlates are novel (ie, intention to adhere, cost-related barriers, and cost-related self-efficacy) and indicate patient-perceived medication cost burden.

International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM): Standardized Patient-Centered Outcomes Measurement Set for Heart Failure Patients.

Whereas multiple national, international, and trial registries for heart failure have been created, international standards for clinical assessment and outcome measurement do not currently exist. The working group's objective was to facilitate international comparison in heart failure care, using standardized parameters and meaningful patient-centered outcomes for research and quality of care assessments. The International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement recruited an international working group of clinical heart failure experts, researchers, and patient representatives to define a standard set of outcomes and risk-adjustment variables. This was designed to document, compare, and ultimately improve patient care outcomes in the heart failure population, with a focus on global feasibility and relevance. The working group employed a Delphi process, patient focus groups, online patient surveys, and multiple systematic publications searches. The process occurred over 10 months, employing 7 international teleconferences. A 17-item set has been established, addressing selected functional, psychosocial, burden of care, and survival outcome domains. These measures were designed to include all patients with heart failure, whether entered at first presentation or subsequent decompensation, excluding cardiogenic shock. Sources include clinician report, administrative data, and validated patient-reported outcome measurement tools: the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire; the Patient Health Questionnaire-2; and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System. Recommended data included those to support risk adjustment and benchmarking across providers and regions. The International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement developed a dataset designed to capture, compare, and improve care for heart failure, with feasibility and relevance for patients and clinicians worldwide.

Sex- and age-related differences in the management and outcomes of chronic heart failure: an analysis of patients from the ESC HFA EORP Heart Failure Long-Term Registry.

AIMS: This study aimed to assess age- and sex-related differences in management and 1-year risk for all-cause mortality and hospitalization in chronic heart failure (HF) patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Of 16 354 patients included in the European Society of Cardiology Heart Failure Long-Term Registry, 9428 chronic HF patients were analysed [median age: 66 years; 28.5% women; mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 37%]. Rates of use of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) were high (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, beta-blockers and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists: 85.7%, 88.7% and 58.8%, respectively). Crude GDMT utilization rates were lower in women than in men (all differences: P ≤ 0.001), and GDMT use became lower with ageing in both sexes, at baseline and at 1-year follow-up. Sex was not an independent predictor of GDMT prescription; however, age >75 years was a significant predictor of GDMT underutilization. Rates of all-cause mortality were lower in women than in men (7.1% vs. 8.7%; P = 0.015), as were rates of all-cause hospitalization (21.9% vs. 27.3%; P < 0.001) and there were no differences in causes of death. All-cause mortality and all-cause hospitalization increased with greater age in both sexes. Sex was not an independent predictor of 1-year all-cause mortality (restricted to patients with LVEF ≤45%). Mortality risk was significantly lower in patients of younger age, compared to patients aged >75 years. CONCLUSIONS: There was a decline in GDMT use with advanced age in both sexes. Sex was not an independent predictor of GDMT or adverse outcomes. However, age >75 years independently predicted lower GDMT use and higher all-cause mortality in patients with LVEF ≤45%.

Exploring the cardiac response to injury in heart transplant biopsies.

BACKGROUND: Because injury is universal in organ transplantation, heart transplant endomyocardial biopsies present an opportunity to explore response to injury in heart parenchyma. Histology has limited ability to assess injury, potentially confusing it with rejection, whereas molecular changes have potential to distinguish injury from rejection. Building on previous studies of transcripts associated with T cell-mediated rejection (TCMR) and antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR), we explored transcripts reflecting injury. METHODS: Microarray data from 889 prospectively collected endomyocardial biopsies from 454 transplant recipients at 14 centers were subjected to unsupervised principal component analysis and archetypal analysis to detect variation not explained by rejection. The resulting principal component and archetype scores were then examined for their transcript, transcript set, and pathway associations and compared to the histology diagnoses and left ventricular function. RESULTS: Rejection was reflected by principal components PC1 and PC2, and by archetype scores S2TCMR, and S3ABMR, with S1normal indicating normalness. PC3 and a new archetype score, S4injury, identified unexplained variation correlating with expression of transcripts inducible in injury models, many expressed in macrophages and associated with inflammation in pathway analysis. S4injury scores were high in recent transplants, reflecting donation-implantation injury, and both S4injury and S2TCMR were associated with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. CONCLUSION: Assessment of injury is necessary for accurate estimates of rejection and for understanding heart transplant phenotypes. Biopsies with molecular injury but no molecular rejection were often misdiagnosed rejection by histology.TRAIL REGISTRATION. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02670408FUNDING. Roche Organ Transplant Research Foundation, the University of Alberta Hospital Foundation, and Alberta Health Services.

Impact of digoxin on risk of death in heart failure patients treated with b-blockers. Results from Polish part of ESC Heart Failure Long-Term Registry.

BACKGROUND: Digoxin is used in the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF). It was reported to increase the risk of death in HF. Studies on digoxin are based mainly on patients treated some years ago, before the era of common b-blocker use. AIM: This study aims to show the influence of digoxin in a modern cohort of HF patients on top of the contemporary guideline-directed treatment. METHODS: This study retrospectively analyses the Polish part of the European Society of Cardiology Heart Failure Long-Term Registry. It includes 912 patients treated for HF between February 2012 and January 2013, and followed until May 2014. At baseline, 19.1% took digoxin, 89.6% angiotensin convertase enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers, 91.9% b-blockers, and 69.4% mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. RESULTS: Digoxin is associated with increased risk of death after adjustment for significant covariates in patients who have HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) but no AF history (hazard ratio [HR] 2.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.23-5.19; p = 0.011), and it does not influence significantly the risk of hospitalisation (adjusted HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.05-1.72; p = 0.11). Digoxin use shows no significant association with the risk of death or hospitalisation in patients with AF and HFrEF or HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Patients on digoxin present a significantly worse clinical status with lower left ventricular ejection fraction and higher New York Heart Association class, and fewer of them received the guideline-directed treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Digoxin is associated with increased risk of death in HFrEF patients without AF history receiving the guideline- -directed treatment. Digoxin seems to be employed in patients with worse clinical status, which may at least partially explain its association with increased risk of death.

Right heart dysfunction and failure in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: mechanisms and management. Position statement on behalf of the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology.

There is an unmet need for effective treatment strategies to reduce morbidity and mortality in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Until recently, attention in patients with HFpEF was almost exclusively focused on the left side. However, it is now increasingly recognized that right heart dysfunction is common and contributes importantly to poor prognosis in HFpEF. More insights into the development of right heart dysfunction in HFpEF may aid to our knowledge about this complex disease and may eventually lead to better treatments to improve outcomes in these patients. In this position paper from the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology, the Committee on Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction reviews the prevalence, diagnosis, and pathophysiology of right heart dysfunction and failure in patients with HFpEF. Finally, potential treatment strategies, important knowledge gaps and future directions regarding the right side in HFpEF are discussed.

Multilevel factors are associated with immunosuppressant nonadherence in heart transplant recipients: The international BRIGHT study.

Factors at the level of family/healthcare worker, organization, and system are neglected in medication nonadherence research in heart transplantation (HTx). The 4-continent, 11-country cross-sectional Building Research Initiative Group: Chronic Illness Management and Adherence in Transplantation (BRIGHT) study used multistaged sampling to examine 36 HTx centers, including 36 HTx directors, 100 clinicians, and 1397 patients. Nonadherence to immunosuppressants-defined as any deviation in taking or timing adherence and/or dose reduction-was assessed using the Basel Assessment of Adherence to Immunosuppressive Medications Scale© (BAASIS© ) interview. Guided by the Integrative Model of Behavioral Prediction and Bronfenbrenner's ecological model, we analyzed factors at these multiple levels using sequential logistic regression analysis (6 blocks). The nonadherence prevalence was 34.1%. Six multilevel factors were associated independently (either positively or negatively) with nonadherence: patient level: barriers to taking immunosuppressants (odds ratio [OR]: 11.48); smoking (OR: 2.19); family/healthcare provider level: frequency of having someone to help patients read health-related materials (OR: 0.85); organization level: clinicians reporting nonadherent patients were targeted with adherence interventions (OR: 0.66); pickup of medications at physician's office (OR: 2.31); and policy level: monthly out-of-pocket costs for medication (OR: 1.16). Factors associated with nonadherence are evident at multiple levels. Improving medication nonadherence requires addressing not only the patient, but also family/healthcare provider, organization, and policy levels.

Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology heart failure nurse curriculum.

Recent advances in care and management of heart failure have improved outcome, largely as a result of the developing evidence basis for medications, implantable devices and the organization of heart failure follow-up. Such developments have also increased the complexity of delivering and coordinating care. This has led to a change to the way in which heart failure services are organized and to the traditional role of the heart failure nurse. Nurses in many countries now provide a range of services that include providing care for patients with acute and with chronic heart failure, working in and across different sectors of care (inpatient, outpatient, community care, the home and remotely), organising care services around the face-to-face and the remote collection of patient data, and liaising with a wide variety of health-care providers and professionals. To support such advances the nurse requires a skill set that goes beyond that of their initial education and training. The range of nurses' roles across Europe is varied. So too is the nature of their educational preparation. This heart failure nurse curriculum aims to provide a framework for use in countries of the European Society of Cardiology. Its modular approach enables the key knowledge, skills, and behaviours for the nurse working in different care settings to be outlined and so facilitate nursing staff to play a fuller role within the heart failure team.

Transplantation for complex congenital heart disease in adults: a subanalysis of the Spanish Heart Transplant Registry.

BACKGROUND: Congenital heart diseases (CHDs) have high infant mortality in their severe forms. When adulthood is reached, a heart transplant (HTx) may be required. Spanish adult population transplanted for CHD was analyzed and compared with the most frequent causes of HTx and between different subgroups of CHD. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 6048 patients (HTx 1984-2009) were included. Pediatric transplants (<15 yr), combined transplants, reHTx, and HTx for heart diseases other than idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy (IDCM) and ischemic heart disease (IHD) were excluded. Total patients included: 3166 (IHD = 1888; IDCM = 1223; CHD = 55). Subgroups were studied as follows: (1) single ventricle with pulmonary stenosis (n = 18), (2) single ventricle with tricuspid atresia and Glenn/Fontan surgery (n = 10), (3) congenitally corrected transposition of the great vessels (TGV) or with switch atrial surgery (n = 10), and (4) CHD with right ventricle overload (n = 17). RESULTS: Survival probability was different between groups (p = 0.0001). Post hoc analysis showed some differences between groups (CHD vs. IHD, p = 0.05; CHD vs. IDCM, p = 0.5; IHD vs. IDCM, p = 0.0001). Early mortality was different between CHD subgroups (group 1 = 19%, group 2 = 40%, group 3 = 0%, group 4 = 29%; p < 0.001); however, overall mortality did not show differences between subgroups (p = 0.5). CONCLUSIONS: The percentage of Spanish adult HTx patients for CHD is low (1%). The survival curve is better than for other HTx causes (IHD). Nevertheless, early mortality was higher, particularly in some subgroups (Fontan).

Validation of the Spanish version of the Kansas city cardiomyopathy questionnaire.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) is specifically designed to evaluate quality of life in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). The purpose of this study was to assess the reliability, validity, and responsiveness to change of the Spanish version of the KCCQ. METHODS: The multicenter study involved 315 patients with CHF. Patients were evaluated at baseline and at weeks 24 and 26. The KCCQ, the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ), and the Short Form-36 (SF-36) were administered. Reliability was assessed in stable patients (n=163) by examining test-retest and internal consistency measures between weeks 24 and 26. Validity was evaluated at baseline (n=315) by determining how KCCQ scores varied with New York Heart Association functional class and by comparing scores with those on similar domains of the MLHFQ and SF-36. Responsiveness to change was assessed in patients who experienced significant clinical improvement between baseline and week 24 (n=31) by determining the effect size. RESULTS: Reliability coefficients ranged between 0.70 and 0.96 for the different domains. Mean KCCQ scores varied significantly with New York Heart Association functional class (P<.001). Correlations with comparable domains on the other questionnaires were acceptable (e.g. for physical limitation, they were between 0.77 and 0.81). The changes observed at 24 weeks in the majority of KCCQ scores in the subsample that improved corresponded to a moderate effect size (i.e. 0.4-0.6). CONCLUSIONS: The Spanish version of the KCCQ has good metric properties (i.e. validity, reliability and responsiveness), which make it suitable for use in evaluating quality of life in Spanish CHF patients.

Validación de la versión española del Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire / Validation of the spanish version of the Kansas City cardiomyopathy questionnaire

Introducción y objetivos. El Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) es un instrumento de calidad de vida específico para insuficiencia cardiaca crónica (ICC). El objetivo es evaluar la fiabilidad, la validez y la sensibilidad al cambio de la versión española del KCCQ. Métodos. Se realizó un estudio multicéntrico con 315 pacientes con ICC. Se realizó una evaluación basal y a las semanas 24 y 26. Se aplicaron el KCCQ, el Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) y el Short Form 36 (SF-36). La fiabilidad se evaluó mediante test-retest y la consistencia interna en pacientes estables entre las semanas 24 y 26 (n=163). La validez se estudió basalmente (n=315) mediante gradiente de las puntuaciones según la New York Heart Association y las correlaciones, con las dimensiones del MLHFQ y SF-36. La evaluación de la sensibilidad al cambio se analizó en los pacientes (n=31) que habían mejorado significativamente entre la primera y la segunda evaluación mediante el coeficiente de tamaño del efecto. Resultados. Los coeficientes de fiabilidad oscilaron entre 0,7 y 0,96 según las dimensiones. Las medias de las puntuaciones mostraron diferencias significativas según la New York Heart Association (p<0,001). Las correlaciones entre las dimensiones de los diferentes cuestionarios fueron aceptables (por ejemplo, limitación física entre 0,77 y 0,81). El cambio a las 24 semanas en la submuestra de mejoría en la mayoría de las puntuaciones del KCCQ correspondió a tamaños del efecto moderados (0,4-0,6). Conclusiones. La versión española del KCCQ tiene unas adecuadas propiedades métricas (validez, fiabilidad y sensibilidad) como instrumento de valoración de calidad de vida en pacientes españoles con ICC (AU)

Introduction and objectives: The Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) is specifically designed to evaluate quality of life in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). The purpose of this study was to assess the reliability, validity, and responsiveness to change of the Spanish version of the KCCQ. Methods: The multicenter study involved 315 patients with CHF. Patients were evaluated at baseline and at weeks 24 and 26. The KCCQ, the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ), and the Short Form-36 (SF-36) were administered. Reliability was assessed in stable patients (n = 163) by examining test–retest and internal consistency measures between weeks 24 and 26. Validity was evaluated at baseline (n = 315) by determining how KCCQ scores varied with NewYork Heart Association functional class and by comparing scores with those on similar domains of the MLHFQ and SF-36. Responsiveness to change was assessed in patients who experienced significant clinical improvement between baseline and week 24 (n = 31) by determining the effect size. Results: Reliability coefficients ranged between 0.70 and 0.96 for the different domains. Mean KCCQ scores varied significantly with New York Heart Association functional class (P < .001). Correlations with comparable domains on the other questionnaires were acceptable (e.g. for physical limitation, they were between 0.77 and 0.81). The changes observed at 24 weeks in the majority of KCCQ scores in the subsample that improved corresponded to a moderate effect size (i.e. 0.4–0.6). Conclusions: The Spanish version of the KCCQ has good metric properties (i.e. validity, reliability and responsiveness), which make it suitable for use in evaluating quality of life in Spanish CHF patients (AU)