Role of ejection fraction in patients at risk for advanced heart failure: insights from the HELP-HF registry.

AIMS: Patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (EF) (HFrEF), mildly reduced EF (HFmrEF), and preserved EF (HFpEF) may all progress to advanced HF, but the impact of EF in the advanced setting is not well established. Our aim was to assess the prognostic impact of EF in patients with at least one 'I NEED HELP' marker for advanced HF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with HF and at least one high-risk 'I NEED HELP' criterion from four centres were included in this analysis. Outcomes were assessed in patients with HFrEF (EF ≤ 40%), HFmrEF (EF 41-49%), and HFpEF (EF ≥ 50%) and with EF analysed as a continuous variable. The prognostic impact of medical therapy for HF in patients with EF < 50% and EF > 50% was also evaluated. All-cause death was the primary endpoint, and cardiovascular death was a secondary endpoint. Among 1149 patients enrolled [mean age 75.1 ± 11.5 years, 67.3% males, 67.6% hospitalized, median follow-up 260 days (inter-quartile range 105-390 days)], HFrEF, HFmrEF, and HFpEF were observed in 699 (60.8%), 122 (10.6%), and 328 (28.6%) patients, and 1 year mortality was 28.3%, 26.2%, and 20.1, respectively (log-rank P = 0.036). As compared with HFrEF patients, HFpEF patients had a lower risk of all-cause death [adjusted hazard ratio (HRadj ) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48-0.94, P = 0.022], whereas no difference was noted for HFmrEF patients. After multivariable adjustment, a lower risk of all-cause death (HRadj for 5% increase 0.94, 95% CI 0.89-0.99, P = 0.017) and cardiovascular death (HRadj for 5% increase 0.94, 95% CI 0.88-1.00, P = 0.049) was observed at higher EF values. Beta-blockers and renin-angiotensin system inhibitors or sacubitril/valsartan were associated with lower mortality in both EF < 50% and EF ≥ 50% groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with HF and at least one 'I NEED HELP' marker for advanced HF, left ventricular EF is still of prognostic value.

Endothelial function evaluation in idiopathic vs. ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy.

AIMS: In the latest years an emerging interest has risen towards the role of endothelial dysfunction (ED) in the pathogenesis of heart failure (HF) since the very first steps of the disease. Since the prevalent etiology of HF is ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM), it is still not clear whether the connection with ED is linked to HF itself or to atherosclerosis. The aim is to determine the presence of ED in subjects with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy (IDCM) compared to ICM. METHODS: In this observational study 107 patients were enrolled, 65 of them suffering from IDCM and 42 from ICM. ED was assessed as peripheral arterial tonometry by means of EndoPAT device. The Reactive Hyperaemia Index (RHI) was calculated, ED being established with RHI values ≤1.67 and normal endothelial function >2.00 (grey area between 1.67 and 2.00). RESULTS: ED, expressed both as RHI ≤1.67 and RHI ≤2.00, showed a similar prevalence in the two groups. However, they differed as regards sex, dyslipidemia and statin use. CONCLUSION: Endothelial function, evaluated through peripheral artery tonometry, seems equally compromised in patients with IDCM and ICM.

Prognostic impact of the updated 2018 HFA-ESC definition of advanced heart failure: results from the HELP-HF registry.

AIMS: The Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology (HFA-ESC) proposed a definition of advanced heart failure (HF) that has not been validated, yet. We assessed its prognostic impact in a consecutive series of patients with high-risk HF. METHODS AND RESULTS: The HELP-HF registry enrolled consecutive patients with HF and at least one high-risk 'I NEED HELP' marker, evaluated at four Italian centres between 1st January 2020 and 30th November 2021. Patients meeting the HFA-ESC advanced HF definition were compared to patients not meeting this definition. The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause mortality or first HF hospitalization. Out of 4753 patients with HF screened, 1149 (24.3%) patients with at least one high-risk 'I NEED HELP' marker were included (mean age 75.1 ± 11.5 years, 67.3% male, median left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] 35% [interquartile range 25%-50%]). Among them, 193 (16.8%) patients met the HFA-ESC advanced HF definition. As compared to others, these patients were younger, had lower LVEF, higher natriuretic peptides and a worse clinical profile. The 1-year rate of the primary endpoint was 69.3% in patients with advanced HF according to the HFA-ESC definition versus 41.8% in the others (hazard ratio [HR] 2.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.82-2.74, p < 0.001). The prognostic impact of the HFA-ESC advanced HF definition was confirmed after multivariable adjustment for relevant covariates (adjusted HR 1.98, 95% CI 1.57-2.50, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The HFA-ESC advanced HF definition had a strong prognostic impact in a contemporary, real-world, multicentre high-risk cohort of patients with HF.

Implications of atrial fibrillation on the clinical course and outcomes of hospitalized COVID-19 patients: results of the Cardio-COVID-Italy multicentre study.

AIMS: To assess the clinical relevance of a history of atrial fibrillation (AF) in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS AND RESULTS: We enrolled 696 consecutive patients (mean age 67.4 ± 13.2 years, 69.7% males) admitted for COVID-19 in 13 Italian cardiology centres between 1 March and 9 April 2020. One hundred and six patients (15%) had a history of AF and the median hospitalization length was 14 days (interquartile range 9-24). Patients with a history of AF were older and with a higher burden of cardiovascular risk factors. Compared to patients without AF, they showed a higher rate of in-hospital death (38.7% vs. 20.8%; P < 0.001). History of AF was associated with an increased risk of death after adjustment for clinical confounders related to COVID-19 severity and cardiovascular comorbidities, including history of heart failure (HF) and increased plasma troponin [adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 1.73; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.06-2.84; P = 0.029]. Patients with a history of AF also had more in-hospital clinical events including new-onset AF (36.8% vs. 7.9%; P < 0.001), acute HF (25.3% vs. 6.3%; P < 0.001), and multiorgan failure (13.9% vs. 5.8%; P = 0.010). The association between AF and worse outcome was not modified by previous or concomitant use of anticoagulants or steroid therapy (P for interaction >0.05 for both) and was not related to stroke or bleeding events. CONCLUSION: Among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, a history of AF contributes to worse clinical course with a higher mortality and in-hospital events including new-onset AF, acute HF, and multiorgan failure. The mortality risk remains significant after adjustment for variables associated with COVID-19 severity and comorbidities.

Determinants of the protective effect of glucocorticoids on mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: Insights from the Cardio-COVID-Italy multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Glucocorticoid therapy has emerged as an effective therapeutic option in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This study aimed to focus on the impact of relevant clinical and laboratory factors on the protective effect of glucocorticoids on mortality. METHODS: A sub-analysis was performed of the multicenter Cardio-COVID-Italy registry, enrolling consecutive patients with COVID-19 admitted to 13 Italian cardiology units between 01 March 2020 and 09 April 2020. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 706 COVID-19 patients were included (349 treated with glucocorticoids, 357 not treated with glucocorticoids). After adjustment for relevant covariates, use of glucocorticoids was associated with a lower risk of in-hospital mortality (adjusted HR 0.44; 95% CI 0.26-0.72; p = 0.001). A significant interaction was observed between the protective effect of glucocorticoids on mortality and PaO2/FiO2 ratio on admission (p = 0.042), oxygen saturation on admission (p = 0.017), and peak CRP (0.023). Such protective effects of glucocorticoids were mainly observed in patients with lower PaO2/FiO2 ratio (<300), lower oxygen saturation (<90%), and higher CRP (>100 mg/L). CONCLUSIONS: The protective effects of glucocorticoids on mortality in COVID-19 were more evident among patients with worse respiratory parameters and higher systemic inflammation.

Pulmonary embolism in patients with COVID-19: characteristics and outcomes in the Cardio-COVID Italy multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary embolism (PE) has been described in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) critically ill patients, but the evidence from more heterogeneous cohorts is limited. METHODS: Data were retrospectively obtained from consecutive COVID-19 patients admitted to 13 Cardiology Units in Italy, from March 1st to April 9th, 2020, and followed until in-hospital death, discharge, or April 23rd, 2020. The association of baseline variables with computed tomography-confirmed PE was investigated by Cox hazards regression analysis. The relationship between D-dimer levels and PE incidence was evaluated using restricted cubic splines models. RESULTS: The study included 689 patients (67.3 ± 13.2 year-old, 69.4% males), of whom 43.6% were non-invasively ventilated and 15.8% invasively. 52 (7.5%) had PE over 15 (9-24) days of follow-up. Compared with those without PE, these subjects had younger age, higher BMI, less often heart failure and chronic kidney disease, more severe cardio-pulmonary involvement, and higher admission D-dimer [4344 (1099-15,118) vs. 818.5 (417-1460) ng/mL, p < 0.001]. They also received more frequently darunavir/ritonavir, tocilizumab and ventilation support. Furthermore, they faced more bleeding episodes requiring transfusion (15.6% vs. 5.1%, p < 0.001) and non-significantly higher in-hospital mortality (34.6% vs. 22.9%, p = 0.06). In multivariate regression, only D-dimer was associated with PE (HR 1.72, 95% CI 1.13-2.62; p = 0.01). The relation between D-dimer concentrations and PE incidence was linear, without inflection point. Only two subjects had a baseline D-dimer < 500 ng/mL. CONCLUSIONS: PE occurs in a sizable proportion of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. The implications of bleeding events and the role of D-dimer in this population need to be clarified.

Impact of heart failure on the clinical course and outcomes of patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Results of the Cardio-COVID-Italy multicentre study.

AIMS: To assess the prognostic value of a history of heart failure (HF) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS AND RESULTS: We enrolled 692 consecutive patients admitted for COVID-19 in 13 Italian cardiology centres between 1 March and 9 April 2020. Mean age was 67.4 ± 13.2 years, 69.5% of patients were males, 90 (13.0%) had a history of HF, median hospitalization length was 14 days (interquartile range 9-24). In-hospital death occurred in 37 of 90 patients (41.1%) with HF history vs. 126 of those with no HF history (20.9%). The increased risk of death associated with HF history remained significant after adjustment for clinical variables related to COVID-19 and HF severity, including comorbidities, oxygen saturation, lymphocyte count and plasma troponin [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for death: 2.25; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.26-4.02; P = 0.006 at multivariable Cox regression model including 404 patients]. Patients with a history of HF also had more in-hospital complications including acute HF (33.3% vs. 5.1%, P < 0.001), acute renal failure (28.1% vs. 12.9%, P < 0.001), multiorgan failure (15.9% vs. 5.8%, P = 0.004) and sepsis (18.4% vs. 8.9%, P = 0.006). Other independent predictors of outcome were age, sex, oxygen saturation and oxygen partial pressure at arterial gas analysis/fraction of inspired oxygen ratio (PaO2 /FiO2 ). In-hospital treatment with corticosteroids and heparin had beneficial effects (adjusted HR for death: 0.46; 95% CI 0.29-0.74; P = 0.001; n = 404 for corticosteroids, and adjusted HR 0.41; 95% CI 0.25-0.67; P < 0.001; n = 364 for heparin). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and a history of HF have an extremely poor outcome with higher mortality and in-hospital complications. HF history is an independent predictor of increased in-hospital mortality.

Characteristics and outcomes of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 and cardiac disease in Northern Italy.

AIMS: To compare demographic characteristics, clinical presentation, and outcomes of patients with and without concomitant cardiac disease, hospitalized for COVID-19 in Brescia, Lombardy, Italy. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study population includes 99 consecutive patients with COVID-19 pneumonia admitted to our hospital between 4 March and 25 March 2020. Fifty-three patients with a history of cardiac disease were compared with 46 without cardiac disease. Among cardiac patients, 40% had a history of heart failure, 36% had atrial fibrillation, and 30% had coronary artery disease. Mean age was 67 ± 12 years, and 80 (81%) patients were males. No differences were found between cardiac and non-cardiac patients except for higher values of serum creatinine, N-terminal probrain natriuretic peptide, and high sensitivity troponin T in cardiac patients. During hospitalization, 26% patients died, 15% developed thrombo-embolic events, 19% had acute respiratory distress syndrome, and 6% had septic shock. Mortality was higher in patients with cardiac disease compared with the others (36% vs. 15%, log-rank P = 0.019; relative risk 2.35; 95% confidence interval 1.08-5.09). The rate of thrombo-embolic events and septic shock during the hospitalization was also higher in cardiac patients (23% vs. 6% and 11% vs. 0%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized patients with concomitant cardiac disease and COVID-19 have an extremely poor prognosis compared with subjects without a history of cardiac disease, with higher mortality, thrombo-embolic events, and septic shock rates.