Long-term impact of home-based monitoring after an admission for acute decompensated heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Background: Patients with heart failure have high rehospitalisation rates and poor cardiovascular outcomes. Home-based monitoring (HBM) has emerged with promising results in different settings. However, its long-term effects on patients recently admitted for acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) remain uncertain. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing HBM with usual care (UC) that were published between database inception and June 24, 2023. We included studies with patients admitted for ADHF in the previous 6 months and with a minimum follow-up of 6 months. We excluded studies with patients hospitalised for reasons other than ADHF and studies with disproportional education interventions between arms. Statistical analyses were performed using R software version 4.3.2. We pooled risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for categorical and continuous outcomes, respectively. Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in RCTs (RoB 2) was used to assess study quality. Publication bias was assessed via funnel plots and Egger's test, and heterogeneity was assessed through I2 statistics and sensitivity analysis. The protocol for this systematic review and meta-analysis was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO, CRD42023465359). Findings: We included 16 RCTs comprising 4629 patients, of whom 2393 (51.7%) were randomised to HBM and 3150 (68%) were men. Follow-up ranged from six to fifteen months. As compared with UC, HBM significantly reduced all-cause mortality (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.61, 0.91; p = 0.005), all-cause hospitalisations (RR 0.82; 95% CI 0.70, 0.97; p = 0.018), cardiovascular (CV) mortality (RR 0.53; 95% CI 0.36, 0.79; p = 0.002), hospitalisations for heart failure (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.62, 0.91; p = 0.004), and CV hospitalisations (RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.55, 0.95; p = 0.018). There were no significant differences in length of hospital stay (MD 0.97 days; 95% CI -0.90, 2.84; p = 0.308). Interpretation: In patients recently admitted with ADHF, HBM significantly reduces long-term all-cause mortality and hospitalisations, CV mortality and hospitalisations, and hospitalisations for heart failure, as compared with UC. This supports the implementation of HBM as a standard practice to optimise patient outcomes following admissions for ADHF. However, future studies are warranted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of implementing HBM in the real-world setting. Funding: None.

Effect on Kidney Function Recovery Guiding Decongestion with VExUS in Patients with Cardiorenal Syndrome 1: A Randomized Control Trial.

INTRODUCTION: In cardiorenal syndrome type 1 (CRS1), vascular congestion is central to the pathophysiology of heart failure and thus a key target for management. The venous evaluation by ultrasound (VExUS) system could guide decongestion effectively and thereby improve outcomes. METHODS: In this randomized clinical trial, patients with CRS1 (i.e., increase in creatinine ≥0.3 mg/dL) were randomized to guide decongestion with VExUS compared to usual clinical evaluation. The primary endpoint was to assess kidney function recovery (KFR), and the key secondary endpoint was decongestion evaluated by physical examination and changes in brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) and CA-125. Exploratory endpoints included days of hospitalization and mortality. RESULTS: From March 2022 to February 2023, a total of 140 patients were randomized 1:1 (70 in the VExUS and 70 in the control group). KFR was not statistically different between groups. However, VExUS improved more than twice the odds to achieve decongestion (odds ratio [OR]: 2.6, 95% CI: 1.9-3.0, p = 0.01) and the odds to reach a decrease of BNP >30% (OR: 2.4, 95% CI: 1.3-4.1, p = 0.01). The survival at 90 days, recongestion, and CA-125 were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: In patients with CRS1, we observed that VExUS-guided decongestion did not improve the probability of KFR but improved the odds to achieve decongestion.

Auto positive airway pressure therapy reduces pulmonary pressures in adults admitted for acute heart failure with pulmonary hypertension and obstructive sleep apnea. The ASAP-HF Pilot Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Pulmonary hypertension (PH) is extremely common in acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) patients and predicts increased mortality. Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), highly prevalent in congestive heart failure patients, may contribute to further elevated pulmonary pressures. This study evaluates the impact of positive airway pressure (PAP) therapy on PH in patients admitted for ADHF with OSA. METHODS: A two-center randomized control trial comparing standard of care (SOC) therapy for ADHF versus addition of PAP therapy in patients with concomitant OSA. RESULTS: Twenty-one consecutive patients were enrolled with 1:1 randomization to SOC versus SOC plus 48-hour PAP therapy protocol. In the intervention arm, the mean pulmonary artery systolic pressure (PASP) difference before therapy and after 48 hours of PAP therapy was -15.8 ± 3.2 (58.6 ± 2.5 mm Hg to 42.8 ± 2.7) versus the SOC arm where the mean PASP difference was -5.2 ± 2.6 (62.7 ± 3.3 mm Hg reduced to 57.5 ± 3.9) (p = 0.025). In addition, ejection fraction in the intervention arm improved (3.4 ± 1.5% versus -0.5 ± 0.5 %) (p = 0.01). Significant improvement was also noted in tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) and right ventricular systolic area in the intervention arm but not in NT-pro-BNP or 6-minute walk distance. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ADHF and OSA, addition of 48 hours of PAP therapy to SOC treatment significantly reduced PH. In addition, PAP therapy was able to improve right and left ventricular function. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02963597.

Preditores clínicos de fração de ejeção preservada em insuficiência cardíaca descompensada / Clinical predictors of preserved left ventricular ejection fraction in decompensated heart failure

FUNDAMENTO: Identificação e impacto clínico da fração de ejeção preservada em desfechos intra-hospitalares em pacientes com insuficiência cardíaca (IC) descompensada permanecem pouco conhecidos. OBJETIVO: Descrever preditores clínicos e desfechos intra-hospitalares de pacientes com IC descompensada e fração de ejeção de ventrículo esquerdo (FEVE) preservada, e desenvolver um escore preditivo baseado em dados clínicos obtidos no momento da admissão. MÉTODOS: Internações consecutivas devido a IC descompensada (n=721) em um hospital terciário foram acompanhadas até a alta ou óbito. Mais de 80 variáveis clínicas foram avaliadas para identificar os preditores da FEVE preservada no momento da admissão. RESULTADOS: Identificou-se FEVE preservada (>50 por cento) em 224 (31 por cento) internações. Os preditores clínicos de FEVE preservada foram: idade >70 anos (p= 0,04); sexo feminino (p<0,001); etiologia não-isquêmica (p<0,001); fibrilação ou flutter atrial (p=0,001); anemia (p=0,001); pressão de pulso >45 mmHg (p<0,001); e ausência de anormalidades de condução intraventricular verificadas no eletrocardiograma (p<0,001). Um escore clínico baseado nessas variáveis foi capaz de predizer com acurácia a presença de FEVE preservada no momento da admissão hospitalar (área sob a curva ROC de 0,76). Nenhuma diferença significativa foi observada na taxa de mortalidade intra-hospitalar ou de complicações clínicas de acordo com os quintis de FEVE. CONCLUSÃO: A FEVE preservada é uma condição prevalente e mórbida entre pacientes hospitalizados por IC. Dados clínicos simples obtidos no momento da internação podem ser utilizados para predizer FEVE preservada.

BACKGROUND: Identification and clinical impact of preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) on in-hospital outcomes in patients with acute decompensated heart failure (HF) remain poorly defined. OBJECTIVE: To describe clinical predictors and in-hospital outcomes of acute decompensated HF patients and preserved LVEF, and to develop a clinically-based predictive rule based on data acquired on admission. METHODS: Consecutive admissions for HF (n=721) at a tertiary care hospital were followed up to discharge or death. More than 80 clinical variables were evaluated to identify predictors of preserved LVEF upon admission. RESULTS: Preserved LVEF (>50 percent) was identified in 224 (31 percent) hospitalizations. Clinical predictors of preserved LVEF were age > 70 years old (p=0.04), female gender (p<0.001), non-ischemic etiology (p<0.001), atrial fibrillation or flutter (p=0.001), anemia (p=0.001), pulse pressure > 45 mmHg (p<0.01) and absence of EKG conduction abnormalities (p<0.001). A clinical score based on these variables was accurate to predict preserved LVEF upon hospital admission (area under ROC curve of 0.76). No significant differences were observed on in-hospital mortality or clinical complications according to quintiles of LVEF. CONCLUSION: Preserved LVEF is a prevalent and morbid condition among hospitalized HF patients. Simple clinical data obtained on admission might be useful for predicting preserved LVEF.