The Singapore Heart Failure Risk Score: Prediction of Survival in Southeast Asian Patients

INTRODUCTION@#Numerous heart failure risk scores have been developed but there is none for Asians. We aimed to develop a risk calculator, the Singapore Heart Failure Risk Score, to predict 1- and 2-year survival in Southeast Asian patients hospitalised for heart failure.@*MATERIALS AND METHODS@#Consecutive patients admitted for heart failure were identified from the Singapore Cardiac Databank Heart Failure registry. The follow-up was 2 to 4 years and mortality was obtained from national registries.@*RESULTS@#The derivation (2008-2009) and 2 validation cohorts (2008-2009, 2013) included 1392, 729 and 804 patients, respectively. Ten variables were ultimately included in the risk model: age, prior myocardial infarction, prior stroke, atrial fibrillation, peripheral vascular disease, systolic blood pressure, QRS duration, ejection fraction and creatinine and sodium levels. In the derivation cohort, predicted 1- and 2-year survival was 79.1% and 68.1% compared to actual 1- and 2-year survival of 78.2% and 67.9%. There was good agreement between the predicted and observed mortality rates (Hosmer-Lemeshow statistic = 14.36, = 0.073). C-statistics for 2-year mortality in the derivation and validation cohorts were 0.73 (95% CI, 0.70-0.75) and 0.68 (95% CI, 0.64-0.72), respectively.@*CONCLUSION@#We provided a risk score based on readily available clinical characteristics to predict 1- and 2-year survival in Southeast Asian patients hospitalised for heart failure via a simple online risk calculator, the Singapore Heart Failure Risk Score.

Ultrafiltration in patients with decompensated heart failure and diuretic resistance: an Asian centre's experience

<p><b>INTRODUCTION</b>Diuretics are the mainstay of therapy for restoring the euvolaemic state in patients with decompensated heart failure. However, diuretic resistance remains a challenge.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>We conducted a retrospective cohort study to examine the efficacy and safety of ultrafiltration (UF) in 44 hospitalised patients who had decompensated heart failure and diuretic resistance between October 2011 and July 2013.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>Among the 44 patients, 18 received UF (i.e. UF group), while 26 received diuretics (i.e. standard care group). After 48 hours, the UF group achieved lower urine output (1,355 mL vs. 3,815 mL, p = 0.0003), greater fluid loss (5,058 mL vs. 1,915 mL, p < 0.0001) and greater weight loss (5.0 kg vs. 1.0 kg, p < 0.0001) than the standard care group. The UF group also had a shorter duration of hospitalisation (5.0 days vs. 9.5 days, p = 0.0010). There were no differences in the incidence of 30-day emergency department visits and rehospitalisations for heart failure between the two groups. At 90 days, the UF group had fewer emergency department visits (0.2 vs. 0.8, p = 0.0500) and fewer rehospitalisations for heart failure (0.3 vs. 1.0, p = 0.0442). Reduction in EQ-5D™ scores was greater in the UF group, both at discharge (2.7 vs. 1.4, p = 0.0283) and 30 days (2.5 vs. 0.3, p = 0.0033). No adverse events were reported with UF.</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>UF is an effective and safe treatment that can improve the health outcomes of Asian patients with decompensated heart failure and diuretic resistance.</p>

Patient barriers to implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation for the primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction

<p><b>INTRODUCTION</b>Device therapy is efficacious in preventing sudden cardiac death (SCD) in patients with reduced ejection fraction. However, few who need the device eventually opt to undergo implantation and even fewer reconsider their decisions after deliberation. This is due to many factors, including unresolved patient barriers. This study identified the factors that influenced patients' decision to decline implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation, and those that influenced patients who initially declined an implant to reconsider having one.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>A single-centre survey was conducted among 240 patients who had heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and met the ICD implantation criteria, but had declined ICD implantation.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>Participants who refused ICD implantation were mostly male (84%), Chinese (71%), married (72%), currently employed (54%), and had up to primary or secondary education (78%) and monthly income of < SGD 3,000 (51%). Those who were more likely to reconsider their decision were aware that SCD was a consequence of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, knowledgeable of the preventive role of ICDs, currently employed and aware that their doctor strongly recommended the implant. Based on multivariate analysis, knowledge of the role of ICDs for primary prophylaxis was the most important factor influencing patient decision.</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>This study identified the demographic and social factors of patients who refused ICD therapy. Knowledge of the role of ICDs in preventing SCD was found to be the strongest marker for reconsidering ICD implantation. Measures to address this information gap may lead to higher rates of ICD implantation.</p>

THE FAILING HEART: NEW MODALITIES OF TREATMENT

In the last 40 years, pharmacological therapy for chronic heart failure has rapidly expanded beyond diuretics and digoxin. Standard pharmacological therapy includes beta blockers and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system antagonists. Even with existing contemporary pharmacological therapy, which has substantially improved outcomes, prognosis is fairly poor. The treatment of heart failure continues to evolve with the integration of the results from landmark clinical trials into contemporary therapy. Development of novel therapeutic strategies for the treatment of this disease is crucial. Some of these new approaches will be briefly discussed.