Outpatient Management of Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy for Heart Failure Using Telehealth: A Comparison of In-Office, Video, and Telephone Visits.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data regarding the management of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) with virtual visits in comparison with in-office visits. We sought to compare the changes in GDMT (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers, angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors) and loop diuretics across visit types. METHODS AND RESULTS: This study included 13,481 outpatient visits performed for 5439 unique patients with HFrEF between March 16, 2020, and March 15, 2021. The rates of initiation and discontinuation of GDMT were documented, and multivariable logistic regression was performed to test associations with outcomes between modes of visit. The rates of medication initiation were higher in office (11.7%) compared with video (9.6%) or telephone (7.2%) visits. In multivariable adjusted analysis, the initiation of at least 1 GDMT class was similar between in-office visits and video visits (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.97, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.82-1.14, P = .703). Telephone visits were associated with less frequent initiation of at least 1 class of GDMT in comparison with in-office visits (adjusted OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.55-0.75; P < .001) and video visits (adjusted OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.55-0.81, P < .001). Despite similar rates of baseline loop diuretic use, patients seen with both video visits (adjusted OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52-0.94, P = .018) and telephone visits (adjusted OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.49-0.83, P < .001) were less likely to have a loop diuretic initiated when compared with in-office visits. CONCLUSIONS: The initiation of GDMT for HFrEF was similar between in-office and video visits and lower with telephone visits, whereas the initiation of a loop diuretic was less frequent in both types of virtual visits. These data suggest that video streaming capabilities should be encouraged for virtual visits.

Usefulness of Combined Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitors and Diuretic Treatment In Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19.

Antecedent use of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) prevents clinical deterioration and protects against cardiovascular/thrombotic complications of COVID-19, for indicated patients. Uncertainty exists regarding treatment continuation throughout infection and doing so with concomitant medications. Hence, the purpose of this study is to evaluate the differential effect of RASi continuation in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 according to diuretic use. We used the Coracle registry, which contains data of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 from 4 regions of Italy. We used Firth logistic regression for adult (>50 years) cases with admission on/after February 22, 2020, with a known discharge status as of April 1, 2020. There were 286 patients in this analysis; 100 patients (35.0%) continued RASi and 186 (65%) discontinued. There were 98 patients treated with a diuretic; 51 (52%) of those continued RASi. The in-hospital mortality rates in patients treated with a diuretic and continued versus discontinued RASi were 8% versus 26% (p = 0.0179). There were 188 patients not treated with a diuretic; 49 (26%) of those continued RASi. The in-hospital mortality rates in patients not treated with a diuretic and continued versus discontinued RASi were 16% versus 9% (p = 0.1827). After accounting for age, cardiovascular disease, and laboratory values, continuing RASi decreased the risk of mortality by approximately 77% (odds ratio 0.23, 95% confidence interval 0.06 to 0.95, p = 0.0419) for patients treated with diuretics, but did not alter the risk in patients treated with RASi alone. Continuing RASi in patients concomitantly treated with diuretics was associated with reduced in-hospital mortality.

[Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management of heart failure outpatient clinics. Lessons during the lockdown restrictions]. / Le ricadute della pandemia COVID-19 sulla gestione dell'Ambulatorio Scompenso. Esperienze e considerazioni operative dopo il lockdown.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, non-urgent outpatient activities were temporarily suspended. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of this measure on the management of the heart failure outpatient clinic at our institution. METHODS: We analyzed the clinical outcome of 110 chronic heart failure patients (mean age 73 ± 9 years) whose follow-up visit had been delayed. RESULTS: At their last visit before the lockdown, 80.9% was in NYHA class II, had an ejection fraction of 37 ± 7%, and B-type natriuretic peptide level was moderately elevated (266 ± 138 pg/ml). All patients received loop diuretics, 97.2% beta-blockers, 64.9% an aldosterone antagonist, 60.9% sacubitril/valsartan (S/V), and 72.2% of the remaining patients were on angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or valsartan therapy. Patients were contacted by phone during and at the end of the lockdown period to fix a new appointment and underwent a structured interview to assess their clinical conditions and ongoing therapy and to verify whether they had contracted SARS-CoV-2 infection. Twelve patients (13.2%) contracted COVID-19. None was hospitalized for worsening heart failure or reported defibrillator shocks and none changed autonomously the prescribed therapy. Overall, 75% of patients reported stable or improved general well-being from the last in-person visit, while 25% described subjective worsening due to the social effect of the pandemic. Unchanged body weight and blood pressure values were reported by 86% and 78.4% of patients, respectively. Lower blood pressure values compared to baseline were recorded in 15.2% of patients on conventional renin-angiotensin system inhibition vs 21% of those on S/V, one of whom had to down-titrate S/V for persistent but asymptomatic hypotension; 4 patients up-titrated S/V to 200 mg/day following phone indications. CONCLUSIONS: Cancellation of scheduled follow-up visits during 3 months did not have significant negative effects in a cohort of stable patients with chronic heart failure on optimized medical therapy. Telephone support was effective in keeping connections with the patients during the lockdown, allowing appropriate management and implementation of drug therapy. In particular, patients who received S/V were not affected by delays in scheduled visits, confirming the tolerability and safety of this novel therapy in terms of both clinical and biohumoral parameters.