Social Vulnerability and Location of Death in Heart Failure in the United States.

Majority of patients with heart failure (HF) die in either nursing homes or inpatient facilities. Social vulnerability captures multiple domains of socioeconomic position and has been linked with higher HF mortality. We sought to investigate the trends in location of death in patients with HF and its association with social vulnerability. We utilized the multiple cause of death files from the United States (1999-2021) to identify decedents with HF as the underlying cause of death and linked them with county-level social vulnerability index (SVI) available from CDC/ATSDR database. Approximately 1.7 million HF deaths were examined across 3003 United States counties. Most patients (63%) died in a nursing home or inpatient facility, followed by home (28%), and only 4% died in hospice. Death at home had a positive correlation with higher SVI with Pearson's r = 0.26 (P < 0.001) as well as deaths in an inpatient facility r = 0.33 (P < 0.001). Death in a nursing home correlated negatively with SVI with r = -0.46 (P < 0.001). There was no association between hospice utilization and SVI. Locations of death were varied by geographic residence. More patients died at home during the COVID-19 pandemic (OR 1.39, P < 0.001). Social vulnerability was associated with location of death in patients with HF in the US. These associations varied by geographic location. Future studies should focus on social determinants of health and end-of-life care in HF.

Sacubitril/Valsartan in Advanced Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: Rationale and Design of the LIFE Trial.

The PARADIGM-HF (Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin II Receptor Blocker Neprilysin Inhibitor With Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure) trial reported that sacubitril/valsartan (S/V), an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, significantly reduced mortality and heart failure (HF) hospitalization in HF patients with a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, fewer than 1% of patients in the PARADIGM-HF study had New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class IV symptoms. Accordingly, data that informed the use of S/V among patients with advanced HF were limited. The LIFE (LCZ696 in Hospitalized Advanced Heart Failure) study was a 24-week prospective, multicenter, double-blinded, double-dummy, active comparator trial that compared the safety, efficacy, and tolerability of S/V with those of valsartan in patients with advanced HFrEF. The trial planned to randomize 400 patients ≥18 years of age with advanced HF, defined as an EF ≤35%, New York Heart Association functional class IV symptoms, elevated natriuretic peptide concentration (B-type natriuretic peptide [BNP] ≥250 pg/ml or N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide [NT-proBNP] ≥800 pg/ml), and ≥1 objective finding of advanced HF. Following a 3- to 7-day open label run-in period with S/V (24 mg/26 mg twice daily), patients were randomized 1:1 to S/V titrated to 97 mg/103 mg twice daily versus 160 mg of V twice daily. The primary endpoint was the proportional change from baseline in the area under the curve for NT-proBNP levels measured through week 24. Secondary and tertiary endpoints included clinical outcomes and safety and tolerability. Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, enrollment in the LIFE trial was stopped prematurely to ensure patient safety and data integrity. The primary analysis consists of the first 335 randomized patients whose clinical follow-up examination results were not severely impacted by COVID-19. (Entresto [LCZ696] in Advanced Heart Failure [LIFE STUDY] [HFN-LIFE]; NCT02816736).

Virtual Visits for Care of Patients with Heart Failure in the Era of COVID-19: A Statement from the Heart Failure Society of America.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, US federal and state governments have implemented wide-ranging stay-at-home recommendations as a means to reduce spread of infection. As a consequence, many US healthcare systems and practices have curtailed ambulatory clinic visits-pillars of care for patients with heart failure (HF). In this context, synchronous audio/video interactions, also known as virtual visits (VVs), have emerged as an innovative and necessary alternative. This scientific statement outlines the benefits and challenges of VVs, enumerates changes in policy and reimbursement that have increased the feasibility of VVs during the COVID-19 era, describes platforms and models of care for VVs, and provides a vision for the future of VVs.