Right heart failure with left ventricular assist devices: Preoperative, perioperative and postoperative management strategies. A clinical consensus statement of the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC.

Right heart failure (RHF) following implantation of a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is a common and potentially serious condition with a wide spectrum of clinical presentations with an unfavourable effect on patient outcomes. Clinical scores that predict the occurrence of right ventricular (RV) failure have included multiple clinical, biochemical, imaging and haemodynamic parameters. However, unless the right ventricle is overtly dysfunctional with end-organ involvement, prediction of RHF post-LVAD implantation is, in most cases, difficult and inaccurate. For these reasons optimization of RV function in every patient is a reasonable practice aiming at preparing the right ventricle for a new and challenging haemodynamic environment after LVAD implantation. To this end, the institution of diuretics, inotropes and even temporary mechanical circulatory support may improve RV function, thereby preparing it for a better adaptation post-LVAD implantation. Furthermore, meticulous management of patients during the perioperative and immediate postoperative period should facilitate identification of RV failure refractory to medication. When RHF occurs late during chronic LVAD support, this is associated with worse long-term outcomes. Careful monitoring of RV function and characterization of the origination deficit should therefore continue throughout the patient's entire follow-up. Despite the useful information provided by the echocardiogram with respect to RV function, right heart catheterization frequently offers additional support for the assessment and optimization of RV function in LVAD-supported patients. In any patient candidate for LVAD therapy, evaluation and treatment of RV function and failure should be assessed in a multidimensional and multidisciplinary manner.

Semaglutide and Diuretic Use in Obesity-Related Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Pooled Analysis of the STEP-HFpEF and STEP-HFpEF-DM trials.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: In the STEP-HFpEF trial program, treatment with semaglutide resulted in multiple beneficial effects in patients with obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Efficacy may vary according to baseline diuretic use, and semaglutide treatment could modify diuretic dose. METHODS: In this pre-specified analysis of pooled data from the STEP-HFpEF and STEP-HFpEF-DM trials (n=1145), which randomized participants with HFpEF and body mass index ≥30 kg/m2 to once weekly semaglutide 2.4 mg or placebo for 52 weeks, we examined whether efficacy and safety endpoints differed by baseline diuretic use, as well as the effect of semaglutide on loop diuretic use and dose changes over the 52-week treatment period. RESULTS: At baseline, across no diuretic (n=220), non-loop diuretic only (n=223), and loop diuretic (<40 [n=219], 40 [n=309], and >40 [n=174] mg/day furosemide-equivalents) groups, there was progressively higher prevalence of hypertension and atrial fibrillation; and severity of obesity and heart failure. Over 52 weeks of treatment, semaglutide had a consistent beneficial effect on change in body weight across diuretic use categories (adjusted mean difference vs. placebo ranged from -8.8% [95% CI -10.3, -6.3] to -6.9% [95% CI -9.1, -4.7] from no diuretics to the highest loop diuretic dose category; interaction P=0.39). Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire clinical summary score improvement was greater in patients on loop diuretics compared to those not on loop diuretics (adjusted mean difference vs. placebo: +9.3 [6.5; 12.1] vs. +4.7 points [1.3, 8.2]; P=0.042). Semaglutide had consistent beneficial effects on all secondary efficacy endpoints (including 6-min walk distance) across diuretic subgroups (interaction P=0.24-0.92). Safety also favored semaglutide versus placebo across the diuretic subgroups. From baseline to 52 weeks, loop diuretic dose decreased by 17% in the semaglutide group vs. a 2.4% increase in the placebo group (P<0.0001). Semaglutide (vs. placebo) was more likely to result in loop diuretic dose reduction (odds ratio [OR] 2.67 [95% CI 1.70, 4.18]) and less likely dose increase (OR 0.35 [95% CI 0.23, 0.53]; P<0.001 for both) from baseline to 52 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with obesity-related HFpEF, semaglutide improved heart failure-related symptoms and physical limitations across diuretic use subgroups, with more pronounced benefits among patients receiving loop diuretics at baseline. Reductions in weight and improvements in exercise function with semaglutide versus placebo were consistent in all diuretic use categories. Semaglutide also led to a reduction in loop diuretic use and dose between baseline and 52 weeks. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV REGISTRATION: NCT04788511 and NCT04916470.

Semaglutide in Patients with Obesity-Related Heart Failure and Type 2 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Obesity and type 2 diabetes are prevalent in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and are characterized by a high symptom burden. No approved therapies specifically target obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in persons with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients who had heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, a body-mass index (the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters) of 30 or more, and type 2 diabetes to receive once-weekly semaglutide (2.4 mg) or placebo for 52 weeks. The primary end points were the change from baseline in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire clinical summary score (KCCQ-CSS; scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating fewer symptoms and physical limitations) and the change in body weight. Confirmatory secondary end points included the change in 6-minute walk distance; a hierarchical composite end point that included death, heart failure events, and differences in the change in the KCCQ-CSS and 6-minute walk distance; and the change in the C-reactive protein (CRP) level. RESULTS: A total of 616 participants underwent randomization. The mean change in the KCCQ-CSS was 13.7 points with semaglutide and 6.4 points with placebo (estimated difference, 7.3 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.1 to 10.4; P<0.001), and the mean percentage change in body weight was -9.8% with semaglutide and -3.4% with placebo (estimated difference, -6.4 percentage points; 95% CI, -7.6 to -5.2; P<0.001). The results for the confirmatory secondary end points favored semaglutide over placebo (estimated between-group difference in change in 6-minute walk distance, 14.3 m [95% CI, 3.7 to 24.9; P = 0.008]; win ratio for hierarchical composite end point, 1.58 [95% CI, 1.29 to 1.94; P<0.001]; and estimated treatment ratio for change in CRP level, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.55 to 0.80; P<0.001]). Serious adverse events were reported in 55 participants (17.7%) in the semaglutide group and 88 (28.8%) in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and type 2 diabetes, semaglutide led to larger reductions in heart failure-related symptoms and physical limitations and greater weight loss than placebo at 1 year. (Funded by Novo Nordisk; STEP-HFpEF DM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04916470.).

Semaglutide versus placebo in people with obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a pooled analysis of the STEP-HFpEF and STEP-HFpEF DM randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: In the STEP-HFpEF (NCT04788511) and STEP-HFpEF DM (NCT04916470) trials, the GLP-1 receptor agonist semaglutide improved symptoms, physical limitations, bodyweight, and exercise function in people with obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. In this prespecified pooled analysis of the STEP-HFpEF and STEP-HFpEF DM trials, we aimed to provide a more definitive assessment of the effects of semaglutide across a range of outcomes and to test whether these effects were consistent across key patient subgroups. METHODS: We conducted a prespecified pooled analysis of individual patient data from STEP-HFpEF and STEP-HFpEF DM, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials at 129 clinical research sites in 18 countries. In both trials, eligible participants were aged 18 years or older, had heart failure with a left ventricular ejection fraction of at least 45%, a BMI of at least 30 kg/m2, New York Heart Association class II-IV symptoms, and a Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Clinical Summary Score (KCCQ-CSS; a measure of heart failure-related symptoms and physical limitations) of less than 90 points. In STEP-HFpEF, people with diabetes or glycated haemoglobin A1c concentrations of at least 6·5% were excluded, whereas for inclusion in STEP-HFpEF DM participants had to have been diagnosed with type 2 diabetes at least 90 days before screening and to have an HbA1c of 10% or lower. In both trials, participants were randomly assigned to either 2·4 mg semaglutide once weekly or matched placebo for 52 weeks. The dual primary endpoints were change from baseline to week 52 in KCCQ-CSS and bodyweight in all randomly assigned participants. Confirmatory secondary endpoints included change from baseline to week 52 in 6-min walk distance, a hierarchical composite endpoint (all-cause death, heart failure events, and differences in changes in KCCQ-CSS and 6-min walk distance); and C-reactive protein (CRP) concentrations. Heterogeneity in treatment effects was assessed across subgroups of interest. We assessed safety in all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. FINDINGS: Between March 19, 2021 and March 9, 2022, 529 people were randomly assigned in STEP-HFpEF, and between June 27, 2021 and Sept 2, 2022, 616 were randomly assigned in STEP-HFpEF DM. Overall, 1145 were included in our pooled analysis, 573 in the semaglutide group and 572 in the placebo group. Improvements in KCCQ-CSS and reductions in bodyweight between baseline and week 52 were significantly greater in the semaglutide group than in the placebo group (mean between-group difference for the change from baseline to week 52 in KCCQ-CSS 7·5 points [95% CI 5·3 to 9·8]; p<0·0001; mean between-group difference in bodyweight at week 52 -8·4% [-9·2 to -7·5]; p<0·0001). For the confirmatory secondary endpoints, 6-min walk distance (mean between-group difference at week 52 17·1 metres [9·2 to 25·0]) and the hierarchical composite endpoint (win ratio 1·65 [1·42 to 1·91]) were significantly improved, and CRP concentrations (treatment ratio 0·64 [0·56 to 0·72]) were significantly reduced, in the semaglutide group compared with the placebo group (p<0·0001 for all comparisons). For the dual primary endpoints, the efficacy of semaglutide was largely consistent across multiple subgroups, including those defined by age, race, sex, BMI, systolic blood pressure, baseline CRP, and left ventricular ejection fraction. 161 serious adverse events were reported in the semaglutide group compared with 301 in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: In this prespecified pooled analysis of the STEP-HFpEF and STEP-HFpEF DM trials, semaglutide was superior to placebo in improving heart failure-related symptoms and physical limitations, and reducing bodyweight in participants with obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. These effects were largely consistent across patient demographic and clinical characteristics. Semaglutide was well tolerated. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk.

Improvement in Echocardiographic Indexes of Systolic Heart Failure Post Kidney Transplantation - a retrospective analysis.

INTRODUCTION: End-stage renal disease (ESRD) is a major risk factor for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, which can be partially eliminated by kidney transplantation. Systolic heart failure might be considered as contraindication for kidney transplant although some patients demonstrate myocardial recovery post-transplant. We aim to identify and characterize the phenomenon of reverse myocardial remodelling in kidney transplanted patients. METHODS: The study is a retrospective cohort of patients undergoing kidney transplant between 2016-2019 (n=604) at Rabin Medical Center. Patients were assessed according to availability of two echocardiographic examinations: pre- and post-kidney transplant. The change in estimated ejection fraction (EF) and possible predictors of myocardial recovery were examined. RESULTS: Data of 293 patients was available for the final analysis. Eighty-one (28%) patients had a LVEF improvement equal or above 5%, whereas 36 (12%) patients had a LVEF improvement 10% or more post transplantation. Twenty-five patients (8.5%) had moderate or severe systolic heart failure with LVEF reduced to 40% or less at baseline. 13 of them (52%) had a LVEF improvement of ≥5% and 10 patients (40%) had an improvement of ≥10% in their EF. Cox regression analyses identified female gender as the only independent variable associated with LVEF improvement of at least 10%. Conclusion Renal transplantation might lead to improved LV systolic function in some patients.

Epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis and management of chronic right-sided heart failure and tricuspid regurgitation. A clinical consensus statement of the Heart Failure Association (HFA) and the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) of the ESC.

Right-sided heart failure and tricuspid regurgitation are common and strongly associated with poor quality of life and an increased risk of heart failure hospitalizations and death. While medical therapy for right-sided heart failure is limited, treatment options for tricuspid regurgitation include surgery and, based on recent developments, several transcatheter interventions. However, the patients who might benefit from tricuspid valve interventions are yet unknown, as is the ideal time for these treatments given the paucity of clinical evidence. In this context, it is crucial to elucidate aetiology and pathophysiological mechanisms leading to right-sided heart failure and tricuspid regurgitation in order to recognize when tricuspid regurgitation is a mere bystander and when it can cause or contribute to heart failure progression. Notably, early identification of right heart failure and tricuspid regurgitation may be crucial and optimal management requires knowledge about the different mechanisms and causes, clinical course and presentation, as well as possible treatment options. The aim of this clinical consensus statement is to summarize current knowledge about epidemiology, pathophysiology and treatment of tricuspid regurgitation in right-sided heart failure providing practical suggestions for patient identification and management.

Changes over time in patient-reported outcomes in patients with heart failure.

AIM: This paper describes the trajectory during 1 year of four patient-reported outcomes (PROs), namely, sleep, depressive symptoms, health-related quality of life (HrQoL), and well-being, in patients with heart failure (HF), their relationship and the patient characteristics associated with changes in these PROs. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data analyses of PROs from 603 patients (mean age 67 years; 29% female, 60% NYHA II) enrolled in the HF-Wii study. On short term, between baseline and 3 months, 16% of the patients experienced continuing poor sleep, 11% had sustained depressive symptoms, 13% had consistent poor HrQoL, and 13% consistent poor well-being. Across the entire 1-year period only 21% of the patients had good PRO scores at all timepoints (baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months). All others had at least one low score in any of the PROs at some timepoint during the study. Over the 12 months, 17% had consistently poor sleep, 17% had sustained symptoms of depression, 15% consistently rated a poor HrQoL, and 13% poor well-being. Different patient characteristics per PRO were associated with a poor outcomes across the 12 months. Age, education, New York Heart Association, and length of disease were related to two PRO domains and submaximal exercise capacity (6 min test), co-morbidity, and poor physical activity to one. CONCLUSION: In total, 79% of the patients with HF encountered problems related to sleep, depressive symptoms, HrQoL, and well-being at least once during a 1-year period. This underscores the need for continuous monitoring and follow-up of patients with HF and the need for dynamic adjustments in treatment and care regularly throughout the HF trajectory.

Diagnosis and management of patients with left ventricular hypertrophy: Role of multimodality cardiac imaging. A scientific statement of the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology.

Left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy consists in an increased LV wall thickness. LV hypertrophy can be either secondary, in response to pressure or volume overload, or primary, i.e. not explained solely by abnormal loading conditions. Primary LV hypertrophy may be due to gene mutations or to the deposition or storage of abnormal substances in the extracellular spaces or within the cardiomyocytes (more appropriately defined as pseudohypertrophy). LV hypertrophy is often a precursor to subsequent development of heart failure. Cardiovascular imaging plays a key role in the assessment of LV hypertrophy. Echocardiography, the first-line imaging technique, allows a comprehensive assessment of LV systolic and diastolic function. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance provides added value as it measures accurately LV and right ventricular volumes and mass and characterizes myocardial tissue properties, which may provide important clues to the final diagnosis. Additionally, scintigraphy with bone tracers is included in the diagnostic algorithm of cardiac amyloidosis. Once the diagnosis is established, imaging findings may help predict future disease evolution and inform therapy and follow-up. This consensus document by the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology provides an overview of the role of different cardiac imaging techniques for the differential diagnosis and management of patients with LV hypertrophy.

The safety of sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors in patients with left ventricular assist device - a single center experience.

AIMS: Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are used increasingly for patients with heart failure or chronic kidney disease to improve cardiac and renal outcomes. The use of these medications in patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) is still limited and lacks evidence regarding the safety profile. In this study, we aimed to report our experience in treating 20 patients, supported by LVAD, with SGLT2 inhibitors. METHODS: We studied the safety profile of SGLT2 inhibitors (dapagliflozin and empagliflozin) in 20 patients (mean age 64.7 ±â€Š12.2 years, 75% male) supported by LVAD as destination therapy. All patients have diabetes mellitus and were prescribed SGLT2 inhibitors for glycemic control. RESULTS: SGLT2 inhibitors were well tolerated with no major adverse events. Few suction events were reported in three patients without the need for pump speed adjustment. There was no change in mean arterial pressure (71.1 ±â€Š5.6 vs. 70.1 ±â€Š4.8 mmHg, P  = 0.063). Modest decline in renal function was observed in six patients within the first weeks after drug initiation. There were no events of diabetic ketoacidosis or limb amputation. CONCLUSION: SGLT2 inhibitors are safe in patients with LVAD and may potentially improve cardiovascular and renal outcomes in this special population.

State-of-the-art document on optimal contemporary management of cardiomyopathies.

Cardiomyopathies represent significant contributors to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Over the past decades, a progress has occurred in characterization of the genetic background and major pathophysiological mechanisms, which has been incorporated into a more nuanced diagnostic approach and risk stratification. Furthermore, medications targeting core disease processes and/or their downstream adverse effects have been introduced for several cardiomyopathies. Combined with standard care and prevention of sudden cardiac death, these novel and emerging targeted therapies offer a possibility of improving the outcomes in several cardiomyopathies. Therefore, the aim of this document is to summarize practical approaches to the treatment of cardiomyopathies, which includes the evidence-based novel therapeutic concepts and established principles of care, tailored to the individual patient aetiology and clinical presentation of the cardiomyopathy. The scope of the document encompasses contemporary treatment of dilated, hypertrophic, restrictive and arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy. It was based on an expert consensus reached at the Heart Failure Association online Workshop, held on 18 March 2021.

Acute heart failure and valvular heart disease: A scientific statement of the Heart Failure Association, the Association for Acute CardioVascular Care and the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions of the European Society of Cardiology.

Acute heart failure (AHF) represents a broad spectrum of disease states, resulting from the interaction between an acute precipitant and a patient's underlying cardiac substrate and comorbidities. Valvular heart disease (VHD) is frequently associated with AHF. AHF may result from several precipitants that add an acute haemodynamic stress superimposed on a chronic valvular lesion or may occur as a consequence of a new significant valvular lesion. Regardless of the mechanism, clinical presentation may vary from acute decompensated heart failure to cardiogenic shock. Assessing the severity of VHD as well as the correlation between VHD severity and symptoms may be difficult in patients with AHF because of the rapid variation in loading conditions, concomitant destabilization of the associated comorbidities and the presence of combined valvular lesions. Evidence-based interventions targeting VHD in settings of AHF have yet to be identified, as patients with severe VHD are often excluded from randomized trials in AHF, so results from these trials do not generalize to those with VHD. Furthermore, there are not rigorously conducted randomized controlled trials in the setting of VHD and AHF, most of the data coming from observational studies. Thus, distinct to chronic settings, current guidelines are very elusive when patients with severe VHD present with AHF, and a clear-cut strategy could not be yet defined. Given the paucity of evidence in this subset of AHF patients, the aim of this scientific statement is to describe the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and overall treatment approach for patients with VHD who present with AHF.

Sodium-Glucose Co-Transporter 2 Inhibitors in Heart Failure-Current Evidence in Special Populations.

Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, originally used for diabetes mellitus, are gaining more popularity for other indications, owing to their positive cardiovascular and renal effects. SGLT2 inhibitors reduce heart failure (HF) hospitalization and improve cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes. Later, SGLT2 inhibitors were evaluated in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFREF) and had beneficial effects independent of the presence of diabetes. Recently, reductions in cardiovascular outcomes were also observed in patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFPEF). SGLT2 inhibitors also reduced renal outcomes in patients with chronic kidney disease. Overall, these drugs have an excellent safety profile with a negligible risk of genitourinary tract infections and ketoacidosis. In this review, we discuss the current data on SGLT2 inhibitors in special populations, including patients with acute myocardial infarction, acute HF, right ventricular (RV) failure, left ventricular assist device (LVAD), and type 1 diabetes. We also discuss the potential mechanisms behind the cardiovascular benefits of these medications.

Couples' Coping Strategies with Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation: A Qualitative Dyadic Study.

A left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is a mechanical device that treats advanced heart failure. Patients coping with an LVAD need extensive instrumental and medical support, which is usually provided by the spouse. Therefore, it seems that dyadic coping strategies play a crucial role as either mitigators or hinderers of couples' illness management in the context of LVADs. The aim of this research was to formulate a typology of dyadic coping strategies applied by these couples, as unfolded in their mutual and individual subjective experiences. The research was performed in collaboration with an LVAD implantation unit at a medium-sized hospital in Israel. Couples (N = 17) participated in an in-depth dyadic interview using a semi-structured interview guide, and the data collected were analyzed using content analysis. Our findings suggest that couples coping with an LVAD develop strategies for handling fear, processing and accepting their illness narratives, adjusting their level of independence and intimacy, and utilizing humor. Moreover, our analysis showed that each couple utilized a unique mix of dyadic coping strategies. To the best of our knowledge, the current study is the first to explore the dyadic coping strategies of couples coping with an LVAD. Our results may constitute a base for developing dyadic intervention programs and clinical recommendations to improve the quality of life and relationships of patients and their spouses while coping with LVAD implementation.

Self-care behaviours of patients with left ventricular assist devices in Israel: changes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

AIMS: Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) support the hearts of patients with advanced heart failure. Following LVAD implantation, patients face a complex regimen of self-care behaviours including self-care maintenance, self-care monitoring and self-care management. However, during the COVID-19 pandemic, symptoms of anxiety and depression may have interfered with their self-care. Currently, little is known on how specific self-care behaviours of LVAD-implanted patients changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. We aim to describe the changes in self-care behaviours among patients with an implanted LVAD in Israel during the COVID-19 pandemic and explore the factors related to self-care behaviour change. METHODS: A prospective observational cross-sectional study design. A convenience sample of 27 Israeli LVAD-implanted patients (mean age 62.4 ± 9, 86% male, 78.6% living with a partner) completed the LVAD Self-Care Behaviour Scale (1 = never to 5 = always) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (0 = not at all to 3 = most of the time). Data were collected before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in Israel. Statistical analyses included paired t-tests, Pearson's correlations, and one-way repeated measures ANOVAs. RESULTS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, a significant decrease was found in patients' adherence to checking and recording their LVAD speed, flow, power and PI (Pulsatility Index) (P = 0.05), checking their INR (P = 0.01), and daily weighing (P < 0.01). The prevalence of some behaviours (e.g. regularly exercising) increased in some patients and decreased in others. Patients living without a partner worsened their adherence to some of the self-care behaviours (e.g. taking medicines as prescribed), compared with those living with a partner (Mb  = 5.0 ± 0 and Md  = 5.0 ± 0, delta = 0 vs. Mb  = 5.0 ± 0 and Md  = 4.6 ± 0.9, delta = -0.4, respectively; F = 4.9, P = 0.04). Women, and not men, tended to improve their adherence to the self-care behaviour such as avoiding kinking, pulling, or moving the LVAD driveline at the exit site (Mb  = 4.0 ± 1.0 and Md  = 5.0 ± 0, delta = 1.0 vs. Mb  = 4.5 ± 0.9 and Md  = 4.4 ± 1.2, delta = -0.1, F = 4.7, P = 0.04, respectively). In total, 41% (11) patients reported neither anxiety nor depression, 11% (3) reported anxiety, 15% (4) reported depression, and 44% (12) reported both anxiety and depression. No associations between anxiety and/or depression and self-care behaviours were found. CONCLUSIONS: Priorities in self-care behaviours among patients with implanted LVAD changed after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Factors that assisted with adherence to self-care behaviours included living with a partner and being female. The current results may guide further research on identifying behaviours that are at risk of not being maintained during a time of emergency.

Identifying patients at risk: multi-centre comparison of HeartMate 3 and HeartWare left ventricular assist devices.

AIMS: Since the withdrawal of HeartWare (HVAD) from the global market, there is an ongoing discussion if and which patients require prophylactically exchange for a HeartMate 3 (HM3). Therefore, it is important to study outcome differences between HVAD and HM3 patients. Because centres differ in patient selection and standard of care, we performed a propensity score (PS)-based study including centres that implanted both devices and aimed to identify which HVAD patients are at highest risk. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed an international multi-centre study (n = 1021) including centres that implanted HVAD and HM3. PS-matching was performed using clinical variables and the implanting centre. Survival and complications were compared. As a sensitivity analysis, PS-adjusted Cox regression was performed. Landmark analysis with conditional survival >2 years was conducted to evaluate long-term survival differences. To identify which HVAD patients may benefit from a HM3 upgrade, Cox regression using pre-operative variables and their interaction with device type was performed. Survival was significantly better for HM3 patients (P < 0.01) in 458 matched patients, with a median follow-up of 23 months. Within the matched cohort, HM3 patients had a median age of 58 years, and 83% were male, 80% of the HVAD patients were male, with a median age of 59 years. PS-adjusted Cox regression confirmed a significantly better survival for HM3 patients when compared with HVAD, with a HR of 1.46 (95% confidence interval 1.14-1.85, P < 0.01). Pump thrombosis (P < 0.01) and ischaemic stroke (P < 0.01) occurred less in HM3 patients. No difference was found for haemorrhagic stroke, right heart failure, driveline infection, and major bleeding. Landmark-analysis confirmed a significant difference in conditional survival >2 years after implantation (P = 0.03). None of the pre-operative variable interactions in the Cox regression were significant. CONCLUSIONS: HM3 patients have a significantly better survival and a lower incidence of ischaemic strokes and pump thrombosis than HVAD patients. This survival difference persisted after 2 years of implantation. Additional research using post-operative variables is warranted to identify which HVAD patients need an upgrade to HM3 or expedited transplantation.

Validity and reliability of the left ventricular assist device self-care behaviour scale.

BACKGROUND: Adequate self-care behaviour is essential for patients with a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) to prevent complications, prolong life, and optimise quality of life. However, there were no valid and reliable measurements available to assess self-care behaviour among patients with LVAD. We have previously developed the 33-item LVAD self-care behaviour scale. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate psychometric properties of the 33-item LVAD self-care behaviour scale. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data on 127 patients with a LVAD in Israel, Japan, and the USA were analysed (mean age 51±14.3, 81% male). Exploratory factor analysis extracted three factors, and 13 items were excluded from the scale. Internal consistency assessed by Cronbach's alpha was acceptable for the total scale (α = 0.80) and the three subscales: Factor 1: Monitoring (α = 0.81), Factor 2: Heart failure self-care (α = 0.67), and Factor 3: LVAD self-care (α = 0.63). The 20-item version of the LVAD self-care behaviour scale had sufficient convergent validity with another scale that assessed self-care related to the driveline of LVAD (r = 0.47, p<0.001). Test-retest reliability was adequate (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.58). CONCLUSIONS: The 20-item version of the LVAD self-care behaviour scale showed adequate validity and reliability. The scale is ready for use in clinical practice and research. Additional testing might further optimise the scale.

Inotropic therapy in patients with advanced heart failure. A clinical consensus statement from the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology.

This clinical consensus statement reviews the use of inotropic support in patients with advanced heart failure. The current guidelines only support use of inotropes in the setting of acute decompensated heart failure with evidence of organ malperfusion or shock. However, inotropic support may be reasonable in other patients with advanced heart failure without acute severe decompensation. The clinical evidence supporting use of inotropes in these situations is reviewed. Particularly, patients with persistent congestion, systemic hypoperfusion, or advanced heart failure with need for palliation, and specific situations relevant to implantation of left ventricular assist devices or heart transplantation are discussed. Traditional and novel drugs with inotropic effects are discussed and use of guideline-directed therapy during inotropic support is reviewed. Finally, home inotropic therapy is described, and palliative care and end-of-life aspects are reviewed in relation to management of ongoing inotropic support (including guidance for maintenance and weaning of chronic inotropic therapy support).

Exergaming in patients with a left ventricular assist device: a feasibility study.

AIMS: Exercise games (exergames) have been recently proposed as a mode of facilitating physical activity in patients with chronic diseases. Although patients supported with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) benefit from physical activity, specific LVAD-related issues hinder their ability to exercise properly. The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility and safety of exergaming in LVAD-supported patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Eleven LVAD-supported patients were enrolled in a 4 week exergaming programme using Nintendo Wii console with five sport games. Patients were instructed to play for 30 min a day, 5 days a week. Data on exercise capacity and exergaming were collected by using the 6 min walk test (6MWT) and a daily self-report diary, respectively. Feasibility of using the console and its safety was assessed by a semi-structured patient interview. Quality of life was assessed by the Minnesota Living with Heart failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) and the Cantril's Ladder of Life. Safety was assessed by patient's report in interview and diary. The study group consisted of 10 male patients and 1 female patient, mean age of 67 ± 7 years, of whom 10 were supported with the HeartMate 3 LVAD for a median of 10 (interquartile range 3, 21) months. Baseline exercise capacity assessed by the 6MWT ranged from 240 to 570 m (mean 448 ± 112). After 4 weeks of exergaming, 6MWT distance increased from a mean of 448 ± 112 (evaluated in six patients) to 472 ± 113 m (P = 0.023). Patients' Cantril's Ladder of Life score improved numerically from an average of 6.13 to 7.67, as did their MLHFQ score from 45.9 ± 27 to 38.7 ± 18, with higher and lower scores, respectively, reflecting higher quality of life. No specific LVAD-related safety issues regarding exergaming were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Exergaming was found to be a safe and feasible mode for encouraging physical activity in LVAD-supported patients and carries a potential for improving exercise capacity and quality of life in these patients. Larger scale studies are warranted to further investigate the effect of exergaming in this patient population.