Unravelling the interplay between hyperkalaemia, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone inhibitor use and clinical outcomes. Data from 9222 chronic heart failure patients of the ESC-HFA-EORP Heart Failure Long-Term Registry.

AIMS: We assessed the interplay between hyperkalaemia (HK) and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor (RAASi) use, dose and discontinuation, and their association with all-cause or cardiovascular death in patients with chronic heart failure (HF). We hypothesized that HK-associated increased death may be related to RAASi withdrawal. METHODS AND RESULTS: The ESC-HFA-EORP Heart Failure Long-Term Registry was used. Among 9222 outpatients (HF with reduced ejection fraction: 60.6%, HF with mid-range ejection fraction: 22.9%, HF with preserved ejection fraction: 16.5%) from 31 countries, 16.6% had HK (≥5.0 mmol/L) at baseline. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) was used in 88.3%, a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) in 58.7%, or a combination in 53.2%; of these, at ≥50% of target dose in ACEi: 61.8%; ARB: 64.7%; and MRA: 90.3%. At a median follow-up of 12.2 months, there were 789 deaths (8.6%). Both hypokalaemia and HK were independently associated with higher mortality, and ACEi/ARB prescription at baseline with lower mortality. MRA prescription was not retained in the model. In multivariable analyses, HK at baseline was independently associated with MRA non-prescription at baseline and subsequent discontinuation. When considering subsequent discontinuation of RAASi (instead of baseline use), HK was no longer found associated with all-cause deaths. Importantly, all RAASi (ACEi, ARB, or MRA) discontinuations were strongly associated with mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In HF, hyper- and hypokalaemia were associated with mortality. However, when adjusting for RAASi discontinuation, HK was no longer associated with mortality, suggesting that HK may be a risk marker for RAASi discontinuation rather than a risk factor for worse outcomes.

El análisis del flujo aórtico por ecocardiografía Doppler es útil en la estratificación pronóstica de los pacientes con estenosis aórtica grave con fracción de eyección normal / Systolic volume index by doppler echocardiography is an useful marker for stratification and prognostic evaluation in patients with severe aortic stenosis and preserved ejection fraction

Introducción y objetivos. El pronóstico de los pacientes con estenosis aórtica grave con bajo gradiente aórtico y fracción de eyección normal es controvertido. Nuestro estudio analiza el pronóstico de estos pacientes y su relación con el gradiente de presión y el flujo valvular aórtico. Métodos. Cohorte retrospectiva de 363 pacientes consecutivos con estenosis aórtica grave y fracción de eyección normal, dividida en cuatro grupos según índice de volumen sistólico mayor o menor que 35 ml/m2 y gradiente aórtico medio mayor o menor que 40 mmHg. Grupo I, flujo normal y gradiente elevado (n = 169; 47%); grupo II, flujo normal y bajo gradiente (n = 98; 27%); grupo III, bajo flujo y gradiente elevado (n = 54; 15%), y grupo IV, bajo flujo y bajo gradiente (n = 42; 12%). El objetivo primario es la mortalidad total. Resultados. Los factores de riesgo independientes de mortalidad son la edad (hazard ratio = 1,04; intervalo de confianza del 95%, 1,01-1,08) y la fibrilación auricular (hazard ratio = 2,21; intervalo de confianza del 95%, 1,24-3,94). El tratamiento quirúrgico se asocia a mayor supervivencia en todos los grupos (hazard ratio = 0,25; intervalo de confianza del 95%, 0,13-0,49). Los pacientes con bajo flujo presentan mayor mortalidad que los pacientes con flujo normal (el 26,6 frente al 13,6%; p = 0,004). El grupo II muestra mejor pronóstico (hazard ratio = 0,4; intervalo de confianza del 95%, 0,2-0,9). Conclusiones. Los pacientes con estenosis aórtica grave, fracción de eyección normal y bajo flujo aórtico presentan peor pronóstico. El análisis del flujo aórtico mediante ecocardiografía Doppler es útil en la estratificación de riesgo y en la toma de decisiones terapéuticas en pacientes con estenosis aórtica (AU)

Introduction and objectives. The prognosis of patients with severe aortic stenosis, low aortic gradient and preserved ejection fraction is controversial. Our study analyzed the prognosis of these patients and its relation to pressure gradient and aortic valve flow. Methods. We performed a retrospective cohort study of 363 consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis and preserved ejection fraction, divided into 4 groups, based on the presence of a systolic volume index greater or lower than 35mL/m2 and the presence of a mean aortic gradient greater or lower than 40mmHg. Group I: normal flow, high gradient (n=169, 47%); group II: normal flow, low gradient (n=98, 27%); group III: low flow, high gradient (n=54, 15%), and group IV: low flow, low gradient (n=42, 12%). The primary endpoint was overall mortality. Results. Independent risk factors for mortality were age (hazard ratio=1.04; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.08) and atrial fibrillation (hazard ratio=2.21; 95% confidence interval, 1.24-3.94). Surgical treatment was associated with longer survival in all groups (hazard ratio=0.25; 95% confidence interval: 0.13-0.49). Mortality was higher in patients with low flow than in those with with normal flow (26.6% vs 13.6%; P=.004). The most favorable mean prognosis was found in group II (hazard ratio=0.4; 95% confidence interval, 0.2-0.9). Conclusions. Patients with severe aortic stenosis, normal ejection fraction and low aortic flow have a worse prognosis. Analysis of aortic flow by Doppler echocardiography is useful in risk stratification and therapeutic decision-making in patients with aortic stenosis (AU)

Systolic volume index by Doppler echocardiography is an useful marker for stratification and prognostic evaluation in patients with severe aortic stenosis and preserved ejection fraction.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The prognosis of patients with severe aortic stenosis, low aortic gradient and preserved ejection fraction is controversial. Our study analyzed the prognosis of these patients and its relation to pressure gradient and aortic valve flow. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 363 consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis and preserved ejection fraction, divided into 4 groups, based on the presence of a systolic volume index greater or lower than 35 mL/m(2) and the presence of a mean aortic gradient greater or lower than 40 mmHg. Group I: normal flow, high gradient (n=169, 47%); group II: normal flow, low gradient (n=98, 27%); group III: low flow, high gradient (n=54, 15%), and group IV: low flow, low gradient (n=42, 12%). The primary endpoint was overall mortality. RESULTS: Independent risk factors for mortality were age (hazard ratio=1.04; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.08) and atrial fibrillation (hazard ratio=2.21; 95% confidence interval, 1.24-3.94). Surgical treatment was associated with longer survival in all groups (hazard ratio=0.25; 95% confidence interval: 0.13-0.49). Mortality was higher in patients with low flow than in those with with normal flow (26.6% vs 13.6%; P=.004). The most favorable mean prognosis was found in group II (hazard ratio=0.4; 95% confidence interval, 0.2-0.9). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with severe aortic stenosis, normal ejection fraction and low aortic flow have a worse prognosis. Analysis of aortic flow by Doppler echocardiography is useful in risk stratification and therapeutic decision-making in patients with aortic stenosis.