Sex differences in the prognostic role of achieving target doses of heart failure medications: Data from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry.

AIMS: Guidelines recommend target doses (TD) of heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) medications regardless of sex. Differences in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics may explain heterogeneity in treatment response, adverse reactions, and tolerability issues across sexes. The aim of this study was to explore sex-based differences in the association between TD achievement and mortality/morbidity in HFrEF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with HFrEF and HF duration ≥6 months registered in the Swedish HF Registry between May 2000 and December 2020 (follow-up until December 2021) were analysed. Treatments of interest were renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASI) or angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI), and beta-blockers. Multivariable Cox regression models were performed to explore the risk of cardiovascular mortality or hospitalization for HF across dose categories in females versus males. A total of 17 912 patients were analysed (median age 77.0 years, interquartile range [IQR] 70.0-83.0), 29% were female. Over a median follow-up of 1.33 years (IQR 0.29-3.22), for RASI/ARNI there was no significant difference in outcome for females achieving 50-99% versus 100% of TD (hazard ratio 0.92, 95% confidence interval 0.83-1.03), whereas males showed a gradual lowering in risk together with the achievement of higher % of TD (p-interaction = 0.030). For beta-blockers the achievement of TD was associated with the lowest risk of outcome regardless of sex. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that females and males might differently benefit from the same dose of RASI/ARNI, and do represent a general call for randomized controlled trials to consider sex-specific up-titration schemes when testing HFrEF treatments in need of up-titration.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Characterization and Clinical Outcomes of Dilated and Arrhythmogenic Left Ventricular Cardiomyopathies.

BACKGROUND: Nondilated left ventricular cardiomyopathy (NDLVC) has been recently differentiated from dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM). A comprehensive characterization of these 2 entities using cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) and genetic testing has never been performed. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to provide a thorough characterization and assess clinical outcomes in a large multicenter cohort of patients with DCM and NDLVC. METHODS: A total of 462 patients with DCM (227) or NDLVC (235) with CMR data from 4 different referral centers were retrospectively analyzed. The study endpoint was a composite of sudden cardiac death or major ventricular arrhythmias. RESULTS: In comparison to DCM, NDLVC had a higher prevalence of pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants of arrhythmogenic genes (40% vs 23%; P < 0.001), higher left ventricular (LV) systolic function (LV ejection fraction: 51% ± 12% vs 36% ± 15%; P < 0.001) and higher prevalence of free-wall late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) (27% vs 14%; P < 0.001). Conversely, DCM showed higher prevalence of pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants of nonarrhythmogenic genes (23% vs 12%; P = 0.002) and septal LGE (45% vs 32%; P = 0.004). Over a median follow-up of 81 months (Q1-Q3: 40-132 months), the study outcome occurred in 98 (21%) patients. LGE with septal location (HR: 1.929; 95% CI: 1.033-3.601; P = 0.039) was independently associated with the risk of sudden cardiac death or major ventricular arrhythmias together with LV dilatation, older age, advanced NYHA functional class, frequent ventricular ectopic activity, and nonsustained ventricular tachycardia. CONCLUSIONS: In a multicenter cohort of patients with DCM and NDLVC, septal LGE together with LV dilatation, age, advanced disease, and frequent and repetitive ventricular arrhythmias were powerful predictors of major arrhythmic events.

Frailty according to the 2019 HFA-ESC definition in patients at risk for advanced heart failure: Insights from the HELP-HF registry.

AIMS: Frailty is highly prevalent in patients with heart failure (HF), but a concordant definition of this condition is lacking. The Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology (HFA-ESC) proposed in 2019 a new multi-domain definition of frailty, but it has never been validated. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients from the HELP-HF registry were stratified according to the number of HFA-ESC frailty domains fulfilled and to the cumulative deficits frailty index (FI) quintiles. Prevalence of frailty and of each domain was reported, as well as the rate of the composite of all-cause death and HF hospitalization, its single components, and cardiovascular death in each group and quintile. Among 854 included patients, 37 (4.3%), 206 (24.1%), 365 (42.8%), 217 (25.4%), and 29 (3.4%) patients fulfilled zero, one, two, three, or four domains, respectively, while 179 patients had a FI < 0.21 and were considered not frail. The 1-year risk of adverse events increased proportionally to the number of domains fulfilled (for each criterion increase, all-cause death or HF hospitalization: hazard ratio [HR] 1.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.27-1.62; all-cause death: HR 1.72, 95% CI 1.46-2.02, HF hospitalizations: subHR 1.21, 95% CI 1.04-1.31; cardiovascular death: HR 1.77, 95% CI 1.45-2.15). Consistent results were found stratifying the cohort for FI quintiles. The FI as a continuous variable demonstrated higher discriminative ability than the number of domains fulfilled (area under the curve = 0.68 vs. 0.64, p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: Frailty in patients at risk for advanced HF, assessed via a multi-domain approach and the FI, is highly prevalent and identifies those at increased risk of adverse events. The FI was found to be slightly more effective in identifying patients at increased risk of mortality.

How to tackle therapeutic inertia in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. A scientific statement of the Heart Failure Association of the ESC.

Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) reduces morbidity and mortality, but its implementation is often poor in daily clinical practice. Barriers to implementation include clinical and organizational factors that might contribute to clinical inertia, i.e. avoidance/delay of recommended treatment initiation/optimization. The spectrum of strategies that might be applied to foster GDMT implementation is wide, and involves the organizational set-up of heart failure care pathways, tailored drug initiation/optimization strategies increasing the chance of successful implementation, digital tools/telehealth interventions, educational activities and strategies targeting patient/physician awareness, and use of quality registries. This scientific statement by the Heart Failure Association of the ESC provides an overview of the current state of GDMT implementation in HFrEF, clinical and organizational barriers to implementation, and aims at suggesting a comprehensive framework on how to overcome clinical inertia and ultimately improve implementation of GDMT in HFrEF based on up-to-date evidence.

Impact of malnutrition in patients with severe heart failure.

AIM: The role of malnutrition among patients with severe heart failure (HF) is not well established. We evaluated the incidence, predictors, and prognostic impact of malnutrition in patients with severe HF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Nutritional status was measured using the geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI), based on body weight, height and serum albumin concentration, with malnutrition defined as GNRI ≤98. It was assessed in consecutive patients with severe HF, defined by at least one high-risk 'I NEED HELP' marker, enrolled at four Italian centres between January 2020 and November 2021. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. A total of 510 patients with data regarding nutritional status were included in the study (mean age 74 ± 12 years, 66.5% male). Among them, 179 (35.1%) had GNRI ≤98 (malnutrition). At multivariable logistic regression, lower body mass index (BMI) and higher levels of natriuretic peptides (B-type natriuretic peptide [BNP] > median value [685 pg/ml] or N-terminal proBNP > median value [5775 pg/ml]) were independently associated with a higher likelihood of malnutrition. Estimated rates of all-cause death at 1 year were 22.4% and 41.1% in patients without and with malnutrition, respectively (log-rank p < 0.001). The impact of malnutrition on all-cause mortality was confirmed after multivariable adjustment for relevant covariates (adjusted hazard ratio 2.03, 95% confidence interval 1.43-2.89, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In a contemporary, real-world, multicentre cohort of patients with severe HF, malnutrition (defined as GNRI ≤98) was common and independently associated with an increased risk of mortality. Lower BMI and higher natriuretic peptides were identified as predictors of malnutrition in these patients.

Impact of DCM-Causing Genetic Background on Long-Term Response to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), severe left ventricular (LV) dysfunction, and complete left bundle branch block benefit from cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). However, a large heterogeneity of response to CRT is described. Several predictors of response to CRT have been identified, but the role of the underlying genetic background is still poorly explored. OBJECTIVES: In the present study, the authors sought to define differences in LV remodeling and outcome prediction after CRT when stratifying patients according to the presence or absence of DCM-causing genetic background. METHODS: From our center, 74 patients with DCM subjected to CRT and available genetic testing were retrospectively enrolled. Carriers of causative monogenic variants in validated DCM-causing genes, and/or with documented family history of DCM, were classified as affected by genetically determined disease (GEN+DCM) (n = 25). Alternatively, by idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy (idDCM) (n = 49). The primary outcome was long-term LV remodeling and prevalence of super response to CRT (evaluated at 24-48 months after CRT); the secondary outcome was heart failure-related death/heart transplant/LV assist device. RESULTS: GEN+DCM and idDCM patients were homogeneous at baseline with the exception of QRS duration, longer in idDCM. The median follow-up was 55 months. Long-term LV reverse remodeling and the prevalence of super response were significantly higher in the idDCM group (27% in idDCM vs 5% in GEN+DCM; P = 0.025). The heart failure-related death/heart transplant/LV assist device outcome occurred more frequently in patients with GEN+DCM (53% vs 24% in idDCM; P = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: Genotyping contributes to the risk stratification of patients with DCM undergoing CRT implantation in terms of LV remodeling and outcomes.

Differences in presentation, diagnosis and management of heart failure in women. A scientific statement of the Heart Failure Association of the ESC.

Despite the progress in the care of individuals with heart failure (HF), important sex disparities in knowledge and management remain, covering all the aspects of the syndrome, from aetiology and pathophysiology to treatment. Important distinctions in phenotypic presentation are widely known, but the mechanisms behind these differences are only partially defined. The impact of sex-specific conditions in the predisposition to HF has gained progressive interest in the HF community. Under-recruitment of women in large randomized clinical trials has continued in the more recent studies despite epidemiological data no longer reporting any substantial difference in the lifetime risk and prognosis between sexes. Target dose of medications and criteria for device eligibility are derived from studies with a large predominance of men, whereas specific information in women is lacking. The present scientific statement encompasses the whole scenario of available evidence on sex-disparities in HF and aims to define the most challenging and urgent residual gaps in the evidence for the scientific and clinical HF communities.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists use and associations with outcomes in heart failure and type 2 diabetes. Data from the Swedish Heart Failure and Swedish National Diabetes Registries.

AIMS: To assess use and associations with outcomes of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) in a real-world population with heart failure (HF) and type 2 diabetes (T2DM). METHODS AND RESULTS: The Swedish HF Registry was linked with the National Diabetes Registry and other national registries. Independent predictors of GLP-1 RA use were assessed by multivariable logistic regressions, and associations with outcomes by Cox regressions in a 1:1 propensity score-matched cohort. Of 8188 patients enrolled in 2017-2021, 9% received a GLP-1 RA. Independent predictors of GLP-1 RA use were age<75, worse glycaemic control, impaired renal function, obesity and reduced ejection fraction (EF). GLP-1 RA use was not significantly associated with a composite of HF hospitalization (HHF) or cardiovascular (CV) death regardless of EF, but was associated with lower risk of major adverse CV events (CV death, non-fatal stroke/transient ischemic attack or myocardial infarction), CV and all-cause death. In patients with body mass index≥30 kg/m2, GLP-1 RA use was also associated with lower risk of HHF/CV death and HHF alone. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with HF and T2DM, GLP-1 RA use was independently associated with more severe T2DM, reduced EF and obesity, and was not associated with a higher risk of HHF/CV death but with longer survival and less major CV adverse events. An association with lower HHF/CV death and HHF was observed in obese patients. Our findings provide new insights into GLP-1 RA use and its safety in HF and T2DM.

Frequency, characteristics and risk assessment of pulmonary arterial hypertension with a left heart disease phenotype.

AIM: To obtain real-world evidence about the features and risk stratification of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) with a left heart disease (LHD) phenotype (PAH-LHD). METHODS AND RESULTS: By reviewing the records of consecutive incident PAH patients at 7 tertiary centers from 2001 to 2021, we selected 286 subjects with all parameters needed to determine risk of death at baseline and at first follow-up with COMPERA and COMPERA 2.0 scores. Fifty seven (20%) had PAH-LHD according to the AMBITION definition. Compared with no-LHD ones, they were older, had higher BMI, more cardiovascular comorbidities, higher E/e' ratio and left atrial area, but lower BNP concentrations and better right ventricular function and pulmonary hemodynamics. Survival was comparable between PAH-LHD and no-LHD patients, although the former were less commonly treated with dual PAH therapy. Both COMPERA and COMPERA 2.0 discriminated all-cause mortality risk of PAH-LHD at follow-up, but not at baseline. Risk profile significantly improved during follow-up only when assessed by COMPERA 2.0. At multivariable analysis with low-risk status as reference, intermediate-high and high-risk, but not LHD phenotype, were associated with higher hazard of all-cause mortality. Results were comparable in secondary analyses including patients in the last 10 years and atrial fibrillation and echocardiographic abnormalities as additional criteria for PAH-LHD. CONCLUSIONS: In real life, PAH-LHD patients are frequent, have less severe disease and are less likely treated with PAH drug combinations than no-LHD. The COMPERA 2.0 model may be more appropriate to evaluate their mortality risk during follow-up and how it is modulated by therapy.

Impact of coronary microvascular dysfunction in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a meta-analysis.

AIMS: Several mechanisms have been identified in the aetiopathogenesis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Among these, coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) may play a key pathophysiological role. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the prevalence, echocardiographic correlates, and prognostic implications of CMD in patients with HFpEF. METHODS AND RESULTS: A systematic search for articles up to 1 May 2023 was performed. The primary aim was to assess the prevalence of CMD. Secondary aims were to compare key echocardiographic parameters (E/e' ratio, left atrial volume index [LAVi], and left ventricular mass index [LVMi]), clinical outcomes [death and hospitalization for heart failure (HF)], and prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF) between patients with and without CMD. Meta-regressions according to baseline patient characteristics and study features were performed to explore potential heterogeneity sources. We identified 14 observational studies, enrolling 1138 patients with HFpEF. The overall prevalence of CMD was 58%. Compared with patients without CMD, patients with HFpEF and CMD had larger LAVi [mean difference (MD) 3.85 confidence interval (CI) 1.19-6.5, P < 0.01)], higher E/e' ratio (MD 2.76 CI 1.54-3.97; P < 0.01), higher prevalence of AF (odds ratio 1.61 CI 1.04-2.48, P = 0.03) and higher risk of death or hospitalization for HF [hazard ratio 3.19, CI 1.04-9.57, P = 0.04]. CONCLUSIONS: CMD is present in little more than half of the patients with HFpEF and is associated with echocardiographic evidence of more severe diastolic dysfunction and a higher prevalence of AF, doubling the risk of death or HF hospitalization.

Role of arrhythmic phenotype in prognostic stratification and management of dilated cardiomyopathy.

AIMS: Dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) with arrhythmic phenotype combines phenotypical aspects of DCM and predisposition to ventricular arrhythmias, typical of arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy. The definition of DCM with arrhythmic phenotype is not universally accepted, leading to uncertainty in the identification of high-risk patients. This study aimed to assess the prognostic impact of arrhythmic phenotype in risk stratification and the correlation of arrhythmic markers with high-risk arrhythmogenic gene variants in DCM patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this multicentre study, DCM patients with available genetic testing were analysed. The following arrhythmic markers, present at baseline or within 1 year of enrolment, were tested: unexplained syncope, rapid non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT), ≥1000 premature ventricular contractions/24 h or ≥50 ventricular couplets/24 h. LMNA, FLNC, RBM20, and desmosomal pathogenic or likely pathogenic gene variants were considered high-risk arrhythmogenic genes. The study endpoint was a composite of sudden cardiac death and major ventricular arrhythmias (SCD/MVA). We studied 742 DCM patients (45 ± 14 years, 34% female, 410 [55%] with left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] <35%). During a median follow-up of 6 years (interquartile range 1.6-12.1), unexplained syncope and NSVT were the only arrhythmic markers associated with SCD/MVA, and the combination of the two markers carried a significant additive risk of SCD/MVA, incremental to LVEF and New York Heart Association class. The probability of identifying an arrhythmogenic genotype rose from 8% to 30% if both early syncope and NSVT were present. CONCLUSION: In DCM patients, the combination of early detected NSVT and unexplained syncope increases the risk of life-threatening arrhythmic outcomes and can aid the identification of carriers of malignant arrhythmogenic genotypes.

Implantable cardioverter defibrillator use in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy in North America and Europe.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) are critical for preventing sudden cardiac death (SCD) in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC). This study aims to identify cross-continental differences in utilization of primary prevention ICDs and survival free from sustained ventricular arrhythmia (VA) in ARVC. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of ARVC patients without prior VA enrolled in clinical registries from 11 countries throughout Europe and North America. Patients were classified according to whether they received treatment in North America or Europe and were further stratified by baseline predicted VA risk into low- (<10%/5 years), intermediate- (10%-25%/5 years), and high-risk (>25%/5 years) groups. Differences in ICD implantation and survival free from sustained VA events (including appropriate ICD therapy) were assessed. RESULTS: One thousand ninety-eight patients were followed for a median of 5.1 years; 554 (50.5%) received a primary prevention ICD, and 286 (26.0%) experienced a first VA event. After adjusting for baseline risk factors, North Americans were more than three times as likely to receive ICDs {hazard ratio (HR) 3.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.5, 3.8]} but had only mildly increased risk for incident sustained VA [HR 1.4 (95% CI 1.1, 1.8)]. North Americans without ICDs were at higher risk for incident sustained VA [HR 2.1 (95% CI 1.3, 3.4)] than Europeans. CONCLUSIONS: North American ARVC patients were substantially more likely than Europeans to receive primary prevention ICDs across all arrhythmic risk strata. A lower rate of ICD implantation in Europe was not associated with a higher rate of VA events in those without ICDs.

Characteristics and outcomes of patients with tricuspid regurgitation and advanced heart failure.

AIMS: To evaluate the role of tricuspid regurgitation in advanced heart failure. METHODS: The multicenter observational HELP-HF registry enrolled consecutive patients with heart failure and at least one 'I NEED HELP' criterion evaluated at four Italian centers between January 2020 and November 2021. Patients with no data on tricuspid regurgitation and/or receiving tricuspid valve intervention during follow-up were excluded. The population was stratified by no/mild tricuspid regurgitation vs. moderate tricuspid regurgitation vs. severe tricuspid regurgitation. Variables independently associated with tricuspid regurgitation, as well as the association between tricuspid regurgitation and clinical outcomes were investigated. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Among the 1085 patients included in this study, 508 (46.8%) had no/mild tricuspid regurgitation, 373 (34.4%) had moderate tricuspid regurgitation and 204 (18.8%) had severe tricuspid regurgitation. History of atrial fibrillation, any prior valve surgery, high dose of furosemide, preserved left ventricular ejection fraction, moderate/severe mitral regurgitation and pulmonary hypertension were found to be independently associated with an increased likelihood of severe tricuspid regurgitation. Estimated rates of 1-year all-cause death were of 21.4, 24.5 and 37.1% in no/mild tricuspid regurgitation, moderate tricuspid regurgitation and severe tricuspid regurgitation, respectively (log-rank P  < 0.001). As compared with nonsevere tricuspid regurgitation, severe tricuspid regurgitation was independently associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 1.38, 95% confidence interval 1.01-1.88, P  = 0.042), whereas moderate tricuspid regurgitation did not. CONCLUSION: In a contemporary, real-world cohort of patients with advanced heart failure, several clinical and echocardiographic characteristics are associated with an increased likelihood of severe tricuspid regurgitation. Patients with severe tricuspid regurgitation have an increased risk of mortality.

Does Heterogeneity Exist in Treatment Associations With Renin-Angiotensin-System Inhibitors or Beta-blockers According to Phenotype Clusters in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction?

BACKGROUND: We explored the association between use of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors and beta-blockers, with mortality/morbidity in 5 previously identified clusters of patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). METHODS AND RESULTS: We analyzed 20,980 patients with HFpEF from the Swedish HF registry, phenotyped into young-low comorbidity burden (12%), atrial fibrillation-hypertensive (32%), older-atrial fibrillation (24%), obese-diabetic (15%), and a cardiorenal cluster (17%). In Cox proportional hazard models with inverse probability weighting, there was no heterogeneity in the association between renin-angiotensin system inhibitor use and cluster membership for any of the outcomes: cardiovascular (CV) mortality, all-cause mortality, HF hospitalisation, CV hospitalisation, or non-CV hospitalisation. In contrast, we found a statistical interaction between beta-blocker use and cluster membership for all-cause mortality (P = .03) and non-CV hospitalisation (P = .001). In the young-low comorbidity burden and atrial fibrillation-hypertensive cluster, beta-blocker use was associated with statistically significant lower all-cause mortality and non-CV hospitalisation and in the obese-diabetic cluster beta-blocker use was only associated with a statistically significant lower non-CV hospitalisation. The interaction between beta-blocker use and cluster membership for all-cause mortality could potentially be driven by patients with improved EF. However, patient numbers were diminished when excluding those with improved EF and the direction of the associations remained similar. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with HFpEF, the association with all-cause mortality and non-CV hospitalisation was heterogeneous across clusters for beta-blockers. It remains to be elucidated how heterogeneity in HFpEF could influence personalized medicine and future clinical trial design.

Clinical burden and predictors of non-cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in advanced heart failure.

BACKGROUND: The changing demographic of heart failure (HF) increases the exposure to non-cardiovascular (non-CV) events. We investigated the distribution of non-CV mortality/morbidity and the characteristics associated with higher risk of non-CV events in patients with advanced HF. METHODS: Patients from the HELP-HF registry were stratified according to the number of 2018 HFA-ESC criteria for advanced HF. Endpoints were non-CV mortality and non-CV hospitalization. Competing risk analyses were performed assessing the association between HFA-ESC criteria and study outcomes and the additional predictors of non-CV endpoints. RESULTS: One thousand one hundred and forty-nine patients were included (median age 77 years-IQR 69-83). At 6, 12, 18 and 22 months, cumulative incidence of CV vs non-CV mortality was 13% vs 5%, 17% vs 8%, 20% vs 12%, 23% vs 12%, and of CV vs non-CV hospitalization was 26% vs 11%, 38% vs 17%, 45% vs 20%, 50% vs 21%. HFA-ESC criteria were associated with increasing adjusted risk of CV death, whereas no association was observed for CV hospitalization, non-CV death and non-CV hospitalization. Predictors of non-CV death were age, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dementia, preserved ejection fraction, >1 HF hospitalization and hemoglobin. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with advanced HF are exposed to high, even though not predominant, burden of non-CV outcomes. HFA-ESC criteria aid to stratify the risk of CV death, but are not associated with lower competing risk of non-CV outcomes. Alternative factors can be useful to define the patients with advanced HF at risk of non-CV events in order to better select patients for treatments specifically reducing CV risk.

Guideline-directed medical therapy in severe heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: An analysis from the HELP-HF registry.

AIM: Persistent symptoms despite guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) and poor tolerance of GDMT are hallmarks of patients with advanced heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, real-world data on GDMT use, dose, and prognostic implications are lacking. METHODS AND RESULTS: We included 699 consecutive patients with HFrEF and at least one 'I NEED HELP' marker for advanced HF enrolled in a multicentre registry. Beta-blockers (BB) were administered to 574 (82%) patients, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers or angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ACEi/ARB/ARNI) were administered to 381 (55%) patients and 416 (60%) received mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA). Overall, ≥50% of target doses were reached in 41%, 22%, and 56% of the patients on BB, ACEi/ARB/ARNI and MRA, respectively. Hypotension, bradycardia, kidney dysfunction and hyperkalaemia were the main causes of underprescription and/or underdosing, but up to a half of the patients did not receive target doses for unknown causes (51%, 41%, and 55% for BB, ACEi/ARB/ARNI and MRA, respectively). The proportions of patients receiving BB and ACEi/ARB/ARNI were lower among those fulfilling the 2018 HFA-ESC criteria for advanced HF. Treatment with BB and ACEi/ARB/ARNI were associated with a lower risk of death or HF hospitalizations (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48-0.84, and HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58-0.95, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In a large, real-world, contemporary cohort of patients with severe HFrEF, with at least one marker for advanced HF, prescription and uptitration of GDMT remained limited. A significant proportion of patients were undertreated due to unknown reasons suggesting a potential role of clinical inertia either by the prescribing healthcare professional or by the patient. Treatment with BB and ACEi/ARB/ARNI was associated with lower mortality/morbidity.

Role of ejection fraction in patients at risk for advanced heart failure: insights from the HELP-HF registry.

AIMS: Patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (EF) (HFrEF), mildly reduced EF (HFmrEF), and preserved EF (HFpEF) may all progress to advanced HF, but the impact of EF in the advanced setting is not well established. Our aim was to assess the prognostic impact of EF in patients with at least one 'I NEED HELP' marker for advanced HF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with HF and at least one high-risk 'I NEED HELP' criterion from four centres were included in this analysis. Outcomes were assessed in patients with HFrEF (EF ≤ 40%), HFmrEF (EF 41-49%), and HFpEF (EF ≥ 50%) and with EF analysed as a continuous variable. The prognostic impact of medical therapy for HF in patients with EF < 50% and EF > 50% was also evaluated. All-cause death was the primary endpoint, and cardiovascular death was a secondary endpoint. Among 1149 patients enrolled [mean age 75.1 ± 11.5 years, 67.3% males, 67.6% hospitalized, median follow-up 260 days (inter-quartile range 105-390 days)], HFrEF, HFmrEF, and HFpEF were observed in 699 (60.8%), 122 (10.6%), and 328 (28.6%) patients, and 1 year mortality was 28.3%, 26.2%, and 20.1, respectively (log-rank P = 0.036). As compared with HFrEF patients, HFpEF patients had a lower risk of all-cause death [adjusted hazard ratio (HRadj ) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48-0.94, P = 0.022], whereas no difference was noted for HFmrEF patients. After multivariable adjustment, a lower risk of all-cause death (HRadj for 5% increase 0.94, 95% CI 0.89-0.99, P = 0.017) and cardiovascular death (HRadj for 5% increase 0.94, 95% CI 0.88-1.00, P = 0.049) was observed at higher EF values. Beta-blockers and renin-angiotensin system inhibitors or sacubitril/valsartan were associated with lower mortality in both EF < 50% and EF ≥ 50% groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with HF and at least one 'I NEED HELP' marker for advanced HF, left ventricular EF is still of prognostic value.

Prognostic role of mitral regurgitation in patients with advanced heart failure.

AIM: The impact of mitral regurgitation (MR) in patients with advanced heart failure (HF) is poorly known. We aimed to evaluate the impact of MR on clinical outcomes of a real-world, contemporary, multicentre population with advanced HF. METHODS: The HELP-HF registry enrolled patients with HF and at least one "I NEED HELP" criterion, at four Italian centres between January 2020 and November 2021. The population was stratified by none/mild MR vs. moderate MR vs. severe MR. Outcomes of interest were all-cause, cardiovascular (CV) death, the composite of all-cause death or first HF hospitalization, first HF hospitalization and recurrent HF hospitalizations. RESULTS: Among 1079 patients, 429 (39.8%) had none/mild MR, 443 (41.1%) had moderate MR and 207 (19.2%) had severe MR. Patients with severe MR were most likely to be inpatients, present with cardiogenic shock, need intravenous loop diuretics and inotropes/vasopressors, have lower ejection fraction and higher natriuretic peptides. Estimated rates of all-cause death, CV death, and the composite of all-cause death or first HF hospitalization at 1 year increased with increasing MR severity. Compared with no/mild MR, severe MR was independently associated with an increased risk of CV death (adjusted HR 1.61, 95% CI 1.04-2.51, p = 0.033) and recurrent HF hospitalizations (adjusted HR 1.49, 95% CI 1.08-2.06, p = 0.015), but not with and increased risk of all-cause death, first HF hospitalization and composite outcome. CONCLUSIONS: In unselected patients with advanced HF, severe MR was common and independently associated with an increased risk of CV death and of recurrent HF hospitalizations.

Clinical and prognostic implications of heart failure hospitalization in patients with advanced heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalization is associated with poor outcomes in patients with heart failure, but its prognostic role in advanced heart failure is still unsettled. We evaluated the prognostic role of heart failure hospitalization in patients with advanced heart failure. METHODS: The multicenter HELP-HF registry enrolled consecutive patients with heart failure and at least one high-risk 'I NEED HELP' marker. Characteristics and outcomes were compared between patients who were hospitalized for decompensated heart failure (inpatients) or not (outpatients) at the time of enrolment. The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause mortality or first heart failure hospitalization. RESULTS: Among the 1149 patients included [mean age 75.1 ±â€Š11.5 years, 67.3% men, median left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 35% (IQR 25-50%)], 777 (67.6%) were inpatients at the time of enrolment. As compared with outpatients, inpatients had lower LVEF, higher natriuretic peptides and a worse clinical profile. The 1-year rate of the primary endpoint was 50.9% in inpatients versus 36.8% in outpatients [crude hazard ratio 1.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.39-2.07, P < 0.001]. At multivariable analysis, inpatient status was independently associated with a higher risk of the primary endpoint (adjusted hazard ratio 1.54, 95% CI 1.23-1.93, P < 0.001). Among inpatients, the independent predictors of the primary endpoint were older age, lower SBP, heart failure association criteria for advanced heart failure and glomerular filtration rate 30 ml/min/1.73 m2 or less. CONCLUSION: Hospitalization for heart failure in patients with at least one high-risk 'I NEED HELP' marker is associated with an extremely poor prognosis supporting the need for specific interventions, such as mechanical circulatory support or heart transplantation.