GEospatial aNalysis of ExtRacorporeal membrane oxygenATion in Europe (GENERATE)

Introduction: A cross-sectional survey GENERATE (GEospatial aNalysis of ExtRacorporeal membrane oxygenATion in Europe) initiated on behalf of the European chapter of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (EuroELSO), aims to provide a systematic, detailed description of contemporary Extracorporeal Life Support (ECLS) provision in Europe, map the spatial distribution of ECLS centers, and the accessibility of ECLS. Methods: Structured data collection forms were used to create a narrative description of ECLS provision in EuroELSO affiliated countries. This consisted of both center-specific data and relevant national infrastructure. Data was provided by a network of local and national representatives. Spatial accessibility analysis was conducted where appropriate geographical data were available.Results: 281 centers from 37 countries affiliated to EuroELSO were included in the geospatial analysis and demonstrate heterogeneous patterns of ECLS provision. Accessibility of ECLS services within 1 hour of drive-time is available for 50% of the adult population in 8 of 37 countries (21.6%). This proportion is reached within 2 hours in 21 of 37 countries (56.8%) and within 3 hours in 24 of 37 countries (64.9%). For pediatric centers, accessibility is similar with 9 of 37 countries (24.3%) reached the covering of 50% of the population aged 0-14 within 1 hour and 23 of 37 countries (62.2%) within 2 hours and 3 hours.Conclusions: ECLS services are accessible in most of the European countries, but their provision differs across the continent. There is still no solid evidence given regarding the optimal ECLS provision model. The spatial disparity in ECLS provision demonstrated in our analysis requires governments, healthcare professionals and policy makers to consider how to develop existing provision to accommodate the anticipated increase in need for time critical access to this advanced support modality

Efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin according to frailty in patients with heart failure: a prespecified analysis of the DELIVER trial

Background: Frailty is increasing in prevalence and because frail patients are often perceived to have a less favorable benefit/risk profile, they may be less likely to receive new pharmacological treatments. We investigated the efficacy and tolerability of dapagliflozin according to frailty status in patients with heart failure and mildly reduced and preserved ejection fraction randomized in DELIVER. Methods: Frailty was measured using the Rockwood cumulative deficit approach. The primary endpoint was time to a first worsening heart failure event or cardiovascular death. Results: Of the 6263 patients randomized, a Frailty Index (FI) was calculable in 6258. In total, 2,354 (37.6%) patients had class 1 frailty (FI <0.210, i.e., not frail), 2,413 (38.6%) were in class 2 (FI 0.211-0.310, i.e., more frail), and 1,491 (23.8%) had class 3 frailty (FI >0.311, i.e., most frail). Greater frailty was associated with a higher rate of the primary endpoint (per 100 person years): FI class 1, 6.3 (95% CI 5.7-7.1); class 2, 8.3 (7.5-9.1); and class 3, 13.4 (12.1-14.7), P<0.001. The effect of dapagliflozin (as a hazard ratio) on the primary endpoint from FI class 1 to 3 was: 0.85 (95% CI, 0.68-1.06); 0.89 (0.74-1.08); and 0.74 (0.61-0.91), respectively (Pinteraction=0.40). Although frailer patients had worse KCCQ scores at baseline, the improvement with dapagliflozin was greater than in less frail patients: placebo-corrected improvement in KCCQ-OSS at 4 months FI class 1, 0.3 (95% CI -0.9 to 1.4); class 2, 1.5 (0.3-2.7); and class 3, 3.4 (1.7-5.1) [Pinteraction=0.021]. Adverse reactions and treatment discontinuation, while more frequent in frailer patients, were not more common with dapagliflozin than placebo, irrespective of frailty class. Conclusions: In DELIVER, frailty was common and associated with worse outcomes. The benefit of dapagliflozin was consistent across the range of frailty studied. The improvement in health-related quality of life with dapagliflozin occurred early and was greater in patients with greater frailty

ECPR for refractory OHCA - lessons from 3 randomized controlled trials. The trialists´view

Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation is a promising treatment for refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Three recent randomized trials (ARREST-trial, Prague OHCA study, and INCEPTION-trial) that addressed the clinical benefit of ECPR in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, yielded seemingly diverging results. The evidence for extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, derived from three recent RCT's, is not contradictory but rather complementary. Excellent results can be achieved with a very high level of dedication, provided that strict selection criteria are applied. However, pragmatic implementation of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation does not necessarily lead to improved outcome of refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Centers that are performing extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest or aspire to do so, should critically evaluate whether they are able to meet the prerequisites that are needed to conduct an effective extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation program

Efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin according to frailty in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

Background: Frailty may modify the risk−benefit profile of certain treatments, and frail patients may have reduced tolerance to treatments. Objective: To investigate the efficacy of dapagliflozin according to frailty status, using the Rockwood cumulative deficit approach, in DAPA-HF (Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in Heart Failure). Design: Post hoc analysis of a phase 3 randomized clinical trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03036124) Setting: 410 sites in 20 countries. Patients: Patients with symptomatic heart failure (HF) with a left ventricular ejection fraction of 40% or less and elevated natriuretic peptide. Intervention: Addition of once-daily 10 mg of dapagliflozin or placebo to guideline-recommended therapy. Measurements: The primary outcome was worsening HF or cardiovascular death. Results: Of the 4744 patients randomly assigned in DAPA-HF, a frailty index (FI) was calculable in 4742. In total, 2392 patients (50.4%) were in FI class 1 (FI ≤0.210; not frail), 1606 (33.9%) in FI class 2 (FI 0.211 to 0.310; more frail), and 744 (15.7%) in FI class 3 (FI ≥0.311; most frail). The median follow-up time was 18.2 months. Dapagliflozin reduced the risk for worsening HF or cardiovascular death, regardless of FI class. The differences in event rate per 100 person-years for dapagliflozin versus placebo from lowest to highest FI class were −3.5 (95% CI, −5.7 to −1.2), −3.6 (CI, −6.6 to −0.5), and −7.9 (CI, −13.9 to −1.9). Consistent benefits were observed for other clinical events and health status, but the absolute reductions were generally larger in the most frail patients. Study drug discontinuation and serious adverse events were not more frequent with dapagliflozin than placebo, regardless of FI class. Limitation: Enrollment criteria precluded the inclusion of very high-risk patients. Conclusion: Dapagliflozin improved all outcomes examined, regardless of frailty status. However, the absolute reductions were larger in more frail patients. Primary Funding Source: AstraZeneca

Efficacy and Safety of Dapagliflozin According to Frailty in Patients With Heart Failure: A Prespecified Analysis of the DELIVER Trial

BACKGROUND: Frailty is increasing in prevalence. Because patients with frailty are often perceived to have a less favorable risk/benefit profile, they may be less likely to receive new pharmacologic treatments. We investigated the efficacy and tolerability of dapagliflozin according to frailty status in patients with heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction randomized in DELIVER (Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the Lives of Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure). METHODS: Frailty was measured using the Rockwood cumulative deficit approach. The primary end point was time to a first worsening heart failure event or cardiovascular death. RESULTS: Of the 6263 patients randomized, a frailty index (FI) was calculable in 6258. In total, 2354 (37.6%) patients had class 1 frailty (FI ≤0.210; ie, not frail), 2413 (38.6%) had class 2 frailty (FI 0.211-0.310; ie, more frail), and 1491 (23.8%) had class 3 frailty (FI ≥0.311; ie, most frail). Greater frailty was associated with a higher rate of the primary end point (per 100 person-years): FI class 1, 6.3 (95% CI 5.7-7.1); class 2, 8.3 (7.5-9.1); and class 3, 13.4 (12.1-14.7; P<0.001). The effect of dapagliflozin (as a hazard ratio) on the primary end point from FI class 1 to 3 was 0.85 (95% CI, 0.68-1.06), 0.89 (0.74-1.08), and 0.74 (0.61-0.91), respectively (Pinteraction=0.40). Although patients with a greater degree of frailty had worse Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores at baseline, their improvement with dapagliflozin was greater than it was in patients with less frailty: placebo-corrected improvement in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary Score at 4 months in FI class 1 was 0.3 (95% CI, -0.9 to 1.4); in class 2, 1.5 (0.3-2.7); and in class 3, 3.4 (1.7-5.1; Pinteraction=0.021). Adverse reactions and treatment discontinuation, although more frequent in patients with a greater degree of frailty, were not more common with dapagliflozin than with placebo irrespective of frailty class. CONCLUSIONS: In DELIVER, frailty was common and associated with worse outcomes. The benefit of dapagliflozin was consistent across the range of frailty studied. The improvement in health-related quality of life with dapagliflozin occurred early and was greater in patients with a higher level of frailty. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT03619213

Effect of dapagliflozin on worsening heart failure and cardiovascular death in patients with heart failure with and without diabetes

Importance: Additional treatments are needed for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors may be an effective treatment for patients with HFrEF, even those without diabetes. Objective: To evaluate the effects of dapagliflozin in patients with HFrEF with and without diabetes. Design, Setting, and Participants: Exploratory analysis of a phase 3 randomized trial conducted at 410 sites in 20 countries. Patients with New York Heart Association classification II to IV with an ejection fraction less than or equal to 40% and elevated plasma N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide were enrolled between February 15, 2017, and August 17, 2018, with final follow-up on June 6, 2019. Interventions: Addition of once-daily 10 mg of dapagliflozin or placebo to recommended therapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the composite of an episode of worsening heart failure or cardiovascular death. This outcome was analyzed by baseline diabetes status and, in patients without diabetes, by glycated hemoglobin level less than 5.7% vs greater than or equal to 5.7%. Results: Among 4744 patients randomized (mean age, 66 years; 1109 [23%] women; 2605 [55%] without diabetes), 4742 completed the trial. Among participants without diabetes, the primary outcome occurred in 171 of 1298 (13.2%) in the dapagliflozin group and 231 of 1307 (17.7%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.60-0.88]). In patients with diabetes, the primary outcome occurred in 215 of 1075 (20.0%) in the dapagliflozin group and 271 of 1064 (25.5%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.63-0.90]) (P value for interaction = .80). Among patients without diabetes and a glycated hemoglobin level less than 5.7%, the primary outcome occurred in 53 of 438 patients (12.1%) in the dapagliflozin group and 71 of 419 (16.9%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.47-0.96]). In patients with a glycated hemoglobin of at least 5.7%, the primary outcome occurred in 118 of 860 patients (13.7%) in the dapagliflozin group and 160 of 888 (18.0%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.59-0.94]) (P value for interaction = .72). Volume depletion was reported as an adverse event in 7.3% of patients in the dapagliflozin group and 6.1% in the placebo group among patients without diabetes and in 7.8% of patients in the dapagliflozin group and 7.8% in the placebo group among patients with diabetes. A kidney adverse event was reported in 4.8% of patients in the dapagliflozin group and 6.0% in the placebo group among patients without diabetes and in 8.5% of patients in the dapagliflozin group and 8.7% in the placebo group among patients with diabetes. Conclusions and Relevance: In this exploratory analysis of a randomized trial of patients with HFrEF, dapagliflozin compared with placebo, when added to recommended therapy, significantly reduced the risk of worsening heart failure or cardiovascular death independently of diabetes status. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03036124

Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibition compared with enalapril on the risk of clinical progression in surviving patients with heart failure

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials in heart failure have focused on the improvement in symptoms or decreases in the risk of death and other cardiovascular events. Little is known about the effect of drugs on the risk of clinical deterioration in surviving patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We compared the angiotensin-neprilysin inhibitor LCZ696 (400 mg daily) with the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor enalapril (20 mg daily) in 8399 patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction in a double-blind trial. The analyses focused on prespecified measures of nonfatal clinical deterioration. In comparison with the enalapril group, fewer LCZ696-treated patients required intensification of medical treatment for heart failure (520 versus 604; hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.74-0.94; P=0.003) or an emergency department visit for worsening heart failure (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.85; P=0.001). The patients in the LCZ696 group had 23% fewer hospitalizations for worsening heart failure (851 versus 1079; P<0.001) and were less likely to require intensive care (768 versus 879; 18% rate reduction, P=0.005), to receive intravenous positive inotropic agents (31% risk reduction, P<0.001), and to have implantation of a heart failure device or cardiac transplantation (22% risk reduction, P=0.07). The reduction in heart failure hospitalization with LCZ696 was evident within the first 30 days after randomization. Worsening of symptom scores in surviving patients was consistently more common in the enalapril group. LCZ696 led to an early and sustained reduction in biomarkers of myocardial wall stress and injury (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide and troponin) versus enalapril. CONCLUSIONS: Angiotensin-neprilysin inhibition prevents the clinical progression of surviving patients with heart failure more effectively than angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01035255

Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibition compared with enalapril on the risk of clinical progression in surviving patients with heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials in heart failure have focused on the improvement in symptoms or decreases in the risk of death and other cardiovascular events. Little is known about the effect of drugs on the risk of clinical deterioration in surviving patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We compared the angiotensin-neprilysin inhibitor LCZ696 (400 mg daily) with the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor enalapril (20 mg daily) in 8399 patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction in a double-blind trial. The analyses focused on prespecified measures of nonfatal clinical deterioration. In comparison with the enalapril group, fewer LCZ696-treated patients required intensification of medical treatment for heart failure (520 versus 604; hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.74-0.94; P=0.003) or an emergency department visit for worsening heart failure (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.85; P=0.001). The patients in the LCZ696 group had 23% fewer hospitalizations for worsening heart failure (851 versus 1079; P<0.001) and were less likely to require intensive care (768 versus 879; 18% rate reduction, P=0.005), to receive intravenous positive inotropic agents (31% risk reduction, P<0.001), and to have implantation of a heart failure device or cardiac transplantation (22% risk reduction, P=0.07). The reduction in heart failure hospitalization with LCZ696 was evident within the first 30 days after randomization. Worsening of symptom scores in surviving patients was consistently more common in the enalapril group. LCZ696 led to an early and sustained reduction in biomarkers of myocardial wall stress and injury (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide and troponin) versus enalapril. CONCLUSIONS: Angiotensin-neprilysin inhibition prevents the clinical progression of surviving patients with heart failure more effectively than angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01035255