Outcomes and factors associated with mortality in patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure: FARAONIC study

Background: Heart failure (HF) and atrial fibrillation (AF) are common and coexistent conditions. Hypothesis: To investigate the adverse events and mortality risk factors in patients with AF and HF treated with rivaroxaban in Spain. Methods: Multicenter, prospective and observational study with a follow-up of 2 years, that included adults, with a diagnosis of nonvalvular AF and chronic HF, anticoagulated with rivaroxaban at least 4 months before being enrolled. Results: A total of 672 patients from 71 Spanish centers were recruited, of whom 658 (97.9%) were included in the safety analysis and 552 (82.1%) in the per protocol analysis. At baseline, the mean age was 73.7 +/- 10.9 years, 65.9% were male, 51.3% had HF with preserved ejection fraction and 58.7% were on New York Heart Association functional class II. CHA2DS2-VASc was 4.1 +/- 1.5. During the follow-up, 11.6% of patients died and around one-quarter of patients were hospitalized or visited the emergency department, being HF worsening/progression the main cause (51.1%), with a 2.9% of thromboembolic events and 2.0% of acute coronary syndromes. Major bleeding occurred in 3.1% of patients, with 0.5% experiencing intracranial bleeding but no fatalities. Compliance with HF treatment was associated with a lower risk of death (hazard ratio: 0.092; 95% confidence interval: 0.03-0.31). Conclusions: Among patients with HF and AF anticoagulated with rivaroxaban, incidences of thromboembolic or hemorrhagic complications were low. The most important factor for improving survival was compliance with HF drugs, what strengths the need for early treatment with HF disease-modifying therapy and anticoagulation

Different profiles of advanced heart failure among patients with and without diabetes mellitus. Findings from the EPICTER study.

This work aims to compare the characteristics of advanced heart failure (HF) in patients with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) and to determine the relevance of variables used to define advanced HF. This cross-sectional, multicenter study included patients hospitalized for HF. They were classified into four groups according to presence/absence of advanced HF, determined based on general and cardiac criteria, and presence/absence of DM. To analyze the importance of variables, we grew a random forest algorithm (RF) based on mortality at six months. A total of 3153 patients were included. The prevalence of advanced HF among patients with DM was 24% compared to 23% among those without DM (p=0.53). Patients with advanced HF and DM had more comorbidity related to cardiovascular and renal diseases; their prognosis was the poorest (log-rank <0.0001) though the adjusted hazard ratio by group in the Cox regression analysis was not significant. The variables that were significantly related to mortality were the number of comorbidities (p=0.005) and systolic blood pressure (p=0.024). The RF showed that general criteria were more important for defining advanced HF than cardiac criteria. Patients with advanced HF and DM were characterized by DM in progression with macro and microvascular complications. The outcomes among advanced HF patients were poor; patients with advanced HF and DM had the poorest outcomes. General criteria were the most important to establish accurately a definition of advanced HF, being decisive the evidence of disease progression in patients with DM

Prospective observational cohort study on grading the severity of postoperative complications in global surgery research

Background The Clavien–Dindo classification is perhaps the most widely used approach for reporting postoperative complications in clinical trials. This system classifies complication severity by the treatment provided. However, it is unclear whether the Clavien–Dindo system can be used internationally in studies across differing healthcare systems in high- (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods This was a secondary analysis of the International Surgical Outcomes Study (ISOS), a prospective observational cohort study of elective surgery in adults. Data collection occurred over a 7-day period. Severity of complications was graded using Clavien–Dindo and the simpler ISOS grading (mild, moderate or severe, based on guided investigator judgement). Severity grading was compared using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Data are presented as frequencies and ICC values (with 95 per cent c.i.). The analysis was stratified by income status of the country, comparing HICs with LMICs. Results A total of 44 814 patients were recruited from 474 hospitals in 27 countries (19 HICs and 8 LMICs). Some 7508 patients (16·8 per cent) experienced at least one postoperative complication, equivalent to 11 664 complications in total. Using the ISOS classification, 5504 of 11 664 complications (47·2 per cent) were graded as mild, 4244 (36·4 per cent) as moderate and 1916 (16·4 per cent) as severe. Using Clavien–Dindo, 6781 of 11 664 complications (58·1 per cent) were graded as I or II, 1740 (14·9 per cent) as III, 2408 (20·6 per cent) as IV and 735 (6·3 per cent) as V. Agreement between classification systems was poor overall (ICC 0·41, 95 per cent c.i. 0·20 to 0·55), and in LMICs (ICC 0·23, 0·05 to 0·38) and HICs (ICC 0·46, 0·25 to 0·59). Conclusion Caution is recommended when using a treatment approach to grade complications in global surgery studies, as this may introduce bias unintentionally

The surgical safety checklist and patient outcomes after surgery: a prospective observational cohort study, systematic review and meta-analysis

© 2017 British Journal of Anaesthesia Background: The surgical safety checklist is widely used to improve the quality of perioperative care. However, clinicians continue to debate the clinical effectiveness of this tool. Methods: Prospective analysis of data from the International Surgical Outcomes Study (ISOS), an international observational study of elective in-patient surgery, accompanied by a systematic review and meta-analysis of published literature. The exposure was surgical safety checklist use. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality and the secondary outcome was postoperative complications. In the ISOS cohort, a multivariable multi-level generalized linear model was used to test associations. To further contextualise these findings, we included the results from the ISOS cohort in a meta-analysis. Results are reported as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals. Results: We included 44 814 patients from 497 hospitals in 27 countries in the ISOS analysis. There were 40 245 (89.8%) patients exposed to the checklist, whilst 7508 (16.8%) sustained ≥1 postoperative complications and 207 (0.5%) died before hospital discharge. Checklist exposure was associated with reduced mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.49 (0.32–0.77); P\u3c0.01], but no difference in complication rates [OR 1.02 (0.88–1.19); P=0.75]. In a systematic review, we screened 3732 records and identified 11 eligible studies of 453 292 patients including the ISOS cohort. Checklist exposure was associated with both reduced postoperative mortality [OR 0.75 (0.62–0.92); P\u3c0.01; I2=87%] and reduced complication rates [OR 0.73 (0.61–0.88); P\u3c0.01; I2=89%). Conclusions: Patients exposed to a surgical safety checklist experience better postoperative outcomes, but this could simply reflect wider quality of care in hospitals where checklist use is routine

Critical care admission following elective surgery was not associated with survival benefit: prospective analysis of data from 27 countries

This was an investigator initiated study funded by Nestle Health Sciences through an unrestricted research grant, and by a National Institute for Health Research (UK) Professorship held by RP. The study was sponsored by Queen Mary University of London