Contribution of comorbidities to functional impairment is higher in heart failure with preserved than with reduced ejection fraction

Background Comorbidities negatively affect prognosis more strongly in heart failure with preserved (HFpEF) than with reduced (HFrEF) ejection fraction. Their comparative impact on physical impairment in HFpEF and HFrEF has not been evaluated so far. Methods and results The frequency of 12 comorbidities and their impact on NYHA class and SF-36 physical functioning score (SF-36 PF) were evaluated in 1,294 patients with HFpEF and 2,785 with HFrEF. HFpEF patients had lower NYHA class (2.0 ± 0.6 vs. 2.4 ± 0.6, p 0.05) negative effect in both groups. Obesity, coronary artery disease and peripheral arterial occlusive disease exerted a significantly (p < 0.05) more adverse effect in HFpEF, while hypertension and hyperlipidemia were associated with fewer (p < 0.05) symptoms in HFrEF only. The total impact of comorbidities on NYHA (AUC for prediction of NYHA III/IV vs. I/II) and SF-36 PF (r 2) in multivariate analyses was approximately 1.5-fold higher in HFpEF, and also much stronger than the impact of a 10% decrease in ejection fraction in HFrEF or a 5 mm decrease in left ventricular end-diastolic diameter in HFpEF. Conclusion The impact of comorbidities on physical impairment is higher in HFpEF than in HFrEF. This should be considered in the differential diagnosis and in the treatment of patients with HFpEF

Consumption of Lactobacillus reuteri‐containing lozenges improves periodontal health in navy sailors at sea: A randomized controlled trial

Background The objective of this trial was to evaluate whether the regular consumption of probiotics may improve the known deterioration of periodontal health in navy sailors during deployments at sea. Methods 72 healthy sailors of a naval ship on a practicing mission at sea were recruited and randomly provided with a blinded supply of lozenges to be consumed twice daily for the following 42 days containing either the probiotic strains Lactobacillus reuteri (DSM 17938 and L. reuteri (ATTC PTA 5289) (test n = 36) or no probiotics (placebo n = 36). At baseline, at day 14 and day 42 bleeding on probing (primary outcome), gingival index, plaque control record, probing attachment level, and probing pocket depth were assessed at the Ramfjord teeth. Results At baseline there were no significant differences between the groups. At day 14 and day 42 test group scores of all assessed parameters were significantly improved (P < 0.001) compared to baseline and to the placebo group which by contrast showed a significant (P < 0.001) deterioration of all parameters at the end of the study. Conclusions The consumption of probiotic L. reuteri‐lozenges is an efficacious measure to improve and maintain periodontal health in situations with waning efficacy of personal oral hygiene

The population comparison index: an intuitive measure to calibrate the extent of impairments in patient cohorts in relation to healthy and diseased populations

We assume that a specific health constraint, e.g., a certain aspect of bodily function or quality of life that is measured by a variable X, is absent (or irrelevant) in a healthy reference population (Ref0), and it is materially present and precisely measured in a diseased reference population (Ref1). We further assume that some amount of this constraint of interest is suspected to be present in a population under study (SP). In order to quantify this issue, we propose the introduction of an intuitive measure, the population comparison index (PCI), that relates the mean value of X in population SP to the mean values of X in populations Ref0 and Ref1. This measure is defined as PCI[X] = (mean[X|SP] − mean[X|Ref0])/(mean[X|Ref1] − mean[X|Ref0]) × 100[%], where mean[X|.] is the average value of X in the respective group of individuals. For interpretation, PCI[X] ≈ 0 indicates that the values of X in the population SP are similar to those in population Ref0, and hence, the impairment measured by X is not materially present in the individuals in population SP. On the other hand, PCI[X] ≈ 100 means that the individuals in SP exhibit values of X comparable to those occurring in Ref1, i.e., the constraint of interest is equally present in populations SP and Ref1. A value of 0 100 means that population SP is even more affected by the constraint than population Ref1

Control of cardiovascular risk factors and its determinants in the general population – findings from the STAAB cohort study

Background: While data from primary care suggest an insufficient control of vascular risk factors, little is known about vascular risk factor control in the general population. We therefore aimed to investigate the adoption of adequate risk factor control and its determinants in the general population free of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Methods: Data from the Characteristics and Course of Heart Failure Stages A-B and Determinants of Progression (STAAB) Cohort Study, a population-based study of inhabitants aged 30 to 79 years from the general population of Würzburg (Germany), were used. Proportions of participants without established CVD meeting targets for risk factor control recommended by 2016 ESC guideline were identified. Determinants of the accumulation of insufficiently controlled vascular risk factors (three or more) were assessed. Results: Between December 2013 and April 2015, 1379 participants without CVD were included; mean age was 53.1 ± 11.9 years and 52.9% were female; 30.8% were physically inactive, 55.2% overweight, 19.3% current smokers. Hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes mellitus were prevalent in 31.8%, 57.6%, and 3.9%, respectively. Treatment goals were not reached despite medication in 52.7% of hypertensive, in 37.3% of hyperlipidemic and in 44.0% of diabetic subjects. Insufficiently controlled risk was associated with male sex (OR 1.94, 95%CI 1.44–2.61), higher age (OR for 30–39 years vs. 70–79 years 4.01, 95%CI 1.94–8.31) and lower level of education (OR for primary vs. tertiary 2.15, 95%CI 1.48–3.11). Conclusions: In the general population, prevalence of vascular risk factors was high. We found insufficient identification and control of vascular risk factors and a considerable potential to improve adherence to cardiovascular guidelines for primary prevention. Further studies are needed to identify and overcome patient- and physician-related barriers impeding successful control of vascular risk factors in the general population