A nationwide, population‐based study on specialized care for acute heart failure throughout the COVID‐19 pandemic

Aims - The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the delivery of care for patients with heart failure (HF), leading to fewer HF hospitalizations and increased mortality. However, nationwide data on quality of care and long-term outcomes across the pandemic are scarce.Methods and results - We used data from the National Heart Failure Audit (NHFA) linked to national records for hospitalization and deaths. We compared pre-COVID (2018–2019), COVID (2020), and late/post-COVID (2021–2022) periods. Data for 227 250 patients admitted to hospital with HF were analysed and grouped according to the admission year and the presence of HF with (HFrEF) or without reduced ejection fraction (non-HFrEF). The median age at admission was 81 years (interquartile range 72–88), 55% were men (n = 125 975), 87% were of white ethnicity (n = 102 805), and 51% had HFrEF (n = 116 990). In-hospital management and specialized cardiology care were maintained throughout the pandemic with an increasing percentage of patients discharged on disease-modifying medications over time (p &lt; 0.001). Long-term outcomes improved over time (hazard ratio [HR] 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.90–0.95, p &lt; 0.001), mainly driven by a reduction in cardiovascular death. Receiving specialized cardiology care was associated with better long-term outcomes both for those who had HFrEF (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.77–0.82, p &lt; 0.001) and for those who had non-HFrEF (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.85–0.90, p &lt; 0.001).Conclusions - Despite the disruption of healthcare systems, the clinical characteristics of patients admitted with HF were similar and the overall standard of care was maintained throughout the pandemic. Long-term survival of patients hospitalized with HF continued to improve after COVID-19, especially for HFrEF.<br/

Validation of U.S. mortality prediction models for hospitalized heart failure in the United Kingdom and Japan: Validation of risk models in decompensated heart failure

Aims: Prognostic models for hospitalised heart failure (HHF) were developed predominantly for patients of European origin in the United States of America; it is unclear whether they perform similarly in other health-care systems or for different ethnicities. We sought to validate published prediction models for HHF in the United Kingdom (UK) & Japan.Methods and Results: Patients in the UK (894) and Japan (3,158) were prospectively enrolled and similar in terms of sex (~60% men) and median age (~77 years). Models predicted that British patients would have a higher mortality than Japanese, which was indeed true both for in-hospital [4.8% vs 2.5%] and 180-day [20.7% vs 9.5%] mortality. The model c-statistics for the published/derivation [range 0.70-0.76] and Japanese [range 0.75-0.77] cohorts were similar and higher than for the UK [0.62-0.75] but models consistently over-estimated mortality in Japan. For in-hospital mortality, OPTIMIZE-HF performed best, providing similar discrimination in published/derivation, UK and Japanese cohorts [c-indices: 0.75 (0.74-0.77); 0.75 (0.68 - 0.81) and 0.77 (0.70 - 0.83)], and least over-estimated mortality in Japan. For 180-day mortality, the cstatistics for ASCEND-HF were similar in published/derivation [0.70] and UK [0.69 (0.64 - 0.74)] cohorts but higher in Japan [0.75 (0.71 - 0.79)]; calibration was good in the UK but again over-estimated mortality in Japan.Conclusion: Calibration of published prediction models appear moderately accurate and unbiased when applied to British patients but consistently overestimate mortality in Japan. Identifying the reason why patients in Japan have a better than predicted prognosis is of great interest

The diagnostic accuracy of plasma BNP and NTproBNP in patients referred from primary care with suspected heart failure: results of the UK natriuretic peptide study

Objectives: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of the measurement of plasma B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal pro-BNP (NTproBNP) in patients referred by their general practitioners (GPs) with symptoms suggestive of heart failure. Additionally, to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the resting 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) with that of the peptides. Design: A diagnostic accuracy study. Setting: Rapid-access heart failure clinics in five hospitals. Participants: 306 patients referred by their GPs with suspected heart failure. Main outcome measures: Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) and positive and negative likelihood ratios for BNP, NTproBNP and the ECG for the diagnosis of heart failure. Area under the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves for the two natriuretic peptides. Results: The diagnosis of heart failure was confirmed in 104 (34%) patients. The area under the ROC curve was 0.84 [95% CI 0.79−0.89] for BNP and 0.85 [0.81−0.90] for NTproBNP. At the manufacturers' recommended decision cut-points, NTproBNP provided a higher NPV (0.97) than BNP (0.87), but at lower PPV (0.44 versus 0.59). An abnormal ECG did not add any further predictive value to that of NTproBNP. Conclusions: We have confirmed the value of the measurement of plasma BNP or NTproBNP as a ‘rule-out’ test for heart failure in patients currently referred by GPs to rapid access diagnostic clinics. A simple classification of the 12-lead ECG into ‘normal’ or ‘abnormal’ adds little value to ruling out heart failure in these circumstances. Further work is necessary to establish the best decision cut-points for use in clinical practice.</p