An international Delphi consensus regarding best practice recommendations for hyperkalaemia across the cardiorenal spectrum.

AIMS: Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASi) are guideline-recommended therapy for individuals with cardiorenal disease. They are associated with increased risk of hyperkalaemia, a common and life-threatening disorder for this population. RAASi-induced hyperkalaemia often leads to dose reduction or discontinuation, reducing cardiorenal protection. Guideline recommendations differ between specialties for the clinical management of hyperkalaemia. Using a modified Delphi method, we developed consensus recommendations for optimal management of hyperkalaemia in adults with cardiorenal disease. METHODS AND RESULTS: An international steering group of cardiologists and nephrologists developed 39 statements regarding hyperkalaemia care, including risk factors and risk stratification, prevention, correction, and cross-specialty coordination. Consensus was determined by agreement on an online questionnaire administered to cardiorenal specialists across Europe and North America. The threshold for consensus agreement was established a priori by the steering group at 67%. Across November 2021, 520 responses were received from Canada (n = 50), France (n = 50), Germany (n = 54), Italy (n = 58), Spain (n = 57), the UK (n = 49), and the US (n = 202); 268 from cardiologists and 252 from nephrologists. Twenty-nine statements attained very high agreement (≥90%) and 10 attained high agreement (≥67%-<90%), with strong alignment between cardiologists and nephrologists. CONCLUSION: A high degree of consensus regarding hyperkalaemia evaluation and management exists among healthcare professionals. Based on high levels of agreement, the steering group derived six key recommendations for hyperkalaemia prevention and management in people with cardiorenal disease. Future studies examining the quality of hyperkalaemia care delivery are required

Pseudo cardiac tamponade in the setting of excess pericardial fat

Cardiac tamponade is the phenomenon of hemodynamic compromise caused by a pericardial effusion. Following a myocardial infarction, the most common causes of pericardial fluid include early pericarditis, Dressler's syndrome, and hemopericardium secondary to a free wall rupture. On transthoracic echocardiography, pericardial fluid appears as an echo-free space in between the visceral and parietal layers of the pericardium. Pericardial fat has a similar appearance on echocardiography and it may be difficult to discern the two entities. We present a case of a post-MI patient demonstrating pseudo tamponade physiology in the setting of excessive pericardial fat

Sacubitril/valsartan in heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction: a pre-specified participant-level pooled analysis of PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF

Background and aims: The PARAGLIDE-HF trial demonstrated reductions in natriuretic peptides with sacubitril/valsartan compared with valsartan in patients with heart failure (HF) with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction who had a recent worsening HF event, but was not adequately powered to examine clinical outcomes. PARAGON-HF included a subset of PARAGLIDE-HF-like patients who were recently hospitalized for HF. Participant-level data from PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF were pooled to better estimate the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in reducing cardiovascular and renal events in HF with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction. Methods: Both PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF were multicenter, double-blind, randomized, active-controlled trials of sacubitril/valsartan vs. valsartan in patients with HF with mildly reduced or preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF &gt;40% in PARAGLIDE-HF and ≥45% in PARAGON-HF). In the pre-specified primary analysis, we pooled participants in PARAGLIDE-HF (all of whom were enrolled during or within 30 days of a worsening HF event) with a ‘PARAGLIDE-like’ subset of PARAGON-HF (those hospitalized for HF within 30 days). We also pooled the entire PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF populations for a broader context. The primary endpoint for this analysis was the composite of total worsening HF events (including first and recurrent HF hospitalizations and urgent visits) and cardiovascular death. The secondary endpoint was the pre-specified renal composite endpoint for both studies (≥50% decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate from baseline, end-stage renal disease, or renal death). Results: Compared with valsartan, sacubitril/valsartan significantly reduced total worsening HF events and cardiovascular death in both the primary pooled analysis of participants with recent worsening HF (n=1,088; rate ratio [RR] 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-0.99; P=0.042) and in the pooled analysis of all participants (n=5,262; RR 0.86; 95% CI: 0.75-0.98; P=0.027). In the pooled analysis of all participants, first nominal statistical significance was reached by day 9 after randomization and treatment benefits were larger in those with LVEF ≤60% (RR 0.78; 95% CI 0.66-0.91) compared with those with LVEF &gt;60% (RR 1.09; 95% CI 0.86-1.40; Pinteraction=0.021). Sacubitril/valsartan was also associated with lower rates of the renal composite endpoint in the primary pooled analysis (hazard ratio [HR] 0.67; 95% CI 0.43-1.05; P=0.080) and the pooled analysis of all participants (HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.44-0.83; P=0.002). Conclusions: In pooled analyses of PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF, sacubitril/valsartan reduced cardiovascular and renal events among patients with HF with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction. These data provide support for use of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with HF with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction, particularly among those with an LVEF below normal, regardless of care setting

The Hospital Frailty Risk Score and its association with in-hospital mortality, cost, length of stay and discharge location in patients with heart failure

Background: Little is known about frailty amongst patients hospitalized with heart failure (HF) on a national level. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to hospital for HF in the United States. We examined how low, intermediate and high risk of frailty as defined by the Hospital Frailty Risk Score has changed over time and how it is related to inpatient mortality, length of stay, cost and discharge location. Results: We included 11,626,400 inpatient episodes for HF. The proportions of patients that had low risk, intermediate and high risk of frailty were 80.0% (n=9,300,873), 19.9% (n=2,314,001) and 0.1% (n=11,526). Intermediate or high risk of frailty increased from 9.9% in 2004 to 31.7% in 2014. Length of stay in hospital was greater in the high compared to low risk groups (11.3 days vs 4.6 days, respectively). The cost of admission was also greater in the high risk group ($23,084±39,681) compared to the low risk group ($9,103±12,768). Intermediate and high risk of frailty groups were associated with increased in odds of mortality (OR 2.38 95% CI 2.22-2.34, p<0.001 and OR 3.05 95%CI 2.57-3.62, p<0.001, respectively) and discharge to nursing facilities (intermediate risk OR 1.52 95%CI 1.50-1.54, p<0.001 and high risk OR 1.60 95%CI 1.35-1.90, p<0.001). Conclusions: Frailty is significant and increasing in a national cohort of patients with HF in the United States. Patients at higher risk of frailty have increased in-hospital mortality, length of stay and inpatient costs, and a greater proportion are discharged to nursing home