Implantable devices for heart failure monitoring: the CardioMEMS™ system.

Several devices have been developed for heart failure (HF) treatment and monitoring. Among device-based monitoring tools, CardioMEMS™ has received growing research attention. This document reflects the key points of an ESC consensus meeting on implantable devices for monitoring in HF, with a particular focus on CardioMEMS™

3-D reconstruction of anterior mantle-field techniques in Hodgkin's disease survivors: doses to cardiac structures

BACKGROUND: The long-term dose-effect relationship for specific cardiac structures in mediastinal radiotherapy has rarely been investigated. As part of an interdisciplinary project, the 3-D dose distribution within the heart was reconstructed in all long-term Hodgkin's disease survivors (n = 55) treated with mediastinal radiotherapy between 1978 and 1985. For dose reconstruction, original techniques were transferred to the CT data sets of appropriate test patients, in whom left (LV) and right ventricle (RV), left (LA) and right atrium (RA) as well as right (RCA), left anterior descending (LAD) and left circumflex (LCX) coronary arteries were contoured. Dose-volume histograms (DVHs) were generated for these heart structures and results compared between techniques. RESULTS: Predominant technique was an anterior mantle field (cobalt-60). 26 patients (47%) were treated with anterior mantle field alone (MF), 18 (33%) with anterior mantle field and monoaxial, bisegmental rotation boost (MF+ROT), 7 (13%) with anterior mantle field and dorsal boost (MF+DORS) and 4 (7%) with other techniques. Mean ± SD total mediastinal doses for MF+ROT (41.7 ± 3.5 Gy) and for MF+DORS (42.7 ± 7.4) were significantly higher than for MF (36.7 ± 5.2 Gy). DVH analysis documented relative overdosage to right heart structures with MF (median maximal dose to RV 129%, to RCA 127%) which was siginificantly reduced to 117% and 112%, respectively, in MF+ROT. Absolute doses in right heart structures, however, did not differ between techniques. Absolute LA doses were significantly higher in MF+ROT patients than in MF patients where large parts of LA were blocked. Median maximal doses for all techniques ranged between 48 and 52 Gy (RV), 44 and 46 Gy (LV), 47 and 49 Gy (RA), 38 and 45 Gy (LA), 46 and 50 Gy (RCA), 39 and 44 Gy (LAD) and 34 and 42 Gy (LCX). CONCLUSION: In patients irradiated with anterior mantle-field techniques, high doses to anterior heart portions were partly compensated by boost treatment from non-anterior angles. As the threshold doses for coronary artery disease, cardiomyopathy, pericarditis and valvular changes are assumed to be 30 to 40 Gy, cardiac toxicity must be anticipated in these patients. Thus, dose distributions in individual subjects should be correlated to the corresponding cardiovascular findings in these long-term survivors, e. g. by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging

"GOLD or lower limit of normal definition? a comparison with expert-based diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in a prospective cohort-study"

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) defines COPD as a fixed post-bronchodilator ratio of forced expiratory volume in 1 second and forced vital capacity (FEV1/FVC) below 0.7. Age-dependent cut-off values below the lower fifth percentile (LLN) of this ratio derived from the general population have been proposed as an alternative. We wanted to assess the diagnostic accuracy and prognostic capability of the GOLD and LLN definition when compared to an expert-based diagnosis.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In a prospective cohort study, 405 patients aged ≥ 65 years with a general practitioner's diagnosis of COPD were recruited and followed up for 4.5 (median; quartiles 3.9; 5.1) years. Prevalence rates of COPD according to GOLD and three LLN definitions and diagnostic performance measurements were calculated. The reference standard was the diagnosis of COPD of an expert panel that used all available diagnostic information, including spirometry and bodyplethysmography.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Compared to the expert panel diagnosis, 'GOLD-COPD' misclassified 69 (28%) patients, and the three LLNs misclassified 114 (46%), 96 (39%), and 98 (40%) patients, respectively. The GOLD classification led to more false positives, the LLNs to more false negative diagnoses. The main predictors beyond the FEV1/FVC ratio for an expert diagnosis of COPD were the FEV1 % predicted, and the residual volume/total lung capacity ratio (RV/TLC). Adding FEV1 and RV/TLC to GOLD or LLN improved the diagnostic accuracy, resulting in a significant reduction of up to 50% of the number of misdiagnoses. The expert diagnosis of COPD better predicts exacerbations, hospitalizations and mortality than GOLD or LLN.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>GOLD criteria over-diagnose COPD, while LLN definitions under-diagnose COPD in elderly patients as compared to an expert panel diagnosis. Incorporating FEV1 and RV/TLC into the GOLD-COPD or LLN-based definition brings both definitions closer to expert panel diagnosis of COPD, and to daily clinical practice.</p

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

Heart failure therapy in diabetic patients-comparison with the recent ESC/EASD guideline

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To assess heart failure therapies in diabetic patients with preserved as compared to impaired systolic ventricular function.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>3304 patients with heart failure from 9 different studies were included (mean age 63 ± 14 years); out of these, 711 subjects had preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (≥ 50%) and 994 patients in the whole cohort suffered from diabetes.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The majority (>90%) of heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction (SHF) and diabetes were treated with an ACE inhibitor (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) or with beta-blockers. By contrast, patients with diabetes and preserved ejection fraction (HFNEF) were less likely to receive these substance classes (p < 0.001) and had a worse blood pressure control (p < 0.001). In comparison to patients without diabetes, the probability to receive these therapies was increased in diabetic HFNEF patients (p < 0.001), but not in diabetic SHF patients. Aldosterone receptor blockers were given more often to diabetic patients with reduced ejection fraction (p < 0.001), and the presence and severity of diabetes decreased the probability to receive this substance class, irrespective of renal function.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Diabetic patients with HFNEF received less heart failure medication and showed a poorer control of blood pressure as compared to diabetic patients with SHF. SHF patients with diabetes were less likely to receive aldosterone receptor blocker therapy, irrespective of renal function.</p

Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibition in patients hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure:rationale for and design of the EMPULSE trial

Aims Treatment with sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors improves outcomes in patients with chronic heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction. There is limited experience with the in-hospital initiation of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with acute HF (AHF) with or without diabetes. EMPULSE is designed to assess the clinical benefit and safety of the SGLT2 inhibitor empagliflozin compared with placebo in patients hospitalized with AHF. Methods EMPULSE is a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled multinational trial comparing the in-hospital initiation of empagliflozin (10 mg once daily) with placebo. Approximately 500 patients admitted for AHF with dyspnoea, signs of fluid overload, and elevated natriuretic peptides will be randomized 1:1 stratified to HF status (de-novo and decompensated chronic HF) to either empagliflozin or placebo at approximately 165 sites across North America, Europe and Asia. Patients will be enrolled regardless of ejection fraction and diabetes status and will be randomized during hospitalization and after stabilization (between 24 h and 5 days after admission), with treatment continued up to 90 days after initiation. The primary outcome is clinical benefit at 90 days, consisting of a composite of all-cause death, HF events, and >= 5 point change from baseline in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score (KCCQ-TSS), assessed using a 'win-ratio' approach. Secondary outcomes include assessments of safety, change in KCCQ-TSS from baseline to 90 days and change in natriuretic peptides from baseline to 30 days. Conclusion The EMPULSE trial will evaluate the clinical benefit and safety of empagliflozin in patients hospitalized for AHF

Less loop diuretic use in patients on sacubitril/valsartan undergoing remote pulmonary artery pressure monitoring

Aims Control of pulmonary pressures monitored remotely reduced heart failure hospitalizations mainly by lowering filling pressures through the use of loop diuretics. Sacubitril/valsartan improves heart failure outcomes and increases the kidney sensitivity for diuretics. We explored whether sacubitril/valsartan is associated with less utilization of loop diuretics in patients guided with haemodynamic monitoring in the CardioMEMS European Monitoring Study for Heart Failure (MEMS-HF). Methods and results The MEMS-HF population (n = 239) was separated by the use of sacubitril/valsartan (n = 68) or no use of it (n = 164). Utilization of diuretics and their doses was prespecified in the protocol and was monitored in both groups. Multivariable regression, ANCOVA, and a generalized linear model were used to fit baseline covariates with furosemide equivalents and changes for 12 months. MEMS-HF participants (n = 239) were grouped in sacubitril/valsartan users [n = 68, 64 ± 11 years, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 25 ± 9%, cardiac index (CI) 1.89 ± 0.4 L/min/m2] vs. non-users (n = 164, 70 ± 10 years, LVEF 36 ± 16%, CI 2.11 ± 0.58 L/min/m2, P = 0.0002, P < 0.0001, and P = 0.0015, respectively). In contrast, mean pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) values were comparable between groups (29 ± 11 vs. 31 ± 11 mmHg, P = 0.127). Utilization of loop diuretics was lower in patients taking sacubitril/valsartan compared with those without (P = 0.01). Significant predictor of loop diuretic use was a history of renal failure (P = 0.005) but not age (P = 0.091). After subjects were stratified by sacubitril/valsartan or other diuretic use, PAP was nominally, but not significantly lower in sacubitril/valsartan-treated patients (baseline: P = 0.52; 6 months: P = 0.07; 12 months: P = 0.53), while there was no difference in outcome or PAP changes. This difference was observed despite lower CI (P = 0.0015). Comparable changes were not observed for other non-loop diuretics (P = 0.21). Conclusions In patients whose treatment was guided by remote PAP monitoring, concomitant use of sacubitril/valsartan was associated with reduced utilization of loop diuretics, which could potentially be relevant for outcomes