Abstract Background Classification of chronic heart failure (HF) is on the basis of criteria that may not adequately capture disease heterogeneity. Improved phenotyping may help inform research and ...therapeutic strategies. Objectives This study used cluster analysis to explore clinical phenotypes in chronic HF patients. Methods A cluster analysis was performed on 45 baseline clinical variables from 1,619 participants in the HF-ACTION (Heart Failure: A Controlled Trial Investigating Outcomes of Exercise Training) study, which evaluated exercise training versus usual care in chronic systolic HF. An association between identified clusters and clinical outcomes was assessed using Cox proportional hazards modeling. Differential associations between clinical outcomes and exercise testing were examined using interaction testing. Results Four clusters were identified (ranging from 248 to 773 patients in each), in which patients varied considerably among measures of age, sex, race, symptoms, comorbidities, HF etiology, socioeconomic status, quality of life, cardiopulmonary exercise testing parameters, and biomarker levels. Differential associations were observed for hospitalization and mortality risks between and within clusters. Compared with cluster 1, risk of all-cause mortality and/or all-cause hospitalization ranged from 0.65 (95% confidence interval 95% CI: 0.54 to 0.78) for cluster 4 to 1.02 (95% CI: 0.87 to 1.19) for cluster 3. However, for all-cause mortality, cluster 3 had a disproportionately lower risk of 0.61 (95% CI: 0.44 to 0.86). Evidence suggested differential effects of exercise treatment on changes in peak oxygen consumption and clinical outcomes between clusters (p for interaction <0.04). Conclusions Cluster analysis of clinical variables identified 4 distinct phenotypes of chronic HF. Our findings underscore the high degree of disease heterogeneity that exists within chronic HF patients and the need for improved phenotyping of the syndrome. (Exercise Training Program to Improve Clinical Outcomes in Individuals With Congestive Heart Failure; NCT00047437 )
Cardiogenic shock (CS) remains the most common cause of mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction. The SHOCK trial (Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic ...Shock) demonstrated a survival benefit with early revascularization in patients with CS complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMICS) 20 years ago. After an initial improvement in mortality related to revascularization, mortality rates have plateaued. A recent Society of Coronary Angiography and Interventions classification scheme was developed to address the wide range of CS presentations. In addition, a recent scientific statement from the American Heart Association recommended the development of CS centers using standardized protocols for diagnosis and management of CS, including mechanical circulatory support devices (MCS). A number of CS programs have implemented various protocols for treating patients with AMICS, including the use of MCS, and have published promising results using such protocols. Despite this, practice patterns in the cardiac catheterization laboratory vary across health systems, and there are inconsistencies in the use or timing of MCS for AMICS. Furthermore, mortality benefit from MCS devices in AMICS has yet to be established in randomized clinical trials. In this article, we outline the best practices for the contemporary interventional management of AMICS, including coronary revascularization, the use of MCS, and special considerations such as the treatment of patients with AMICS with cardiac arrest.
Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a risk factor for incident heart failure and increases the risk of morbidity and mortality in patients with established disease. Secular trends in the prevalence of ...diabetes mellitus and heart failure forecast a growing burden of disease and underscore the need for effective therapeutic strategies. Recent clinical trials have demonstrated the shared pathophysiology between diabetes mellitus and heart failure, the synergistic effect of managing both conditions, and the potential for diabetes mellitus therapies to modulate the risk of heart failure outcomes. This scientific statement on diabetes mellitus and heart failure summarizes the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and impact of diabetes mellitus and its control on outcomes in heart failure; reviews the approach to pharmacological therapy and lifestyle modification in patients with diabetes mellitus and heart failure; highlights the value of multidisciplinary interventions to improve clinical outcomes in this population; and outlines priorities for future research.
In this secondary analysis of the EMPEROR-Reduced trial, we sought to evaluate whether the benefits of empagliflozin varied by baseline health status and how empagliflozin impacted patient-reported ...outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.
Health status was assessed by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaires-clinical summary score (KCCQ-CSS). The influence of baseline KCCQ-CSS (analyzed by tertiles) on the effect of empagliflozin on major outcomes was examined using Cox proportional hazards models. Responder analyses were performed to assess the odds of improvement and deterioration in KCCQ scores related to treatment with empagliflozin. Empagliflozin reduced the primary outcome of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization regardless of baseline KCCQ-CSS tertiles hazard ratio (HR) 0.83 (0.68-1.02), HR 0.74 (0.58-0.94), and HR 0.61 (0.46-0.82) for <62.5, 62.6-85.4, and ≥85.4 score tertiles, respectively; P-trend = 0.10. Empagliflozin improved KCCQ-CSS, total symptom score, and overall summary score at 3, 8, and 12 months. More patients on empagliflozin had ≥5-point odds ratio (OR) 1.20 (1.05-1.37), 10-point OR 1.26 (1.10-1.44), and 15-point OR 1.29 (1.12-1.48) improvement and fewer had ≥5-point OR 0.75 (0.64-0.87) deterioration in KCCQ-CSS at 3 months. These benefits were sustained at 8 and 12 months and were similar for other KCCQ domains.
Empagliflozin improved cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization risk across the range of baseline health status. Empagliflozin improved health status across various domains, and this benefit was sustained during long-term follow-up.
URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03057977.
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of mortality in women, yet many people perceive breast cancer to be the number one threat to women’s health. CVD and breast cancer have several ...overlapping risk factors, such as obesity and smoking. Additionally, current breast cancer treatments can have a negative impact on cardiovascular health (eg, left ventricular dysfunction, accelerated CVD), and for women with pre-existing CVD, this might influence cancer treatment decisions by both the patient and the provider. Improvements in early detection and treatment of breast cancer have led to an increasing number of breast cancer survivors who are at risk of long-term cardiac complications from cancer treatments. For older women, CVD poses a greater mortality threat than breast cancer itself. This is the first scientific statement from the American Heart Association on CVD and breast cancer. This document will provide a comprehensive overview of the prevalence of these diseases, shared risk factors, the cardiotoxic effects of therapy, and the prevention and treatment of CVD in breast cancer patients.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE—This American Heart Association (AHA) scientific statement provides a comprehensive overview of current evidence on the burden cardiovascular disease (CVD) among Hispanics in ...the United States. Hispanics are the largest minority ethnic group in the United States, and their health is vital to the public health of the nation and to achieving the AHA’s 2020 goals. This statement describes the CVD epidemiology and related personal beliefs and the social and health issues of US Hispanics, and it identifies potential prevention and treatment opportunities. The intended audience for this statement includes healthcare professionals, researchers, and policy makers.
METHODS—Writing group members were nominated by the AHA’s Manuscript Oversight Committee and represent a broad range of expertise in relation to Hispanic individuals and CVD. The writers used a general framework outlined by the committee chair to produce a comprehensive literature review that summarizes existing evidence, indicate gaps in current knowledge, and formulate recommendations. Only English-language studies were reviewed, with PubMed/MEDLINE as our primary resource, as well as the Cochrane Library Reviews, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the US Census data as secondary resources. Inductive methods and descriptive studies that focused on CVD outcomes incidence, prevalence, treatment response, and risks were included. Because of the wide scope of these topics, members of the writing committee were responsible for drafting individual sections selected by the chair of the writing committee, and the group chair assembled the complete statement. The conclusions of this statement are the views of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official view of the AHA. All members of the writing group had the opportunity to comment on the initial drafts and approved the final version of this document. The manuscript underwent extensive AHA internal peer review before consideration and approval by the AHA Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee.
RESULTS—This statement documents the status of knowledge regarding CVD among Hispanics and the sociocultural issues that impact all subgroups of Hispanics with regard to cardiovascular health. In this review, whenever possible, we identify the specific Hispanic subgroups examined to avoid generalizations. We identify specific areas for which current evidence was less robust, as well as inconsistencies and evidence gaps that inform the need for further rigorous and interdisciplinary approaches to increase our understanding of the US Hispanic population and its potential impact on the public health and cardiovascular health of the total US population. We provide recommendations specific to the 9 domains outlined by the chair to support the development of these culturally tailored and targeted approaches.
CONCLUSIONS—Healthcare professionals and researchers need to consider the impact of culture and ethnicity on health behavior and ultimately health outcomes. There is a need to tailor and develop culturally relevant strategies to engage Hispanics in cardiovascular health promotion and cultivate a larger workforce of healthcare providers, researchers, and allies with the focused goal of improving cardiovascular health and reducing CVD among the US Hispanic population.
PURPOSE—The aim of this statement is to summarize data on stroke risk factors that are unique to and more common in women than men and to expand on the data provided in prior stroke guidelines and ...cardiovascular prevention guidelines for women. This guideline focuses on the risk factors unique to women, such as reproductive factors, and those that are more common in women, including migraine with aura, obesity, metabolic syndrome, and atrial fibrillation.
METHODS—Writing group members were nominated by the committee chair on the basis of their previous work in relevant topic areas and were approved by the American Heart Association (AHA) Stroke Council’s Scientific Statement Oversight Committee and the AHA’s Manuscript Oversight Committee. The panel reviewed relevant articles on adults using computerized searches of the medical literature through May 15, 2013. The evidence is organized within the context of the AHA framework and is classified according to the joint AHA/American College of Cardiology and supplementary AHA Stroke Council methods of classifying the level of certainty and the class and level of evidence. The document underwent extensive AHA internal peer review, Stroke Council Leadership review, and Scientific Statements Oversight Committee review before consideration and approval by the AHA Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee.
RESULTS—We provide current evidence, research gaps, and recommendations on risk of stroke related to preeclampsia, oral contraceptives, menopause, and hormone replacement, as well as those risk factors more common in women, such as obesity/metabolic syndrome, atrial fibrillation, and migraine with aura.
CONCLUSIONS—To more accurately reflect the risk of stroke in women across the lifespan, as well as the clear gaps in current risk scores, we believe a female-specific stroke risk score is warranted.
PDF
