Background: The respiratory instability frequently observed in advanced heart failure (HF) is likely to mirror the clinical status of worsening HF. The present multicenter study was conducted to ...examine whether the noble respiratory stability index (RSI), a quantitative measure of respiratory instability, reflects the recovery process from HF decompensation. Methods and Results: Thirty-six of 44 patients hospitalized for worsening HF completed all-night measurements of RSI both at deterioration and recovery phases. Based on the signs, symptoms, and laboratory data during hospitalization, the Central Adjudication Committee identified 22 convalescent patients and 14 patients with less extent of recovery in a blinded manner without any information on RSI or other respiratory variables. The all-night RSI in the convalescent patients was increased from 27.8±18.4 to 34.6±15.8 (P<0.05). There was no significant improvement of RSI, however, in the remaining patients with little clinical improvement. Of the clinical and laboratory variables, on stepwise linear regression modeling, body weight, peripheral edema, and lung congestion were closely related to the RSI of recovered patients and accounted for 56% of the changes in RSI (coefficient of determination, R2=0.56). Conclusions: All-night RSI, a quantitative measure of respiratory instability, could faithfully reflect congestive signs and clinical status of HF during the recovery process from acute decompensation.
Aims
To describe the prevalence, overlap, and prognostic implications of physical and social frailties and cognitive dysfunction in hospitalized elderly patients with heart failure.
Methods and ...results
The FRAGILE‐HF study was a prospective multicentre cohort study enrolling consecutive hospitalized patients with heart failure aged ≥65 years. The study objectives were to examine the prevalence, overlap, and prognostic implications of the coexistence of multiple frailty domains. Physical frailty, social frailty, and cognitive dysfunction were evaluated by the Fried phenotype model, Makizako's 5 items, and Mini‐Cog, respectively. The primary study outcome was the combined endpoint of heart failure rehospitalization and all‐cause death within 1 year. Among 1180 enrolled hospitalized patients (median age, 81 years; 57.4% male), physical frailty, social frailty, and cognitive dysfunction were identified in 56.1%, 66.4%, and 37.1% of the patients, respectively. The number of identified frailty domains was 0, 1, 2, and 3 in 13.5%, 31.4%, 36.9%, and 18.2% of the patients, respectively. During follow‐up, the combined endpoint occurred in 383 patients. Adjusted hazard ratios for 1, 2, and 3 domains, with 0 domains as the reference, were 1.38 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89–2.13; P = 0.15, 1.60 (95% CI 1.04–2.46; P = 0.034), and 2.04 (95% CI 1.28–3.24; P = 0.003), respectively. Incorporating the number of frailty domains into the pre‐existing risk model yielded a 22.0% (95% CI 0.087–0.352; P = 0.001) net reclassification improvement for the primary outcome.
Conclusions
The coexistence of multiple frailty domains is prevalent in hospitalized elderly patients with heart failure. Holistic assessment of multi‐domain frailty provides additive value to known prognostic factors.
Background: The global ROCKET AF study evaluated once-daily rivaroxaban vs. warfarin for stroke and systemic embolism prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). A separate trial, J-ROCKET ...AF, compared the safety of a Japan-specific rivaroxaban dose with warfarin administered according to Japanese guidelines in Japanese patients with AF. Methods and Results: J-ROCKET AF was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, phase III trial. Patients (n=1,280) with non-valvular AF at increased risk for stroke were randomized to receive 15mg once-daily rivaroxaban or warfarin dose-adjusted according to Japanese guidelines. The primary objective was to determine non-inferiority of rivaroxaban against warfarin for the principal safety outcome of major and non-major clinically relevant bleeding, in the on-treatment safety population. The primary efficacy endpoint was the composite of stroke and systemic embolism. Non-inferiority of rivaroxaban to warfarin was confirmed; the rate of the principal safety outcome was 18.04% per year in rivaroxaban-treated patients and 16.42% per year in warfarin-treated patients (hazard ratio HR 1.11; 95% confidence interval 0.87–1.42; P<0.001 non-inferiority). Intracranial hemorrhage rates were 0.8% with rivaroxaban and 1.6% with warfarin. There was a strong trend for a reduction in the rate of stroke/systemic embolism with rivaroxaban vs. warfarin (HR, 0.49; P=0.050). Conclusions: J-ROCKET AF demonstrated the safety of a Japan-specific rivaroxaban dose and supports bridging the global ROCKET AF results into Japanese clinical practice. (Circ J 2012; 76: 2104–2111)
Background:In the Prospective Comparison of angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) With ACEi to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure (PARADIGM-HF) study, ...treatment with sacubitril/valsartan reduced the primary outcome of cardiovascular (CV) death and heart failure (HF) hospitalization compared with enalapril in patients with chronic HF and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). A prospective randomized trial was conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in Japanese HFrEF patients.Methods and Results:In the Prospective comparison of ARNI with ACEi to determine the noveL beneficiaL trEatment vaLue in Japanese Heart Failure patients (PARALLEL-HF) study, 225 Japanese HFrEF patients (New York Heart Association NYHA class II–IV, left ventricular ejection fraction LVEF ≤35%) were randomized (1 : 1) to receive sacubitril/valsartan 200 mg bid or enalapril 10 mg bid. Over a median follow up of 33.9 months, no significant between-group difference was observed for the primary composite outcome of CV death and HF hospitalization (HR 1.09; 95% CI 0.65–1.82; P=0.6260). Early and sustained reductions in N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) from baseline were observed with sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril (between-group difference: Week 2: 25.7%, P<0.01; Month 6: 18.9%, P=0.01, favoring sacubitril/valsartan). There was no significant difference in the changes in NYHA class and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) clinical summary score at Week 8 and Month 6. Sacubitril/valsartan was well tolerated with fewer study drug discontinuations due to adverse events, although the sacubitril/valsartan group had a higher proportion of patients with hypotension.Conclusions:In Japanese patients with HFrEF, there was no difference in reduction in the risk of CV death or HF hospitalization between sacubitril/valsartan and enalapril, and sacubitril/valsartan was safe and well tolerated.
Background:Increased heart rate (HR) is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular outcomes in chronic heart failure (HF). Ivabradine, anIfinhibitor, improved outcomes in patients with HF and ...reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in the SHIFT study. We evaluated its efficacy and safety in Japanese HFrEF patients in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III study: the J-SHIFT study. The main objective was to confirm a hazard ratio of <1 in the primary composite endpoint of cardiovascular death or hospital admission for worsening HF.Methods and Results:Patients with NYHA functional class II–IV, left ventricular EF ≤35%, and resting HR ≥75 beats/min in sinus rhythm under optimal medical therapy received ivabradine (n=127) or placebo (n=127). Mean reduction in resting HR was significantly greater in the ivabradine group (15.2 vs. 6.1 beats/min, P<0.0001). However, symptomatic bradycardia did not occur. A total of 26 (20.5%) patients in the ivabradine group and 37 (29.1%) patients in the placebo group had the primary endpoint event (hazard ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.40–1.11, P=0.1179) during median follow-up of 589 days. Mild phosphenes were reported in 8 (6.3%) patients in the ivabradine group and 4 (3.1%) patients in the placebo group (P=0.3760).Conclusions:The J-SHIFT study supported the efficacy and safety of ivabradine for Japanese HFrEF patients, in accord with the SHIFT study.
We aimed to investigate the prevalence and the prognostic impact of malnutrition using the geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI) in elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We ...investigated 130 consecutive patients aged ≥ 75 years who were discharged following successful primary coronary intervention between March 2009 and December 2016. The mean age of the patients was 81.5 ± 5.0 years, and 55.4% of them were male. At discharge, the patients’ nutritional statuses were evaluated using the GNRI, which were calculated as follows: 14.89 × serum albumin (g/dL) + 41.7 × body mass index/22. The patients were divided into two groups, a low GNRI group (GNRI < 92) with nutrition-related risk and a high GNRI group (GNRI ≥ 92) without nutrition-related risk. The mean GNRI score of all patients was 95.2 ± 11.0, and 46 patients (35.4%) had a low GNRI score. During the mean follow-up of 1030 ± 850 days, the all-cause mortality was significantly higher in the low GNRI group than in the high GNRI group (32.6% vs. 13.1%,
p
< 0.001), while the event rates of AMI recurrence and hospitalization due to heart failure did not differ significantly between the two groups. Multivariate Cox proportional analysis revealed that low GNRI was a modest but independent predictor of mortality (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval 0.90–0.98;
p
= 0.01). Among elderly patients with AMI, malnutrition assessed using the GNRI was often encountered and was an independent predictor of long-term mortality.
Background Frailty is conceptualized as an accumulation of deficits in multiple areas and is strongly associated with the prognosis of heart failure (HF). However, the social domain of frailty is ...less well investigated. We prospectively evaluated the clinical characteristics and prognostic impact of social frailty (SF) in elderly patients with HF. Methods and Results FRAGILE-HF (prevalence and prognostic value of physical and social frailty in geriatric patients hospitalized for heart failure) is a multicenter, prospective cohort study focusing on patients hospitalized for HF and aged ≥65 years. We defined SF by Makizako's 5 items, which have been validated as associated with future disability. The primary end point was a composite of all-cause death and rehospitalization because of HF. The impact of SF on all-cause mortality alone was also evaluated. Among 1240 enrolled patients, 825 (66.5%) had SF. During the 1-year observation period after discharge, the rates of the combined end point and all-cause mortality were significantly higher in patients with SF than in those without SF (Log-rank test: both
< 0.05). SF remained as significantly associated with both the combined end point (hazard ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.02-1.66;
= 0.038) and all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.01-2.30;
= 0.044), even after adjusting for key clinical risk factors. Furthermore, SF showed significant incremental prognostic value over known risk factors for both the combined end point (net-reclassification improvement: 0.189, 95% CI, 0.063-0.316,
= 0.003) and all-cause mortality (net-reclassification improvement: 0.234, 95% CI, 0.073-0.395,
= 0.004). Conclusions Among hospitalized geriatric patients with HF, two thirds have SF. Evaluating SF provides additive prognostic information in elderly patients with HF. Registration URL: https://upload.umin.ac.jp/. Unique identifier: UMIN000023929.
PDF
