Cardiology

Dewan, P., P. S. Jhund, L. Shen, M. C. Petrie, W. T. Abraham, M. Atif Ali, C. H. Chen, A. S. Desai, K. Dickstein, J. Huang, S. Kiatchoosakun, K. S. Kim, L. Kober, W. T. Lai, Y. Liao, U. M. Mogensen, B. H. Oh, M. Packer, J. L. Rouleau, V. Shi, A. S. Sibulo, Jr., S. D. Solomon, P. Sritara, K. Swedberg, H. Tsutsui, M. R. Zile and J. J. V. McMurray (2019). “Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: comparison of patient characteristics and clinical outcomes within Asia and between Asia, Europe and the Americas.” Eur J Heart Fail 21(5): 577-587.

Full text of this article.

AIMS: Nearly 60% of the world’s population lives in Asia but little is known about the characteristics and outcomes of Asian patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) compared to other areas of the world. METHODS AND RESULTS: We pooled two, large, global trials, with similar design, in 13 174 patients with HFrEF (patient distribution: China 833, India 1390, Japan 209, Korea 223, Philippines 223, Taiwan 199 and Thailand 95, Western Europe 3521, Eastern Europe 4758, North America 613, and Latin America 1110). Asian patients were younger (55.0-63.9 years) than in Western Europe (67.9 years) and North America (66.6 years). Diuretics and devices were used less, and digoxin used more, in Asia. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist use was higher in China (66.3%), the Philippines (64.1%) and Latin America (62.8%) compared to Europe and North America (range 32.8% to 49.6%). The rate of cardiovascular death/heart failure hospitalization was higher in Asia (e.g. Taiwan 17.2, China 14.9 per 100 patient-years) than in Western Europe (10.4) and North America (12.8). However, the adjusted risk of cardiovascular death was higher in many Asian countries than in Western Europe (except Japan) and the risk of heart failure hospitalization was lower in India and in the Philippines than in Western Europe, but significantly higher in China, Japan, and Taiwan. CONCLUSION: Patient characteristics and outcomes vary between Asia and other regions and between Asian countries. These variations may reflect several factors, including geography, climate and environment, diet and lifestyle, health care systems, genetics and socioeconomic influences.

Balmforth, C., J. Simpson, L. Shen, P. S. Jhund, M. Lefkowitz, A. R. Rizkala, J. L. Rouleau, V. Shi, S. D. Solomon, K. Swedberg, M. R. Zile, M. Packer and J. J. V. McMurray (2019). “Outcomes and Effect of Treatment According to Etiology in HFrEF: An Analysis of PARADIGM-HF.” JACC Heart Fail May 3. [Epub ahead of print].

Full text of this article.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes (and the effect of sacubitril/valsartan) according to etiology in the PARADIGM-HF (Prospective comparison of angiotensin-receptor-neprilysin inhibitor [ARNI] with angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor [ACEI] to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and morbidity in Heart Failure) trial. BACKGROUND: Etiology of heart failure (HF) has changed over time in more developed countries and is also evolving in non-Western societies. Outcomes may vary according to etiology, as may the effects of therapy. METHODS: We examined outcomes and the effect of sacubtril/valsartan according to investigator-reported etiology in PARADIGM-HF. The outcomes analyzed were the primary composite of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization, and components, and death from any cause. Outcomes were adjusted for known prognostic variables including N terminal pro-B type natriuretic peptide. RESULTS: Among the 8,399 patients randomized, 5,036 patients (60.0%) had an ischemic etiology. Among the 3,363 patients (40.0%) with a nonischemic etiology, 1,595 (19.0% of all patients; 47% of nonischemic patients) had idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy, 968 (11.5% of all patients; 28.8% of nonischemic patients) had a hypertensive cause, and 800 (9.5% of all patients, 23.8% of nonischemic patients) another cause (185 infective/viral, 158 alcoholic, 110 valvular, 66 diabetes, 30 drug-related, 14 peripartum-related, and 237 other). Whereas the unadjusted rates of all outcomes were highest in patients with an ischemic etiology, the adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were not different from patients in the 2 major nonischemic etiology categories; for example, for the primary outcome, compared with ischemic (HR: 1.00), hypertensive 0.87 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.75 to 1.02), idiopathic 0.92 (95% CI: 0.82 to 1.04) and other 1.00 (95% CI: 0.85 to 1.17). The benefit of sacubitril/valsartan over enalapril was consistent across etiologic categories (interaction for primary outcome; p = 0.11). CONCLUSIONS: Just under half of patients in this global trial had nonischemic HF with reduced ejection fraction, with idiopathic and hypertensive the most commonly ascribed etiologies. Adjusted outcomes were similar across etiologic categories, as was the benefit of sacubitril/valsartan over enalapril. (Efficacy and Safety of LCZ696 Compared to Enalapril on Morbidity and Mortality of Patients With Chronic Heart Failure; NCT01035255).

Mack, M. J., M. B. Leon, V. H. Thourani, R. Makkar, S. K. Kodali, M. Russo, S. R. Kapadia, S. C. Malaisrie, D. J. Cohen, P. Pibarot, J. Leipsic, R. T. Hahn, P. Blanke, M. R. Williams, J. M. McCabe, D. L. Brown, V. Babaliaros, S. Goldman, W. Y. Szeto, P. Genereux, A. Pershad, S. J. Pocock, M. C. Alu, J. G. Webb and C. R. Smith (2019). “Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement with a Balloon-Expandable Valve in Low-Risk Patients.” N Engl J Med Mar 17. [Epub ahead of print].

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with aortic stenosis who are at intermediate or high risk for death with surgery, major outcomes are similar with transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic-valve replacement. There is insufficient evidence regarding the comparison of the two procedures in patients who are at low risk. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with severe aortic stenosis and low surgical risk to undergo either TAVR with transfemoral placement of a balloon-expandable valve or surgery. The primary end point was a composite of death, stroke, or rehospitalization at 1 year. Both noninferiority testing (with a prespecified margin of 6 percentage points) and superiority testing were performed in the as-treated population. RESULTS: At 71 centers, 1000 patients underwent randomization. The mean age of the patients was 73 years, and the mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score was 1.9% (with scores ranging from 0 to 100% and higher scores indicating a greater risk of death within 30 days after the procedure). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the rate of the primary composite end point at 1 year was significantly lower in the TAVR group than in the surgery group (8.5% vs. 15.1%; absolute difference, -6.6 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -10.8 to -2.5; P<0.001 for noninferiority; hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.79; P = 0.001 for superiority). At 30 days, TAVR resulted in a lower rate of stroke than surgery (P = 0.02) and in lower rates of death or stroke (P = 0.01) and new-onset atrial fibrillation (P<0.001). TAVR also resulted in a shorter index hospitalization than surgery (P<0.001) and in a lower risk of a poor treatment outcome (death or a low Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score) at 30 days (P<0.001). There were no significant between-group differences in major vascular complications, new permanent pacemaker insertions, or moderate or severe paravalvular regurgitation. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with severe aortic stenosis who were at low surgical risk, the rate of the composite of death, stroke, or rehospitalization at 1 year was significantly lower with TAVR than with surgery. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; PARTNER 3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02675114.).

Vemulapalli, S., J. D. Carroll, M. J. Mack, Z. Li, D. Dai, A. S. Kosinski, D. J. Kumbhani, C. E. Ruiz, V. H. Thourani, G. Hanzel, T. G. Gleason, H. C. Herrmann, R. G. Brindis and J. E. Bavaria (2019). “Procedural Volume and Outcomes for Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement.” N Engl J Med Apr 3. [Epub ahead of print].

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: During the introduction of transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) in the United States, requirements regarding procedural volume were mandated by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services as a condition of reimbursement. A better understanding of the relationship between hospital volume of TAVR procedures and patient outcomes could inform policy decisions. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry regarding procedural volumes and outcomes from 2015 through 2017. The primary analyses examined the association between hospital procedural volume as a continuous variable and risk-adjusted mortality at 30 days after transfemoral TAVR. Secondary analysis included risk-adjusted mortality according to quartile of hospital procedural volume. A sensitivity analysis was performed after exclusion of the first 12 months of transfemoral TAVR procedures at each hospital. RESULTS: Of 113,662 TAVR procedures performed at 555 hospitals by 2960 operators, 96,256 (84.7%) involved a transfemoral approach. There was a significant inverse association between annualized volume of transfemoral TAVR procedures and mortality. Adjusted 30-day mortality was higher and more variable at hospitals in the lowest-volume quartile (3.19%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.78 to 3.67) than at hospitals in the highest-volume quartile (2.66%; 95% CI, 2.48 to 2.85) (odds ratio, 1.21; P = 0.02). The difference in adjusted mortality between a mean annualized volume of 27 procedures in the lowest-volume quartile and 143 procedures in the highest-volume quartile was a relative reduction of 19.45% (95% CI, 8.63 to 30.26). After the exclusion of the first 12 months of TAVR procedures at each hospital, 30-day mortality remained higher in the lowest-volume quartile than in the highest-volume quartile (3.10% vs. 2.61%; odds ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.40). CONCLUSIONS: An inverse volume-mortality association was observed for transfemoral TAVR procedures from 2015 through 2017. Mortality at 30 days was higher and more variable at hospitals with a low procedural volume than at hospitals with a high procedural volume.

Holmes, D. R., Jr. and M. J. Mack (2019). “Rational Dispersion for the Introduction of Transcatheter Mitral Valve Repair Into Clinical Practice: Lessons Learned From TAVR.” JAMA 321(11): 1043-1044.

Full text of this article.

The introduction of new medical devices to address unmet clinical needs into the patient care arena, with little or no previous physician experience with the therapy, is a complex process with several important considerations. The questions regarding implementation of transcatheter mitral valve therapy are generally the same as the questions that occurred with TAVR, but with some important nuances. What are the safety and effectiveness profiles, the risk/benefit ratio, and cost-effectiveness of the new therapy compared with other available therapies? In the case of the transcatheter mitral valve repair device for functional mitral regurgitation, additional questions include the following: which specific patient populations may derive the maximal intended benefit of the device (responders), what are the characteristics and qualifications of the centers that care for these patients, what is the optimal geographic dispersion to facilitate patient access, and what specific training and qualifications will the operators need? Surgical and cardiovascular professional societies will need to work closely with the FDA, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, and device manufacturers to address these issues and develop appropriate methods for rational dispersion to help improve the outcome of patients treated with this new technology. (Excerpt from text, p. 1044; no abstract available.)