Browsing by Author "Ben-Gal, Tuvia (7003448638)"

Acute heart failure (AHF) represents a broad spectrum of disease states, resulting from the interaction between an acute precipitant and a patient's underlying cardiac substrate and comorbidities. Valvular heart disease (VHD) is frequently associated with AHF. AHF may result from several precipitants that add an acute haemodynamic stress superimposed on a chronic valvular lesion or may occur as a consequence of a new significant valvular lesion. Regardless of the mechanism, clinical presentation may vary from acute decompensated heart failure to cardiogenic shock. Assessing the severity of VHD as well as the correlation between VHD severity and symptoms may be difficult in patients with AHF because of the rapid variation in loading conditions, concomitant destabilization of the associated comorbidities and the presence of combined valvular lesions. Evidence-based interventions targeting VHD in settings of AHF have yet to be identified, as patients with severe VHD are often excluded from randomized trials in AHF, so results from these trials do not generalize to those with VHD. Furthermore, there are not rigorously conducted randomized controlled trials in the setting of VHD and AHF, most of the data coming from observational studies. Thus, distinct to chronic settings, current guidelines are very elusive when patients with severe VHD present with AHF, and a clear-cut strategy could not be yet defined. Given the paucity of evidence in this subset of AHF patients, the aim of this scientific statement is to describe the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and overall treatment approach for patients with VHD who present with AHF. © 2023 European Society of Cardiology.

Aims: The Heart Failure Frailty Score (HFFS) is a novel, multidimensional tool to assess frailty in patients with heart failure (HF). It has been developed to overcome limitations of existing frailty assessment tools while being practical for clinical use. The HFFS reflects the concept of frailty as a multidimensional, dynamic and potentially reversible state, which increases vulnerability to stressors and risk of poor outcomes in patients with HF. Methods and results: The HFFS was developed through a Delphi consensus process involving 54 international experts. This approach involved iterative rounds of questionnaires and interviews, where a panel of experts provided their opinions on specific questions prepared by the Steering Committee. The experts were invited to vote and share their views anonymously, using a 5-point Likert scale over iterative rounds. An 80% threshold was set for agreement or disagreement for each statement. Twenty-two variables from four domains (clinical, functional, psycho-cognitive and social) have been selected for inclusion in the HFFS after the third round of the Delphi process. A shorter version (S-HFFS), including 10 variables, has also been developed for daily clinical use. Conclusions: The HFFS is a new multidimensional tool for the identification of frailty in patients with HF. It should also enables healthcare providers to identify potential ‘red flags’ for frailty in order to develop personalized care plans. The next step will be to validate the new score in patients with HF. © 2024 The Author(s). ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.

Acute heart failure (AHF) affects millions of people each year and vasodilators have been a central part of treatment for over 25 years. The haemodynamic effects of vasodilators vary considerably among individual agents. Some vasodilators, such as nitrates, primarily act on the venous system by redistributing the circulating blood volume away from the heart towards the venous capacitance system. Other vasodilators, such as nesiritide, lead to balanced vasodilatation in the arteries and veins, decreasing left ventricular afterload and preload. Considering mechanisms of action, intravenous vasodilators are thought to be effective in patients with AHF, particularly in those with acute pulmonary oedema, where increased cardiac filling pressures and elevated systemic blood pressures occur in the absence of, or with minimal systemic fluid accumulation. However, the 2021 European heart failure guidelines have downgraded the use of vasodilators due to two recent studies and several contemporary meta-analyses failing to show benefit in terms of survival. Thus, there remains no firm recommendation suggesting the use of vasodilator treatment over usual care. In addition, despite repeated efforts to develop new vasodilatory agents, no novel therapy has outperformed traditional AHF management. In parallel with the development of novel vasodilators, changing the design of clinical trials for AHF to consider phenotype diversity of AHF patients remains an unmet need. New randomized clinical trials should particularly focus on subgroups that may mechanistically derive benefit from vasodilators, which may entail moving enrolment of patients to clinical settings close to moment of decompensation, such as the emergency department. © 2025 European Society of Cardiology.