Browsing by Author "Coats, Andrew J. S (35395386900)"

Aims: To evaluate the prevalence and associations of non-cardiac comorbidities (NCCs) with in-hospital and post-discharge outcomes in acute heart failure (AHF) across the ejection fraction (EF) spectrum. Methods and results: The 9326 AHF patients from European Society of Cardiology (ESC)-Heart Failure Association (HFA)-EURObservational Research Programme Heart Failure Long-Term Registry had complete information for the following 12 NCCs: Anaemia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diabetes, depression, hepatic dysfunction, renal dysfunction, malignancy, Parkinson's disease, peripheral vascular disease (PVD), rheumatoid arthritis, sleep apnoea, and stroke/transient ischaemic attack (TIA). Patients were classified by number of NCCs (0, 1, 2, 3, and ≥4). Of the AHF patients, 20.5% had no NCC, 28.5% had 1 NCC, 23.1% had 2 NCC, 15.4% had 3 NCC, and 12.5% had ≥4 NCC. In-hospital and post-discharge mortality increased with number of NCCs from 3.0% and 18.5% for 1 NCC to 12.5% and 36% for ≥4 NCCs. Anaemia, COPD, PVD, sleep apnoea, rheumatoid arthritis, stroke/TIA, Parkinson, and depression were more prevalent in HF with preserved EF (HFpEF). The hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for post-discharge death for each NCC was for anaemia 1.6 (1.4-1.8), diabetes 1.2 (1.1-1.4), kidney dysfunction 1.7 (1.5-1.9), COPD 1.4 (1.2-1.5), PVD 1.2 (1.1-1.4), stroke/TIA 1.3 (1.1-1.5), depression 1.2 (1.0-1.5), hepatic dysfunction 2.1 (1.8-2.5), malignancy 1.5 (1.2-1.8), sleep apnoea 1.2 (0.9-1.7), rheumatoid arthritis 1.5 (1.1-2.1), and Parkinson 1.4 (0.9-2.1). Anaemia, kidney dysfunction, COPD, and diabetes were associated with post-discharge mortality in all EF categories, PVD, stroke/TIA, and depression only in HF with reduced EF, and sleep apnoea and malignancy only in HFpEF. Conclusion: Multiple NCCs conferred poor in-hospital and post-discharge outcomes. Ejection fraction categories had different prevalence and risk profile associated with individual NCCs. © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.

[No abstract available]

Background: Diagnostic tools available to support general practitioners diagnose heart failure (HF) are limited. Objectives: (i) Determine the feasibility of the novel cardiac output response to stress (CORS) test in suspected HF patients, and (ii) Identify differences in the CORS results between (a) confirmed HF patients from non-HF patients, and (b) HF reduced (HFrEF) vs HF preserved (HFpEF) ejection fraction. Methods: Single centre, prospective, observational, feasibility study. Consecutive patients with suspected HF (N = 105; mean age: 72 ± 10 years) were recruited from specialized HF diagnostic clinics in secondary care. The consultant cardiologist confirmed or refuted a HF diagnosis. The patient completed the CORS but the researcher administering the test was blinded from the diagnosis. The CORS assessed cardiac function (stroke volume index, SVI) noninvasively using the bioreactance technology at rest-supine, challenge-standing, and stress-step exercise phases. Results: A total of 38 patients were newly diagnosed with HF (HFrEF, n = 21) with 79% being able to complete all phases of the CORS (91% of non-HF patients). A 17% lower SVI was found in HF compared with non-HF patients at rest-supine (43 ± 15 vs 51 ± 16 mL/beat/m2, P = 0.02) and stress-step exercise phase (49 ± 16 vs 58 ± 17 mL/beat/m2, P = 0.02). HFrEF patients demonstrated a lower SVI at rest (39 ± 15 vs 48 ± 13 mL/beat/m2, P = 0.02) and challenge-standing phase (34 ± 9 vs 42 ± 12 mL/beat/m2, P = 0.03) than HFpEF patients. Conclusion: The CORS is feasible and patients with HF responded differently to non-HF, and HFrEF from HFpEF. These findings provide further evidence for the potential use of the CORS to improve HF diagnostic and referral accuracy in primary care. © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Oxford University Press.

Heart failure (HF) is the prevailing cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with dilated non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (DCM) and DCM is one of several causes of HF, with several distinct epidemiological and clinical features which may have important implications for its management and prognosis. This article reviews cardiovascular monitoring of specific characteristics of HF in DCM. DCM is defined as ventricular dilatation and systolic dysfunction in the absence of abnormal loading conditions or significant coronary artery disease, the predominant phenotypes of being HFmrEF or HFrEF. DCM accounts for ∼40% of all cardiomyopathies but its true prevalence among patients with HFrEF is difficult to ascertain with certainty. Compared with patients with other HF aetiologies, individuals with DCM tend to be younger, more likely male and less likely to have associated comorbidities. A genetic aetiology of DCM is deemed responsible for ∼40% of cases. Confirmation of a specific genetic background is clinically relevant (e.g. Duchene or Backer muscular dystrophies, lamin A/C mutation), because those patients may be at a high risk of progressive left ventricular dysfunction or conduction system disease and sudden death, prompting early prophylaxis with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator. However, in most instances, HF in DCM has a multifactorial aetiology, with multiple factors needing to be systematically evaluated and/or monitored, since correction of reversible causes or (e.g. tachycardia-induced cardiomyopathy, alcohol intoxication, iron-overload, cancer therapies etc.) or targeting specific pathophysiological causes could lead to an improvement in clinical status. The treatment of DCM encompasses HF-related pharmacological and device therapies, and aetiology-specific treatments. At present, options for aetiology-related therapies are limited, and their effectiveness mostly requires confirmation from larger scale randomized trials. Whether outcomes of patients with HF in DCM differ from those with other HF aetiologies is unresolved. DCM is attributable for >40% of patients receiving mechanical circulatory support for advanced HF and it is the leading indication for heart transplantation. More aetiology-specific information is needed both in the evaluation and treatment of dilated cardiomyopathy. © 2019 Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.