Guideline Adherence of β-blocker Initiating Dose and its Consequence in Hospitalized Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Zhou Y
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8660072 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThis study evaluated the relationship between guideline adherence for heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) at discharge and relevant clinical outcomes in patients with acute HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) with or without atrial fibrillation (AF).MethodsWe analyzed Korean Acute Heart Failure Registry data for 707 patients with HFpEF with documented AF and 687 without AF. Guideline adherence was defined as good or poor according to the prescription of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, β-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. Anticoagulation adherence was also incorporated for the AF group.ResultsAmong patients with normal sinus rhythm, those with poor guideline adherence had a reduced prevalence of comorbidities and favorable clinical characteristics when compared with those with good guideline adherence. Using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to address the bias of nonrandom treatment assignment, good adherence was associated with a poor 60-day composite endpoint in the multivariable Cox model (weighted hazard ratio [wHR], 1.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-3.00; P = 0.045). For patients with AF, baseline clinical characteristics were similar according to the degree of adherence. The IPTW-adjusted analysis indicated that good adherence was significantly associated with the 60-day composite endpoint (wHR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.27-0.79; P = 0.005). In the analysis excluding warfarin, good adherence was associated with 60-day re-hospitalization (wHR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.37-0.98; P = 0.040), 1-year re-hospitalization (wHR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.48-0.93; P = 0.018), and the composite endpoint (wHR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.59-0.99; P = 0.041).ConclusionOur findings indicate that good adherence to guidelines for HFrEF is associated with a better 60-day composite endpoint in patients with HFpEF with AF.
| S-EPMC8524233 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe aim of this study was to compare the benefit of beta-blockers (BB) in heart failure (HF) with preserved versus reduced ejection fraction (EF).Methods and resultsThis was a retrospective study of insured patients who were hospitalized for HF from January 2000 to June 2008. Pharmacy claims were used to estimate BB exposure over 6-month rolling windows. The association between BB exposure and all-cause hospitalization or death was tested with the use of time-updated proportional hazards regression, with adjustment for baseline covariates and other HF medication exposure. The groups were compared by stratification (EF <50% vs ?50%) and with the use of an EF-group × BB exposure interaction term. A total of 1,835 patients met the inclusion criteria, 741 (40%) with a preserved EF. Median follow-up was 2.1 years. In a fully adjusted multivariable model, BB exposure was associated with a decreased risk of death or hospitalization in both groups (EF <50%: hazard ratio [HR] 0.53 [P < .0001]; EF ?50%: HR 0.68 [P = .009]). There was no significant difference in this protective association between groups (interaction: P = .32).ConclusionsBB exposure was associated with a similar protective effect regarding time to death or hospitalization in HF patients regardless of whether EF was preserved or reduced. An adequately powered randomized trial of BB in HF with preserved EF is warranted.
| S-EPMC3678365 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is a progressive disease with high rates of hospitalization and mortality. The Canadian Cardiovascular Society recommends treating patients with HFrEF with medications from 4 standard medication classes-this is known as guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT). However, despite clear evidence and recommendations, GDMT agents are known to be underutilized in the HFrEF population. To determine if the implementation of a prescriber-alert stewardship tool for hospitalized patients with HFrEF will increase the frequency of GDMT prescribing with all classes during hospitalization. Utilization of GDMT in patients with HFrEF between admission and discharge pre- and post-implementation of a prescriber alert stewardship tool was compared. Patients admitted to a cardiology stepdown unit between January and April 2022 had a stewardship-alert tool placed on their chart for physician review, while those admitted during the same time frame 1 year prior did not. Following the use of a prescriber alert, there was a statistically significant increase in prescribing for β-blockers (38.1% to 95.2%; p < 0.001), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (9.5% to 66.7%; p < 0.001) and combination GDMT (9.5% to 52.4%; p = 0.004) from admission to discharge. A statistically significant increase in the prescribing of β-blockers (47.6% to 76.2%; p = 0.004) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (21.4% to 40.5%; p = 0.008) was still observed without the use of the prescriber alert. A pharmacist-led heart failure stewardship tool initiative increased uptake of GDMT in patients with HFrEF.
| S-EPMC11290585 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOver five million Americans suffer from heart failure (HF), and this is associated with multiple chronic comorbidities and recurrent decompensation. Currently, there is an increased incidence in vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs). We aim to investigate the impact of HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in patients hospitalized with VPDs.HypothesisPatient with HFrEF are at higher risk for VPDs and they carry a higher risk for in-hospital complications.MethodsRetrospective analysis from all hospital admissions from the 2016-2018 National Inpatient Sample (NIS) using the ICD-10CM codes for patients admitted with a primary diagnosis of VPDs with HFrEF and those without reduced ejection fraction. Outcomes evaluated were in-hospital mortality, length of stay (LOS), healthcare utilization, frequency of admissions, and in-hospital complications. Multivariate regression analysis was conducted to adjust for confounders.ResultsOut of 317 670 VPDs discharges, we identified 12 130 (3.8%) patients with HFrEF as a comorbidity. The most common admission diagnosis for VPDs was influenza virus (IV) infection (75.0% vs. 64.1%; p < .01), followed by pneumococcal pneumonia (PNA) (13% vs. 9.4%; p < .01). After adjusting for confounders, patients with HFrEF had higher odds of having diagnosis of IV (adjusted [aOR], 1.42; p < .01) and PNA (aOR, 1.27; p < .01). Patients with VPDs and HFrEF had significantly higher odds of mortality (aOR, 1.76; p < .01), LOS, respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation, and mechanical ventilation for less than 96 h.ConclusionInfluenza and PNA were the most common VPDs admitted to the hospital in patients with a concomitant diagnosis of HFrEF. They were associated with increased mortality and in-hospital complications.
| S-EPMC9045068 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsHeart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) has received increasing attention following the publication of the latest ESC guidelines in 2021. However, it remains unclear whether patients with HFmrEF could benefit from guideline-directed medical treatment (GDMT), referring the combination of ACEI/ARB/ARNI, β-blockers, and MRAs, which are recommended for those with reduced ejection fraction. This study explored the efficacy of GDMT in HFmrEF patients.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of HFmrEF patients admitted to The First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University between 1 September 2015 and 30 November 2019. Propensity score matching (1:2) between patients receiving triple-drug therapy (TT) and non-triple therapy (NTT) based on age and sex was performed. The primary outcome was all cause death, cardiac death, rehospitalization from any cause, and rehospitalization due to worsening heart failure.ResultsOf the 906 patients enrolled in the matched cohort (TT group, n = 302; NTT group, N = 604), 653 (72.08%) were male, and mean age was 61.1 ± 11.92. Survival analysis suggested that TT group experienced a significantly lower incidence of prespecified primary endpoints than NTT group. Multivariable Cox regression showed that TT group had a lower risk of all-cause mortality (HR 0.656, 95% CI 0.447-0.961, P = 0.030), cardiac death (HR 0.599, 95% CI 0.380-0.946, P = 0.028), any-cause rehospitalization (HR 0.687, 95% CI 0.541-0.872, P = 0.002), and heart failure rehospitalization (HR 0.732, 95% CI 0.565-0.948, P = 0.018).ConclusionsIn patients with HFmrEF, combined use of neurohormonal antagonists produces remarkable effects in reducing the occurrence of the primary outcome of rehospitalization and death. Thus, the treatment of HFmrEF should be categorized as HFrEF due to the similar benefit of neurohormonal blocking therapy in HFrEF and HFmrEF.
| S-EPMC10053349 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsThe beneficial effect of β-blocker on heart failure with reduced ejection fraction is well established. However, its effect on the 1-year outcome of heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction (HFmrEF) remains unclear.Methods and resultsWe analysed the data of the patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) between 40% and 49% in China Patient-centred Evaluative Assessment of Cardiac Events Prospective Heart Failure Study (China PEACE 5p-HF Study), in which patients hospitalized for heart failure from 52 Chinese hospitals were recruited from 2016 to 2018. Two primary outcomes were all-cause death and all-cause hospitalization. The associations between β-blocker use at discharge and outcomes were assessed by inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW)-weighted Cox regression analyses. To assess consistency, IPTW adjusting medications analyses, multivariable analyses and dose-effect analyses were performed. A total of 1035 HFmrEF patients were included in the analysis. The mean age was 65.5 ± 12.7 years and 377 (36.4%) were female. The median (interquartile range) of LVEF was 44% (42-47%). Six hundred and sixty-one (63.8%) were treated with β-blocker. Patients using β-blocker were younger with better cardiac function, and more likely to use renin-angiotensin system inhibitor and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist. During the 1-year follow-up, death occurred in 84 (12.7%) treated and 85 (22.7%) untreated patients (P < 0.0001); all-cause hospitalization occurred in 298 (45.1%) treated and 188 (50.3%) untreated patients (P = 0.04). After IPTW-weighted adjustment, β-blocker use was significantly associated with lower risk of all-cause death [hazard ratio (HR): 0.70; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.51-0.96, P = 0.03], but not with lower all-cause hospitalization (HR, 0.92, 95% CI, 0.76-1.10, P = 0.36). Consistency analyses showed consistent favourable effect of β-blocker on all-cause death, but not on all-cause hospitalization.ConclusionsAmong patients with HFmrEF, β-blocker use was associated with lower risk of all-cause death, but not with lower risk of all-cause hospitalization.
| S-EPMC8847069 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Backgroundβ-Blockers (BBs) are mainstay therapy for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. However, individual patient responses to BB vary, which may be partially due to genetic variation. The goal of this study was to derive and validate the first polygenic response predictor (PRP) for BB survival benefit in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction patients.MethodsDerivation and validation analyses were performed in n=1436 total HF patients of European descent and with ejection fraction <50%. The PRP was derived in a random subset of the Henry Ford Heart Failure Pharmacogenomic Registry (n=248) and then validated in a meta-analysis of the remaining patients from Henry Ford Heart Failure Pharmacogenomic Registry (n=247), the TIME-CHF (Trial of Intensified Versus Standard Medical Therapy in Elderly Patients With Congestive Heart Failure; n=431), and HF-ACTION trial (Heart Failure: a Controlled Trial Investigating Outcomes of Exercise Training; n=510). The PRP was constructed from a genome-wide analysis of BB×genotype interaction predicting time to all-cause mortality, adjusted for Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure score, genotype, level of BB exposure, and BB propensity score.ResultsFive-fold cross-validation summaries out to 1000 single-nucleotide polymorphisms identified optimal prediction with a 44 single-nucleotide polymorphism score and cutoff at the 30th percentile. In validation testing (n=1188), greater BB exposure was associated with reduced all-cause mortality in patients with low PRP score (n=251; hazard ratio, 0.19 [95% CI, 0.04-0.51]; P=0.0075) but not high PRP score (n=937; hazard ratio, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.53-1.3]; P=0.448)-a difference that was statistically significant (P interaction, 0.0235). Results were consistent regardless of atrial fibrillation, ejection fraction (≤40% versus 41%-50%), or when examining cardiovascular death.ConclusionsAmong patients of European ancestry with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, a PRP distinguished patients who derived substantial survival benefit from BB exposure from a larger group that did not. Additional work is needed to prospectively test clinical utility and to develop PRPs for other population groups and other medications.
| S-EPMC7738407 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceOptimal treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is scripted by treatment guidelines, but many eligible patients do not receive guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) in clinical practice.ObjectiveTo determine whether a remote, algorithm-driven, navigator-administered medication optimization program could enhance implementation of GDMT in HFrEF.Design, setting, and participantsIn this case-control study, a population-based sample of patients with HFrEF was offered participation in a quality improvement program directed at GDMT optimization. Treating clinicians in a tertiary academic medical center who were caring for patients with heart failure and an ejection fraction of 40% or less (identified through an electronic health record-based search) were approached for permission to adjust medical therapy according to a sequential titration algorithm modeled on the current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association heart failure guidelines. Navigators contacted participants by telephone to direct medication adjustment and conduct longitudinal surveillance of laboratory tests, blood pressure, and symptoms under supervision of a pharmacist, nurse practitioner, and heart failure cardiologist. Patients and clinicians declining to participate served as a control group.ExposuresNavigator-led remote optimization of GDMT compared with usual care.Main outcomes and measuresProportion of patients receiving GDMT in the intervention and control groups at 3 months.ResultsOf 1028 eligible patients (mean [SD] values: age, 68 [14] years; ejection fraction, 32% [8%]; and systolic blood pressure, 122 [18] mm Hg; 305 women (30.0%); 892 individuals [86.8%] in New York Heart Association class I and II), 197 (19.2%) participated in the medication optimization program, and 831 (80.8%) continued with usual care as directed by their treating clinicians (585 [56.9%] general cardiologists; 443 [43.1%] heart failure specialists). At 3 months, patients participating in the remote intervention experienced significant increases from baseline in use of renin-angiotensin system antagonists (138 [70.1%] to 170 [86.3%]; P < .001) and β-blockers (152 [77.2%] to 181 [91.9%]; P < .001) but not mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (51 [25.9%] to 60 [30.5%]; P = .14). Doses for each category of GDMT also increased from baseline in the intervention group. Among the usual-care group, there were no changes from baseline in the proportion of patients receiving GDMT or the dose of GDMT in any category.Conclusions and relevanceRemote titration of GDMT by navigators using encoded algorithms may represent an efficient, population-level strategy for rapidly closing the gap between guidelines and clinical practice in patients with HFrEF.
| S-EPMC7495335 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGuideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) dramatically improves outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Our goal was to examine GDMT use in community patients with newly diagnosed HFrEF.Methods and resultsWe performed a population-based, retrospective cohort study of all Olmsted County, Minnesota, residents with newly diagnosed HFrEF (EF ≤ 40%) 2007-2017. We excluded patients with contraindications to medication initiation. We examined the use of beta-blockers, HF beta-blockers (metoprolol succinate, carvedilol, bisoprolol), angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIS), and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) in the first year after HFrEF diagnosis. We used Cox models to evaluate the association of being seen in an HF clinic with the initiation of GDMT. From 2007 to 2017, 1160 patients were diagnosed with HFrEF (mean age 69.7 years, 65.6% men). Most eligible patients received beta-blockers (92.6%) and ACEis/ARBs/ARNIs (87.0%) in the first year. However, only 63.8% of patients were treated with an HF beta-blocker, and few received MRAs (17.6%). In models accounting for the role of an HF clinic in initiation of these medications, being seen in an HF clinic was independently associated with initiation of new GDMT across all medication classes, with a hazard ratio (95% CI) of 1.54 (1.15-2.06) for any beta-blocker, 2.49 (1.95-3.20) for HF beta-blockers, 1.97 (1.46-2.65) for ACEis/ARBs/ARNIs, and 2.14 (1.49-3.08) for MRAs.ConclusionsIn this population-based study, most patients with newly diagnosed HFrEF received beta-blockers and ACEis/ARBs/ARNIs. GDMT use was higher in patients seen in an HF clinic, suggesting the potential benefit of referral to an HF clinic for patients with newly diagnosed HFrEF.
| S-EPMC9588715 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Sacubitril/Valsartan has been highly efficacious in randomized trials of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, the effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan in older patients hospitalized for HFrEF in real-world US practice is unclear. Methods and Results This study included Medicare beneficiaries age ≥65 years who were hospitalized for HFrEF ≤40% in the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry between October 2015 and December 2018, and eligible for sacubitril/valsartan. Associations between discharge prescription of sacubitril/valsartan and clinical outcomes were assessed after inverse probability of treatment weighting and adjustment for other HFrEF medications. Overall, 1551 (10.9%) patients were discharged on sacubitril/valsartan. Of those not prescribed sacubitril/valsartan, 7857 (62.0%) were prescribed an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blocker. Over 12-month follow-up, compared with a discharge prescription of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blocker, sacubitril/valsartan was independently associated with lower all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.82; 95% CI, 0.72-0.94; P=0.004) but not all-cause hospitalization (adjusted HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.89-1.07; P=0.55) or heart failure hospitalization (adjusted HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.91-1.18; P=0.59). Patients prescribed sacubitril/valsartan versus those without a prescription had lower risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.60-0.79; P<0.001), all-cause hospitalization (adjusted HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.82-0.98; P=0.02), but not heart failure hospitalization (adjusted HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.82-1.08; P=0.40). Conclusions Among patients hospitalized for HFrEF, prescription of sacubitril/valsartan at discharge was independently associated with reduced postdischarge mortality compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blocker, and reduced mortality and all-cause hospitalization compared with no sacubitril/valsartan. These findings support the use of sacubitril/valsartan to improve postdischarge outcomes among older patients hospitalized for HFrEF in routine US clinical practice.
| S-EPMC8475054 | biostudies-literature