Alberto Aimo, Giuseppe Vergaro, Maria Concetta Pastore, Daniela Tomasoni, Vincenzo Castiglione, Riccardo Saro, Elisa Zaro, Antonio Maria Sammartino, Elisa Giacomin, Matteo Serenelli, Alberto Cipriani, Aldostefano Porcari, Andrea Di Lenarda, Marco Metra, Gianfranco Sinagra, Matteo Cameli, Marco Merlo, Michele Emdin
{"title":"High prevalence of wild‐type transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis in older adults with carpal tunnel syndrome, heart failure or increased left ventricular mass: The CAPTURE study","authors":"Alberto Aimo, Giuseppe Vergaro, Maria Concetta Pastore, Daniela Tomasoni, Vincenzo Castiglione, Riccardo Saro, Elisa Zaro, Antonio Maria Sammartino, Elisa Giacomin, Matteo Serenelli, Alberto Cipriani, Aldostefano Porcari, Andrea Di Lenarda, Marco Metra, Gianfranco Sinagra, Matteo Cameli, Marco Merlo, Michele Emdin","doi":"10.1002/ejhf.70030","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ejhf.70030","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":164,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Heart Failure","volume":"38 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":18.2,"publicationDate":"2025-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144928251","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Karina V Bunting, Asgher Champsi, Simrat K Gill, Khalil Saadeh, A John Camm, Mary Stanbury, Sandra Haynes, Jonathon N Townend, Richard P Steeds, Dipak Kotecha
Aims: To compare the effect of digoxin versus beta-blockers on left ventricular function, in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation (AF) and symptoms of heart failure within the RATE-AF randomized trial.
Methods and results: Blinded echocardiograms were performed at baseline and 12-month follow-up using a pre-defined imaging protocol and the index-beat approach. The change in systolic and diastolic function was assessed, stratified by left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Overall, 145 patients completed follow-up, with median age 75 years (interquartile range 69-82) and 44% women. In 119 patients with baseline LVEF ≥50%, a significantly greater improvement in systolic function was noted in patients randomized to low-dose digoxin versus beta-blockers: adjusted mean difference for LVEF 2.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.3-4.2; p = 0.021), s' 1.1 cm/s (95% CI 1.0-1.2; p = 0.001) and stroke volume 6.5 ml (95% CI 0.4-12.6; p = 0.037), with no difference in global longitudinal strain (p = 0.11) or any diastolic parameters. There were no significant differences between groups for patients with LVEF 40-49% and <40%. Digoxin reduced N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide compared to beta-blockers (geometric mean difference 0.77; 95% CI 0.64-0.92; p = 0.004), improved New York Heart Association functional class (odds ratio [OR] 11.3, 95% CI 4.3-29.8; p < 0.001) and modified European Heart Rhythm Association arrhythmia symptom class (OR 4.91, 95% CI 2.36-10.23; p < 0.001), with substantially less adverse events (incident rate ratio 0.21, 95% CI 0.13-0.31; p < 0.001). There were no interactions between treatment effects and baseline LVEF for these outcomes (interaction p = 0.62, 0.49, 0.07 and 0.13, respectively).
Conclusions: Low-dose digoxin in patients with symptoms of heart failure, preserved LVEF and permanent AF leads to a significantly greater improvement in systolic function compared to treatment with beta-blockers.
目的:在RATE-AF随机试验中,比较地高辛与β受体阻滞剂对永久性心房颤动(AF)和心力衰竭患者左心室功能的影响。方法和结果:在基线和12个月的随访中,采用预先定义的成像方案和指数心跳方法进行盲法超声心动图。以左室射血分数(LVEF)分层评估收缩和舒张功能的变化。总体而言,145名患者完成了随访,中位年龄为75岁(四分位数范围为69-82岁),其中44%为女性。在119例基线LVEF≥50%的患者中,随机分配到低剂量地高辛与β受体阻滞剂的患者的收缩功能改善明显更大:LVEF调整后的平均差异为2.3%(95%置信区间[CI] 0.3-4.2; p = 0.021), s' 1.1 cm/s (95% CI 1.0-1.2; p = 0.001)和卒中容积6.5 ml (95% CI 0.4-12.6; p = 0.037),总体纵向应变(p = 0.11)或任何舒张参数无差异。LVEF为40-49%的患者组间无显著差异。结论:低剂量地高辛治疗有心衰症状、保留LVEF和永久性房颤的患者比使用受体阻滞剂治疗更能显著改善收缩功能。
{"title":"Low-dose digoxin improves cardiac function in patients with heart failure, preserved ejection fraction and atrial fibrillation - the RATE-AF randomized trial.","authors":"Karina V Bunting, Asgher Champsi, Simrat K Gill, Khalil Saadeh, A John Camm, Mary Stanbury, Sandra Haynes, Jonathon N Townend, Richard P Steeds, Dipak Kotecha","doi":"10.1002/ejhf.70022","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ejhf.70022","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To compare the effect of digoxin versus beta-blockers on left ventricular function, in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation (AF) and symptoms of heart failure within the RATE-AF randomized trial.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>Blinded echocardiograms were performed at baseline and 12-month follow-up using a pre-defined imaging protocol and the index-beat approach. The change in systolic and diastolic function was assessed, stratified by left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Overall, 145 patients completed follow-up, with median age 75 years (interquartile range 69-82) and 44% women. In 119 patients with baseline LVEF ≥50%, a significantly greater improvement in systolic function was noted in patients randomized to low-dose digoxin versus beta-blockers: adjusted mean difference for LVEF 2.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.3-4.2; p = 0.021), s' 1.1 cm/s (95% CI 1.0-1.2; p = 0.001) and stroke volume 6.5 ml (95% CI 0.4-12.6; p = 0.037), with no difference in global longitudinal strain (p = 0.11) or any diastolic parameters. There were no significant differences between groups for patients with LVEF 40-49% and <40%. Digoxin reduced N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide compared to beta-blockers (geometric mean difference 0.77; 95% CI 0.64-0.92; p = 0.004), improved New York Heart Association functional class (odds ratio [OR] 11.3, 95% CI 4.3-29.8; p < 0.001) and modified European Heart Rhythm Association arrhythmia symptom class (OR 4.91, 95% CI 2.36-10.23; p < 0.001), with substantially less adverse events (incident rate ratio 0.21, 95% CI 0.13-0.31; p < 0.001). There were no interactions between treatment effects and baseline LVEF for these outcomes (interaction p = 0.62, 0.49, 0.07 and 0.13, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Low-dose digoxin in patients with symptoms of heart failure, preserved LVEF and permanent AF leads to a significantly greater improvement in systolic function compared to treatment with beta-blockers.</p>","PeriodicalId":164,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Heart Failure","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.8,"publicationDate":"2025-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144937346","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Angela Dettling, Caroline Kellner, Jonas Sundermeyer, Benedikt N. Beer, Lisa Besch, Marvin Kriz, Stefan Kluge, Paulus Kirchhof, Stefan Blankenberg, Benedikt Schrage
AimsMortality for cardiogenic shock (CS) remains high. To improve outcomes, centralization of treatment in specialized centres, especially those with expertise in mechanical circulatory support (MCS), has been recommended. High‐volume centres may be able to provide standardized, better care. We analysed associations between centre volume and outcomes in Germany, a large country with multiple types of CS centres.Methods and resultsBased on data from all CS patients treated in Germany from 2017–2021, the association between annual CS/MCS hospital volume and in‐hospital mortality was assessed using adjusted Cox‐regression, and spline plots were used to assess case thresholds. Overall, 220 223 CS patients underwent treatment at 1232 hospitals; 435/1232 (35%) of these performed MCS therapy, although only few hospitals (60/435, 14%) performed >25 MCS cases per year on average. Treatment at hospitals with a higher annual volume of CS and MCS cases was associated with a significantly lower mortality risk as compared to hospitals with a lower volume (upper third vs. lower two‐thirds; CS: hazard ratio [HR] 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.91–0.94; p < 0.001; MCS: HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.76–0.84; p < 0.001). These associations were continuous without a detectable ceiling effect, with spline plots suggesting case thresholds of at least 90 CS cases/25 MCS cases per year.ConclusionsCare for patients with CS treated with and without MCS is associated with lower in‐hospital mortality in hospitals that manage high volumes of CS and MCS. This analysis indicates that centralization of CS care in specialized centres treating high volumes of patients with CS and MCS might improve outcomes.
目的心源性休克(CS)的死亡率仍然很高。为了改善结果,建议在专门的中心集中治疗,特别是那些具有机械循环支持(MCS)专业知识的中心。大容量中心可能能够提供标准化的、更好的护理。我们分析了德国中心数量与结果之间的关系,德国是一个拥有多种类型CS中心的大国。方法和结果基于2017-2021年在德国接受治疗的所有CS患者的数据,使用调整后的Cox回归评估年度CS/MCS医院容量与院内死亡率之间的关系,并使用样条图评估病例阈值。总体而言,220223名CS患者在1232家医院接受了治疗;其中435/1232(35%)进行了MCS治疗,尽管只有少数医院(60/435,14%)平均每年治疗25例MCS病例。与数量较少的医院相比,每年接收CS和MCS病例较多的医院的治疗与较低的死亡风险相关(三分之一以上vs三分之二以下;CS:风险比[HR] 0.92, 95%可信区间[CI] 0.91-0.94; p < 0.001; MCS: HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.76-0.84; p < 0.001)。这些关联是连续的,没有可检测到的天花板效应,样条图显示病例阈值至少为每年90例CS /25例MCS。结论:在大量使用CS和MCS的医院中,接受和不接受MCS治疗的CS患者的恐慌与较低的院内死亡率相关。这一分析表明,在专门的中心集中治疗大量的CS和MCS患者可能会改善结果。
{"title":"Higher hospital volume is associated with lower mortality for patients with cardiogenic shock and mechanical circulatory support","authors":"Angela Dettling, Caroline Kellner, Jonas Sundermeyer, Benedikt N. Beer, Lisa Besch, Marvin Kriz, Stefan Kluge, Paulus Kirchhof, Stefan Blankenberg, Benedikt Schrage","doi":"10.1002/ejhf.70025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ejhf.70025","url":null,"abstract":"AimsMortality for cardiogenic shock (CS) remains high. To improve outcomes, centralization of treatment in specialized centres, especially those with expertise in mechanical circulatory support (MCS), has been recommended. High‐volume centres may be able to provide standardized, better care. We analysed associations between centre volume and outcomes in Germany, a large country with multiple types of CS centres.Methods and resultsBased on data from all CS patients treated in Germany from 2017–2021, the association between annual CS/MCS hospital volume and in‐hospital mortality was assessed using adjusted Cox‐regression, and spline plots were used to assess case thresholds. Overall, 220 223 CS patients underwent treatment at 1232 hospitals; 435/1232 (35%) of these performed MCS therapy, although only few hospitals (60/435, 14%) performed >25 MCS cases per year on average. Treatment at hospitals with a higher annual volume of CS and MCS cases was associated with a significantly lower mortality risk as compared to hospitals with a lower volume (upper third vs. lower two‐thirds; CS: hazard ratio [HR] 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.91–0.94; <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> < 0.001; MCS: HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.76–0.84; <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> < 0.001). These associations were continuous without a detectable ceiling effect, with spline plots suggesting case thresholds of at least 90 CS cases/25 MCS cases per year.ConclusionsCare for patients with CS treated with and without MCS is associated with lower in‐hospital mortality in hospitals that manage high volumes of CS and MCS. This analysis indicates that centralization of CS care in specialized centres treating high volumes of patients with CS and MCS might improve outcomes.","PeriodicalId":164,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Heart Failure","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":18.2,"publicationDate":"2025-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144920672","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Gregor Heitzinger, Julien Dreyfus, Varius Dannenberg, Yan Topilsky, Giovanni Benfari, Nina Ajmone Marsan, Maurizio Taramasso, Giulio Russo, Yohann Bohbot, Christos Iliadis, Marcel Weber, Luis Nombela-Franco, Andrea Eixerés-Esteve, Baptiste Bazire, Bernard Iung, Jean-François Obadia, Rodrigo Estevez Loureiro, Elisabeth Riant, Erwan Donal, Gilbert Habib, Yoan Lavie-Badie, Jörg Hausleiter, Lucas Stolz, Luigi Badano, Thierry Le Tourneau, Augustin Coisne, Thomas Modine, Fabien Praz, Jose Luis Zamorano, Ralph Stephan von Bardeleben, Rebecca T Hahn, Neil Fam, Horst Sievert, Denisa Muraru, Mariana Adamo, Samuel Heuts, Mohammed Nejjari, Vincent Chan, Michele De Bonis, Manuel Carnero-Alcazar, Volker Rudolph, Juan Crestanello, Philipp Lurz, Jeroen Bax, Roja Gauda, Jordan Bernick, George A Wells, Francesco Maisano, Maurice Enriquez-Sarano, Philipp Bartko, David Messika-Zeitoun
Aims: The impact of treatment for tricuspid regurgitation (TR) across different levels of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) remains uncertain. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of surgical and transcatheter tricuspid valve interventions (TTVI) to conservative (medical) management across LVEF categories.
Methods and results: Patients with severe isolated TR from the TRIGISTRY, a multicentre international registry, were categorized based on LVEF (preserved ejection fraction [pEF]: ≥50%, mildly reduced ejection fraction [mrEF]: 41-49%, and reduced ejection fraction [rEF]: ≤40%). We assessed the impact of treatment modality and procedural success (mild-to-moderate or lower residual TR) on 2-year survival within each LVEF category. Among 2384 patients, 1383 had pEF, 400 had mrEF, and 601 had rEF. Compared to conservative management, surgery (p < 0.0005) and TTVI (p < 0.0001) were associated with a survival benefit in patients with pEF. No significant survival advantage was observed in patients with mrEF (p = 0.28 for both), nor in those with rEF (p = 0.76 and p = 0.22, respectively). Similar results were obtained when surgical and transcatheter interventions were grouped (p < 0.0001, p = 0.17 and p = 0.29 in patients with pEF, mrEF and rEF, respectively). Patients with residual TR after TTVI exhibited a trend toward worse survival compared to those managed conservatively across all LVEF categories (p = 0.47, p = 0.33 and p = 0.008 in pEF, mrEF and rEF, respectively).
Conclusions: Transcatheter tricuspid valve intervention, whether surgical or transcatheter-based, was associated with improved survival in patients with pEF but not in those with mrEF or rEF. Residual TR remained a significant prognostic factor across the entire LVEF spectrum. These findings highlight the need for careful patient selection when considering TTVI in individuals with rEF.
{"title":"Left ventricular ejection fraction and benefit of tricuspid valve interventions - insights from the international TRIGISTRY.","authors":"Gregor Heitzinger, Julien Dreyfus, Varius Dannenberg, Yan Topilsky, Giovanni Benfari, Nina Ajmone Marsan, Maurizio Taramasso, Giulio Russo, Yohann Bohbot, Christos Iliadis, Marcel Weber, Luis Nombela-Franco, Andrea Eixerés-Esteve, Baptiste Bazire, Bernard Iung, Jean-François Obadia, Rodrigo Estevez Loureiro, Elisabeth Riant, Erwan Donal, Gilbert Habib, Yoan Lavie-Badie, Jörg Hausleiter, Lucas Stolz, Luigi Badano, Thierry Le Tourneau, Augustin Coisne, Thomas Modine, Fabien Praz, Jose Luis Zamorano, Ralph Stephan von Bardeleben, Rebecca T Hahn, Neil Fam, Horst Sievert, Denisa Muraru, Mariana Adamo, Samuel Heuts, Mohammed Nejjari, Vincent Chan, Michele De Bonis, Manuel Carnero-Alcazar, Volker Rudolph, Juan Crestanello, Philipp Lurz, Jeroen Bax, Roja Gauda, Jordan Bernick, George A Wells, Francesco Maisano, Maurice Enriquez-Sarano, Philipp Bartko, David Messika-Zeitoun","doi":"10.1002/ejhf.3797","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ejhf.3797","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>The impact of treatment for tricuspid regurgitation (TR) across different levels of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) remains uncertain. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of surgical and transcatheter tricuspid valve interventions (TTVI) to conservative (medical) management across LVEF categories.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>Patients with severe isolated TR from the TRIGISTRY, a multicentre international registry, were categorized based on LVEF (preserved ejection fraction [pEF]: ≥50%, mildly reduced ejection fraction [mrEF]: 41-49%, and reduced ejection fraction [rEF]: ≤40%). We assessed the impact of treatment modality and procedural success (mild-to-moderate or lower residual TR) on 2-year survival within each LVEF category. Among 2384 patients, 1383 had pEF, 400 had mrEF, and 601 had rEF. Compared to conservative management, surgery (p < 0.0005) and TTVI (p < 0.0001) were associated with a survival benefit in patients with pEF. No significant survival advantage was observed in patients with mrEF (p = 0.28 for both), nor in those with rEF (p = 0.76 and p = 0.22, respectively). Similar results were obtained when surgical and transcatheter interventions were grouped (p < 0.0001, p = 0.17 and p = 0.29 in patients with pEF, mrEF and rEF, respectively). Patients with residual TR after TTVI exhibited a trend toward worse survival compared to those managed conservatively across all LVEF categories (p = 0.47, p = 0.33 and p = 0.008 in pEF, mrEF and rEF, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Transcatheter tricuspid valve intervention, whether surgical or transcatheter-based, was associated with improved survival in patients with pEF but not in those with mrEF or rEF. Residual TR remained a significant prognostic factor across the entire LVEF spectrum. These findings highlight the need for careful patient selection when considering TTVI in individuals with rEF.</p>","PeriodicalId":164,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Heart Failure","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.8,"publicationDate":"2025-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144937291","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Simon A.S. Beggs, Mark C. Petrie, Sylvia Wright, Derek T. Connelly, Gary A. Wright, Iain Squire, Theresa A. McDonagh, Luke McSpadden, Chunlan Jiang, Kyungmoo Ryu, John J.V. McMurray, Roy S. Gardner