Circulation-Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes最新文献

Background: Although frailty is strongly associated with mortality in patients with heart failure (HF), the risk of which specific cause of death is associated with being complicated with frailty is unclear. We aimed to clarify the association between multidomain frailty and the causes of death in elderly patients hospitalized with HF.

Methods: We analyzed data from the FRAGILE-HF cohort, where patients aged 65 years and older, hospitalized with HF, were prospectively registered between 2016 and 2018 in 15 Japanese hospitals before discharge and followed up for 2 years. All patients were assessed for physical, social, and cognitive dysfunction, and categorized into 3 groups based on their number of frailty domains (FDs, 0-1, 2, and 3). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to evaluate the association between the number of FDs and all-cause mortality, whereas Fine-Gray competing risk regression analysis was used for assessing the impact on cause-specific mortality.

Results: We analyzed 1181 patients with HF (81 years old in median, 57.4% were male), 530 (44.9%), 437 (37.0%), and 214 (18.1%) of whom were categorized into the FD 0 to 1, FD 2, and FD 3 groups, respectively. During the 2-year follow-up, 240 deaths were observed (99 HF deaths, 34 cardiovascular deaths, and 107 noncardiovascular deaths), and an increase in the number of FD was significantly associated with mortality (Log-rank: P<0.001). The Fine-Gray competing risk analysis adjusted for age and sex showed that FDs 2 (subdistribution hazard ratio, 1.77 [95% CI, 1.11-2.81]) and 3 (2.78, [95% CI, 1.69-4.59]) groups were associated with higher incidence of noncardiovascular death but not with HF and other cardiovascular deaths.

Conclusions: Although multidomain frailty is strongly associated with mortality in older patients with HF, it is mostly attributable to noncardiovascular death and not cardiovascular death, including HF death.

Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: UMIN000023929.

Background: The HOPE 4 trial (Heart Outcomes Prevention and Evaluation 4) investigated the effectiveness of a comprehensive, collaborative model of care, implemented in Colombia and Malaysia, which aimed to reduce cardiovascular disease risk in individuals with hypertension. One component of this intervention was the nomination of a treatment supporter, where participants could select a family member or friend to assist them with their care. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of these individuals on participant outcomes, as well as the relationship dynamics between participants and their treatment supporter.

Methods: Participants in the HOPE 4 intervention group with baseline and 12 months of follow-up were included for analysis. They were divided into Every Visit (n=339) and

Results: Groups were majority female (53% versus 62%) with a mean age of 63 and 66 years. Country of origin differed between groups (22% versus 86%; Colombia). A 15.5% ([95% CI, 6.2%-24.8%] P=0.004) greater increase in statin medication use was reported in the Every Visit group at 12 months compared with the P<0.003). The difference in change in systolic blood pressure between groups was not found to be significant at 12 months, though it favored the Every Visit group (-2.3 [95% CI, -6.1 to 1.5]; P=0.045). The majority of survey respondents from either study group strongly agreed that having a treatment supporter positively influenced their health.

Conclusions: Long-term support from a nominated treatment supporter was associated with improved adherence, risk factor management, and medication use among individuals with hypertension.

Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01826019.

Background: Despite women having fewer traditional risk factors (eg, hypertension, diabetes), strokes are more common in women than men aged ≤45 years. This study examined the contributions of traditional and nontraditional risk factors (eg, migraine, thrombophilia) in the development of strokes among young adults.

Methods: This retrospective case-control study used Colorado's All Payer Claims Database (2012-2019). We identified index stroke events in young adults (aged 18-55 years), matched 1:3 to stroke-free controls, by (1) sex, (2) age±2 years, (3) insurance type, and (4) prestroke period. All traditional and nontraditional risk factors were identified from enrollment until a stroke or proxy-stroke date (defined as the prestroke period). Conditional logistic regression models stratified by sex and age group first assessed the association of stroke with counts of risk factors by type and then computed their individual and aggregated population attributable risks.

Results: We included 2618 cases (52% women; 73.3% ischemic strokes) and 7827 controls. Each additional traditional and nontraditional risk factors were associated with an increased risk of stroke in all sex and age groups. In adults aged 18 to 34 years, more strokes were associated with nontraditional (population attributable risk: 31.4% men and 42.7% women) than traditional risk factors (25.3% men and 33.3% women). The contribution of nontraditional risk factors declined with age (19.4% men and 27.9% women aged 45-55 years). The contribution of traditional risk factors peaked among patients aged 35 to 44 years (32.8% men and 39.7% women). Hypertension was the most important traditional risk factor and increased in contribution with age (population attributable risk: 27.8% men and 26.7% women aged 45 to 55 years). Migraine was the most important nontraditional risk factor and decreased in contribution with age (population attributable risk: 20.1% men and 34.5% women aged 18-35 years).

Conclusions: Nontraditional risk factors were as important as traditional risk factors in the development of strokes for both young men and women and have a stronger association with the development of strokes in adults younger than 35 years of age.

Background: Women who suffer a witnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrest receive bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) less often than men. To understand this phenomenon, we queried whether there are differences in deterrents to providing CPR based on the rescuer's gender.

Methods: Participants were surveyed using a national crowdsourcing platform. Participants ranked the following 5 previously identified themes as reasons: rescuers are afraid to injure or hurt women; rescuers might have a misconception that women do not suffer cardiac arrest; rescuers are afraid to be accused of sexual assault or sexual harassment; rescuers have a fear of touching women or that their touch might be inappropriate; and rescuers think that women are faking it or being overdramatic. Participants were adult US residents able to correctly define CPR. Participants ranked the themes if the rescuer was gender unidentified, a man, and a woman, in variable order.

Results: In November 2018, 520 surveys were completed. The respondents identified as 42.3% women, 74.2% White, 10.4% Black, and 6.7% Hispanic. Approximately half (48.1%) of the cohort knew how to perform CPR, but only 7.9% had ever performed CPR. When the rescuer was identified as a man, survey participants ranked fear of sexual assault or sexual harassment and fear of touching women or that the touch might be inappropriate as the top reasons (36.2% and 34.0% of responses, respectively). Conversely, when the rescuer was identified as a woman, survey respondents reported fear of hurting or injuring as the top reason (41.2%).

Conclusions: Public perceptions as to why women receive less bystander CPR than men were different based on the gender of the rescuer. Participants reported that men rescuers would potentially be hindered by fears of accusations of sexual assault/harassment or inappropriate touch, while women rescuers would be deterred due to fears of causing physical injury.

Background: Patients with atrial fibrillation have a high mortality rate that is only partially attributable to vascular outcomes. The competing risk of death may affect the expected anticoagulant benefit. We determined if competing risks materially affect the guideline-endorsed estimate of anticoagulant benefit.

Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of 12 randomized controlled trials that randomized patients with atrial fibrillation to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) or either placebo or antiplatelets. For each participant, we estimated the absolute risk reduction (ARR) of VKAs to prevent stroke or systemic embolism using 2 methods-first using a guideline-endorsed model (CHA₂DS₂-VASc) and then again using a competing risk model that uses the same inputs as CHA₂DS₂-VASc but accounts for the competing risk of death and allows for nonlinear growth in benefit. We compared the absolute and relative differences in estimated benefit and whether the differences varied by life expectancy.

Results: A total of 7933 participants (median age, 73 years, 36% women) had a median life expectancy of 8 years (interquartile range, 6-12), determined by comorbidity-adjusted life tables and 43% were randomized to VKAs. The CHA₂DS₂-VASc model estimated a larger ARR than the competing risk model (median ARR at 3 years, 6.9% [interquartile range, 4.7%-10.0%] versus 5.2% [interquartile range, 3.5%-7.4%]; P<0.001). ARR differences varied by life expectancies: for those with life expectancies in the highest decile, 3-year ARR difference (CHA₂DS₂-VASc model - competing risk model 3-year risk) was -1.3% (95% CI, -1.3% to -1.2%); for those with life expectancies in the lowest decile, 3-year ARR difference was 4.7% (95% CI, 4.5%-5.0%).

Conclusions: VKA anticoagulants were exceptionally effective at reducing stroke risk. However, VKA benefits were misestimated with CHA₂DS₂-VASc, which does not account for the competing risk of death nor decelerating treatment benefit over time. Overestimation was most pronounced when life expectancy was low and when the benefit was estimated over a multiyear horizon.