PCV13 In-Hospital Initiation of Sacubitril/Valsartan after an ACUTE Decompensated Heart Failure Event: Clinical Outcomes and Economic IMPACT in Portugal

Abstract It is well known that the heart and kidney have a bi-directional correlation, in which organ dysfunction results in maladaptive changes in the other. We aimed to investigate the impact of renal function and its decline during hospitalization on clinical outcomes in patients with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). A total of 119 consecutive Chinese patients admitted for ADHF were prospectively enrolled. The course of renal function was presented with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), calculated by the four-variable equation proposed by the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) Study. Worsening renal function (WRF), defined as eGFR decline between admission (eGFRadmission) and pre-discharge (eGFRpredischarge), occurred in 41 patients. Clinical outcomes during the follow-up period were defined as 4P-major adverse cardiovascular events (4P-MACE), including the composition of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, and nonfatal HF hospitalization. During an average follow-up period of 2.6±3.2 years, 66 patients experienced 4P-MACE. Cox regression analysis revealed that impaired eGFRpredischarge, but not eGFRadmission or WRF, was significantly correlated with the development of 4P-MACE (HR, 2.003; 95% CI, 1.072–3.744; P=0.029). In conclusion, impaired renal function before discharge, but not WRF, is a significant risk factor for poor outcomes in patients with ADHF.

Download Full-text

Implementation of a Cardiogenic Shock Team and Clinical Outcomes (INOVA-SHOCK Registry): Observational and Retrospective Study (Preprint)

10.2196/preprints.9761 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Behnam Tehrani ◽

Alexander Truesdell ◽

Ramesh Singh ◽

Charles Murphy ◽

Patricia Saulino

Keyword(s):

Myocardial Infarction ◽

Heart Failure ◽

Acute Myocardial Infarction ◽

Cardiogenic Shock ◽

Clinical Outcomes ◽

Mechanical Circulatory Support ◽

Acute Decompensated Heart Failure ◽

Survival Rates ◽

Decompensated Heart Failure ◽

Circulatory Support

BACKGROUND The development and implementation of a Cardiogenic Shock initiative focused on increased disease awareness, early multidisciplinary team activation, rapid initiation of mechanical circulatory support, and hemodynamic-guided management and improvement of outcomes in cardiogenic shock. OBJECTIVE The objectives of this study are (1) to collect retrospective clinical outcomes for acute decompensated heart failure cardiogenic shock and acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock, and compare current versus historical survival rates and clinical outcomes; (2) to evaluate Inova Heart and Vascular Institute site specific outcomes before and after initiation of the Cardiogenic Shock team on January 1, 2017; (3) to compare outcomes related to early implementation of mechanical circulatory support and hemodynamic-guided management versus historical controls; (4) to assess survival to discharge rate in patients receiving intervention from the designated shock team and (5) create a clinical archive of Cardiogenic Shock patient characteristics for future analysis and the support of translational research studies. METHODS This is an observational, retrospective, single center study. Retrospective and prospective data will be collected in patients treated at the Inova Heart and Vascular Institute with documented cardiogenic shock as a result of acute decompensated heart failure or acute myocardial infarction. This registry will include data from patients prior to and after the initiation of the multidisciplinary Cardiogenic Shock team on January 1, 2017. Clinical outcomes associated with early multidisciplinary team intervention will be analyzed. In the study group, all patients evaluated for documented cardiogenic shock (acute decompensated heart failure cardiogenic shock, acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock) treated at the Inova Heart and Vascular Institute by the Cardiogenic Shock team will be included. An additional historical Inova Heart and Vascular Institute control group will be analyzed as a comparator. Means with standard deviations will be reported for outcomes. For categorical variables, frequencies and percentages will be presented. For continuous variables, the number of subjects, mean, standard deviation, minimum, 25th percentile, median, 75th percentile and maximum will be reported. Reported differences will include standard errors and 95% CI. RESULTS Preliminary data analysis for the year 2017 has been completed. Compared to a baseline 2016 survival rate of 47.0%, from 2017 to 2018, CS survival rates were increased to 57.9% (58/110) and 81.3% (81/140), respectively (P=.01 for both). Study data will continue to be collected until December 31, 2018. CONCLUSIONS The preliminary results of this study demonstrate that the INOVA SHOCK team approach to the treatment of Cardiogenic Shock with early team activation, rapid initiation of mechanical circulatory support, hemodynamic-guided management, and strict protocol adherence is associated with superior clinical outcomes: survival to discharge and overall survival when compared to 2015 and 2016 outcomes prior to Shock team initiation. What may limit the generalization of these results of this study to other populations are site specific; expertise of the team, strict algorithm adherence based on the INOVA SHOCK protocol, and staff commitment to timely team activation. Retrospective clinical outcomes (acute decompensated heart failure cardiogenic shock, acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock) demonstrated an increase in current survival rates when compared to pre-Cardiogenic Shock team initiation, rapid team activation and diagnosis and timely utilization of mechanical circulatory support. CLINICALTRIAL ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03378739; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03378739 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/701vstDGd)

Download Full-text