Cardiology Department, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, UK.
Centre for Sport, Exercise & Life Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Coventry University, Coventry, UK.
Open Heart. 2022 Nov;9(2). doi: 10.1136/openhrt-2022-002101.
The diagnostic and therapeutic arsenal for heart failure with preserved ejection (HFpEF) has expanded. With novel therapies (eg, sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors) and firmer recommendations to optimise non-cardiac comorbidities, it is unclear if outpatient HFpEF models can adequately deliver this. We; therefore, evaluated the efficacy of an existing dedicated HFpEF clinic to find innovative ways to design a more comprehensive model tailored to the modern era of HFpEF.
A single-centre retrospective analysis of 202 HFpEF outpatients was performed over 12 months before the COVID-19 pandemic. Baseline characteristics, clinic activities (eg, medication changes, lifestyle modifications, management of comorbidities) and follow-up arrangements were compared between a HFpEF and general cardiology clinic to assess their impact on mortality and morbidity at 6 and 12 months.
Between the two clinic groups, the sample population was evenly matched with a typical HFpEF profile (mean age 79±9.6 years, 55% female and a high prevalence of cardiometabolic comorbidities). While follow-up practices were similar, the HFpEF clinic delivered significantly more interventions on lifestyle changes, blood pressure and heart rate control (p<0.0001) compared with the general clinic. Despite this, no significant differences in all-cause hospitalisation and mortality were observed. This may be attributed to the fact that clinic activities were primarily cardiology-focused. Importantly, non-cardiovascular admissions accounted for >60% of hospitalisation, including causes of recurrent admissions.
This study suggests that existing general and emerging dedicated HFpEF clinics may not be adequate in addressing the multifaceted aspects of HFpEF as clinic activities concentrated primarily on cardiological measures. Although the small cohort and short follow-up period are important limitations, this study reminds clinicians that HFpEF patients are more at risk of non-cardiac than HF-related events. We have therefore proposed a pragmatic framework that can comprehensively deliver the modern guideline-directed recommendations and management of non-cardiac comorbidities through a multidisciplinary approach.
心力衰竭伴射血分数保留(HFpEF)的诊断和治疗方法不断增多。随着新型疗法(如钠-葡萄糖共转运蛋白 2 抑制剂)的出现以及对优化非心脏合并症的建议更加坚定,尚不清楚门诊 HFpEF 模式是否能够充分提供这些治疗。因此,我们评估了现有专门的 HFpEF 诊所的疗效,以寻找创新方法来设计更全面的模式,以适应 HFpEF 的现代时代。
对 12 个月前发生 COVID-19 大流行期间的 202 例 HFpEF 门诊患者进行了单中心回顾性分析。比较 HFpEF 诊所和普通心脏病诊所的基线特征、诊所活动(例如,药物调整、生活方式改变、合并症管理)和随访安排,以评估它们对 6 个月和 12 个月时死亡率和发病率的影响。
在两个诊所组中,样本人群的典型 HFpEF 特征均匀匹配(平均年龄 79±9.6 岁,55%为女性,存在大量心血管代谢合并症)。虽然随访实践相似,但 HFpEF 诊所的生活方式改变、血压和心率控制方面的干预明显更多(p<0.0001),而普通诊所则不然。尽管如此,并未观察到全因住院和死亡率的显著差异。这可能归因于这样一个事实,即诊所活动主要侧重于心脏病学。重要的是,非心血管住院占住院的>60%,包括反复住院的原因。
本研究表明,现有的普通和新兴的专门 HFpEF 诊所可能无法充分解决 HFpEF 的多方面问题,因为诊所活动主要集中在心脏措施上。尽管小队列和短随访期是重要的局限性,但本研究提醒临床医生,HFpEF 患者发生非心脏相关事件的风险高于 HF 相关事件。因此,我们提出了一个实用的框架,可以通过多学科方法全面提供现代指南指导的建议和非心脏合并症的管理。