Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Comprehensive Evaluation of the Heart Failure Patient Stephen G. Phillips, M.D. Assistant Professor of Medicine Virginia Tech Carilion School of Medicine September 25, 2015 Outline • • • • • • Causes of Heart Failure Inpatient Evaluation at Initial Diagnosis Medical therapy Device therapy Outpatient management When to refer for advanced therapies Definition • Heart Failure is a complex clinical syndrome that can result from any structural or functional cardiac disorder that impairs the ability of the ventricles to fill with or eject blood Background • Heart Failure affects approximately 6 million Americans • Heart Failure is the most common Medicare discharge diagnosis • Admissions rates have increased approximately 150% over the past 2 decades • Half of the hospital admissions are patients with HFpEF Definition of Heart Failure Classification I. Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction (HFrEF) II. Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF) Ejection Fraction ≤40% ≥50% a. HFpEF, Borderline 41% to 49% b. HFpEF, Improved >40% Description Also referred to as systolic HF. Randomized clinical trials have mainly enrolled patients with HFrEF and it is only in these patients that efficacious therapies have been demonstrated to date. Also referred to as diastolic HF. Several different criteria have been used to further define HFpEF. The diagnosis of HFpEF is challenging because it is largely one of excluding other potential noncardiac causes of symptoms suggestive of HF. To date, efficacious therapies have not been identified. These patients fall into a borderline or intermediate group. Their characteristics, treatment patterns, and outcomes appear similar to those of patient with HFpEF. It has been recognized that a subset of patients with HFpEF previously had HFrEF. These patients with improvement or recovery in EF may be clinically distinct from those with persistently preserved or reduced EF. Further research is needed to better characterize these patients. www.cardiosource.com Classification of Heart Failure A B C ACCF/AHA Stages of HF At high risk for HF but without structural heart disease or symptoms of HF. Structural heart disease but without signs or symptoms of HF. Structural heart disease with prior or current symptoms of HF. NYHA Functional Classification None I I II III IV D Refractory HF requiring specialized interventions. No limitation of physical activity. Ordinary physical activity does not cause symptoms of HF. No limitation of physical activity. Ordinary physical activity does not cause symptoms of HF. Slight limitation of physical activity. Comfortable at rest, but ordinary physical activity results in symptoms of HF. Marked limitation of physical activity. Comfortable at rest, but less than ordinary activity causes symptoms of HF. Unable to carry on any physical activity without symptoms of HF, or symptoms of HF at rest. Case Presentation • Mr. S is a 51 male with PMH significant for HTN ( on HCTZ 25mg daily) who presents to ED with 1 week h/o fatigue, SOB, and LE edema • Physical Exam • Gen: NAD Vitals: BP =110/70 P=90, afebrile,weight=185lbs pulse ox 88% RA, 92% on 2LNC HEENT: JVP, no carotid bruits Resp: crackles 1/3 way up both lung fields CV: RRR, normal S1S2, S3 gallop is present ABD: soft NT/ND Skin: 2 plus pitting edema to knees bilaterally Case Presentation-cont • EKG: NSR, rate=90 bpm, LBBB QRS=160ms CXR: cardiomegaly, mild interstitial edema • Labs: na=135, K=4.1, CL=100, CO2= 21, Bun=30, crt=1,2 Wbc=7000, Hgb=13.1, plt=250,000, TSH=3.5 ,NT-proBNP= 1100pg/ml The Hospitalized Patient Diagnosis of HF I IIa IIb III The diagnosis of heart failure is primarily based on signs and symptoms derived from a thorough history and physical exam. Clinicians should determine the following: New a. adequacy of systemic perfusion; b. volume status; c. the contribution of precipitating factors and/or comorbidities d. if the heart failure is new onset or an exacerbation of chronic disease; and e. whether it is associated with preserved normal or reduced I IIa IIb III ejection fraction. Chest radiographs, echocardiogram, and echocardiography are key tests in this assessment. New High Risk Features Elevated BUN(>43mg/dl) or creatinine >2.75 Low SBP(<115mmhg) Hyponatremia Elevated BNP Elevated troponin Ischemic EKG changes The Hospitalized Patient I IIa IIb III Precipitating Factors for Acute HF It is recommended that the following common potential precipitating factors for acute HF be identified as recognition of these comorbidities, New is critical to guide therapy: • acute coronary syndromes/coronary ischemia • severe hypertension • atrial and ventricular arrhythmias • infections • pulmonary emboli • renal failure • medical or dietary noncompliance Cardiosource, 2011 BNP Cardiosource, 2011 Hospitalized/Acute I IIa IIb III Measurement of BNP or NT-proBNP is useful to support clinical judgment for the diagnosis of acutely decompensated HF, especially in the setting of uncertainty for the diagnosis. I IIa IIb III Measurement of BNP or NT-proBNP and/or cardiac troponin is useful for establishing prognosis or disease severity in acutely decompensated HF. Ambulatory/Outpatient I IIa IIb III In ambulatory patients with dyspnea, measurement of BNP or N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NTproBNP) is useful to support clinical decision making regarding the diagnosis of HF, especially in the setting of clinical uncertainty. I IIa IIb III Measurement of BNP or NT-proBNP is useful for establishing prognosis or disease severity in chronic HF. Ambulatory/Outpatient (cont.) I IIa IIb III BNP- or NT-proBNP guided HF therapy can be useful to achieve optimal dosing of GDMT in select clinically euvolemic patients followed in a well-structured HF disease management program. I IIa IIb III I IIa IIb III The usefulness of serial measurement of BNP or NTproBNP to reduce hospitalization or mortality in patients with HF is not well established. Measurement of other clinically available tests such as biomarkers of myocardial injury or fibrosis may be considered for additive risk stratification in patients with chronic HF. Case Presentation-cont • Pt received 40mg IV Lasix in the ED and transferred to telemetry unit • UOP 1.5 L after 2 hours • BMP in AM essentially unchanged; Pt started on 40mg Lasix IV bid w/ KCL supplements • TTE performed mildly dilated LV ( 5.3cm) Severe global hypokinesis, EF=25% - mildly dilated LA - mild mitral regurgitation Diuretics in Hospitalized Patients I IIa IIb III I IIa IIb III Patients with HF admitted with evidence of significant fluid overload should be promptly treated with intravenous loop diuretics to reduce morbidity. If patients are already receiving loop diuretic therapy, the initial intravenous dose should equal or exceed their chronic oral daily dose and should be given as either intermittent boluses or continuous infusion. Urine output and signs and symptoms of congestion should be serially assessed, and the diuretic dose should be adjusted accordingly to relieve symptoms, reduce volume excess, and avoid hypotension. More than 50% of Patients Have Little or No Weight Loss During Hospitalization 35 30 24% Patients (%) 25 Current treatment options 33% • Loop diuretics • IV inotropes • Nitrates • Nesiritide 20 15 10 13% 7% 15% 6% 5 3% 2% 0 (<-20) (-20 to -15) (-15 to -10) (-10 to -5) (-5 to 0) Change in Weight (lbs) Fonarow GC. Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2003;4(suppl 7): 21. (0 to 5) (5 to 10) (>10) Dosing of diuretics in renal disease Cardiosource,2011 Diuretics in Heart Failure Study Design of DOSE Trial Acute Heart Failure (1 symptom AND 1 sign) Home diuretics dose ≥ 80 mg and ≤240 mg furosemide <24 hours after admission 2x2 factorial randomization High Dose (2.5x oral) Continuous infusion High Dose (2.5x oral) Q12 IV bolus Low Dose (1x oral) Continuous infusion 48 hours 1) Change to oral 2) continue current dose 3) 50% increase in dose 72 hours Co-Primary endpoints: Change in creatinine from baseline to 72 hours PGA VAS area under curve over 72 hours Low Dose (1 x oral) Q12 IV bolus DOSE Trial Cardiosource, 2014 Diuretics in Hospitalized Patients (cont.) I IIa IIb III I IIa IIb III The effect of HF treatment should be monitored with careful measurement of fluid intake and output, vital signs, body weight that is determined at the same time each day, and clinical signs and symptoms of systemic perfusion and congestion. Daily serum electrolytes, urea nitrogen, and creatinine concentrations should be measured during the use of intravenous diuretics or active titration of HF medications. When diuresis is inadequate to relieve symptoms, it is reasonable to intensify the diuretic regimen using either: a. higher doses of intravenous loop diuretics. b. addition of a second (e.g., thiazide) diuretic. Noninvasive Cardiac Imaging I IIa IIb III Patients with suspected or new-onset HF, or those presenting with acute decompensated HF, should undergo a chest x-ray to assess heart size and pulmonary congestion, and to detect alternative cardiac, pulmonary, and other diseases that may cause or contribute to the patients’ symptoms. I IIa IIb III A 2-dimensional echocardiogram with Doppler should be performed during initial evaluation of patients presenting with HF to assess ventricular function, size, wall thickness, wall motion, and valve function. I IIa IIb III Repeat measurement of EF and measurement of the severity of structural remodeling are useful to provide information in patients with HF who have had a significant change in clinical status; who have experienced or recovered from a clinical event; or who have received treatment, including GDMT, that might have had a significant effect on cardiac function; or who may be candidates for device therapy. Noninvasive Cardiac Imaging (cont.) I IIa IIb III Noninvasive imaging to detect myocardial ischemia and viability is reasonable in patients presenting with de novo HF who have known CAD and no angina unless the patient is not eligible for revascularization of any kind. I IIa IIb III Viability assessment is reasonable in select situations when planning revascularization in HF patients with CAD. I IIa IIb III Radionuclide ventriculography or magnetic resonance imaging can be useful to assess LVEF and volume when echocardiography is inadequate. Noninvasive Cardiac Imaging (cont.) I IIa IIb III Magnetic resonance imaging is reasonable when assessing myocardial infiltrative processes or scar burden. I IIa IIb III No Benefit Routine repeat measurement of LV function assessment in the absence of clinical status change or treatment interventions should not be performed. Case Presentation • Mr. S went for LHC on HD #2 which demonstrated mild non-obstructive CAD; LVEDP= 20. • Pt started on carvedilol 3.125mg po bid and Lisinopril 5mg po daily • By HD #3, IV Lasix converted to PO Lasix 40mg daily • Pt discharged home on HD#4 Causes of Heart Failure in Western World Most Common Causes of Heart Failure 1. Coronary Artery Disease 2. Hypertension 3. Valvular Heart Disease 4. Cardiomyopathy Pharmacologic Treatment for Stage C HFrEF HFrEF Stage C NYHA Class I – IV Treatment: Class I, LOE A ACEI or ARB AND Beta Blocker For all volume overload, NYHA class II-IV patients For persistently symptomatic African Americans, NYHA class III-IV For NYHA class II-IV patients. Provided estimated creatinine >30 mL/min and K+ <5.0 mEq/dL Add Add Add Class I, LOE C Loop Diuretics Class I, LOE A Hydral-Nitrates Class I, LOE A Aldosterone Antagonist Neprilysin Inhibition Potentiates Actions of Endogenous Vasoactive Peptides That Counter Maladaptive Mechanisms in Heart Failure Endogenous vasoactive peptides (natriuretic peptides, adrenomedullin, bradykinin, substance P, calcitonin gene-related peptide) Neprilysin Inactive metabolites Neurohormonal activation Vascular tone Cardiac fibrosis, hypertrophy Sodium retention Neprilysin inhibition LCZ696: Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibition LCZ696 Angiotensin receptor blocker Inhibition of neprilysin PARADIGM-HF: Study Design Randomization Single-blind run-in period Double-blind period LCZ696 200 mg BID Enalapril LCZ696 (1:1 randomization) 10 mg BID 100 mg BID 200 mg BID Enalapril 10 mg BID 2 weeks 1-2 weeks 2-4 weeks PARADIGM-HF: Cardiovascular Death or Heart Failure Hospitalization (Primary Endpoint) Kaplan-Meier Estimate of Cumulative Rates (%) 4 0 Enalapril 3 2 (n=4212) 914 2 4 LCZ696 (n=4187) 1 6 8 0 0 180 360 540 720 900 1080 1260 896 853 249 236 Days After Randomization Patients at Risk LCZ696 Enalapril 1117 4187 4212 3922 3883 3663 3579 3018 2922 2257 2123 1544 1488 Ivabradine • Specifically binds the Funny channel – Reduces the slope for diastolic depolarization • Prolongs diastolic duration • Does not alter… • Ventricular repolarization • Myocardial contractility • Blood pressure 44 Systolic Heart failure treatment with the If inhibitor ivabradine Trial Heart rate at baseline influences the effect of ivabradine on cardiovascular outcomes in chronic heart failure: analysis from the SHIFT study Effect of ivabradine on outcomes in patients with chronic heart failure and HR 75 bpm Böhm M, Borer J, Ford I, et al. Clin Res Cardiol. 2013;102(1):11-22 www.shift-study.com Effect of ivabradine on primary outcome CV death or hospitalization for HF Patients with primary composite end point (%) Hazard ratio=0.76 P<0.0001 40 Placebo 30 Ivabradine 20 10 0 0 6 12 18 24 30 Time (months) Böhm M, Borer J, Ford I, et al. Clin Res Cardiol. 2013;102(1):11-22 www.shift-study.com Inpatient and Transitions of Care I IIa IIb III The use of performance improvement systems and/or evidence-based systems of care is recommended in the hospital and early postdischarge outpatient setting to identify appropriate HF patients for GDMT, provide clinicians with useful reminders to advance GDMT, and to assess the clinical response. Inpatient and Transitions of Care I IIa IIb III Throughout the hospitalization as appropriate, before hospital discharge, at the first postdischarge visit, and in subsequent follow-up visits, the following should be addressed: a. initiation of GDMT if not previously established and not contraindicated; b. precipitant causes of HF, barriers to optimal care transitions, and limitations in postdischarge support; c. assessment of volume status and supine/upright hypotension with adjustment of HF therapy, as appropriate; d. titration and optimization of chronic oral HF therapy; e. assessment of renal function and electrolytes, where appropriate; f. assessment and management of comorbid conditions; g. reinforcement of HF education, self-care, emergency plans, and need for adherence; and h. consideration for palliative care or hospice care in selected patients. Inpatient and Transitions of Care I IIa IIb III I IIa IIb III I IIa IIb III Multidisciplinary HF disease-management programs are recommended for patients at high risk for hospital readmission, to facilitate the implementation of GDMT, to address different barriers to behavioral change, and to reduce the risk of subsequent rehospitalization for HF. Scheduling an early follow-up visit (within 7 to 14 days) and early telephone follow-up (within 3 days) of hospital discharge is reasonable. Use of clinical risk prediction tools and/or biomarkers to identify patients at higher risk for postdischarge clinical events is reasonable. Stage C: Nonpharmacological Interventions I IIa IIb III Patients with HF should receive specific education to facilitate HF self-care. I IIa IIb III Exercise training (or regular physical activity) is recommended as safe and effective for patients with HF who are able to participate to improve functional status. I IIa IIb III Sodium restriction is reasonable for patients with symptomatic HF to reduce congestive symptoms. Stage C: Nonpharmacological Interventions (cont.) I IIa IIb III I IIa IIb III Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) can be beneficial to increase LVEF and improve functional status in patients with HF and sleep apnea. Cardiac rehabilitation can be useful in clinically stable patients with HF to improve functional capacity, exercise duration, HRQOL, and mortality. Case Presentation-cont • Patient seen every 2 weeks for 6 weeks in HF clinic for uptitration of carvedilol and Lisinopril. • At week 6 post-discharge, spironolactone 25mg po daily added. BMP check at 5 days and at 30 days. • At week 16 post-discharge, patient still with NYHA class II symptoms. Repeat echo essentially unchanged with Ef=25-30%. Device Therapy for Stage C HFrEF I IIa IIb III I IIa IIb III NYHA Class III/IV I IIa IIb III NYHA Class II ICD therapy is recommended for primary prevention of SCD to reduce total mortality in selected patients with nonischemic DCM or ischemic heart disease at least 40 days post-MI with LVEF of 35% or less, and NYHA class II or III symptoms on chronic GDMT, who have reasonable expectation of meaningful survival for more than 1 year. CRT is indicated for patients who have LVEF of 35% or less, sinus rhythm, left bundle-branch block (LBBB) with a QRS duration of 150 ms or greater, and NYHA class II, III, or ambulatory IV symptoms on GDMT. Device Therapy for Stage C HFrEF (cont.) I IIa IIb III CRT is not recommended for patients with NYHA class I or II symptoms and non-LBBB pattern with a QRS duration of less than 150 ms. No Benefit I IIa IIb III No Benefit CRT is not indicated for patients whose comorbidities and/or frailty limit survival with good functional capacity to less than 1 year. Indications for CRT Therapy Patient with cardiomyopathy on GDMT for >3 mo or on GDMT and >40 d after MI, or with implantation of pacing or defibrillation device for special indications LVEF <35% Evaluate general health status Comorbidities and/or frailty limit survival with good functional capacity to <1 y Continue GDMT without implanted device Acceptable noncardiac health Evaluate NYHA clinical status NYHA class I · · · · · · LVEF ≤30% QRS ≥150 ms LBBB pattern Ischemic cardiomyopathy QRS ≤150 ms Non-LBBB pattern NYHA class III & Ambulatory class IV NYHA class II · · · · · · · · · · · · · · LVEF ≤35% QRS ≥150 ms LBBB pattern Sinus rhythm LVEF ≤35% QRS 120-149 ms LBBB pattern Sinus rhythm LVEF ≤35% QRS ≥150 ms Non-LBBB pattern Sinus rhythm QRS ≤150 ms Non-LBBB pattern · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · LVEF ≤35% QRS ≥150 ms LBBB pattern Sinus rhythm LVEF ≤35% QRS 120-149 ms LBBB pattern Sinus rhythm LVEF≤35% QRS ≥150 ms Non-LBBB pattern Sinus rhythm LVEF ≤35% QRS 120-149 ms Non-LBBB pattern Sinus rhythm · · Special CRT Indications Anticipated to require frequent ventricular pacing (>40%) Atrial fibrillation, if ventricular pacing is required and rate control will result in near 100% ventricular pacing with CRT Colors correspond to the class of recommendations in the ACCF/AHA Table 1. Benefit for NYHA class I and II patients has only been shown in CRT-D trials, and while patients may not experience immediate symptomatic benefit, late remodeling may be avoided along with long-term HF consequences. There are no trials that support CRT-pacing (without ICD) in NYHA class I and II patients. Thus, it is anticipated these patients would receive CRT-D unless clinical reasons or personal wishes make CRT-pacing more appropriate. In patients who are NYHA class III and ambulatory class IV, CRT-D may be chosen but clinical reasons and personal wishes may make CRT-pacing appropriate to improve symptoms and quality of life when an ICD is not expected to produce meaningful benefit in survival. Case Presentation-cont • Pt receives CRT-D 2 weeks after repeat echo( which demonstrated EF still 2530% range) • Pt feels better with more energy for about 12 months after device implant • Pt admitted in June 2015 for ADHF - treated with IV diuretics for 3 days - Cardiomems implanted HD#4 Cardiosource 2014 TeleHealth in Heart Failure Why is it Likely to Become Essential? 1. More patients with long-term conditions – – – More older people Longer survival with illness Better primary & secondary prevention 2. More monitoring required – – – Higher expected standards of care More things that can be monitored More treatments that can be monitored 3. Patient preference and convenience 4. Reduced Cost Telemonitoring MEMS-based pressure sensor Device Implant Non-Invasive Home Monitoring Structured Telephone Support Cardiosource, 2014 Clinical Events and Findings Useful for Identifying Patients With Advanced HF Repeated (≥2) hospitalizations or ED visits for HF in the past year Progressive deterioration in renal function (e.g., rise in BUN and creatinine) Weight loss without other cause (e.g., cardiac cachexia) Intolerance to ACE inhibitors due to hypotension and/or worsening renal function Intolerance to beta blockers due to worsening HF or hypotension Frequent systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg Persistent dyspnea with dressing or bathing requiring rest Inability to walk 1 block on the level ground due to dyspnea or fatigue Recent need to escalate diuretics to maintain volume status, often reaching daily furosemide equivalent dose >160 mg/d and/or use of supplemental metolazone therapy Progressive decline in serum sodium, usually to <133 mEq/L Frequent ICD shocks Adapted from Russell et al. Congest Heart Fail. 2008;14:316-21. Cardiac Transplantation I IIa IIb III Evaluation for cardiac transplantation is indicated for carefully selected patients with stage D HF despite GDMT, device, and surgical management. Mechanical Circulatory Support I IIa IIb III MCS use is beneficial in carefully selected* patients with stage D HFrEF in whom definitive management (e.g., cardiac transplantation) or cardiac recovery is anticipated or planned. I IIa IIb III I IIa IIb III Nondurable MCS, including the use of percutaneous and extracorporeal ventricular assist devices (VADs), is reasonable as a “bridge to recovery” or a “bridge to decision” for carefully selected* patients with HFrEF with acute, profound hemodynamic compromise. Durable MCS is reasonable to prolong survival for carefully selected* patients with stage D HFrEF. Heart Mate II A surgically implanted, rotary continuous-flow device in parallel with the native left ventricle – Left ventricle to ascending aorta Percutaneous driveline Electrically powered – Batteries & line power Fixed speed operating mode Home discharge 69 Post-op management • Aspirin 81mg and coumadin with INR 1.5 to 2.5 • MAP of 70-80mmhg • Acquired von-Willebrand syndrome- GI bleeding • 10% chance of CVA per year