Clinical course and predictive value of congestion during hospitalization in patients admitted for worsening signs and symptoms of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: findings from the EVEREST trial.

AIMS Signs and symptoms of congestion are the most common cause for hospitalization for heart failure (HHF). The clinical course and prognostic value of congestion during HHF has not been systemically characterized. METHODS AND RESULTS A post hoc analysis was performed of the placebo group (n = 2061) of the EVEREST trial, which enrolled patients within 48 h of admission (median ~24 h) for worsening HF with an EF ≤ 40% and two or more signs or symptoms of fluid overload [dyspnoea, oedema, or jugular venous distension (JVD)] for a median follow-up of 9.9 months. Clinician-investigators assessed patients daily for dyspnoea, orthopnoea, fatigue, rales, pedal oedema, and JVD and rated signs and symptoms on a standardized 4-point scale ranging from 0 to 3. A modified composite congestion score (CCS) was calculated by summing the individual scores for orthopnoea, JVD, and pedal oedema. Endpoints were HHF, all-cause mortality (ACM), and ACM + HHF. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to evaluate the risk of CCS at discharge on outcomes at 30 days and for the entire follow-up period. The mean CCS obtained after initial therapy decreased from the mean ± SD of 4.07 ± 1.84 and the median (25th, 75th) of 4 (3, 5) at baseline to 1.11 ± 1.42 and 1 (0, 2) at discharge. At discharge, nearly three-quarters of study participants had a CCS of 0 or 1 and fewer than 10% of patients had a CCS >3. B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and amino terminal-proBNP, respectively, decreased from 734 (313, 1523) pg/mL and 4857 (2251, 9642) pg/mL at baseline to 477 (199, 1079) pg/mL, and 2834 (1218, 6075) pg/mL at discharge/Day 7. A CCS at discharge was associated with increased risk (HR/point CCS, 95% CI) for a subset of endpoints at 30 days (HHF: 1.06, 0.95-1.19; ACM: 1.34, 1.14-1.58; and ACM + HHF: 1.13, 1.03-1.25) and all outcomes for the overall study period (HHF: 1.07, 1.01-1.14; ACM: 1.16, 1.09-1.24; and ACM + HHF 1.11, 1.06-1.17). Patients with a CCS of 0 at discharge experienced HHF of 26.2% and ACM of 19.1% during the follow-up. CONCLUSION Among patients admitted for worsening signs and symptoms of HF and reduced EF, congestion improves substantially during hospitalization in response to standard therapy alone. However, patients with absent or minimal resting signs and symptoms at discharge still experienced a high mortality and readmission rate.

[1]  M. Drazner,et al.  2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of heart failure: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. , 2013, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[2]  D. Mozaffarian,et al.  Heart disease and stroke statistics--2012 update: a report from the American Heart Association. , 2012, Circulation.

[3]  D. Mozaffarian,et al.  Executive summary: heart disease and stroke statistics--2012 update: a report from the American Heart Association. , 2012, Circulation.

[4]  E. Braunwald,et al.  Hospitalizations for heart failure in the United States--a sign of hope. , 2011, JAMA.

[5]  Worsening kidney function in decompensated heart failure: treat the heart, don't mind the kidney. , 2011, European heart journal.

[6]  K. Swedberg,et al.  Changes in renal function during hospitalization and soon after discharge in patients admitted for worsening heart failure in the placebo group of the EVEREST trial. , 2011, European heart journal.

[7]  L. Allen,et al.  Identifying Patients Hospitalized With Heart Failure at Risk for Unfavorable Future Quality of Life , 2011, Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes.

[8]  M. Gheorghiade,et al.  Beyond dyspnoea as an endpoint in acute heart failure trials. , 2011, European heart journal.

[9]  E. Braunwald,et al.  A proposed model for initial assessment and management of acute heart failure syndromes. , 2011, JAMA.

[10]  Nancy M Albert,et al.  HFSA 2010 Comprehensive Heart Failure Practice Guideline. , 2010, Journal of cardiac failure.

[11]  P. Ponikowski,et al.  Assessing and grading congestion in acute heart failure: a scientific statement from the Acute Heart Failure Committee of the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology and endorsed by the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine , 2010, European journal of heart failure.

[12]  L. Allen,et al.  Critical elements of clinical follow‐up after hospital discharge for heart failure: insights from the EVEREST trial , 2010, European journal of heart failure.

[13]  K. Sliwa,et al.  The impact of early standard therapy on dyspnoea in patients with acute heart failure: the URGENT-dyspnoea study. , 2010, European heart journal.

[14]  George A Mensah,et al.  Heart failure-related hospitalization in the U.S., 1979 to 2004. , 2008, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[15]  K. Swedberg,et al.  Short-term clinical effects of tolvaptan, an oral vasopressin antagonist, in patients hospitalized for heart failure: the EVEREST Clinical Status Trials. , 2007, JAMA.

[16]  K. Swedberg,et al.  Effects of oral tolvaptan in patients hospitalized for worsening heart failure: the EVEREST Outcome Trial. , 2007, JAMA.

[17]  M. Gheorghiade.  Treatment of congestion in acute heart failure syndromes: importance, strategies, and challenges. Introduction. , 2006, The American journal of medicine.

[18]  G. Filippatos,et al.  Congestion in acute heart failure syndromes: an essential target of evaluation and treatment. , 2006, The American journal of medicine.

[19]  N. Kipshidze,et al.  Targeted vascular delivery of antisense molecules using intravenous microbubbles. , 2006, Cardiovascular revascularization medicine : including molecular interventions.

[20]  C. Yancy.  Current approaches to monitoring and management of heart failure. , 2006, Reviews in cardiovascular medicine.

[21]  N. Ayas,et al.  Does this dyspneic patient in the emergency department have congestive heart failure? , 2005, JAMA.

[22]  D. DeMets,et al.  Rationale and design of the multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the Efficacy of Vasopressin antagonism in Heart Failure: Outcome Study with Tolvaptan (EVEREST). , 2005, Journal of cardiac failure.

[23]  V. Hasselblad,et al.  Demographics, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of patients hospitalized for decompensated heart failure: observations from the IMPACT-HF registry. , 2005, Journal of cardiac failure.

[24]  K. Adams,et al.  Characteristics and outcomes of patients hospitalized for heart failure in the United States: rationale, design, and preliminary observations from the first 100,000 cases in the Acute Decompensated Heart Failure National Registry (ADHERE). , 2005, American heart journal.

[25]  L. Stevenson,et al.  Clinical assessment identifies hemodynamic profiles that predict outcomes in patients admitted with heart failure. , 2003, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[26]  M. Drazner,et al.  Prognostic importance of elevated jugular venous pressure and a third heart sound in patients with heart failure. , 2001, The New England journal of medicine.

[27]  G. Fonarow,et al.  Freedom from congestion predicts good survival despite previous class IV symptoms of heart failure. , 2000, American heart journal.

[28]  G A Ewy,et al.  Bedside cardiovascular examination in patients with severe chronic heart failure: importance of rest or inducible jugular venous distension. , 1993, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[29]  R. Myerburg,et al.  Clinical, radiographic, and hemodynamic correlations in chronic congestive heart failure: conflicting results may lead to inappropriate care. , 1991, The American journal of medicine.