Transition to a heart failure score alert state during remote monitoring was significantly associated with all-cause death (HR 6.99; 95% CI 1.89-25.94; p=0.004).
Cohort (n=511)
No
Does the occurrence of a heart failure score alert during remote monitoring predict heart failure hospitalization or all-cause death in patients with heart failure and CIEDs?
In HF patients with CIEDs on remote monitoring, the occurrence of an HF score alert is strongly associated with subsequent all-cause mortality.
Effect estimate: HR 6.99 (95% CI 1.89-25.94)
p-value: p=0.004
BACKGROUND: Understanding how baseline conditions influence alerts and adverse events in patients with heart failure (HF) and cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) under remote monitoring (RM) is crucial for patient management. However, the impact of HF alerts on clinical outcomes remains poorly defined. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of HF alerts on adverse outcomes and to identify clinical trajectories based on individual baseline risk factors. METHODS: We conducted a single-center, retrospective study including HF patients implanted with a CIED and provided with RM. We modeled patients trajectories using a semi-Markov, four-state framework with six possible transitions, encompassing a HF score alert state, HF Hospitalization (HFH) state and all-cause death. Cox proportional hazards models assessed the effects of baseline covariates on transition rates and evaluated the impact of HF alert occurrence on outcomes, treated as time-dependent covariates. RESULTS: A total of 511 patients (median age 69.9 years IQR 61.4-77.1) were included. During a median follow-up of 1.8 years IQR 0.7-3.9, 60 patients (11.7%) transitioned to an HF score alert state, of whom 6 (10%) and 12 (20%) respectively experienced an HFH and died without a prior HFH. From the baseline group, 29 patients (5.7%) transitioned directly to death and 53 patients (10.4%) had an HFH. Of the 59 total patients who experienced an HFH, 19 (32%) died during follow-up. The transition to a HF score alert state was significantly associated with all-cause death (HR 6.99, 95% CI 1.89-25.94; p = 0.004) while not statistically significant associated with HFH (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.13-2.69; p = 0.65). CONCLUSIONS: Using a multistate model, we characterized clinical trajectories in HF patients and observed the effects of different covariates on transition rates.
Mei et al. (Thu,) conducted a cohort in Heart failure with cardiac implantable electronic devices (n=511). Heart failure score alert vs. No alert (baseline state) was evaluated on All-cause death (HR 6.99, 95% CI 1.89-25.94, p=0.004). Transition to a heart failure score alert state during remote monitoring was significantly associated with all-cause death (HR 6.99; 95% CI 1.89-25.94; p=0.004).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: