Key result
HFmrEF and HFpEF are linked to lower mortality than HFrEF despite similarly high healthcare utilization.
Why the study?
Evidence on healthcare resource utilization across hospitalized heart failure patients with HFrEF, HFmrEF, and HFpEF was limited.
How do healthcare resource utilization and 12-month outcomes compare across LVEF phenotypes in patients hospitalized for heart failure?
Observational (n=16,943)
Yes
How do healthcare resource utilization and 12-month outcomes compare across LVEF phenotypes in patients hospitalized for heart failure?
Effect estimate: adjusted HR 0.78 (95% CI 0.59-0.71)
Healthcare resource utilization is similarly high across all LVEF phenotypes in hospitalized heart failure patients, despite better long-term cardiovascular outcomes in HFmrEF and HFpEF compared to HFrEF.
High resource use across LVEF groups in hospitalized HF warrants attention; leaves open whether LVEF-specific strategies reduce burden.
AIM: Evidence on healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) for hospitalized patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced (HFrEF), mildly reduced (HFmrEF) and preserved (HFpEF) ejection fraction is limited. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analysed HCRU in relation to left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) phenotypes, clinical features and in-hospital and 12-month outcomes in 16 943 patients hospitalized for HF in a worldwide registry. HFrEF was more prevalent (53%) than HFmrEF (17%) or HFpEF (30%). Patients with HFmrEF and HFpEF were older, more often women, with milder symptoms and more comorbidities, but differences were not pronounced. HCRU was high in all three groups; two or more in- and out-of-hospital services were required by 51%, 49% and 52% of patients with HFrEF, HFmrEF and HFpEF, respectively, and intensive care unit by 41%, 41% and 37%, respectively. Hospitalization length was similar (median, 8 days). Discharge prescription of neurohormonal inhibitors was <80% for each agent in HFrEF and only slightly lower in HFmrEF and HFpEF (74% and 67%, respectively, for beta-blockers). Compared to HFrEF, 12-month all-cause and cardiovascular mortality were lower for HFmrEF (adjusted hazard ratios 0.78 [95% confidence interval 0.59-0.71] and 0.80 [0.70-0.92]) and HFpEF (0.64 [0.59-0.87] and 0.63 [0.56-0.71]); 12-month HF hospitalization was also lower for HFpEF and HFmrEF (21% and 20% vs. 25% for HFrEF). In-hospital mortality, 12-month non-cardiovascular mortality and 12-month all-cause hospitalization were similar among groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients hospitalized for HF, overall HCRU was similarly high across LVEF spectrum, reflecting the subtle clinical differences among LVEF phenotypes during hospitalization. Discharge prescription of neurohormonal inhibitors was suboptimal in HFrEF and lower but significant in patients with HFpEF and HFmrEF, who had better long-term cardiovascular outcomes than HFrEF, but similar risk for non-cardiovascular events.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Farmakis et al. (2023) conducted an observational in Hospitalized heart failure (n=16,943). Mildly reduced (HFmrEF) and preserved (HFpEF) ejection fraction vs. Reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) was evaluated on 12-month all-cause mortality (HFmrEF vs HFrEF) (adjusted HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.59-0.71). Mildly reduced and preserved ejection fraction had similarly high healthcare resource utilization (49% and 52% vs 51% for HFrEF) but lower 12-month all-cause mortality (HR 0.78 and 0.64).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: