Aims Anaemia and iron deficiency (ID) are frequently found in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) and associated with adverse outcome. However, it is unclear whether absolute [transferrin saturation (TSAT) <20%, ferritin <100 μg/L] or inflammation‐driven functional ID (TSAT 100 μg/L) with and without anaemia had similar or different consequences for such patients. Methods and results Within this retrospective cohort study, 2223 patients (1601 men and 622 women) with CHF, referred to our department, between 2000 and 2018, were followed for a median time of 84 months. Anaemia was found in 393 patients and was an independent predictor for an adverse outcome [HR 2.164 (95% CI 1.865–2.512), P < 0.001]. In 674 patients with available parameters of iron metabolism, ID was present in 228 patients and was associated with an unfavourable outcome [HR 1.499 (95% CI 1.158–1.940), P = 0.002]. ID was best predicting an adverse outcome in men ≤59 years, with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, preserved kidney function, no inflammation, and a body mass index (BMI) ≥25.5 kg/m². Functional ID in women and absolute ID in men were associated with poor prognosis. Of note, TSAT <20% but not low ferritin levels were predictive for an adverse outcome. Anaemic patients with high ferritin levels, advanced inflammation, older age, low BMI, male gender, and reduced glomerular filtration rate had the worst prognosis. Conclusions Anaemia and low tissue iron availability as reflected by TSAT <20% are negative predictors of outcome in patients with CHF. Systemic inflammation, renal function, BMI, age, and gender are important contributors for the clinical course.

Hospitalization for acute heart failure (HF) is associated with a substantial morbidity burden and with associated healthcare costs and an increased mortality risk. However, few if any major medical innovations have been witnessed in this area in recent times. Levosimendan is a first-in-class calcium sensitizer and potassium channel opener indicated for the management of acute HF. Experience in several clinical studies has indicated that administration of intravenous levosimendan in intermittent cycles may reduce hospitalization and mortality rates in patients with advanced HF; however, none of those trials were designed or powered to give conclusive insights into that possibility. This paper describes the rationale and protocol of LeoDOR (levosimendan infusions for patients with advanced chronic heart failure), a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, international, multicentre trial that will explore the efficacy and safety of intermittent levosimendan therapy, in addition to optimized standard therapy, in patients following hospitalization for acute HF. Salient features of LeoDOR include the use of two treatment regimens, in order to evaluate the effects of different schedules and doses of levosimendan during a 12 week treatment phase, and the use of a global rank primary endpoint, in which all patients are ranked across three hierarchical groups ranging from time to death or urgent heart transplantation or implantation of a ventricular assist device to time to rehospitalization and, lastly, time-averaged proportional change in N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide. Secondary endpoints include changes in HF symptoms and functional status at 14 weeks.

Aims: Amyloid cardiomyopathy is an underappreciated cause of morbidity and mortality. Recent evidence suggests that ATTR wild-type cardiomyopathy (ATTRwt-CM) is probably much more common than widely appreciated. So far, no data are available on comparison of mortality from ATTRwt-CM and other heart failure aetiologies. Methods and results: This was a retrospective, observational, cohort study of 2251 patients and their data collected prospectively from May 2000 to June 2018. Long-term mortality was the main outcome measure. Underlying cardiomyopathies were classified as amyloid CM (6.1%) [ATTRwt 3.0%; light-chain amyloidosis (AL) 3.1%], dilated CM (dCMP) (46.4%), ischaemic heart disease (IHD) (24.4%), hypertensive heart disease (HHD) (14.6%), hypertrophic CM (HCM) (5.1%), and valvular heart disease (VHD) (3.4%). Median duration of follow-up was 7.1 years (interquartile range 3.4–11.3). Five-year overall survival in the whole cohort was 80.1%. In multivariate analysis, individuals with amyloid CM were 3.74 times [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.72–5.14; P < 0.001] more likely to die of any reason than were individuals with dCMP. Mortality was higher in AL-CM compared with ATTRwt-CM [hazard ratio (HR) 2.88; 95% CI 1.48–5.58; P = 0.002]. Mortality rates in patients with ATTRwt-CM were higher than in patients with dCMP (HR 1.96; 95% CI 1.24–3.22; P = 0.007), HCM (HR 2.94; 95% CI 1.28–6.67; P = 0.011), HHD (HR 2.08; 95% CI 1.27–3.45; P = 0.004), VHD (HR 2.38; 95% CI 1.30–4.35; P = 0.005), or left ventricular ejection fraction ≥ 40% (HR 1.99; 95% CI 1.12–3.52; P = 0.018). Conclusions: Our study demonstrates that amyloid CM is independently associated with poor survival among patients with various causes of heart failure. ATTRwt-CM had a better long-term prognosis than did AL-CM, but was associated with higher mortality than were dCMP, HCM, HHD, VHD, and heart failure with preserved or mid-range ejection fraction.

Heart failure is a major health problem associated with frequent hospital admissions. HerzMobil Tirol is a multidisciplinary postdischarge disease management program for heart failure patients to improve quality of life, prevent readmission, and reduce mortality and health care costs. It uses a telemonitoring system that is incorporated into a network of specialized heart failure nurses, physicians, and hospitals. Patients are equipped with a mobile phone, a weighing scale, and a blood pressure and heart rate monitor for daily acquisition and transmission of data on blood pressure, heart rate, weight, well-being, and drug intake. These data are transmitted daily and regularly reviewed by the network team. In addition, patients are scheduled for 3 visits with the network physician and 2 visits with the heart failure nurse within 3 months after hospitalization for acute heart failure. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the feasibility of HerzMobil Tirol by analyzing changes in health status as well as patients' self-care behavior and satisfaction and to derive recommendations for implementing a telemonitoring-based interdisciplinary disease management program for heart failure in everyday clinical practice. In this prospective, pilot, single-arm study including 35 elderly patients, the feasibility of HerzMobil Tirol was assessed by analyzing changes in health status (via Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, KCCQ), patients' self-care behavior (via European Heart Failure Self-Care Behavior Scale, revised into a 9-item scale, EHFScB-9), and user satisfaction (via Delone and McLean System Success Model). A total of 43 patients joined the HerzMobil Tirol program, and of these, 35 patients completed it. The mean age of participants was 67 years (range: 43-86 years). Health status (KCCQ, range: 0-100) improved from 46.2 to 69.8 after 3 months. Self-care behavior (EHFScB-9, possible range: 9-22) after 3 months was 13.2. Patient satisfaction in all dimensions was 86% or higher. Lessons learned for the rollout of HerzMobil Tirol comprise a definite time schedule for interventions, solid network structures with clear process definition, a network coordinator, and specially trained heart failure nurses. On the basis of the positive evaluation results, HerzMobil Tirol has been officially introduced in the province of Tyrol in July 2017. It is, therefore, the first regular financed telehealth care program in Austria.

Aim: The LeoDOR trial explored the efficacy and safety of intermittent levosimendan therapy in the vulnerable phase following a hospitalization for acute heart failure (HF). Methods and results: In this prospective multicentre, double-blind, two-armed trial, patients with advanced HF were randomized 2:1 at the end of an index hospitalization for acute HF to intermittent levosimendan therapy or matching placebo for 12 weeks. All patients had left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤30% during index hospitalization. Levosimendan was administered according to centre preference either as 6 h infusion at a rate of 0.2 μg/kg/min every 2 weeks, or as 24 h infusion at a rate of 0.1 μg/kg/min every 3 weeks. The primary efficacy assessment after 14 weeks was based on a global rank score consisting of three hierarchical groups. Secondary clinical endpoints included the composite risk of tiers 1 and 2 at 14 and 26 weeks, respectively. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the planned number of patients could not be recruited. The final modified intention-to-treat analysis included 145 patients (93 in the combined levosimendan arm, 52 in the placebo arm), which reduced the statistical power to detect a 20% risk reduction in the primary endpoint to 60%. Compared with placebo, intermittent levosimendan had no significant effect on the primary endpoint: the mean rank score was 72.55 for the levosimendan group versus 73.81 for the placebo group (p = 0.863). However, there was a signal towards a higher incidence of the individual clinical components of the primary endpoint in the levosimendan group versus the placebo group both after 14 weeks (hazard ratio [HR] 2.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12–7.68; p = 0.021) and 26 weeks (HR 1.64, 95% CI 0.87–3.11; p = 0.122). Conclusions: Among patients recently hospitalized with HF and reduced LVEF, intermittent levosimendan therapy did not improve post-hospitalization clinical stability.

Patients in the latest stages of heart failure are severely compromised, with poor quality of life and frequent hospitalizations. Heart transplantation and left ventricular assist device implantation are viable options only for a minority, and intermittent or continuous infusions of positive inotropes may be needed as a bridge therapy or as a symptomatic approach. In these settings, levosimendan has potential advantages over conventional inotropes (catecholamines and phosphodiesterase inhibitors), such as sustained effects after initial infusion, synergy with beta-blockers, and no increase in oxygen consumption. Levosimendan has been suggested as a treatment that reduces re-hospitalization and improves quality of life. However, previous clinical studies of intermittent infusions of levosimendan were not powered to show statistical significance on key outcome parameters. A panel of 45 expert clinicians from 12 European countries met in Rome on November 24-25, 2016 to review the literature and envision an appropriately designed clinical trial addressing these needs. In the earlier FIGHT trial (daily subcutaneous injection of liraglutide in heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction) a composite Global Rank Score was used as primary end-point where death, re-hospitalization, and change in N-terminal-prohormone-brain natriuretic peptide level were considered in a hierarchical order. In the present study, we tested the same end-point post hoc in the PERSIST and LEVOREP trials on oral and repeated i.v. levosimendan, respectively, and demonstrated superiority of levosimendan treatment vs placebo. The use of the same composite end-point in a properly powered study on repetitive levosimendan in advanced heart failure is strongly advocated.