The gut microbiota represents a potential treatment target in heart failure (HF) through microbial metabolites such as trimethylamine N-oxide (TMAO) and systemic inflammation. Treatment with the probiotic yeast Saccharomyces boulardii have been suggested to improve left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). In a multicentre, prospective randomized open label, blinded end-point trial, we randomized patients with LVEF <40% and New York Heart Association functional class II or III, despite optimal medical therapy, to treatment (1:1:1) with the probiotic yeast Saccharomyces boulardii, the antibiotic rifaximin, or standard of care (SoC) only. The primary endpoint, the baseline-adjusted LVEF at three months, was assessed in an intention-to-treat analysis. We enrolled a total of 151 patients. After three months' treatment, the LVEF did not differ significantly between the SoC arm and the rifaximin arm (mean difference was -1•2 percentage points; 95% CI -3•2 - 0•7; p=0•22) or between the SoC arm and the Saccharomyces boulardii arm (mean difference -0•2 percentage points; 95% CI -2•2 - 1•9; p=0•87). We observed no significant between-group differences in changes in microbiota diversity, TMAO, or C-reactive protein. Three months' treatment with Saccharomyces boulardii or rifaximin on top of SoC had no significant effect on LVEF, microbiota diversity, or the measured biomarkers in our population with HF. The trial was funded by the Norwegian Association for Public Health, the Blix foundation, Stein Erik Hagen's Foundation for Clinical Heart Research, Ada og Hagbart Waages humanitære og veldedige stiftelse, Alfasigma, and Biocodex.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with increased mortality and morbidity, including risk for cerebral macro- and microinfarctions and cognitive decline, even in the presence of adequate oral anticoagulation. AF is strongly related to increased inflammatory activity whereby anti-inflammatory agents can reduce the risk of new or recurrent AF. However, it is not known whether anti-inflammatory therapy can also modify the deterioration of neurocognitive function in older patients with AF. In the present study, older patients with AF were treated with intensive lipid-lowering therapy with atorvastatin 40 mg and ezetimibe 10 mg, or placebo. We examined the relationship between neurocognitive functions and inflammatory burden. Analysis of inflammatory markers revealed significant reductions in high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), fibroblast growth factor (FGF), granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1RA), interleukin (IL)-9, IL-13 and IL-17, and interferon-γ (IFNγ) in the treatment group compared to placebo. Reduction in plasma concentration of IL-1RA, IL-2, IL-9 and IL-12, and macrophage inflammatory protein-1β (MIP-1β) correlated significantly with improvement in the neurocognitive functions memory and speed. Loss of volume in amygdala and hippocampus, as determined by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), was reduced in the treatment arm, statistically significant for left amygdala. Anti-inflammatory therapy through intensive lipid-lowering treatment with atorvastatin 40 mg and ezetimibe 10 mg can modify the deterioration of neurocognitive function, and the loss of volume in certain cerebral areas in older patients with AF. NCT00449410

High-density lipoproteins (HDL) are a heterogenous group of plasma molecules with a large variety in composition. There is a wide specter in lipid content and the number of different proteins that has been associated with HDL is approaching 100. Given this heterogeneity and the fact that the total amount of HDL is inversely related to the risk of coronary heart disease (CHD), there has been increasing interest in the function of specific HDL subgroups and in what way measuring and quantifying these subgroups could be of clinical importance in determining individual CHD risk. If certain subgroups appear to be more protective than others, it may also in the future be possible to pharmacologically increase beneficial and decrease harmful subgroups in order to reduce CHD risk. In this review we give a short historical perspective, summarize some of the recent clinical findings regarding HDL subclassifications and discuss why such classification may or may not be of clinical relevance.

The aim of our study was to perform an economic assessment in order to check whether or not telemonitoring of users with pacemakers offers a cost-effective alternative to traditional follow-up in outpatient clinics. We used effectiveness and cost data from the NORDLAND trial, which is a controlled, randomized, non-masked clinical trial. Fifty patients were assigned to receive either telemonitoring (TM; n = 25) or conventional monitoring (CM; n = 25) and were followed up for 12 months after the implantation. A cost–utility analysis was performed in terms of additional costs per additional Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY) attained from the perspectives of the Norwegian National Healthcare System and patients and their caregivers. Effectiveness was similar between alternatives (TM: 0.7804 [CI: 0.6864 to 0.8745] vs. CM: 0.7465 [CI: 0.6543 to 0.8387]), while cost per patient was higher in the RM group, both from the Norwegian NHS perspective (TM: €2,079.84 [CI: 0.00 to 4,610.58] vs. €271.97 [CI: 158.18 to 385.76]; p = 0.147) and including the patient/family perspective (TM: €2,295.91 [CI: 0.00 to 4,843.28] vs. CM: €430.39 [CI: 0.00 to 4,841.48]), although these large differences—mainly due to a few patients being hospitalized in the TM group, as opposed to none in the CM group—did not reach statistical significance. The Incremental Cost–Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) from the Norwegian NHS perspective (€53,345.27/QALY) and including the patient/caregiver perspective (€55,046.40/QALY), as well as the Incremental Net Benefit (INB), favors the CM alternative, albeit with very broad 95%CIs. The probabilistic analysis confirmed inconclusive results due to the wide CIs even suggesting that TM was not cost-effective in this study. Supplemental analysis excluding the hospitalization costs shows positive INBs, whereby suggesting a discrete superiority of the RM alternative if hospitalization costs were not considered, albeit also with broad CIs. Cost–utility analysis of TM vs. CM shows inconclusive results because of broad confidence intervals with ICER and INB figures ranging from potential savings to high costs for an additional QALY, with the majority of ICERs being above the usual NHS thresholds for coverage decisions. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02237404.

The purpose of this study was to analyse the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients followed up using a remote device-monitoring system (TM) compared to patients followed up through standard outpatient visits (HM), 12 months after the implantation of a pacemaker. This was a trial design that used the EuroQol-5D Questionnaire and the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHF). The HRQoL of a cohort of 50 consecutive patients randomly allocated to one of the two follow-up modalities was measured at baseline and then during follow-up, 12 months after the pacemaker implantation. Eventually, 23 patients were followed-up through standard outpatient visits, while 23 used a remote monitoring system. Results: The baseline clinical characteristics and health-related quality of life of the patients from both groups were observed to be statistically similar. Twelve months after the pacemaker implantation, both groups showed statistically significant improvements in the baseline parameters based on the MLHF. The patients followed up through hospital visits showed a greater increase in MLHF-HRQoL after 12 months, although the increase was not significantly greater than that of the TM group. Furthermore, the frequencies of emergency visits and re-hospitalisations did not differ between the groups.