Background/Objectives: The “weekend effect,” characterized by increased mortality and complication rates for weekend hospital admissions, is well documented in myocardial infarction and stroke but has been less thoroughly investigated in acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). This study evaluates the weekend effect in ADHF using a national cohort. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the 2016–2020 Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS). Adult ADHF admissions were identified by ICD-10 codes and classified as weekend or weekday admissions. Over 30 variables, including age, sex, and comorbidities, were analyzed. Propensity score matching (1:1) yielded 489,204 patients per group. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to assess outcomes, adjusting for key covariates. Results: Of 2,131,915 ADHF hospitalizations, 501,076 (23.5%) occurred on weekends. The cohort was 48% female, with a mean age of 72 years (SD ± 12.3). After 1:1 matching, weekend admissions had higher odds of cardiac arrest (aOR: 1.10; 95% CI: 1.06–1.13, p < 0.001), inpatient mortality (aOR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.05–1.09, p < 0.001), acute kidney injury (AKI; aOR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.06–1.08, p < 0.001), and acute respiratory failure (ARF; aOR: 1.28; 95% CI: 1.27–1.30, p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed in mechanical circulatory support (MCS) use or length of stay. Conclusions: Weekend ADHF admissions were associated with a higher risk of mortality and complications, which may be attributable to reduced specialist availability or delayed diagnostics. These findings underscore the need for standardized ADHF protocols to ensure equitable care throughout the week.

Background: Pressure-Adjusted Heart Rate (PAHR) is a novel hemodynamic index in cardiogenic shock (CS); however, its dynamic outcome remains underexplored. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, which utilized the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV (MIMIC-IV) database, PAHR was calculated using at least 12 time-matched values of mean arterial pressure (MAP), central venous pressure (CVP), and heart rate (HR) over the first 48 h. Patients receiving early mechanical circulatory support (MCS) were excluded. Multivariable regression assessed PAHR’s association with mortality, requirement of renal replacement therapy (RRT), and invasive mechanical ventilation. Effect estimates were reported per 10-unit increments of PAHR. Results: A total of 772 patients with CS were included. Mean PAHR was 15.9 ± 7.0. In our multivariable analysis, every 10-unit PAHR increase independently predicted in-hospital mortality (adjusted OR 1.97; 95% CI 1.45–2.68; p < 0.001). Using statistically comparable increments, PAHR showed strong association with in-hospital mortality (adjusted OR 1.97; 95% CI 1.45–2.68; p < 0.001) and ICU mortality (adjusted OR 1.85; 95% CI 1.35–2.54; p < 0.001). PAHR strongly predicted the use of RRT (aOR 2.69; p < 0.001) and invasive mechanical ventilation (aOR 2.11; p < 0.001). Among survivors, higher PAHR predicted prolonged ICU stay and vasopressor duration (p < 0.001). Conclusion: PAHR is a promising integrated marker of mortality and morbidity in patients with CS. It serves as a sustained predictor of outcomes, though external validation is required.

Background/Objectives: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a significant and prevalent cardiovascular complication in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients, yet its specific predictors within this population are not well understood. This study aimed to identify the predictors of new-onset AF in ESRD patients undergoing dialysis. Methods: We conducted a retrospective multicenter cohort study within the Northwell Health System, analyzing data from 5326 ESRD patients on dialysis between 2017 and 2019. The mean age was 64.2 ± 13.1 years, with 48.3% females. Multivariable-adjusted logistic regression was used to identify predictors of new-onset AF, the primary outcome. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for potential risk factors. Results: Of the 5326 patients, 1564 (29.4%) developed new-onset AF. Significant predictors included increasing age (OR 1.038 per year, 95% CI 1.032–1.044, p < 0.0001), obesity (BMI > 30 vs. BMI 20–25: OR 1.208, 95% CI 1.026–1.422, p = 0.023), and coronary artery disease (OR 1.678, 95% CI 1.466–1.920, p < 0.0001). African American patients had lower odds of developing AF compared to White patients (OR 0.578, 95% CI 0.494–0.676, p < 0.0001). Hypertension, sex, diabetes, and tobacco use were not significantly associated with AF risk. Conclusions: Age, obesity, and coronary artery disease are significant predictors of new-onset AF in ESRD patients on dialysis. Notable racial disparities exist, with African American patients having a lower risk. These findings may inform targeted prevention strategies and guide future research into the mechanisms underlying AF in ESRD patients.

Background: Sepsis-associated cardiac dysfunction has historically been characterized as predominantly systolic, yet the burden of heart failure with the preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) phenotype among patients with heart failure (HF) first documented during sepsis remains poorly defined. Methods: In a single-center retrospective cohort of adults (≥18 years) admitted to a tertiary-care hospital between 1 January 2022 and 31 December 2024, we identified patients whose first sepsis diagnosis (ICD-10) coincided with their first HF diagnosis (ICD-10 I50.x) during the same encounter, with no prior HF in the EHR. Patients were classified by ICD-10 subtype as HFpEF, HFrEF, combined, or unspecified; the unspecified group underwent echocardiographic reclassification when LVEF was documented. Demographics, selected comorbidities, peak inflammatory markers, and unadjusted in-hospital and subsequent-encounter outcomes were compared between HFpEF and HFrEF. Results: Of 924 patients with HF first documented during sepsis, 438 (47.4%) were ICD-10–coded HFpEF and 405 (43.8%) HFrEF. HFpEF patients were older (74.0 vs. 69.2 years; p < 0.001) and more often female (53.0% vs. 37.0%; p < 0.001), with higher prevalence of COPD exacerbation (21.5% vs. 13.1%; p = 0.004) and hypothyroidism (26.3% vs. 17.5%; p = 0.034). HFrEF patients exhibited higher peak lactate (2.88 vs. 2.48 mmol/L; p = 0.009) and procalcitonin (8.52 vs. 7.24 ng/mL; p = 0.011). Unadjusted in-hospital mortality (28.1% vs. 27.7%; p = 0.95), ICU admission (75.8% vs. 74.8%; p = 0.80), and length of stay did not differ. Subsequent encounters were descriptively more frequent after HFpEF (11.0% vs. 6.2%). Conclusions: ICD-10–coded HFpEF and HFrEF occurred at nearly equal frequency among adults with HF first documented during sepsis, challenging the systolic-centric paradigm. Despite distinct demographic and biochemical profiles, unadjusted in-hospital outcomes did not differ. These descriptive findings, limited by administrative-coding-based phenotype classification, the absence of multivariable adjustment, and unmeasured sepsis-severity and comorbidity variables, are hypothesis-generating and support phenotype-aware prospective study of HF arising during sepsis.