Aims: The objectives of the present study were to describe epidemiology and outcomes in ambulatory heart failure (HF) patients stratified by left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and to identify predictors for mortality at 1 year in each group. Methods and results: The European Society of Cardiology Heart Failure Long-Term Registry is a prospective, observational study collecting epidemiological information and 1-year follow-up data in 9134 HF patients. Patients were classified according to baseline LVEF into HF with reduced EF [EF 50% (HFpEF)]. In comparison with HFpEF subjects, patients with HFrEF were younger (64 years vs. 69 years), more commonly male (78% vs. 52%), more likely to have an ischaemic aetiology (49% vs. 24%) and left bundle branch block (24% vs. 9%), but less likely to have hypertension (56% vs. 67%) or atrial fibrillation (18% vs. 32%). The HFmrEF group resembled the HFrEF group in some features, including age, gender and ischaemic aetiology, but had less left ventricular and atrial dilation. Mortality at 1 year differed significantly between HFrEF and HFpEF (8.8% vs. 6.3%); HFmrEF patients experienced intermediate rates (7.6%). Age, New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III/IV status and chronic kidney disease predicted mortality in all LVEF groups. Low systolic blood pressure and high heart rate were predictors for mortality in HFrEF and HFmrEF. A lower body mass index was independently associated with mortality in HFrEF and HFpEF patients. Atrial fibrillation predicted mortality in HFpEF patients. Conclusions: Heart failure patients stratified according to different categories of LVEF represent diverse phenotypes of demography, clinical presentation, aetiology and outcomes at 1 year. Differences in predictors for mortality might improve risk stratification and management goals.

Vorapaxar is a new oral protease-activated–receptor 1 (PAR-1) antagonist that inhibits thrombin-induced platelet activation. In this multinational, double-blind, randomized trial, we compared vorapaxar with placebo in 12,944 patients who had acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation. The primary end point was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, stroke, recurrent ischemia with rehospitalization, or urgent coronary revascularization. Follow-up in the trial was terminated early after a safety review. After a median follow-up of 502 days (interquartile range, 349 to 667), the primary end point occurred in 1031 of 6473 patients receiving vorapaxar versus 1102 of 6471 patients receiving placebo (Kaplan–Meier 2-year rate, 18.5% vs. 19.9%; hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.01; P=0.07). A composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke occurred in 822 patients in the vorapaxar group versus 910 in the placebo group (14.7% and 16.4%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.81 to 0.98; P=0.02). Rates of moderate and severe bleeding were 7.2% in the vorapaxar group and 5.2% in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.16 to 1.58; P<0.001). Intracranial hemorrhage rates were 1.1% and 0.2%, respectively (hazard ratio, 3.39; 95% CI, 1.78 to 6.45; P<0.001). Rates of nonhemorrhagic adverse events were similar in the two groups. In patients with acute coronary syndromes, the addition of vorapaxar to standard therapy did not significantly reduce the primary composite end point but significantly increased the risk of major bleeding, including intracranial hemorrhage. (Funded by Merck; TRACER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00527943.)

The "no-reflow" phenomenon, the occurrence of areas with very low flow in hearts reperfused after ischemia, is thought to be largely established at the time of reperfusion as a result of microvascular damage induced by ischemia. In the present study we sought to determine whether additional impairment of tissue perfusion might also occur during the course of reperfusion. Open-chest dogs were subjected to 90 minutes of left circumflex coronary artery occlusion and reperfused for 2 minutes (n = 7) or 3.5 hours (n = 8). Myocardial perfusion was visualized in left ventricular slices following in vivo injection of the fluorescent dye thioflavin-S just before killing. The area of impaired perfusion (absent thioflavin) averaged 9.5 +/- 3.0% of the risk region in dogs reperfused for 2 minutes, whereas it was nearly three times as large in dogs reperfused for 3.5 hours (25.9 +/- 8.2% of the risk region, p less than 0.05). Serial measurements of flow by microspheres during reperfusion demonstrated zones within the postischemic myocardium that were hyperemic 2 minutes after reperfusion, with adequate flow still present at 30 minutes, but with a subsequent marked fall in perfusion. After 3.5 hours these areas showed negligible flow (0.13 +/- 0.3 ml/min/g) and no thioflavin uptake. Tissue samples showing postischemic impairment in perfusion has received virtually no collateral flow during ischemia (less than 0.01 ml/min/g), whereas collateral flow was significantly higher in adjacent thioflavin-positive zones (0.04 +/- 0.01 ml/min/g in endocardial samples and 0.07 +/- 0.02 ml/min/g in samples from the midmyocardium, p less than 0.001 vs. thioflavin-negative areas). Areas that showed late impairment of flow invariably demonstrated contraction band necrosis, which contrasted with the pattern of coagulation necrosis observed in areas of "true" (i.e., immediate) no-reflow. Intracapillary erythrocyte stasis and marked intravascular neutrophil accumulation (to levels greater than 20-fold that found after 2 minutes reperfusion) were typically observed in areas of delayed impairment to flow. Obstruction to flow at the capillary level was confirmed in additional dogs in which the heart was injected postmortem with silicone rubber to delineate the microvascular filling pattern. Areas of absent capillary filling were much more extensive after 3.5 hours than after 2 minutes reperfusion. Thus, this study shows that the occurrence of areas of markedly impaired perfusion in postischemic myocardium is related only in part to an inability to reperfuse certain areas on reflow. A more important factor is represented by a delayed, progressive fall in flow to areas that initially received adequate reperfusion.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

The management of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HF-REF) has improved significantly over the last two decades. In contrast, little or no progress has been made in identifying evidence-based, effective treatments for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HF-PEF). Despite the high prevalence, mortality, and cost of HF-PEF, large phase III international clinical trials investigating interventions to improve outcomes in HF-PEF have yielded disappointing results. Therefore, treatment of HF-PEF remains largely empiric, and almost no acknowledged standards exist. There is no single explanation for the negative results of past HF-PEF trials. Potential contributors include an incomplete understanding of HF-PEF pathophysiology, the heterogeneity of the patient population, inadequate diagnostic criteria, recruitment of patients without true heart failure or at early stages of the syndrome, poor matching of therapeutic mechanisms and primary pathophysiological processes, suboptimal study designs, or inadequate statistical power. Many novel agents are in various stages of research and development for potential use in patients with HF-PEF. To maximize the likelihood of identifying effective therapeutics for HF-PEF, lessons learned from the past decade of research should be applied to the design, conduct, and interpretation of future trials. This paper represents a synthesis of a workshop held in Bergamo, Italy, and it examines new and emerging therapies in the context of specific, targeted HF-PEF phenotypes where positive clinical benefit may be detected in clinical trials. Specific considerations related to patient and endpoint selection for future clinical trials design are also discussed.