Aims Despite signals from clinical trials and mechanistic studies implying different resilience to heart failure (HF) depending on gender, the impact of gender on presentation and outcomes in patients with HF remains unclear. This study assessed the impact of gender on clinical presentation and outcomes in patients with HF referred to a specialised tertiary HF service. Methods and resultsConsecutive patients with HF referred to a specialised tertiary HF service offering advanced therapy options including left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) and heart transplantation were prospectively enrolled from August 2015 until March 2018. We assessed clinical characteristics at baseline and performed survival analyses and age-adjusted Cox regression analyses in men vs. women for all-cause death and a combined disease-related endpoint comprising death, heart transplantation, and LVAD implantation. Analyses were performed for the overall study population and for patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Of 356 patients included, 283 (79.5%) were male. The median age was 58 years (interquartile range 50-67). Two hundred and fifty-one (74.5%) patients had HFrEF. HF aetiology, ejection fraction, functional status measures, and most of the cardiac and non-cardiac comorbidities did not differ between men and women. In a median follow-up of 3.2 years, 50 patients died (45 men, 5 women), 15 patients underwent LVAD implantation, and 8 patients heart transplantation. While all-cause death was not significantly different between both genders in the overall population [16.9 vs. 6.0%, P = 0.065, hazard ratio (HR) 2.29 (95% confidence interval 0.91-5.78), P = 0.078], in the HFrEF subgroup, a significant difference between men and women was observed [20.7% vs. 3.9%, P = 0.017, HR 3.67 (95% confidence interval 1.13-11.91), P = 0.031]. The combined endpoint was more often reached in men than in women in both the overall population [21.6% vs. 9.0%, P = 0.053, HR 2.51 (1.08-5.82), P = 0.032] and the HFrEF subgroup [27.1% vs. 7.7%, P = 0.015, HR 3.58 (1.29-9.94), P = 0.014]. Conclusions Patients referred to a specialised tertiary HF service showed a similar clinical profile without relevant gender differences. In the mid-term follow-up, more male than female patients died or underwent heart transplantation and LVAD implantation. These findings call for independent validation and for further research into gender-specific drivers of HF progression.

Objectives Palliative care (PC) has gained rising attention in a holistic treatment approach to chronic heart failure (HF). It is unclear whether there is a need for PC in left ventricular assist device (LVAD) patients or heart transplant recipients. Methods In a cross-sectional explorative pilot study, outpatients after heart transplantation (HTx, n = 69) or LVAD implantation (n = 21) underwent screening for palliative care (PC) need and evaluation of symptom burden and psychological distress using tools that emanated from palliative cancer care. Results The ‘Palliative Care Screening Tool for Heart Failure Patients’ revealed scores of 4.3 ± 2.2 in HTx and 6.0 ± 2.1 in LVAD patients (max. 12 points, P = 0.003), indicating the need for PC (≥5 points) in 32% of HTx and 67% of LVAD patients. Symptom burden, as assessed by MIDOS (‘Minimal Documentation System for Palliative Care’) scores was substantial in both groups (4.9 ± 4.7 in HTx vs 6.6 ± 5.3 in LVAD, max. 30 points, P = 0.181). ‘Fatigue’, ‘weakness’ and ‘pain’ were the most frequent symptoms. Using the ‘Distress-Thermometer’, ‘clinically relevant’ distress was detected in 57% of HTx and 47% of LVAD patients (P = 0.445). In the PHQ-4 (‘4-Item Patient Health Questionnaire’), 45% of LVAD patients, compared to only 10% of HTx patients, reported mild symptoms of anxiety and depression. Conclusions Findings reveal substantial need for PC in LVAD patients and, to a lesser extent, in heart transplant recipients, suggesting that multi-disciplinary PC should be introduced into routine aftercare.

Background Beyond guideline-directed treatments aimed at improving cardiac function and prognosis in heart failure (HF), patient-reported outcomes have gained attention. Purpose Using a cross-sectional approach, we assessed symptom burden, psychosocial distress, and potential palliative care (PC) needs in patients with advanced stages of HF. Methods At a large tertiary care center, we enrolled HF patients in an exploratory pilot study. Symptom burden and psychosocial distress were assessed using the MIDOS (Minimal Documentation System for Patients in PC) questionnaire and the Distress Thermometer (DT), respectively. The 4-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-4) was used to screen for anxiety and depression. To assess PC needs, physicians used the “Palliative Care Screening Tool for HF Patients”. Results We included 259 patients, of whom 137 (53%) were enrolled at the Heart Failure Unit (HFU), and 122 (47%) at the outpatient clinic (OC). Mean age was 63 years, 72% were male. New York Heart Association class III or IV symptoms were present in 56%. With a mean 5-year survival 64% (HFU) vs. 69% (OC) calculated by the Seattle Heart Failure Model, estimated prognosis was comparatively good. Symptom burden (MIDOS score 8.0 vs. 5.4, max. 30 points, p < 0.001) and level of distress (DT score 6.0 vs. 4.8, max. 10 points, p < 0.001) were higher in hospitalised patients. Clinically relevant distress was detected in the majority of patients (HFU 76% vs. OC 57%, p = 0.001), and more than one third exhibited at least mild symptoms of depression or anxiety. Screening for PC needs revealed 82% of in- and 52% of outpatients fulfil criteria for specialized palliative support. Conclusion Despite a good prognosis, we found multiple undetected and unaddressed needs in an advanced HF cohort. This study’s tools and screening results may help to early explore these needs, to further improve integrated HF care. Graphical abstract

No abstract

No abstract