This article updates the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) 2007 classification of advanced heart failure and describes new diagnostic and treatment options for these patients. Recognizing the patient with advanced heart failure is critical to facilitate timely referral to advanced heart failure centres. Unplanned visits for heart failure decompensation, malignant arrhythmias, co-morbidities, and the 2016 ESC guidelines criteria for the diagnosis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction are included in this updated definition. Standard treatment is, by definition, insufficient in these patients. Inotropic therapy may be used as a bridge strategy, but it is only a palliative measure when used on its own, because of the lack of outcomes data. Major progress has occurred with short-term mechanical circulatory support devices for immediate management of cardiogenic shock and long-term mechanical circulatory support for either a bridge to transplantation or as destination therapy. Heart transplantation remains the treatment of choice for patients without contraindications. Some patients will not be candidates for advanced heart failure therapies. For these patients, who are often elderly with multiple co-morbidities, management of advanced heart failure to reduce symptoms and improve quality of life should be emphasized. Robust evidence from prospective studies is lacking for most therapies for advanced heart failure. There is an urgent need to develop evidence-based treatment algorithms to prolong life when possible and in accordance with patient preferences, increase life quality, and reduce the burden of hospitalization in this vulnerable patient population.

Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

Aims To assess tolerability and optimal time point for initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in patients stabilised after acute heart failure (AHF). Methods and results TRANSITION was a randomised, multicentre, open‐label study comparing two treatment initiation modalities of sacubitril/valsartan. Patients aged ≥ 18 years, hospitalised for AHF were stratified according to pre‐admission use of renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system inhibitors and randomised (n = 1002) after stabilisation to initiate sacubitril/valsartan either ≥ 12‐h pre‐discharge or between Days 1–14 post‐discharge. Starting dose (as per label) was 24/26 mg or 49/51 mg bid with up‐ or down‐titration based on tolerability. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients attaining 97/103 mg bid target dose after 10 weeks. Median time of first dose of sacubitril/valsartan from the day of discharge was Day –1 and Day +1 in the pre‐discharge group and the post‐discharge group, respectively. Comparable proportions of patients in the pre‐ and post‐discharge initiation groups met the primary endpoint [45.4% vs. 50.7%; risk ratio (RR) 0.90; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79–1.02]. The proportion of patients who achieved and maintained for ≥ 2 weeks leading to Week 10, either 49/51 or 97/103 mg bid was 62.1% vs. 68.5% (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.83–0.99); or any dose was 86.0% vs. 89.6% (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.92–1.01). Discontinuation due to adverse events occurred in 7.3% vs. 4.9% of patients (RR 1.49; 95% CI 0.90–2.46). Conclusions Initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in a wide range of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction patients stabilised after an AHF event, either in hospital or shortly after discharge, is feasible with about half of the patients achieving target dose within 10 weeks. Clinical Trial Registration: http://ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02661217

Aims To describe the characteristics and assess the 1‐year outcomes of hospitalized (HHF) and chronic (CHF) heart failure patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) enrolled in a large European registry between May 2011 and April 2013. Methods and results Overall, 1334/6920 (19.3%) HHF patients and 1322/9409 (14.1%) CHF patients were diagnosed with COPD. In both groups, patients with COPD were older, more frequently men, had a worse clinical presentation and a higher prevalence of co‐morbidities. In HHF, the increase in the use of heart failure (HF) medications at hospital discharge was greater in non‐COPD than in COPD for angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors (+13.7% vs. +7.2%), beta‐blockers (+20.6% vs. +11.8%) and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (+20.9% vs. +17.3%), thus widening the gap in HF treatment already existing between the two groups at admission. In CHF patients, there was a similar increase in the use of these medications after enrollment visit in the two groups, leaving a significant difference of 8.2% for beta‐blockers in favour of non‐COPD patients (89.8% vs. 81.6%, P < 0.001). At 1‐year follow‐up, the hazard ratios for COPD in multivariable analysis confirmed its independent association with hospitalizations both in HHF [all‐cause: 1.16 (1.04–1.29), for HF: 1.22 (1.05–1.42)] and CHF patients [all‐cause: 1.26 (1.13–1.41), for HF: 1.37 (1.17–1.60)]. The association between COPD and all‐cause mortality was not confirmed in both groups after adjustments. Conclusions COPD frequently coexists in HHF and CHF, worsens the clinical course of the disease, and significantly impacts its therapeutic management and prognosis. The matter should deserve greater attention from the cardiology community.

In our study, BMSC intracoronary transplantation in patients with anterior AMI did not result in increase in EF. Slight improvement of myocardial perfusion was noticed in the BMSC group. This finding may indicate better microcirculation enhanced by BMSCs, but small number of patients allow for hypothesis rather than final statement.