Shih-Hsien Sung1, Chi-Jung Huang2, Hao-Min Cheng3, Wei-Ming Huang4, Wen-Chung Yu4, Chen-Huan Chen5. 1. Department of Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan; Department of Medicine, National Yang-Ming University School of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan; Institute of Public Health, National Yang-Ming University School of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan. 2. Department of Medical Education, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan. 3. Department of Medical Education, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan; Department of Medicine, National Yang-Ming University School of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan. 4. Department of Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan; Department of Medicine, National Yang-Ming University School of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan. 5. Department of Medical Education, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan; Cardiovascular Research Center, National Yang-Ming University School of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan; Department of Medicine, National Yang-Ming University School of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan; Institute of Public Health, National Yang-Ming University School of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan. Electronic address: chchen3@ym.edu.tw.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The electromechanical activation time (EMAT) normalized by cardiac cycle length (%EMAT) and the third heart sound (S3) strength, as measured by automated acoustic cardiography, are predictive of postdischarge adverse events in patients with acute heart failure (AHF). The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the acoustic cardiography-guided management improves outcomes in patients with AHF when it is compared with the conventional therapy. METHODS AND RESULTS: This prospective single-blind study randomized 225 patients with AHF (74.1 ± 14.5 years of age, 26.2% women, and left ventricular ejection fraction 38.4 ± 14.4%) before discharge to the EMAT-guided group (n = 114) with the postdischarge treatment goals to reduce %EMAT to < 15% and S3 < 5, and the symptom-guided group (n = 111) to adjust medications without knowledge of the results of acoustic cardiography. The primary endpoints were rehospitalization for heart failure and total mortality during 1-year follow-up. The 2 groups were well matched in age and predischarge %EMAT and S3 strength. After a mean follow-up period of 238.1 ± 140.8 days, a significant reduction in the primary endpoints was seen in the EMAT-guided group compared with the symptom-guided group (43 events vs 61 events, P = 0.0095). Kaplan-Meier curves demonstrated significant differences in the time to first event, favoring the EMAT-guided group in the total study population (n = 225, hazard ratio and 95% confidence interval: 0.61, 0.42-0.91, log-rank P = 0.0129), as well as in the prespecified subgroup of patients with predischarge %EMAT > 15% (n = 85; 0.32, 0.16-0.65, P = 0.0008). CONCLUSIONS: In patients hospitalized due to AHF, EMAT-guided postdischarge management was superior to the conventional symptoms-driven therapy in terms of 1-year outcomes (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT01298232).
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The electromechanical activation time (EMAT) normalized by cardiac cycle length (%EMAT) and the third heart sound (S3) strength, as measured by automated acoustic cardiography, are predictive of postdischarge adverse events in patients with acute heart failure (AHF). The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the acoustic cardiography-guided management improves outcomes in patients with AHF when it is compared with the conventional therapy. METHODS AND RESULTS: This prospective single-blind study randomized 225 patients with AHF (74.1 ± 14.5 years of age, 26.2% women, and left ventricular ejection fraction 38.4 ± 14.4%) before discharge to the EMAT-guided group (n = 114) with the postdischarge treatment goals to reduce %EMAT to < 15% and S3 < 5, and the symptom-guided group (n = 111) to adjust medications without knowledge of the results of acoustic cardiography. The primary endpoints were rehospitalization for heart failure and total mortality during 1-year follow-up. The 2 groups were well matched in age and predischarge %EMAT and S3 strength. After a mean follow-up period of 238.1 ± 140.8 days, a significant reduction in the primary endpoints was seen in the EMAT-guided group compared with the symptom-guided group (43 events vs 61 events, P = 0.0095). Kaplan-Meier curves demonstrated significant differences in the time to first event, favoring the EMAT-guided group in the total study population (n = 225, hazard ratio and 95% confidence interval: 0.61, 0.42-0.91, log-rank P = 0.0129), as well as in the prespecified subgroup of patients with predischarge %EMAT > 15% (n = 85; 0.32, 0.16-0.65, P = 0.0008). CONCLUSIONS: In patients hospitalized due to AHF, EMAT-guided postdischarge management was superior to the conventional symptoms-driven therapy in terms of 1-year outcomes (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT01298232).