Cardiology groups around the world unite to redefine heart failure
Many of the world’s leading cardiology groups have collaborated on a new way to think and talk about heart failure.
Representatives from the American College of Cardiology, American Heart Association, European Society of Cardiology, World Heart Federation, Heart Failure Society of America, ESC Heart Failure Association and Japanese Heart Failure Society worked together to craft the new consensus document. Their goal was to craft a helpful guide for clinicians, researchers, health systems and policymakers that standardizes heart failure terminology and ensures everyone is on the same page when discussing and thinking about this complex condition.
The final document has now been published in JACC, Circulation and the European Heart Journal.[1, 2, 3]
Why an update was necessary
Back in 2021, several healthcare groups worked together to define heart failure.[4] A lot has changed in the years since then, however, including the fact that heart failure is becoming more common as time goes on.
“The growing prevalence of heart failure is driven by the increasing numbers of individuals with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), the aging of the population and secular trends in the prevalence of comorbidities that drive heart failure risk,” wrote Mary Norine Walsh, MD, a heart failure specialist with Ascension Medical Group and co-chair of the consensus document, and colleagues.
“In addition, advances in technology and the development of more advanced imaging methods (magnetic resonance imaging, positron emission tomography), allowing earlier and more accurate disease detection, along with improvements in survival resulting from the availability of expanded treatment options, have increased prevalence,” the authors added. “Improved strategies for early diagnosis of heart failure leveraging artificial intelligence may enhance heart failure detection even further over traditional biomarker- and imaging-based approaches, making estimates of the total population-level heart failure burden more accurate.”
Because of how much has changed in heart failure, including the development of new treatment strategies and technologies, Walsh et al. believe it is time for an update.
Key takeaways
One of the primary updates in this new document compared to the 2021 definition is the introduction of a universal classification system for heart failure. It also drives home the point that strict cutoff values for left ventricular ejection fraction may be doing a disservice to some patients who might fall just outside of what is generally believed to be heart failure. This new classification system, the groups explained, should help more patients receive the care they need.
Another primary takeaway is the many benefits of going through with an early intervention instead of waiting for symptoms to get worse and worse. By getting started with guideline-directed medical therapy, clinicians can take a proactive approach to care and hopefully “alter disease progression.”
The groups also noted that consensus document is expected to play a key role in the development of new heart failure guidelines to be published in 2027. Click here for the full analysis.
Michael has more than 19 years of experience as a professional writer and editor. He has written at length about cardiology, radiology, artificial intelligence and other key healthcare topics.