Heart failure & cardiomyopathies
Knowledge and Application of ESC/HFA Guidelines in the Management of Advanced Heart Failure
Authors' conclusion
The study highlights significant disparities in knowledge and application of advanced HF guidelines among cardiologists
Study context
- Population
- Cardiologists across Europe, June–October 202325% heart failure cardiologists (HFCs), 40% general cardiologists (GCs), 35% other participants (OPs)
- Participants
- 497 cardiologists
- Exposure
- Heart failure (HF) cardiologists vs general cardiologists vs other participants
- Outcome
- Awareness and implementation of 2021 ESC/HFA advanced HF guidelines; barriers to referral
Methodological detailsonline survey, ESC mailing list
- Online survey
- ESC mailing list
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
High level of guideline knowledge
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
'Regularly or always' used ESC/HFA criteria to identify advanced HF
Correct recommendation class for MCS as bridge to transplantation
Referral of severe HF to tertiary centre team 'very difficult' or 'difficult'
| Outcome | HFCs | GCs | OPs |
|---|---|---|---|
| Correct recommendation class for heart transplantation | — not stated in the abstract | 55% | 60% |
— not stated in the abstract
- 'Regularly or always' used ESC/HFA criteria to identify advanced HF: p < 0.001
- Correct recommendation class for heart transplantation: p < 0.0001
- Correct recommendation class for mechanical circulatory support (MCS) as bridge to transplantation: p = 0.018
- Referral of severe HF to tertiary centre team 'very difficult' or 'difficult': p = 0.0005
Original publication
Knowledge and Application of ESC/HFA Guidelines in the Management of Advanced Heart Failure. Eur J Heart Fail. Published 19 November 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →