B-lines Lung Ultrasound Guided ED Management of Acute Heart Failure Pilot Trial

Overview

Nearly 80% of acute heart failure (AHF) patients admitted to the hospital are initially treated in the emergency department (ED). Once admitted, within 30 days post-discharge, 27% of patients are re-hospitalized or die. Attempts to improve outcomes with novel therapies have all failed. The evidence for existing AHF therapies are poor: No currently used AHF treatment is known to improve outcomes. ED treatment is largely the same today as 40 years ago. Congestion, such as difficulty breathing, weight gain, and leg swelling, is the primary reason why patients present to the hospital for AHF. Treating congestion is the cornerstone of AHF management. Yet half of all AHF patients leave the hospital inadequately decongested. The investigators propose a novel approach to aggressively decongest patients in the ED setting: lung ultrasound guided, protocol driven, AHF management. LUS B-lines are a measure of extra-vascular lung water (EVLW). In the setting of AHF, LUS B-lines are a measure of congestion. This simple, easily learned technique has excellent reliability and reproducibility. The investigators hypothesize that a strategy-of-care will outperform usual care. At the present time, usual care is largely empirical. This study will improve the evidence base for ED AHF management. This proposed pilot study, if successful, will lead to an outcome trial examining whether an ED AHF strategy-of-care increases days alive and out of the hospital for patients.

The primary goal of the BLUSHED AHF pilot trial is to determine whether an early lung ultrasound (LUS) guided, protocol-driven ED AHF strategy-of-care leads to more rapid and sustained resolution of congestion, as measured by LUS B-lines. If the investigators are able to demonstrate this necessary and sufficient information - targeted strategy-of-care is more effective than usual care - they will apply for a follow on study to achieve the following aim. Aim 1: To demonstrate the effectiveness of a targeted decongestion strategy - LUS guided, protocol-driven ED AHF management - will result in improved 30-day outcomes vs. usual care. This aim will be tested using a randomized, controlled, unblinded, pragmatic, multi-center, simple trial design. The pilot trial may determine that ED management alone is insufficient to impact the outcome. Thus, the investigators may need to modify their subsequent trial design to include targeted therapy throughout hospitalization. However, the pilot study will demonstrate whether targeted therapy effectively reduces B-lines. PUBLIC HEALTH IMPACT Over one million hospitalizations for AHF occur every year in the US. Within 30 days after hospitalization, over 25% of AHF patients will be dead or re-hospitalized.4 Up to 67% of patients will be re-hospitalized and 36% will be dead by one year. For patients aged 65 years and older, AHF is the most common and most expensive reason for hospitalization. Despite major reductions in morbidity and mortality for chronic HF, considerably less progress has been seen in AHF. Congestion is the primary reason why AHF patients present to the ED seeking medical care. Congestion is manifest by signs and symptoms of heart failure (HF); dyspnea, orthopnea, edema, and weight gain. Yet, how to best assess, grade, and manage congestion is not well established. Freedom from congestion is associated with improved outcomes; Yet many patients leave the hospital inadequately decongested. The absence of robust, reliable methods to assess congestion is a primary reason why it is not well-assessed. A recent consensus statement published in 2010 highlights this fact: "…no method to assess congestion…has been validated." The investigators would argue many ED AHF patients are poorly assessed prior to treatment. In addition, they are poorly re-assessed prior to hospitalization to gauge the success or failure of initial management. While physical exam is currently the cornerstone of congestion assessment, it lacks sensitivity and inter-rater reliability. The investigators challenge the current paradigm of relying on insensitive methods of congestion to guide therapy. Furthermore, they argue the lack of a robust evidence base for ED management of congestion contributes to poor outcomes.