LV Dysfunction

This prospective, multicenter, cluster-randomized controlled study aims to evaluate the accuracy of an investigational artificial intelligence (AI) Software as a Medical Device (SaMD) designed to compute ejection fraction (EF) severity categories based on the American Society of Echocardiography's (ASE) 4-category scale. The software analyzes continuous ECG waveform data acquired by the FDA-cleared Peerbridge COR® ECG Wearable Monitor, an ambulatory patch device designed for use during daily activities. The AI software assists clinicians in cardiac evaluations by estimating EF severity, which reflects how well the heart pumps blood. In this study, EF severity determination will be made using 5-minute ECG recordings collected during a 15-minute resting period with participants seated upright. The results will be compared to EF severity obtained from an FDA-cleared, non-contrast transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) predicate device. This comparison aims to validate the accuracy of the AI software.

The evidence-based pharmacologic treatments available for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has been established over the last few decades of cardiovascular research. These treatments, termed Foundational Guideline-Directed-Medical Therapies (GDMT), prolong patient life, improve patient-reported symptoms, and reduce hospitalizations for heart failure. A direct effect of most medication classes encompassed within GDMT is the reduction in blood pressure due to their mechanisms of action. In addition, as patients with HFrEF become more advanced in their disease, a significant proportion develop hypotension related to pump failure and autonomic dysfunction, amongst other possible mechanisms. As a result, a significant proportion of HFrEF patients are not optimized on GDMT with hypotension as their limiting barrier that would otherwise have served to improve their heart function, heart failure symptoms, and mortality. Currently, there does not exist any evidence-based strategies to address the problem of hypotension in HFrEF patients who are not optimized on GDMT. Midodrine is an alpha-adrenergic agonist (α1-AR) that exerts its effects on peripheral venous and arteriolar vasculature to increase blood pressure. This medication has been used off-label by some clinicians in the hypotensive HFrEF population to increase blood pressure and has been reported to have beneficial effects in improving GDMT utilization as well as increasing left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in published case reports/case series. There does not exist any randomized prospective data on the use of midodrine in the hypotensive HFrEF population. The investigators' objective is to complete the first open-label, randomized control trial of midodrine in the hypotensive HFrEF population to demonstrate feasibility in performing a trial in this patient population and to show efficacy in increasing blood pressure without associated harm. The results of this trial will be used as the foundation and rationale for future studies assessing the impact of midodrine use on GDMT utilization as well as hard cardiovascular outcomes in the hypotensive HFrEF population, including hospitalizations for heart failure and mortality.

To investigate patients suffering from iHF and a LVEF of equal or less than 40% despite best medical treatment safety and efficacy of a single retrograde intra-cardiac venous (i.cv.) injection of UA-ADRCs isolated from lipoaspirate at the point of care, using the Transpose® RT / Matrase System (InGeneron, Houston, TX, USA) through an over-the- wire, small balloon catheter, advanced through the coronary si-nus and located within a coronary vein at the site of inter-est, versus patients on best medical treatment.

Most patients with Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction (LVSD) or heart failure (HF) have coronary artery disease (CAD) while some patients also have renal disease. Life-saving revascularization is underperformed in patients with LVSD or HF due to CAD, and especially if there is concomitant renal disease. We hypothesize that PCI will be non-inferior to CABG for all-cause mortality and recurrent myocardial infarction (MI), stroke or hospitalization for HF. To compare revascularization by PCI versus by CABG, we will perform a multicentre, open-label, parallel, randomized, controlled trial in patients with severe CAD who belong to defined categories of moderate-to-high risk characteristics, where guidelines acknowledge that both PCI and CABG are relevant treatment options.