Evidence Hub

A randomized controlled trial of lung ultrasound-guided therapy in heart failure (CLUSTER-HF study)

D. Araiza-Garaygordobil, R. Gopar-Nieto, Pablo Martínez-Amezcua, Alejandro Cabello-López, G. Alanís-Estrada, Abraham Luna-Herbert, H. González-Pacheco, Cynthia P. Paredes-Paucar et al.

American Heart Journal, 2020

63 participants · 91 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Lung ultrasound (LUS) has emerged as a new tool for the evaluation of congestion in heart failure (HF); incorporation of LUS during follow-up may detect congestion earlier and prompt interventions to prevent hospitalizations. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that the incorporation of LUS during follow-up of patients with HF may reduce the rate of adverse events compared with usual care.

METHODS

In this single-blinded, randomized controlled trial, patients were randomized into an LUS-guided arm or control arm. Patients were followed in 4 prespecified visits during a 6-month period. LUS was performed in every patient visit in both groups; however, LUS results were available for the treating physician only in the LUS group. The primary outcome was the composite of urgent HF visits, rehospitalization for worsening HF, and death from any cause.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-six patients were randomized to either LUS (n = 63) or control (n = 63) (age 62.5 ± 10 years, median left ventricular ejection fraction 31%). The primary end point occurred in 30 (47.6%) patients in the control group and 20 (31.7%) patients in the LUS group (P = .041). LUS-guided treatment was associated with a 45% risk reduction in the primary end point (hazard ratio 0.55, 95% CI 0.31-0.98, P = .044), mainly driven by a reduction in urgent HF visits (hazard ratio 0.28, 95% CI 0.13-0.62, P = .001). No significant differences in rehospitalizations for HF or death were found.

CONCLUSIONS…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 63 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free