Wilhelm, Matthias

Abstract Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally, imposing a substantial patient burden. Digital biomarkers derived from digital health technologies enable quantifiable, near-continuous, real-world capture of pathophysiological signals and are increasingly used across cardiovascular medicine. Their growth is often supported by big data analytics, artificial intelligence and connected sensors within the Internet of Things. This scientific statement systematically reviews digital biomarkers, their clinical utility across the cardiovascular care continuum, and summarizes major methodological and implementation challenges. We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase and Scopus for phase III–IV cardiovascular trials published between 1 January 2019 and 1 August 2024 that collected digital biomarkers. We identified 541 records and included 32 trials (40 reports) enrolling 32 246 participants (44.71% women; mean age 66.2 ± 11.0 years). Heart failure was the most frequent target condition (16 trials, 50%), followed by cardiac implantable electronic devices trials (12 trials, 38%). Digital biomarkers included cardiac rhythm and heart rate, blood pressure, body weight, impedance-based measures, haemodynamic pressures, and physical activity and sleep patterns captured using diverse sensor technologies. Methodological quality was good (modal quality score 5; range 3–7), although most trials were unblinded. Current studies suggest potential clinical utility in selected cardiovascular conditions. Implementation remains challenging because of measurement variability, privacy and regulatory requirements, affordability and reimbursement barriers and inequities in access. Robust validation and outcome- and cost-effectiveness evidence are still needed. Registration number: CRD42024573879.

Abstract Patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) universally complain of exercise intolerance and dyspnoea as key clinical correlates. Cardiac as well as extracardiac components play a role for the limited exercise capacity, including an impaired cardiac and peripheral vascular reserve, a limitation in mechanical ventilation and/or gas exchange with reduced pulmonary vascular reserve, skeletal muscle dysfunction and iron deficiency/anaemia. Although most of these components can be differentiated and quantified through gas exchange analysis by cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET), the information provided by objective measures of exercise performance has not been systematically considered in the recent algorithms/scores for HFpEF diagnosis, by neither European nor US groups. The current clinical consensus statement by the Heart Failure Association (HFA) and European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC) of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) aims at outlining the role of exercise testing and its pathophysiological, clinical and prognostic insights, addressing the implications of a thorough functional evaluation from the diagnostic algorithm to the pathophysiology and treatment perspectives of HFpEF. Along with these goals, we provide a specific analysis of the evidence that CPET is the standard for assessing, quantifying, and differentiating the origin of dyspnoea and exercise impairment and even more so when combined with echocardiography and/or invasive haemodynamic evaluation. This will lead to improved quality of diagnosis when applying the proposed scores and may also help to implement the progressive characterization of the specific HFpEF phenotypes, a critical step toward the delivery of phenotype-specific treatments.