Effect of diuresis on the performance of the failing left ventricle in man

Advanced Hemodynamic Monitoring Allows Recognition of Early Response Patterns to Diuresis in Congestive Heart Failure Patients

There are no clear guidelines for diuretic administration in heart failure (HF), and reliable markers are needed to tailor treatment. Continuous monitoring of multiple advanced physiological parameters during diuresis may allow better differentiation of patients into subgroups according to their responses. In this study, 29 HF patients were monitored during outpatient intravenous diuresis, using a noninvasive wearable multi-parameter monitor. Analysis of changes in these parameters during the course of diuresis aimed to recognize subgroups with different response patterns. Parameters did not change significantly, however, subgroup analysis of the last quartile of treatment showed significant differences in cardiac output, cardiac index, stroke volume, pulse rate, and systemic vascular resistance according to gender, and in systolic blood pressure according to habitus. Changes in the last quartile could be differentiated using k-means, a technique of unsupervised machine learning. Moreover, patients' responses could be best clustered into four groups. Analysis of baseline parameters showed that two of the clusters differed by baseline parameters, body mass index, and diabetes status. To conclude, we show that physiological changes during diuresis in HF patients can be categorized into subgroups sharing similar response trends, making noninvasive monitoring a potential key to personalized treatment in HF.

Loop Diuretic Use is Associated With Adverse Clinical Outcomes in Acute Myocardial Infarction Patients With Low Volume Status: Loop diuretics in AMI patient

BACKGROUND

Little information is available on the difference in the prognostic impact of loop diuretics in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) based on plasma volume status.

METHODS

A total of 3,364 survivors of AMI who were registered in the large database of the Osaka Acute Coronary Insufficiency Study (OACIS) were studied. Plasma volume status was assessed by the estimated plasma volume status (ePVS) that was calculated based on a weight- and hematocrit-based formula at discharge. The endpoint was a composite endpoint of all-cause death and rehospitalization due to heart failure for 5 years.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up period of 1.9 years, 90 and 223 patients had events in the groups with low ePVS (<median value of 4.07%) and high ePVS (≥4.07%), respectively. Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed that loop diuretics use was independently associated with an increased risk of the composite endpoint in the low ePVS group (hazard ratio [HR], 2.572; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.386-4.771; p=0.002), but not in the high ePVS group (HR, 1.028; 95% CI, 0.698-1.512; p=0.890). These results were unchanged even in the propensity-score matched cohorts. There was no heterogeneity in the increased risk of the primary endpoints between various patient characteristics and loop diuretic use in the matched cohorts.

CONCLUSION

Prescription of loop diuretics at discharge was associated with increased risk of poor long-term prognosis in patients with AMI without PV expansion, but not with PV expansion. Therefore, careful observation is needed when loop diuretics are prescribed for AMI patients without PV expansion.

2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" replaces the "2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" and the "2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure." The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose, and manage patients with heart failure.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2020 to December 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant clinical trials and research studies, published through September 2021, were also considered. This guideline was harmonized with other American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines published through December 2021. Structure: Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The 2022 heart failure guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with heart failure, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests. Many recommendations from the earlier heart failure guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data. Value statements are provided for certain treatments with high-quality published economic analyses.

2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure

AIM

The "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" replaces the "2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" and the "2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure." The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose, and manage patients with heart failure.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2020 to December 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant clinical trials and research studies, published through September 2021, were also considered. This guideline was harmonized with other American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines published through December 2021.

STRUCTURE

Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The 2022 heart failure guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with heart failure, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests. Many recommendations from the earlier heart failure guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data. Value statements are provided for certain treatments with high-quality published economic analyses.

Impact of Loop Diuretic on Outcomes in Patients with Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Loop diuretics are the cornerstone of the treatment of congestion in heart failure patients. The manuscript aims to summarize the most updated information regarding the use of loop diuretics in heart failure.

RECENT FINDINGS

Diuretic response can be highly variable between patients and needs to be carefully evaluated during and after the hospitalization. Diuretic resistance can lead to residual congestion which affects prognosis and can be difficult to detect. The effect of loop diuretics on long-term prognosis remains uncertain but patients with advanced heart failure typically have renal dysfunction and are more inclined to develop loop diuretic resistance, which may lead to an incomplete decongestion and thus to a worse prognosis. Loop diuretics are the most potent diuretics available and their use is recommended in order to alleviate symptoms, improve exercise capacity, and reduce hospitalizations in patients with heart failure. Their use should be limited to the lowest dose necessary to maintain euvolemia because a low dose does not increase the risk of decompensation but reduce the risk of adverse effects and allow the up-titration of disease-modifying drugs.

Loop Diuretic Prescription and Long-Term Outcomes in Heart Failure: Association Modification by Congestion

BACKGROUND

The effect of loop diuretics on clinical outcomes in heart failure has not been evaluated in randomized controlled trials. In hospitalized patients with heart failure, a discharge loop diuretic prescription has been shown to be associated with improved 30-day outcomes, which appears to be more pronounced in subgroups with congestion. In the current study, we examined these associations and association modifications during longer follow-up.

METHODS

We assembled a propensity score-matched cohort of 2191 pairs of hospitalized heart failure patients discharged with, vs without, a prescription for loop diuretics, balanced on 74 baseline characteristics (mean age 78 years; 54% women; 11% African American).

RESULTS

Hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for 6-year combined endpoint of heart failure readmission or all-cause mortality was 1.02 (0.96-1.09). HRs and 95% CIs for this combined endpoint in patients with no, mild-to-moderate, and severe pulmonary rales were 1.19 (1.07-1.33), 0.95 (0.86-1.04), and 0.77 (0.63-0.94), respectively (P for interaction, < .001). Respective HRs (95% CIs) for no, mild-to-moderate, and severe lower extremity edema were 1.16 (1.06-1.28), 0.94 (0.85-1.04), and 0.71 (0.56-0.89; interaction P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The association between a discharge loop diuretic prescription and long-term clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients with heart failure is modified by admission congestion with worse, neutral, and better outcomes in patients with no, mild-to-moderate, and severe congestion, respectively. If these findings can be replicated, congestion may be used to risk-stratify patients with heart failure for potential optimization of loop diuretic prescription and outcomes.

READY: relative efficacy of loop diuretics in patients with chronic systolic heart failure-a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised trials

The majority of patients with chronic heart failure (HF) receive long-term treatment with loop diuretics. The comparative effectiveness of different loop diuretics is unknown. We searched PubMed, clinicaltrials.gov , the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the European Union Clinical Trials Register for randomised clinical trials exploring the efficacy of the loop diuretics azosemide, bumetanide, furosemide or torasemide in patients with HF. Comparators included placebo, standard medical care or any other active treatment. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. Secondary endpoints included cardiovascular mortality, HF-related hospitalisation and any combined endpoint thereof. Hypokalaemia and acute renal failure were defined as additional safety endpoints. Evidence was synthesised using network meta-analysis (NMA). Thirty-four trials reporting on 2647 patients were included. The overall quality of evidence was rated as moderate. NMA demonstrated no significant differences between loop diuretics with respect to all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality or hypokalaemia. In contrast, torasemide ranked best in terms of HF hospitalisation, and there was a trend towards benefits with torasemide with regard to occurrence of acute renal failure. Sensitivity analyses excluding trials with a follow-up < 6 months, trials with a cross-over design and those including < 25 patients confirmed the main results. We found no significant superiority of either loop diuretic with respect to mortality and safety endpoints. However, clinicians may prefer torasemide, as it was associated with fewer HF-related hospitalisations.

Contemporary Treatment of Heart Failure

Heart failure (HF) affects 2.4% of the adult population in the United States and is associated with high health care costs. Medical and device therapy delay disease progression and improve survival in HF with reduced ejection fraction. Stage D HF is characterized by significant functional limitation, frequent HF hospitalization for decompensation, intolerance of medical therapy, use of inotropes, and high diuretic requirement. Advanced therapies with left ventricular assist devices and cardiac transplantation reduce mortality and improve quality of life, and early referral to specialized centers is imperative for patient selection and success with these therapies.

Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia: An Update of Current Pharmacologic Therapies and New Approaches

Bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) remains the most prevalent long-term morbidity of surviving extremely preterm infants and is associated with significant health care utilization in infancy and beyond. Recent advances in neonatal care have resulted in improved survival of extremely low birth weight (ELBW) infants; however, the incidence of BPD has not been substantially impacted by novel interventions in this vulnerable population. The multifactorial cause of BPD requires a multi-pronged approach for prevention and treatment. New approaches in assisted ventilation, optimal nutrition, and pharmacologic interventions are currently being evaluated. The focus of this review is the current state of the evidence for pharmacotherapy in BPD. Promising future approaches in need of further study will also be reviewed.

2017 Comprehensive Update of the Canadian Cardiovascular Society Guidelines for the Management of Heart Failure

Since the inception of the Canadian Cardiovascular Society heart failure (HF) guidelines in 2006, much has changed in the care for patients with HF. Over the past decade, the HF Guidelines Committee has published regular updates. However, because of the major changes that have occurred, the Guidelines Committee believes that a comprehensive reassessment of the HF management recommendations is presently needed, with a view to producing a full and complete set of updated guidelines. The primary and secondary Canadian Cardiovascular Society HF panel members as well as external experts have reviewed clinically relevant literature to provide guidance for the practicing clinician. The 2017 HF guidelines provide updated guidance on the diagnosis and management (self-care, pharmacologic, nonpharmacologic, device, and referral) that should aid in day-to-day decisions for caring for patients with HF. Among specific issues covered are risk scores, the differences in management for HF with preserved vs reduced ejection fraction, exercise and rehabilitation, implantable devices, revascularization, right ventricular dysfunction, anemia, and iron deficiency, cardiorenal syndrome, sleep apnea, cardiomyopathies, HF in pregnancy, cardio-oncology, and myocarditis. We devoted attention to strategies and treatments to prevent HF, to the organization of HF care, comorbidity management, as well as practical issues around the timing of referral and follow-up care. Recognition and treatment of advanced HF is another important aspect of this update, including how to select advanced therapies as well as end of life considerations. Finally, we acknowledge the remaining gaps in evidence that need to be filled by future research.

Intracardiac Pressures Measured Using an Implantable Hemodynamic Monitor: Relationship to Mortality in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this analysis was to examine whether implantable hemodynamic monitor-derived baseline estimated pulmonary artery diastolic pressure (ePAD) and change from baseline ePAD were independent predictors of all-cause mortality in patients with chronic heart failure.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Retrospective analysis used data from 3 studies (n=790 patients; 216 deaths). Baseline ePAD was related to mortality using a multivariable model including baseline and demographic data. Changes in ePAD defined as change from baseline to 6 months and from baseline to 14 days before death or exit from study were related to subsequent mortality, and analysis was adjusted for baseline ePAD. Area under the pressure versus time curve during 180 days before death or exit from study was related to mortality. Baseline ePAD, independent of other covariates, was a significant predictor of mortality (hazard ratio=1.07; 95% confidence interval=1.05-1.09; P<0.0001). Change in ePAD was an independent predictor of mortality (hazard ratio=1.07; 95% confidence interval=1.05-1.100; P=0.0008). Increased ePAD of 3, 4, or 5 mm Hg from baseline to 6 months was associated with increased mortality risk of 23.8%, 32.9%, or 42.8%. Change in ePAD from baseline to 14 days before death or exit from study was higher in patients who died (3.0±8 versus 1.7±10 mm Hg; P=0.003). Area under the pressure versus time curve in the final 180 days before death or exit from study was higher in patients who died versus those alive at end of study (185±668 versus 17±482 mm Hg.days; P=0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Implantable hemodynamic monitor-derived baseline ePAD and change from baseline ePAD were independent predictors of mortality in chronic heart failure patients.

Pharmacologic Management of Chronic Heart Failure: A Review

Standard drug therapy of systolic heart failure has been evaluated in large-scale randomized clinical trials and includes angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibi tors, which should be used as first-line therapy, diuret ics for the management of extracellular fluid volume excess, and digoxin. In combination with ACE inhibitors and diuretics, with or without digoxin, some β-adrener gic receptor blockers attenuate disease progression and improve outcome in mild-to-moderate systolic heart failure. The pharmacologic management of chronic dia stolic heart failure is largely empirical and directed at reducing symptoms. Symptoms caused by increased ventricular filling pressures may be diminished by diuret ics and nitrovasodilators. Some calcium channel antago nists and most β-blockers prolong diastolic filling time by slowing heart rate, thereby improving the symptoms of diastolic heart failure.

Heart Failure: Overcoming the Physiologic Dilemma Through Evidence-Based Practice

Treatment options for patients with heart failure (HF) have improved in recent years. Medication combinations along with improved device management have improved survival rates and quality of life for patients with HF. Most patients with HF are older than 65 years. Because patients with HF with multiple comorbidities and any physical or cognitive impairments are often excluded from trials or studies, the evidence to guide therapy for most older patients with HF is not always representative and requires customization. Health care providers must remember that older patients with HF with multiple comorbidities and polypharmacy are at great risk for adverse effects and drug-to-drug interactions.

Diagnosis and Management of Acute Congestive Heart Failure in the Intensive Care Unit

Congestive heart failure has emerged as an important public health problem in the United States and is pres ently the number one Diagnostic Related Group for inpatients over the age of 65. Patients admitted to an intensive care or coronary care unit because of de compensated heart failure are frequently older and frequently have multiple serious medical problems. In addition to standard intensive care practices, it is often important to characterize systolic and diastolic proper ties qualitatively with echocardiography. Hemodynamic monitoring is essential for patients with hypotension, oliguria, or questionable left ventricular filling pressures. A combination of loop diuretics, intravenous vaso dilators, and inotropic agents will often be necessary to correct severe underlying hemodynamic abnormalities, and an understanding of basic left ventricular systolic and diastolic function is essential to the optimal use of these potent agents. Manipulation of loading conditions and contractile state are important considerations, and pharmacological interventions should be targeted to ward specific abnormalities in individual patients. Once patients are stabilized, switching to orally active inotro pic and vasodilator agents can usually be accomplished over a 24-hour period, allowing for a total stay of 48 to 72 hours in the intensive care unit.

Congestive heart failure (CHF) is rapidly becoming a public health problem of major proportions [1- 5]. As the American population continues to age, we can expect greater numbers of patients to be admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) and coro nary care units (CCUs) with progressive decompen sation of previously stable CHF. Our current ap proaches to the diagnosis and management of acute heart failure are summarized; however, the care of such patients must always be highly individualized.

Pharmacotherapy of Congestive Heart Failure in Elderly Patients

With longer life expectancy, as well as better survival rates after myocardial infarction, the population of elderly patients with congestive heart failure steadily increases. Large, randomized, placebo-controlled studies have shown significant beneficial effects for several classes of drugs (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers, β-blockers, aldosterone antagonists) in patients with congestive heart failure. In most of these studies, however, elderly patients were either excluded or represented only a minority of the study population. Therefore, the treatment benefit for the large population of patients aged 65 and older is still not very well documented. In this paper, we critically review the current literature with regard to outcome of heart failure therapy in this particular subpopulation.

WITHDRAWN: Diuretics for heart failure

This protocol was withdrawn in April 2016 as the author team was unable to progress to the final review stage. An editorial decision was taken not to pursue this title.

The editorial group responsible for this previously published document have withdrawn it from publication.

Discharge Diuretic Dose and 30-Day Readmission Rate in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure

Background: Loop diuretics play a crucial role in symptom management in patients with fluid overload. There is a paucity of data regarding optimal diuretic dose at hospital discharge for acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) patients requiring loop diuretics. Objective: To compare all-cause 30-day readmission in ADHF patients on chronic loop diuretics who had an increase in loop diuretic dose at discharge (relative to their preadmission dose) with patients without a change or a decrease in loop diuretic dose at discharge. Methods: This was a multicenter, retrospective cohort study. Institutional review board approval was obtained. Patients admitted with a primary discharge diagnosis of heart failure, evidence of fluid overload, and reduced ejection fraction were included. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on total daily loop diuretic dose at discharge: those discharged on an increased dose and those discharged on a dose less than or equal to their preadmission dose. Results: A total of 131 patient admissions met inclusion criteria; 50 had an increase in loop diuretic dose at discharge, and 81 were discharged with no change or a decrease in diuretic dose. Patients in the increased dose group had an all-cause 30-day readmission rate of 20% compared with 38% of patients with no change or a decrease in diuretic dose (adjusted odds ratio = 0.320; 95% CI = 0.117-0.873). Conclusion: In patients admitted for ADHF with reduced ejection fraction and evidence of fluid overload, an increase in loop diuretic dose at discharge was associated with a reduced rate of 30-day hospital readmission.

Fluid Management in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure

Congestion, or fluid overload, is a classic clinical feature of patients presenting with heart failure patients, and its presence is associated with adverse outcome. However, congestion is not always clinically evident, and more objective measures of congestion than simple clinical examination may be helpful. Although diuretics are the mainstay of treatment for congestion, no randomised trials have shown the effects of diuretics on mortality in chronic heart failure patients. Furthermore, appropriate titration of diuretics in this population is unclear. Research is required to determine whether a robust method of detecting - and then treating - subclinical congestion improves outcomes.

Management of ACCF/AHA Stage C heart failure

ACC Stage C heart failure includes those patients with prior or current symptoms of heart failure in the context of an underlying structural heart problem who are primarily managed with medical therapy. Although there is guideline-based medical therapy for those with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), therapies in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) have thus far proven elusive. Emerging therapies such as serelaxin are currently under investigation and may prove beneficial. The role of advanced surgical therapies, such as mechanical circulatory support, in this population is not well defined. Further investigation is warranted for these therapies in patients with Stage C heart failure.