Effects of digoxin on morbidity and mortality in diastolic heart failure: the ancillary digitalis investigation group trial

Diastolic dysfunction and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: rationale for RAAS antagonist/CCB combination therapy

A large number of patients who present with signs or symptoms of heart failure (HF) do not have evidence of left ventricular systolic dysfunction. As a result, HF in the presence of normal or preserved ejection fraction, or diastolic HF, is increasingly recognized as a health care challenge. Guidelines have been issued for the classification, diagnosis, and prevention of HF from diastolic dysfunction, but treatment of this condition remains problematic. Antihypertensive agents that have been proven in clinical trials to improve outcomes in HF with systolic dysfunction, such as angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, and beta-blockers, have not yet demonstrated comparable benefits in patients with diastolic dysfunction. Combination therapy using an antagonist of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system and a calcium-channel blocker has potential advantages over monotherapy and is being explored in several ongoing clinical trials.

Treatment of heart failure with preserved systolic function

Heart failure is a major public health problem. Heart failure with preserved systolic function (HF-PSF) is a common form, which is difficult to diagnose. Results of recent studies show that HF-PSF has a poor prognosis, with an annual survival rate similar to that of heart failure with left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Despite these findings, the therapeutic management of HF-PSF is not clearly defined. We will discuss in this review of the literature the current therapeutic management of HF-PSF, including the role of precipitating factors such as hypertension, myocardial ischaemia and supraventricular arrhythmias, and the main results of epidemiological registries and randomized controlled clinical trials in this disease. Only four large therapeutic trials have assessed the impact of different classes of drugs (digoxin, angiotensin II converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptors type I blockers and beta-blockers) on morbidity and mortality in HF-PSF. Results of these trials are disappointing. Apart from the beta-blockers, the other three classes of drugs did not show benefit on the outcome of the disease. Moreover, the results of the beta-blocker trial are controversial as a mixed population of heart failure with and without preserved systolic function was studied. Finally, the current therapeutic management of patients with HF-PSF is still based on our pathophysiological knowledge: education, low salt diet, diuretics, slowing heart rate and controlling triggering factors. Other large randomized controlled multicenter trials, which may help us in the understanding of HF-PSP and its therapeutic management, are ongoing.

Comparison of one-year outcome (death and rehospitalization) in hospitalized heart failure patients with left ventricular ejection fraction >50% versus those with ejection fraction <50%

Heart failure (HF) with preserved systolic function (ejection fraction [EF] >50%) is common, yet no proven therapies exist. Large registries could shed light on what medications may or may not be useful to reduce hospitalization and mortality. The EFFECT Registry, which prospectively enrolled 9,943 patients admitted to the hospital for HF from 1999 to 2001 in 103 hospitals in Ontario, Canada, was used. Patients discharged alive were divided into those with EF >50% and EF <50%. Discharge medications (angiotensin-converting enzyme [ACE] inhibitors, beta blockers [BBs], spironolactone, and digoxin) were examined for their association with HF rehospitalization or death during 1 year. In the HF group with EF >50% (n = 1,026), 199 patients died within 1 year and 349 patients died or were hospitalized for HF within 1 year. In the HF group with EF <50% (n = 1,898), 427 patients died and 720 patients died or were hospitalized for HF. In the HF group with EF >50%, 67% were administered an ACE inhibitor; 32%, a BB; 37%, digoxin; and 12%, spironolactone. No differences were seen in adjusted survival for any medications (ACE inhibitors, BBs, digoxin, or spironolactone) examined in the HF group with EF >50% despite an adjusted survival benefit with ACE inhibitors (hazard ratio [HR] 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77 to 0.94), BBs (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.89), and spironolactone (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.98) in patients with low EF. In conclusion, none of the medications proved to improve outcomes in patients with HF with low EF showed an association with outcomes in patients with HF and EF >50%, highlighting the need for randomized trial evidence to define therapies that will be beneficial in patients with HF and preserved systolic function.

Diastolic heart failure: mechanisms and controversies

Epidemiological and experimental studies have documented both the rising burden of diastolic heart failure (DHF) and several mechanisms that distinguish this disease from systolic heart failure (SHF). Controversies continue to surround the term 'DHF' as well as its existence as a pathophysiological entity distinct from SHF. Approximately half of all patients who present with heart failure have near-normal systolic function and predominately abnormal diastolic function. Recent reports counter the commonly held belief that survival of patients with DHF is better than that of patients with SHF. The challenges associated with managing the DHF phenotype arise from the heterogeneous etiologies of the condition that include aging, diabetes mellitus, hypertension and ischemia. Lack of diastolic distensibility in DHF has been attributed primarily to hypertrophy and fibrosis. Extracellular matrix and cytoskeletal components including matrix metalloproteinases, titin isoforms, and the quality and quantity of collagen are implicated in DHF development. Impaired active relaxation of the contractile apparatus also contributes to DHF. Novel therapeutic targets that address the pathophysiology of this disease are being actively explored, although as yet there are no proven therapies for DHF. New epidemiologic and mechanistic data regarding DHF highlight the urgency with which the scientific community must address this important public health problem.

DEFEAT heart failure: assessment and management of heart failure in nursing homes made easy

Heart failure (HF) in older adults presents challenges that are different in many ways than those for younger adults. Diagnosis of HF in older adults can be delayed due to attributing early symptoms to normal changes of aging or, in the setting of a normal ejection fraction, failing to appreciate diastolic heart failure. Moreover, treatment of HF in the elderly is often complicated by comorbidities and polypharmacy. The long-term care setting can present even more challenges, yet can be made easy by following a simple mnemonic DEFEAT-HF. After making a clinical Diagnosis and determining the Etiology, Fluid volume must be assessed to achieve euvolemia, and Ejection frAction must be determined to guide Therapy.

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: clinical characteristics of 4133 patients enrolled in the I-PRESERVE trial

BACKGROUND

We describe the baseline characteristics of subjects randomised in the largest placebo-controlled, morbidity-mortality trial to date in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction - the irbesartan in heart failure with preserved systolic function trial (I-PRESERVE).

METHODS AND RESULTS

4133 patients with a mean age of 72 years (a third were 75 years or older) were randomised and 60% were women. The mean (SD) LVEF was 59 (9)% and almost 80% of patients were in NYHA Class III or IV. Approximately 80% of patients were also overweight or obese. Heart failure was reported by investigators to have a hypertensive aetiology in 64% of patients. Prior myocardial infarction was relatively uncommon (24%), as was coronary revascularisation (13%). Atrial fibrillation and diabetes each occurred in between a quarter and a third of patients. The following treatments were used at baseline: diuretic 83%, beta-blocker 59%, calcium channel blocker 40%, ACE inhibitor 25%, spironolactone 15% and digoxin 14%.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients in I-PRESERVE are broadly representative of those seen in epidemiological studies and, because of this, the results of this trial should be generally applicable to "real world" patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction.

Treatment of heart failure with normal left ventricular ejection fraction

Underlying causes and precipitating causes of heart failure (HF) should be treated when possible. Persons with HF and normal left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) should have maintenance of sinus rhythm, treatment of hypertension, myocardial ischemia, dyslipidemia, and anemia, slowing of the ventricular rate below 90 bpm, and reduction of salt overload. First-line drug treatment in the management of these persons is the use of loop diuretics combined with beta blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors. If persons are unable to tolerate ACE inhibitors because of cough, angioneurotic edema, rash, or altered taste sensation, angiotensin II type I receptor antagonists (ARBs) should be given. If HF persists despite diuretics, beta blockers, and ACE inhibitors or ARBs, isosorbide dinitrate plus hydralazine should be administered. Beta blockers, verapamil, diltiazem, and digoxin may be used to slow a rapid ventricular rate in persons with supraventricular tachyarrhythmias. Digoxin should not be used in persons with HF in sinus rhythm with normal LVEF. Exercise training should be encouraged in persons with mild to moderate HF to improve functional status and to decrease symptoms.

Prognostic impact of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor therapy in diastolic heart failure

The angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor has a well defined place in the treatment of systolic heart failure (HF). Evidence for routine prescription of an ACE inhibitor in patients with diastolic HF (DHF) is inconsistent. Therefore, our aim was to evaluate the prognostic impact of ACE inhibitor in patients with DHF. The present prospective study included patients with normal or slightly impaired ejection fraction (> or =50%) surviving a first hospitalization for HF. We assessed the long-term prognosis of these patients according to prescription of an ACE inhibitor at discharge. ACE inhibitor therapy prescribed at discharge in 46% (n = 165) of the 358 included patients was associated with a 30% relative decrease in the risk of 5-year mortality (hazard ratio 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.53 to 0.93, p = 0.013). On multivariable Cox analysis, the relation between ACE inhibitor prescription and mortality remained significant (hazard ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.54 to 0.99, p = 0.045). Using propensity score analysis, 120 patients receiving an ACE inhibitor were matched with 120 patients not receiving this medication. In the postmatch group, prescription of ACE inhibitor was associated with a significant decrease in the risk of 5-year mortality (hazard ratio 0.61, 95% confidence interval 0.43 to 0.87, p = 0.006). Five-year relative survival (observed/expected survival) of the ACE inhibitor group was better than that of the no-ACE inhibitor group (65% vs 57%). In conclusion, we demonstrate that in this cohort of patients with DHF, prescription of ACE inhibitor was associated with a significant decrease in long-term mortality.

Current understanding of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

A substantial proportion of patients with heart failure have preserved ejection fraction. Though patients with preserved ejection fraction experience a substantial burden of morbidity and mortality, the understanding of heart failure pathophysiology in this group remains incomplete and evidence-based therapeutic options are limited.

RECENT FINDINGS

The prevalence of heart failure in patients with preserved ejection fraction is increasing and prognosis in this population remains poor despite modern medical therapy. Though diastolic dysfunction is typically present, increasing evidence suggests that extracardiac factors such as renal dysfunction and enhanced central aortic stiffness may play an important role in the development and progression of heart failure symptoms. Results of the first randomized, controlled clinical trials in this population suggest a possible therapeutic role for renin-angiotensin system blockade in reducing heart failure-associated morbidity, but there is still no evidence-supported strategy for reducing mortality in this population.

SUMMARY

Though the epidemiology and impact of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction are increasingly clear, consensus regarding pathophysiology and the optimal therapeutic approach is still lacking. Pending completion of additional therapeutic trials in this population, treatment remains largely empiric and focused on optimizing myocardial performance in diastole by control of blood pressure, restoration or maintenance of sinus rhythm, and relief of volume overload.

DEFEAT heart failure: clinical manifestations, diagnostic assessment, and etiology of geriatric heart failure

Aging is characterized by heterogeneity, both in health and in disease. Older adults who have heart failure (HF) often have atypical and delayed clinical manifestations and many have diastolic HF. The assessment and management of HF in older adults may be simplified by a 5-step process called DEFEAT HF: (1) establish a clinical Diagnosis of HF; (2) establish an Etiology for HF, preferably in collaboration with a cardiologist; (3) determine Fluid status and achieve euvolemia; (4) determine left ventricular Ejection frAction; and (5) provide evidence-based Therapy.

Heart failure with preserved systolic function: giving well-deserved attention to the "other" heart failure

Heart failure with preserved systolic function is common in patients hospitalized with decompensated heart failure and is associated with postdischarge morbidity and costs similar to patients with heart failure and systolic dysfunction. It is common in the older people, and hypertension and cardiac ischemia are often etiological factors. Nurses must be able to recognize left ventricular diastolic abnormalities and understand treatment priorities and treatment options on the basis of structural cardiovascular disease; etiology and risk factors; and signs, symptoms, and hemodynamic parameters. Currently, clinical treatments are on the basis of individual randomized clinical trials; however, there are general principles that should be followed during hospitalization and as part of general practice. As in the treatment of systolic heart failure, nurses have active roles in ensuring accurate assessment; optimal care planning; implementation of clinical, psychosocial; and education interventions; and timely and accurate evaluation so that patients have the best chance for successful hospital and postdischarge outcomes.

Diastolic Heart Failure in the Elderly

Most elderly patients, particularly women, who have heart failure have a normal ejection fraction. Patients who have this syndrome have severe symptoms of exercise intolerance, frequent hospitalizations, and increased mortality. The pathophysiology and treatment are not well defined. Control of systemic hypertension may be a key to prevention and treatment. Several large trials of specific agents are currently underway.

Intensive Session: New Approaches to Medical Issues in Long-Term Care

This article, based on a series of presentations at the American Medical Directors Association, briefly highlights new advances in medical areas of interest to long-term care physicians. The areas discussed are heart failure, vitamin D, falls, new treatments for diabetes mellitus, blood pressure measurement, anemia, clinical nutrition, pressure ulcers, Clostridium difficile, insomnia, and antipsychotic therapy.

Characteristics, treatments, and outcomes of patients with preserved systolic function hospitalized for heart failure: a report from the OPTIMIZE-HF Registry

OBJECTIVES

We sought to evaluate the characteristics, treatments, and outcomes of patients with preserved and reduced systolic function heart failure (HF).

BACKGROUND

Heart failure with preserved systolic function (PSF) is common but not well understood.

METHODS

This analysis of the OPTIMIZE-HF (Organized Program to Initiate Lifesaving Treatment in Hospitalized Patients With Heart Failure) registry compared 20,118 patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) and 21,149 patients with PSF (left ventricular ejection fraction [EF] > or =40%). Sixty- to 90-day follow-up was obtained in a pre-specified 10% sample of patients. Analyses of patients with PSF defined as EF >50% were also performed for comparison.

RESULTS

Patients with PSF (EF > or =40%) were more likely to be older, female, and Caucasian and to have a nonischemic etiology. Although length of hospital stay was the same in both groups, risk of in-hospital mortality was lower in patients with PSF (EF > or =40%) (2.9% vs. 3.9%; p < 0.0001). During 60- to 90-day post-discharge follow-up, patients with PSF (EF > or =40%) had a similar mortality risk (9.5% vs. 9.8%; p = 0.459) and rehospitalization rates (29.2% vs. 29.9%; p = 0.591) compared with patients with LVSD. Findings were comparable with those with PSF defined as EF >50%. In a risk- and propensity-adjusted model, there were no significant relationships between discharge use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker or beta-blocker and 60- to 90-day mortality and rehospitalization rates in patients with PSF.

CONCLUSIONS

Data from the OPTIMIZE-HF registry reveal a high prevalence of HF with PSF, and these patients have a similar post-discharge mortality risk and equally high rates of rehospitalization as patients with HF and LVSD. Despite the burden to patients and health care systems, data are lacking on effective management strategies for patients with HF and PSF. (Organized Program To Initiate Lifesaving Treatment In Hospitalized Patients With Heart Failure [OPTIMIZE-HF]); http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show/NCT00344513?order=1; NCT00344513).

Digoxin and reduction in mortality and hospitalization in geriatric heart failure: importance of low doses and low serum concentrations

BACKGROUND

Digoxin reduces hospitalizations due to heart failure (HF) and may also reduce mortality at low serum digoxin concentrations (SDC). Most HF patients are > or = 65 years, yet the effects of digoxin on outcomes in these patients have not been well studied.

METHODS

Of the 7788 ambulatory chronic HF patients in normal sinus rhythm in the Digitalis Investigation Group trial (1991-1995), 5548 (2890 were > or = 65 years) were alive at 1 month and were either receiving placebo or had data on SDC. Of these patients, 982 had low (0.5-0.9 ng/mL) and 705 had high (> or = 1 ng/mL) SDC.

RESULTS

Among patients > or = 65 years, compared with 38% placebo patients, 34% low SDC patients died during 39 months of median follow-up (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] = 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.68-0.96; p =.017). All-cause hospitalizations occurred in 70% of placebo and 68% of low-SDC patients (AHR = 0.86; 95% CI = 0.76-0.98; p =.019). Reduction in hospitalizations for HF occurred in both low and high SDC groups. High SDC was not independently associated with all-cause hospitalization or all-cause mortality. Age, impaired renal function, and pulmonary congestion reduced the odds of low SDC. Low-dose digoxin (< or = 0.125 mg/d) was the strongest independent predictor of low SDC (adjusted odd ratio = 2.37; 95% CI = 1.65-3.39); p <.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Digoxin at low SDC was associated with a reduction in mortality and hospitalization in chronic geriatric HF, and low-dose digoxin was the strongest predictor of low SDC.

Effects of digoxin at low serum concentrations on mortality and hospitalization in heart failure: a propensity-matched study of the DIG trial

BACKGROUND

In heart failure (HF), digoxin at low serum digoxin concentrations (SDC) reduces all-cause mortality and HF hospitalizations. However, the effects of digoxin on other cause-specific outcomes have not been studied in a propensity-matched cohort.

METHODS

The Digitalis Investigation Group trial, conducted during 1991-1993, enrolled 7788 ambulatory chronic HF patients. This analysis focuses on 4843 patients: 982 receiving digoxin with low (0.5-0.9 ng/ml) SDC at one month, and 3861 receiving placebo and alive at one month. Propensity scores for low SDC, calculated using a non-parsimonious multivariable logistic regression model, were used to match 982 low-SDC patients with 982 placebo patients. Matched Cox regression analyses were used to determine the effect of digoxin at low SDC on outcomes.

RESULTS

All-cause mortality occurred in 315 placebo (rate, 1071/10,000 person-years) and 288 low-SDC digoxin (rate, 871/10,000 person-years) patients, respectively, during 2940 and 3305 years of follow up (hazard ratio {HR}, 0.81, 95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.68-0.98; p=0.028). Cardiovascular hospitalizations occurred in 493 placebo (2359/10,000 person-year) and 471 low-SDC digoxin (1963/10,000 person-year) patients, respectively during 2090 and 2399 years of follow up (HR, 0.82, 95% CI, 0.70-0.95; P=0.010). Low-SDC digoxin to placebo HR (95%CI) for HF mortality and HF hospitalizations were respectively, 0.65 (0.45-0.92; P=0.015) and 0.63 (0.52-0.77; P<0.0001). Low-dose digoxin (< or = 0.125 mg/day) was the strongest independent predictor of low SDC (adjusted odd ratio, 2.07, 95% CI 1.54-2.80).

CONCLUSIONS

Digoxin at low SDC significantly reduced mortality and hospitalizations in ambulatory chronic systolic and diastolic HF patients.

Clinical manifestations, diagnostic assessment, and etiology of heart failure in older adults

Aging is characterized by heterogeneity, both in health and in dis-ease. Older adults who have heart failure (HF) often have a typical and delayed clinical manifestations and many have diastolic HF. The assessment and management of HF in older adults may be simplified by a 5-step process called DEFEAT HF: (1) Establish a clinical Diagnosis of HF; (2) Establish an Etiology for HF, preferably in collaboration with a cardiologist; (3) Determine Fluid status and achieve euvolemia; (4) Determine left ventricular Ejection frAction; and (5) Provide evidence-based Therapy.

Diastolic heart failure in the elderly

Most elderly patients, particularly women, who have heart failure have a normal ejection fraction. Patients who have this syndrome have severe symptoms of exercise intolerance, frequent hospitalizations, and increased mortality. The pathophysiology and treatment are not well defined. Control of systemic hypertension may be a key to prevention and treatment. Several large trials of specific agents are currently underway.

Pharmacological treatment of chronic heart failure

Heart failure (HF) is associated with a high morbidity and mortality in the Western World. Our knowledge of the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and therapy has improved dramatically during the last 20 years. Pharmacological treatment, as it stands today, is a combination of preventive and symptomatic strategies. The mainstay life-saving drugs are angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and beta-blockers. Additional benefits are obtained when angiotensin-receptor blockers or aldosterone antagonists are added. Digitalis and/or diuretics are useful for symptom reduction. In addition, combination therapy with hydralazine and isosorbide dinitrate is recommended in African Americans.

Outcomes in ambulatory chronic systolic and diastolic heart failure: a propensity score analysis

BACKGROUND

Prior studies demonstrating significant difference in outcomes in systolic and diastolic heart failure (HF) are often limited to hospitalized acute HF patients, and may be confounded by residual bias. In this analysis, we examined long-term mortality and hospitalization in a propensity score matched cohort of ambulatory chronic systolic and diastolic HF patients.

METHODS

Of the 7788 patients in the Digitalis Investigation Group trial, 6800 had systolic HF (ejection fraction >45%) and 988 had diastolic HF (ejection fraction >45%). We restricted our analysis to 7617 patients without valvular heart disease: 916 diastolic HF and 6701 systolic HF. Propensity scores for diastolic HF, calculated for each patient by a non-parsimonious multivariable logistic regression model, were used to match 697 diastolic HF with 2091 systolic HF patients. Matched Cox regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for outcomes in diastolic (versus systolic) HF.

RESULTS

During a median 38-month follow-up, compared with 32% mortality in systolic HF, 23% of diastolic HF patients died (HR=0.70; 95% CI=0.59-0.84; P<.0001). Respective HR (95%CI) for cardiovascular and HF mortality were 0.60 (0.48-0.74; P<.0001) and 0.56 (0.39-0.79; P=.001). All-cause hospitalizations occurred in 64% of systolic and 67% of diastolic HF patients (HR=0.99; 95% CI=0.87-1.11; P=0.801). Respective HR (95%CI) for cardiovascular and HF hospitalizations were 0.84 (0.73-0.96; P=.011) and 0.63 (0.51-0.77; P<.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite lower mortality and cardiovascular morbidity, diastolic HF patients had similar overall hospitalizations as in systolic HF. Ejection fraction should be assessed in all HF patients to guide therapy, with special attention to non-cardiovascular morbidity in diastolic HF.

Digitalis for treatment of congestive heart failure in patients in sinus rhythm

BACKGROUND

Digitalis glycosides have been in clinical use in the treatment of congestive heart failure (CHF) for more than 200 years. In recent years several trials have been conducted to address concerns about efficacy and toxicity. Although a systematic review of the literature was published in 1990, an update is required to include more current trials.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effectiveness of digitalis glycosides in treating CHF in patients with normal sinus rhythm. To examine the effect of digitalis in patients taking diuretics, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, and beta-blockers; patients with varying severity and duration of disease; patients with prior exposure to digitalis vs. no prior exposure; and patients with "CHF due to systolic dysfunction" vs. "CHF with preserved systolic function."

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) 2003 Issue 4, MEDLINE (1966 to December 2003) and EMBASE (1990 to December 2003) were searched. Dissertation Abstracts and annual meeting abstracts of the American Heart Association, American College of Cardiology, and European Society of Cardiology were also searched from 1996-2003. In addition, reference lists provided by the pharmaceutical industry (Glaxo Wellcome Inc.) were searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Included were randomized placebo-controlled trials of 20 or more adult patients of either sex with symptomatic CHF who were studied for seven weeks or more. Excluded were trials in which the prevalence of atrial fibrillation was 2% or greater, or in which any arrhythmia that might compromise cardiac function or any potentially reversible cause of CHF such as acute ischemic heart disease or myocarditis was present.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Articles selected from the searches described above were evaluated as a joint effort of the coauthors. The staff of the Cochrane Heart Group ran searches on the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirteen articles meeting the defined criteria were identified, and major endpoints of mortality, hospitalization, and clinical status, based respectively upon 8, 4, and 12 of these selected studies, were recorded and analyzed. The data show that there is no evidence of a difference in mortality between treatment and control groups, whereas digitalis therapy is associated with a lower rate of hospitalization and of clinical deterioration.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

The literature indicates that digitalis has a useful role in the treatment of patients with CHF who are in normal sinus rhythm.