Association of Long-term Use of Antihypertensive Medications With Late Outcomes Among Patients With Aortic Dissection

Efficacy and Safety of Sacubitril/Valsartan in Chronic Type B Aortic Dissection Combined With Mild Hypertension

BACKGROUND

Optimal antihypertensive medication for chronic type B aortic dissection (AD) remains undecided. This study compared the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan with valsartan to determine suitable antihypertensive drug combinations.

METHODS

In this single-center, open-label, randomized, controlled trial, patients with chronic Stanford type B AD and mild hypertension were randomized to receive sacubitril/valsartan 100/200 mg or valsartan 80/160 mg. The primary endpoint was the reduction in mean sitting systolic blood pressure (msSBP) at week 8 in patients with sacubitril/valsartan vs. valsartan. Key secondary endpoints included changes in (i) mean sitting diastolic blood pressure (msDBP); (ii) pulse pressure (PP); and (iii) mean ambulatory blood pressure (BP) for 24-hour, daytime, and nighttime. Safety assessments included adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs. This trial was registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, identifier: ChiCTR2300073399.

RESULTS

A total of 315 patients completed the study. Sacubitril/valsartan provided a significantly greater reduction in msSBP than valsartan at week 8 (between-treatment difference: -5.1 mm Hg [95% confidence interval -5.8 to -4.5], P < 0.001). Reductions in msSBP, msDBP, and PP as well as the mean ambulatory BP for 24-hour, daytime, and nighttime, were significantly greater in sacubitril/valsartan compared with valsartan (all P < 0.001). No excessive episodes of AEs occurred in the sacubitril/valsartan group.

CONCLUSIONS

Sacubitril/valsartan and valsartan reduced BP compared with baseline values. However, sacubitril/valsartan improved BP control to a greater extent than valsartan. It may offer a new treatment option for patients with mild hypertension and chronic type B AD.

Treatment of Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection: Optimal Medical Therapy vs TEVAR + Optimal Medical Therapy

Optimal Medical Therapy (OMT) has been the accepted mode of treatment for uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection (uTBAD). There is growing evidence that despite the short-term benefits of OMT, patients suffer deleterious consequences in the long-term with OMT alone. Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) along with OMT has emerged as an alternative option for patients with uTBAD. This study evaluates the available literature for TEVAR + OMT as an alternative to OMT for treatment of uTBAD. In addition, issues related to TEVAR as a treatment for uTBAD are discussed.

Prescription pattern and effectiveness of antihypertensive drugs in patients with aortic dissection who underwent surgery

Background: Surgical patients with aortic dissection often require multiple antihypertensive drugs to control blood pressure. However, the prescription pattern and effectiveness of antihypertensive drugs for these patients are unclear. We aimed to investigate the prescription pattern and effectiveness of different classes of antihypertensive drugs in surgical patients with aortic dissection. Methods: Newly diagnosed aortic dissection patients who underwent surgery, aged >20 years, from 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2017 were identified. Patients with missing data, in-hospital mortality, aortic aneurysms, or congenital connective tissue disorders, such as Marfan syndrome, were excluded. Prescription patterns of antihypertensive drugs were identified from medical records of outpatient visits within 90 days after discharge. Antihypertensive drugs were classified into four classes: 1) β-blockers, 2) calcium channel blockers (CCBs), 3) renin-angiotensin system, and 4) other antihypertensive drugs. Patients were classified according to the number of classes of antihypertensive drugs as follows: 1) class 0, no exposure to antihypertensive drugs; 2) class 1, antihypertensive drugs of the same class; 3) class 2, antihypertensive drugs of two classes; 4) class 3, antihypertensive drugs of three classes; or 5) class 4, antihypertensive drugs of four classes. The primary composite outcomes included rehospitalization associated with aortic dissection, death due to aortic dissection, and all-cause mortality. Results: Most patients were prescribed two (28.87%) or three classes (28.01%) of antihypertensive drugs. In class 1, β-blockers were most commonly used (8.79%), followed by CCBs (5.95%). In class 2, β-blockers+CCB (10.66%) and CCB+RAS (5.18%) were the most common drug combinations. In class 3, β-blockers + CCB+RAS (14.84%) was the most prescribed combination. Class 0 had a significantly higher hazard of the composite outcome (HR, 2.1; CI, 1.46-3.02; p < 0.001) and all-cause mortality (HR, 2.34; CI, 1.56-3.51; p < 0.001) than class 1. There were no significant differences in hazards for rehospitalization associated with aortic dissection among classes. Conclusion: Among operated patients with type A aortic dissection, no specific type of antihypertensive drug was associated with a better outcome, whereas among those with type B aortic dissection, the use of β-blockers and CCBs was related to a significantly lower risk of the composite outcome.

2022 ACC/AHA guideline for the diagnosis and management of aortic disease: A report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

Durability of Biological Valves Implanted in Aortic or Mitral Positions: A Nationwide Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Biologic prostheses are being increasingly used for aortic and mitral valve replacement (AVR and MVR). This study evaluated the long-term durability of bioprosthetic valves in the mitral and aortic positions, as no well-designed population-based studies have addressed this issue before.

METHODS

Using Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database, we compared biologic valve durability in the mitral and aortic positions in patients hospitalized between 2001 and 2017, with reoperation as the primary outcome. Both between-subject and within-subject designs were used, and the propensity score matching cohort (1:1 ratio) was created for the former.

RESULTS

We identified a total of 10,308 patients, 5462 of whom received AVR, 3901 received MVR, and 945 received double valve replacement. Both AVR and MVR cohorts had 2259 patients after matching. During a mean follow-up of 4.2 years (range, 1 day to 17.9 years), the reoperation rate in the MVR cohort (3.5%) was higher than that in the AVR cohort (2.6%) (hazard ratio 1.41; 95% CI, 1.01-1.98). A higher risk of all-cause death was observed in the MVR cohort (36.5%) than in the AVR cohort (32.6%) (hazard ratio 1.21; 95% CI, 1.10-1.34). Among patients receiving double valve replacement with the same prosthesis type, valves implanted in the aortic position were considerably less likely to require reimplantation.

CONCLUSIONS

Bioprosthetic valve placement in the aortic position is associated with superior outcomes in terms of durability, long-term mortality, and perioperative morbidity. Developing novel interventions and enhancing valve durability would expand bioprosthesis use for valve replacement.

Acute aortic dissection

Although substantial progress has been made in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of acute aortic dissection, it remains a complex cardiovascular event, with a high immediate mortality and substantial morbidity in individuals surviving the acute period. The past decade has allowed a leap forward in understanding the pathophysiology of this disease; the existing classifications have been challenged, and the scientific community moves towards a nomenclature that is likely to unify the current definitions according to morphology and function. The most important pathophysiological pathway, namely the location and extension of the initial intimal tear, which causes a disruption of the media layer of the aortic wall, together with the size of the affected aortic segments, determines whether the patient should undergo emergency surgery, an endovascular intervention, or receive optimal medical treatment. The scientific evidence for the management and follow-up of acute aortic dissection continues to evolve. This Seminar provides a clinically relevant overview of potential prevention, diagnosis, and management of acute aortic dissection, which is the most severe acute aortic syndrome.

Evaluating Prescription Pattern and Effectiveness of Antihypertensive Drugs in Non-Operated Aortic Dissection Patients

INTRODUCTION

Aortic dissection (AD) is a life-threatening disease. However, the effectiveness of different strategies of antihypertensive therapies in non-operated AD patients is still unclear.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients were classified into five groups (groups 0-4) based on the number of classes of antihypertensive drugs, including β-blockers, renin-angiotensin system (RAS) agents (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), and the renin-inhibitors), calcium channel blockers (CCBs), and other antihypertensive drugs, were prescribed within 90 days after discharge. The primary endpoint was a composite outcome of re-hospitalization associated with AD, referral for aortic surgery, and all-cause death.

RESULTS

A total of 3932 non-operated AD patients were included in our study. The most prescribed antihypertensive drugs were CCBs, followed by β-blockers and ARBs. Within group 1, compared to other antihypertensive drugs, patients using RAS agents (aHR, 0.58; p = 0.005) had a significantly lower risk of occurrence of the outcome. Within group 2, the risk of composite outcomes was lower in patients using β-blockers + CCBs (aHR, 0.60; p = 0.004) or CCBs + RAS agents (aHR, 0.60; p = 0.006) than in those using RAS agents + others.

CONCLUSION

For non-operated AD patients, RAS agents, β-blockers, or CCBs should be given in a different strategy of combinations to reduce the hazard of AD-related complications compared to other agents.

Genetics and mechanisms of thoracic aortic disease

Aortic disease has many forms including aortic aneurysm and dissection, aortic coarctation or abnormalities in aortic function, such as loss of aortic distensibility. Genetic analysis in humans is one of the most important experimental approaches in uncovering disease mechanisms, but the relative infrequency of thoracic aortic disease compared with other cardiovascular conditions such as coronary artery disease has hindered large-scale identification of genetic associations. In the past decade, advances in machine learning technology coupled with large imaging datasets from biobank repositories have facilitated a rapid expansion in our capacity to measure and genotype aortic traits, resulting in the identification of dozens of genetic associations. In this Review, we describe the history of technological advances in genetic discovery and explain how newer technologies such as deep learning can rapidly define aortic traits at scale. Furthermore, we integrate novel genetic observations provided by these advances into our current biological understanding of thoracic aortic disease and describe how these new findings can contribute to strategies to prevent and treat aortic disease.

Distinct Mechanisms of β-Arrestin-Biased Agonist and Blocker of AT1R in Preventing Aortic Aneurysm and Associated Mortality

BACKGROUND

Aortic aneurysm (AA) is a "silent killer" human disease with no effective treatment. Although the therapeutic potential of various pharmacological agents have been evaluated, there are no reports of β-arrestin-biased AT1R (angiotensin-II type-1 receptor) agonist (TRV027) used to prevent the progression of AA.

METHODS

We tested the hypothesis that TRV027 infusion in AngII (angiotensin II)-induced mouse model of AA prevents AA. High-fat-diet-fed ApoE (apolipoprotein E gene)-null mice were infused with AngII to induce AA and co-infused with TRV027 and a clinically used AT1R blocker Olmesartan to prevent AA. Aortas explanted from different ligand infusion groups were compared with assess different grades of AA or lack of AA.

RESULTS

AngII produced AA in ≈67% male mice with significant mortality associated with AA rupture. We observed ≈13% mortality due to aortic arch dissection without aneurysm in male mice. AngII-induced AA and mortality was prevented by co-infusion of TRV027 or Olmesartan, but through different mechanisms. In TRV027 co-infused mice aortic wall thickness, elastin content, new DNA, and protein synthesis were higher than untreated and Olmesartan co-infused mice. Co-infusion with both TRV027 and Olmesartan prevented endoplasmic reticulum stress, fibrosis, and vasomotor hyper responsiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

TRV027-engaged AT1R prevented AA and associated mortality by distinct molecular mechanisms compared with the AT1R blocker, Olmesartan. Developing novel β-arrestin-biased AT1R ligands may yield promising drugs to combat AA.

2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate. Structure: Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

Pharmacological treatment in patients with aortic dissection

Objectives

To describe medical management in aortic dissection (AD) and to analyse the possible associations between antihypertensive, antithrombotic, anticoagulant and statin agents, respectively, and long-term survival.

Methods

From Swedish medical registers, all patients diagnosed with AD in 2006–2015 were identified. Filled prescriptions prior to admission and within 1 year from discharge in patients discharged and alive at 30 days were registered. Associations between pharmacological treatment and long-term survival were analysed using Cox proportional hazards models.

Results

Of 3951 patients hospitalised with acute AD, 3046 (77%) were discharged and alive at 30 days. In hospitalised patients, mean age was 66 years (SD 13), and 36% (n=1098) were women. Within 1 year from discharge, 96% (n=2939) had at least one antihypertensive drug. Beta blocker was the most commonly used drug type (90%, n=2741). Statin treatment (47%, n=1418) was associated with higher long-term survival; HR 0.74 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.87, p<0.001). The positive association between statins and long-term survival remained, in subgroup analysis, in medically managed patients (HR 0.72 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.86, p<0.001)), but not in patients undergoing surgical repair (HR 0.82 (95% CI 0.58 to 1.14, p=0.230)). Beta blockers were associated with favourable long-term survival in surgically managed patients (HR 0.58 (95% CI 0.35 to 0.97, p=0.038)) but not in medically managed patients (HR 0.93 (95% CI 0.72 to 1.12, p=0.057)). Neither antiplatelet therapy nor anticoagulants were associated with long-term survival.

Conclusions

Statin treatment was associated with favourable long-term outcome in medically managed AD patients, whereas treatment with beta blocker was associated with higher survival only in surgically managed AD patients. Statin use as well as optimal antihypertensive therapy in the chronic stage of the disease need to be further analysed, preferably in randomised controlled trials.

Chronic Thoracic Aortic Dissection: How to Treat, When to Intervene

Thoracic aortic dissection (AD) is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Acute aortic syndrome is the first presentation of the disease in most cases. While acute AD management follows concrete guidelines because of its urgent and life-threatening nature, chronic AD is usually overlooked, although it concerns a wide spectrum of patients surviving an acute event. Acute AD survivors ultimately enter a chronic aortic disease course. Patients with chronic thoracic AD (CTAD) require lifelong surveillance and a proportion of them may present with symptoms and late complications demanding further surgical or endovascular treatment. However, the available data concerning the management of CTAD is sparse in the literature. The management of patients with CTAD is challenging as far as determining the best medical therapy and deciding on intervention are concerned. Until recently, there were no guidelines or recommendations for imaging surveillance in patients with chronic AD. The diagnostic methods for imaging aortic diseases have been improved, while the data on new endovascular and surgical approaches has increased significantly. In this review, we summarize the current evidence in the diagnosis and management of CTAD and the latest recommendations for the surgical/endovascular aortic repair of CTAD.

Cardiovascular Outcomes in Kidney Transplant Recipients With ADPKD

Introduction

Cardiovascular disease leads to high morbidity and mortality in patients with kidney failure. Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease (ADPKD) is a systemic disease with various cardiac abnormalities. Details on the cardiovascular profile of patients with ADPKD who are undergoing kidney transplantation (KT) and its progression are limited.

Methods

Echocardiographic data within 2 years before KT (1993-2020), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) after transplantation were retrieved. The primary outcome is to assess cardiovascular abnormalities on echocardiography at the time of transplantation in ADPKD as compared with patients without ADPKD matched by sex (male, 59.4%) and age at transplantation (57.2 ± 8.8 years).

Results

Compared with diabetic nephropathy (DN, n = 271) and nondiabetic, patients without ADPKD (NDNA) (n = 271) at the time of KT, patients with ADPKD (n = 271) had lower rates of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) (39.4% vs. 66.4% vs. 48.6%), mitral (2.7% vs. 6.3% vs. 7.45) and tricuspid regurgitations (1.8% vs. 6.6% vs. 7.2%). Patients with ADPKD had less diastolic (25.3%) and systolic (5.6%) dysfunction at time of transplantation. Patients with ADPKD had the most favorable post-transplantation survival (median 18.7 years vs. 12.0 for diabetic nephropathy [DN] and 13.8 years for nondiabetic non-ADPKD [NDNA]; P < 0.01) and the most favorable MACE-free survival rate (hazard ratio = 0.51, P < 0.001). Patients with ADPKD had worsening of their valvular function and an increase in the sinus of Valsalva diameter post-transplantation (38.2 vs. 39.9 mm, P < 0.01).

Conclusion

ADPKD transplant recipients have the most favorable cardiac profile pretransplantation with better patient survival and MACE-free survival rates but worsening valvular function and increasing sinus of Valsalva diameter, as compared with patients with other kidney diseases.

Impact of Hypertension History and Blood Pressure at Presentation on Cardiac Remodeling and Mortality in Aortic Dissection

Objective

This study compared clinical, echocardiographic, and prognostic characteristics among patients with aortic dissection (AD) with (HypHist) and without (No-HypHist) hypertension history and evaluated the association of blood pressure (BP) at presentation with 1-year mortality, left ventricular (LV) remodeling and renal dysfunction.

Methods

We investigated clinical and echocardiographic characteristics and 1-year mortality among 367 patients with AD (81% HypHist, 66% Type-A) from three Brazilian centers.

Results

Patients with No-HypHist were more likely to have Marfan syndrome, bicuspid aortic valve, to undergo surgical therapy, were less likely to have LV hypertrophy and concentricity, and had similar mortality compared with HypHist patients. Adjusted restricted cubic spline analysis showed that systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) at presentation had a J-curve association with mortality among patients with No-HypHist, but did not associate with death among patients with HypHist (p for interaction = 0.001 for SBP and = 0.022 for DBP). Conversely, the association between SBP at presentation and mortality was influenced by previous use of antihypertensive medications in the HypHist group (p for interaction = 0.002). Results of multivariable logistic regression analysis comprising the whole sample showed direct associations of SBP and DBP at presentation with LV hypertrophy (p = 0.009) and LV concentricity (p = 0.015), respectively, and an inverse association between pulse pressure at presentation and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <60 ml/min/1.73 m² (p = 0.008).

Conclusion

Combined information on BP at presentation, previous diagnosis of hypertension, and use of antihypertensive medications might be useful to predict mortality risk and to estimate extra-aortic end-organ damage among patients with AD.