Incremental benefit of drug therapies for chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: a network meta-analysis

Epidemiology and risk factors for hyperkalaemia in heart failure

Patients with heart failure (HF), particularly those with impaired renal function receiving renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASis), are at risk of hyperkalaemia; when hyperkalaemia is severe, this can have serious clinical consequences. The incidence, prevalence, and risk factors for hyperkalaemia reported in randomized trials of RAASis may not reflect clinical practice due to exclusion of patients with elevated serum potassium (sK+) or severe renal impairment: information on patients managed in routine clinical care is important to understanding the actual burden of hyperkalaemia. This paper reviews the available clinical epidemiology data on hyperkalaemia in HF and considers areas requiring further research. Observational studies published since 2017 that focused on hyperkalaemia, included patients with HF, and had ≥1000 participants were considered. Hyperkalaemia occurrence in HF varied widely from 7% to 39% depending on the setting, HF severity, follow-up length, and concomitant medications. Rates were lowest in patients with newly diagnosed HF and highest in patients with greater disease severity; comorbidities, such as chronic kidney disease and diabetes, and RAASi use, reflected commonly identified risk factors for hyperkalaemia in patients with HF. Hyperkalaemia was most often mild; however, from the limited data available, persistence of mild hyperkalaemia was associated with an increased risk of mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events. There were also limited data available on the progression of hyperkalaemia. Recurrence was common, occurring in one-quarter to two-fifths of hyperkalaemia cases. Despite HF guidelines recommending close monitoring of sK+, 55-93% of patients did not receive appropriate testing before or after initiation of RAASi or in follow-up to moderate/severe hyperkalaemia detection. Many of the observational studies were retrospective and from a single country. There is a need for international, prospective, longitudinal, observational studies, such as the CARE-HK in HF study (NCT04864795), to understand hyperkalaemia's prevalence, incidence, and severity; to identify and characterize cases that persist, progress, and recur; to highlight the importance of sK+ monitoring when using RAASi; and to assess the impact of newer HF therapies and potassium binders in clinical practice. Data from both clinical trials and observational studies with adjustments for confounding variables will be needed to assess the contribution of hyperkalaemia to clinical outcomes.

Admission prioritization of heart failure patients with multiple comorbidities

The primary objective of this study was to enhance the operational efficiency of the current healthcare system by proposing a quicker and more effective approach for healthcare providers to deliver services to individuals facing acute heart failure (HF) and concurrent medical conditions. The aim was to support healthcare staff in providing urgent services more efficiently by developing an automated decision-support Patient Prioritization (PP) Tool that utilizes a tailored machine learning (ML) model to prioritize HF patients with chronic heart conditions and concurrent comorbidities during Urgent Care Unit admission. The study applies key ML models to the PhysioNet dataset, encompassing hospital admissions and mortality records of heart failure patients at Zigong Fourth People's Hospital in Sichuan, China, between 2016 and 2019. In addition, the model outcomes for the PhysioNet dataset are compared with the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Maryland (MD) State Inpatient Data (SID) for 2014, a secondary dataset containing heart failure patients, to assess the generalizability of results across diverse healthcare settings and patient demographics. The ML models in this project demonstrate efficiencies surpassing 97.8% and specificities exceeding 95% in identifying HF patients at a higher risk and ranking them based on their mortality risk level. Utilizing this machine learning for the PP approach underscores risk assessment, supporting healthcare professionals in managing HF patients more effectively and allocating resources to those in immediate need, whether in hospital or telehealth settings.

Effect of sacubitril/valsartan on cardiac remodeling compared with other renin-angiotensin system inhibitors: a difference-in-difference analysis of propensity-score matched samples

BACKGROUND

In patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), treatment with sacubitril-valsartan (S/V) may reverse left ventricular remodeling (rLVR). Whether this effect is superior to that induced by other renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors is not well known.

METHODS

HFrEF patients treated with S/V (n = 795) were compared, by propensity score matching, with a historical cohort of 831 HFrEF patients (non-S/V group) treated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (RAS inhibitors). All patients were also treated with beta-blockers and shared the same protocol with repeat echocardiogram 8-12 months after starting therapy. The difference-in-difference (DiD) analysis was used to evaluate the impact of S/V on CR indices between the two groups.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, compared to non-S/V group (n = 354), S/V group (n = 354) showed a relative greater reduction in end-diastolic and end-systolic volume index (ESVI), and greater increase in ejection fraction (DiD estimator =  + 5.42 mL/m2, P = 0.0005; + 4.68 mL/m2, P = 0.0009, and + 1.76%, P = 0.002, respectively). Reverse LVR (reduction in ESVI ≥ 15% from baseline) was more prevalent in S/V than in non-S/V group (34% vs 26%, P = 0.017), while adverse LVR (aLVR, increase in ESVI at follow-up ≥ 15%) was more frequent in non-S/V than in S/V (16% vs 7%, P < 0.001). The beneficial effect of S/V on CR over other RAS inhibitors was appreciable across a wide range of patient's age and baseline end-diastolic volume index, but it tended to attenuate in more dilated left ventricles (P for interaction = NS for both).

CONCLUSION

In HFrEF patients treated with beta-blockers, sacubitril/valsartan is associated with a relative greater benefit in LV reverse remodeling indices than other RAS inhibitors.

Pharmacotherapy in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), β-blockers (BBs), and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) are the cornerstones in treating heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT-2is) are included in HFrEF treatment guidelines. However, the effect of SGLT-2i and the five drugs on HFrEF have not yet been systematically evaluated.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception dates to September 23, 2022. Additional trials from previous relevant reviews and references were also included. The primary outcomes were changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular end-diastolic diameter/dimension (LVEDD), left ventricular end-systolic diameter/dimension (LVESD), left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV), and left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV), left ventricular end-systolic volume index (LVESVI), and left ventricular end-diastolic volume index (LVEDVI). Secondary outcomes were New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, 6-min walking distance (6MWD), B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) level, and N-terminal pro-BNP (NT-proBNP) level. The effect sizes were presented as the mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

We included 68 RCTs involving 16,425 patients. Compared with placebo, ARNI + BB + MRA + SGLT-2i was the most effective combination to improve LVEF (15.63%, 95% CI: 9.91% to 21.68%). ARNI + BB + MRA + SGLT-2i (5.83%, 95% CI: 0.53% to 11.14%) and ARNI + BB + MRA (3.83%, 95% CI: 0.72% to 6.90%) were superior to the traditional golden triangle "ACEI + BB + MRA" in improving LVEF. ACEI + BB + MRA + SGLT-2i was better than ACEI + BB + MRA (-8.05 mL/m2, 95% CI: -14.88 to -1.23 mL/m2) and ACEI + BB + SGLT-2i (-18.94 mL/m2, 95% CI: -36.97 to -0.61 mL/m2) in improving LVEDVI. ACEI + BB + MRA + SGLT-2i (-3254.21 pg/mL, 95% CI: -6242.19 to -560.47 pg/mL) was superior to ARB + BB + MRA in reducing NT-proBNP.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding SGLT-2i to ARNI/ACEI + BB + MRA is beneficial for reversing cardiac remodeling. The new quadruple drug "ARNI + BB + MRA + SGLT-2i" is superior to the golden triangle "ACEI + BB + MRA" in improving LVEF.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO; No. CRD42022354792.

Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy in Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction and Incident Cancer

BACKGROUND

It has been postulated that cancer hampers the delivery of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for heart failure (HF). However, few data are available in this regard.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis from the HF Outpatient Clinic of the IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino in Genova, Italy. All HF patients evaluated between 2010 and 2019, with a left ventricular ejection fraction <50% and at least two visits ≥3 months apart with complete information about GDMT were included in the study. We assessed the prescription of GDMT-in particular, beta-blockers (BB), renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi), and mineralocorticoid antagonists (MRA)-at the time of the last HF evaluation and compared it between patients with and without incidental cancer. For those with incidental cancer, we also evaluated modifications of GDMT comparing the HF evaluations before and after cancer diagnosis.

RESULTS

Of 464 HF patients, 39 (8%) had incidental cancer. There were no statistical differences in GDMT between patients with and without incidental cancer at last evaluation. In the year following cancer diagnosis, of 33 patients with incidental cancer on BB, none stopped therapy, but two had a down-titration to a dosage <50%; of 27 patients on RASi, two patients stopped therapy and three had a down-titration to a dosage <50%; of 19 patients on MRA, four stopped therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Although HF patients with incidental cancer may need to have GDMT down-titrated at the time of cancer diagnosis, this does not appear to significantly hinder the delivery of HF therapies during follow-up.

Novel Medical Treatments and Devices for the Management of Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction

Heart failure (HF) is a growing issue in developed countries; it is often the result of underlying processes such as ischemia, hypertension, infiltrative diseases or even genetic abnormalities. The great majority of the affected patients present a reduced ejection fraction (≤40%), thereby falling under the name of "heart failure with reduced ejection fraction" (HFrEF). This condition represents a major threat for patients: it significantly affects life quality and carries an enormous burden on the whole healthcare system due to its high management costs. In the last decade, new medical treatments and devices have been developed in order to reduce HF hospitalizations and improve prognosis while reducing the overall mortality rate. Pharmacological therapy has significantly changed our perspective of this disease thanks to its ability of restoring ventricular function and reducing symptom severity, even in some dramatic contexts with an extensively diseased myocardium. Notably, medical therapy can sometimes be ineffective, and a tailored integration with device technologies is of pivotal importance. Not by chance, in recent years, cardiac implantable devices witnessed a significant improvement, thereby providing an irreplaceable resource for the management of HF. Some devices have the ability of assessing (CardioMEMS) or treating (ultrafiltration) fluid retention, while others recognize and treat life-threatening arrhythmias, even for a limited time frame (wearable cardioverter defibrillator). The present review article gives a comprehensive overview of the most recent and important findings that need to be considered in patients affected by HFrEF. Both novel medical treatments and devices are presented and discussed.

The Safety and Efficacy of the Early Use of Sacubitril/Valsartan After Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is a significant global cause of mortality, necessitating the exploration of innovative treatments against the condition. Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), and angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs) such as sacubitril/valsartan have demonstrated promise in managing acute heart failure (HF). However, despite favorable evidence from clinical trials for the use of sacubitril/valsartan in AMI, its overall efficacy remains a subject of debate. Hence, we conducted this review and meta-analysis, by adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines and aligned with European Society of Cardiology recommendations, to compare sacubitril/valsartan with traditional ACEI/ARB treatments for AMI. We employed Review Manager 5.4 for statistical analysis, the Risk of Bias Tool 2.0 was utilized for quality assessment, and publication bias was assessed using a funnel plot. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this meta-analysis. Our findings revealed that participants treated with sacubitril experienced significantly improved outcomes in terms of HF (OR=0.79; 95% CI: 0.66-0.95; p=0.01; I2=23%), N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels (MD = -1.58; 95% CI: -1.78 to -1.37, p<0.00001; I2=97%), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (OR=0.84; 95% CI: 0.72-0.99; p=0.03; I2=44%). However, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (MD=3.68; 95% CI: 3.35-4.01, p<0.00001; I2=71%) showed greater improvement in the control group compared to the experimental group. Our meta-analysis suggests that sacubitril offers a favorable balance between safety and effectiveness. Sacubitril significantly improved outcomes in terms of HF, MACE, and NT-proBNP levels when compared to the control group. However, improvement in LVEF was notably higher in the control group over the sacubitril/valsartan group.

Impact of adherence to guideline-directed therapy on risk of death in HF patients across an ejection fraction spectrum

AIMS

How different degrees of adherence to guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) affect mortality risk in patients with heart failure (HF) in a real-world clinical setting is poorly understood. This study sought to investigate how different levels of adherence to GDMT were associated with the risk of all-cause mortality in patients with HF across a spectrum of left ventricular ejection fractions (LVEFs) in a real-world clinical setting.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 64 610 HF patients with no missing value of LVEF from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry were included in the study. Patients were divided according to different LVEFs (<30%, 30-39%, 40-49%, and≥50%) and stratified by an adherence score (good, moderate, or poor) according to the triple, double, and single one usage of GDMT: angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, beta-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. The outcome is time to all-cause mortality. The mean age of the whole cohort was 73.9 ± 12.1 years, and the proportion of patients in LVEF < 30%, 30-39%, 40-49%, and≥50% groups was 27.6%, 26.9%, 22.1%, and 23.3%, respectively. Patients with LVEF < 30% had the highest mortality rate, almost 20% higher than those with LVEF ≥ 50% {hazard ratio [HR] [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 0.80 [0.71-0.90], P < 0.001}. After treatment of GDMT with good adherence, patients with LVEF < 30% had similar mortality to those with LVEF ≥ 50% [HR (95% CI): 0.97 (0.86-1.10), P = 0.664]. However, the percentage of moderate or poor GDMT was alarmingly high, with good adherence only in 20% of the patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Good adherence to GDMT works best in patients with LVEF < 50%, whereas moderate adherence to GDMT varies in efficacy depending on the components of the drug combinations.

Comparative cardiovascular outcomes of novel drugs as an addition to conventional triple therapy for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF): a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Currently, there is no head-to-head comparison of novel pharmacological treatments for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). A network meta-analysis aimed to compare effects of both conventional and alternative drug combinations on time to develop primary composite outcome of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalisation (PCO).

METHODS

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified from Medline, Scopus up to June 2021. The RCTs were included if comparing any single or combination of drugs, that is, ACE inhibitors (ACEI), angiotensin receptor blockers, beta-blockers (BB), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA), ivabradine (IVA), angiotensin receptor blocker/neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI) and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i), soluble guanylyl cyclase and omecamtiv mecarbil and reporting PCO. Data were extracted from Kaplan-Meier curves, individual patient data were generated. A mixed-effect Weibull regression was applied. Median time to PCO, HRs with 95% CI were estimated accordingly. Our findings suggested that ACEI+BB+MRA+SGLT2i, BB+MRA+ARNI, and ACEI+BB+MRA+IVA had lower probability of PCOs than the conventional triple therapy (ACEI+BB+MRA).

RESULTS

Median time to PCOs of ACEI+BB+MRA was 57.7 months whereas median times to those new combinations were longer than 57.7 months. In addition, the three new regimens had a significantly lower PCO risks than ACEI+BB+MRA, with the HRs (95% CI) of 0.51 (0.43 to 0.61), 0.55 (0.46 to 0.65) and 0.56 (0.47 to 0.67), accordingly.

CONCLUSION

This study suggested that SGLT2i, ARNI and IVA in addition to ACEI+BB+MRA may be better in prolonging time to develop PCO in HFrEF patients.

Evaluation of early left-sided cardiac reverse remodeling under combined therapy of sacubitril-valsartan and spironolactone compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and spironolactone

We aimed to compare therapies of sacubitril/valsartan + spironolactone (S/V + S) with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors + spironolactone (ACEI + S) on the left-sided cardiac reverse remodeling (L-CRR). The second objective was to analyze the usefulness of GLS and LVEF in response to therapy.

Methods

78 patients (mean age 63.4 years, 20 females) with symptomatic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction were randomized to groups of equal numbers, i.e., 39 patients, and started on therapy of S/V + S or ACEI + S. Second evaluations were made after 6-8 weeks of therapy.

Results

GLS changed from -7.4% to -9.4% (18% improvement) in both arms equally. More than 50% of patients, initially with very severe systolic dysfunction (GLS > -8%), were reclassified to severe (GLS -8% to -12%). LVEF did not improve in any of the groups. The quality of life measured by MLHFQ and walking distance by 6-MWT increased. Positive correlations between GLS and 6MWT (r = 0.41, p = 0.02) and GLS and MHFLQ (r = 0.42, p = 0.03) were found. The S/V + S subgroup demonstrated improvements in LVEDV (Δ16.7 vs. 4.5 ml), E/e ratio (Δ 2.8 vs. 1.4), and LAVI (Δ 9.4 vs. 8.4 ml/m2) as compared to ACEI + S.

Conclusion

GLS, unlike LVEF, detects early changes in LV systolic function after 6-8 weeks of combined therapy, i.e., SV + S and ACE + S. GLS is more useful than LVEF in assessing early response to treatment. The effect of S/V + S and ACEI + S on LV systolic function was comparable, but the improvement in diastolic function as expressed by E/e', LAVI, and LVEDV was more pronounced with S/V + S.

Cost-effectiveness in unstable economies: the case of sacubitril/valsartan in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in Argentina

BACKGROUND

Sacubitril/valsartan (an Angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor-ARNI) is one of the cornerstones in the management of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) having demonstrated significant reductions in both mortality and hospitalisations as compared with enalapril. It proved to be a cost-effective treatment in many countries with stable economies. In Argentina, a country with chronic financial instability and a fragmented health care system, the estimation of its cost-effectiveness requires to consider local financial data.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan in HFrEF in Argentina.

METHODS

We populated an Excel-based cost-effectiveness model, previously validated, using inputs from the pivotal phase-3 PARADIGM-HF trial and from local sources. As the main problem to consider was the financial instability, we adopted a differential approach to cost discounting based on the opportunity cost of capital. Thus, a discount rate for costs were set at 31.6%, using the BADLAR rate published by the Central Bank of Argentina. Discount for effects were set at 5% as is the current practice. Costs were expressed in Argentinian pesos (ARS). We used the perspective for both the social security and private payers at a 30-year horizon. The primary analysis was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) versus enalapril, the previous standard of care. Alternative scenarios performed included a 5% cost discount rate and 3 a 5-year horizon (as is usually used).

RESULTS

In Argentina the cost-per quality adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril was 391,158 ARS and 376,665 ARS for a social security and a private payer, respectively, at a 30- year horizon. These ICERs were under the cost- effectiveness threshold of 520,405.79 ARS (1 Gross domestic product (GDP) per capita) suggested by Argentinian health technology assessment bodies. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed an acceptability of sacubitril/valsartan as a cost-effective alternative of 86.40% and 88.25% for social security and private payers, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Sacubitril/valsartan is a cost-effective treatment in HFrEF using local inputs that considered the financial instability. For both payers considered the cost per QALY gained are under the cost-effectiveness threshold considered.

Efficacy of new medical therapies in patients with heart failure, reduced ejection fraction, and chronic kidney disease already receiving neurohormonal inhibitors: a network meta-analysis

AIMS

We assessed the efficacy of the drugs developed after neurohormonal inhibition (NEUi) in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and concomitant chronic kidney disease (CKD).

METHODS AND RESULTS

The literature was systematically searched for phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving ≥90% patients with left ventricular ejection fraction <45%, of whom <30% were acutely decompensated, and with published information about the subgroup of estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m2. Six RCTs were included in a study-level network meta-analysis evaluating the effect of NEUi, ivabradine, angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i), vericiguat, and omecamtiv mecarbil (OM) on a composite outcome of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for HF. In a fixed-effects model, SGLT2i [hazard ratio (HR) 0.78, 95% credible interval (CrI) 0.69-0.89], ARNI (HR 0.79, 95% CrI 0.69-0.90), and ivabradine (HR 0.82, 95% CrI 0.69-0.98) decreased the risk of the composite outcome vs. NEUi, whereas OM did not (HR 0.98, 95% CrI 0.89-1.10). A trend for improved outcome was also found for vericiguat (HR 0.90, 95% CrI 0.80-1.00). In indirect comparisons, both SLGT2i (HR 0.80, 95% CrI 0.68-0.94) and ARNI (HR 0.80, 95% CrI 0.68-0.95) reduced the risk vs. OM; furthermore, there was a trend for a greater benefit of SGLT2i vs. vericiguat (HR 0.88, 95% CrI 0.73-1.00) and ivabradine vs. OM (HR 0.84, 95% CrI 0.68-1.00). Results were comparable in a random-effects model and in sensitivity analyses. Surface under the cumulative ranking area scores were 81.8%, 80.8%, 68.9%, 44.2%, 16.6%, and 7.8% for SGLT2i, ARNI, ivabradine, vericiguat, OM, and NEUi, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Expanding pharmacotherapy beyond NEUi improves outcomes in HFrEF with CKD.

Incremental value of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction treated with sacubitril/valsartan

AIMS

We investigated the incremental advantage in terms of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) reduction in patients affected by heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) treated with sacubitril/valsartan (S/V) and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA) versus patients treated with S/V only.

METHODS

Consecutive adult patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of ≤40% who were followed in our outpatient clinic from January 2016 to December 2019 and treated with S/V were analysed.

RESULTS

Out of eligible 147 patients, 99 were treated with S/V+MRA at baseline and 48 patients were treated with S/V. Patients treated with S/V+MRA were significantly younger (61.5 vs 67.8 years, p=0.006), had better basal renal function (serum creatinine 1.2 vs 1.4 mg/dL, p=0.006) and lower LVEF (30.9% vs 33.1%, p=0.039). At follow-up at 8-16 months, 84 out of 99 patients continued to be on S/V+MRA, and 39 out of 48 patients continued to be on S/V. Between these two groups, at follow-up, LVEF did not vary significantly, ΔNT-proBNP was not significantly different (-215.7 vs -165.9 pg/mL, p=0.93) and neither was the rate of hospitalisation for heart failure (9.5% vs 12.8%, p=0.58). Using general linear models, both age and basal NT-proBNP influenced significantly ΔNT-proBNP (respectively, p=0.002; p=0.005), while treatment with S/V+MRA versus S/V only did not significantly influence ΔNT-proBNP (p=0.462).

CONCLUSION

Even with the limitations of a small retrospective study, our results generate the hypothesis that MRA might not provide any additional value in patients with HFrEF treated with S/V. Larger studies are needed to test if MRA should remain a standard treatment in patients with HFrEF treated with S/V.

Getting ahead of the game: in-hospital initiation of HFrEF therapies

Hospitalizations for heart failure (HF) have become a global problem worldwide. Each episode of HF decompensation may lead to deleterious short- and long- term consequences, but on the other hand is an unique opportunity to adjust the heart failure pharmacotherapy. Thus, in-hospital and an early post-discharge period comprise an optimal timing for initiation and optimization of the comprehensive management of HF. This timeframe affords clinicians an opportunity to up titrate and adjust guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMT) to potentially mitigate poor outcomes associated post-discharge and longer-term. This review will cover this timely concept, present the data of utilization of GDMT in HF populations, discuss recent evidence for in-hospital initiation and up-titration of GDMT with a need for post-discharge follow-up and implementation this into clinical practice in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction.

Comparative efficacy and safety of different catheter ablation strategies for persistent atrial fibrillation: a network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

AIMS

Whereas pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is the universally agreed target in catheter ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF), an ideal ablation set in persistent AF remains questioned. Aim of this study is to conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing different ablation strategies in persistent AF patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Network meta-analysis was performed in a frequentist framework with the different ablation strategies constituting the competitive arms of interest. Primary efficacy endpoint was recurrences of atrial tachyarrhythmia (AF, atrial flutter, and/or organized atrial tachycardia). Secondary endpoints included major peri-procedural complications, procedure, and fluoroscopy duration. PubMED/MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched through June 2020. 2548 records were screened and 57 full-text articles assessed. Eventually 24 RCTs were included, encompassing 3245 patients (median follow-up 15 months, IQR 12-18). Compared to PVI alone, PVI plus linear lesions in the left atrium and elimination of extra-PV sources was the only strategy associated with a reduced risk of arrhythmia recurrence (RR 0.49, 95%CI 0.27-0.88). Most treatment arms were associated with longer procedural time compared with PVI; however, major peri-procedural complications and fluoroscopy time did not differ.

CONCLUSION

A comprehensive strategy including PVI, linear lesions in the left atrium, and elimination of extra-PV sources (constrained by a heterogeneous definition across studies) was associated with reduced risk of recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmias compared to PVI alone. All investigated treatment arms yielded similar safety profiles. Further research should rely on enhanced substrate-based approach definitions to solve one of the most evident knowledge gaps in interventional electrophysiology.

Optimal effectiveness of heart failure management - an umbrella review of meta-analyses examining the effectiveness of interventions to reduce (re)hospitalizations in heart failure

Heart failure (HF) is a major health concern, which accounts for 1-2% of all hospital admissions. Nevertheless, there remains a knowledge gap concerning which interventions contribute to effective prevention of HF (re)hospitalization. Therefore, this umbrella review aims to systematically review meta-analyses that examined the effectiveness of interventions in reducing HF-related (re)hospitalization in HFrEF patients. An electronic literature search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, PsycInfo, Cochrane Reviews, CINAHL, and Medline to identify eligible studies published in the English language in the past 10 years. Primarily, to synthesize the meta-analyzed data, a best-evidence synthesis was used in which meta-analyses were classified based on level of validity. Secondarily, all unique RCTS were extracted from the meta-analyses and examined. A total of 44 meta-analyses were included which encompassed 186 unique RCTs. Strong or moderate evidence suggested that catheter ablation, cardiac resynchronization therapy, cardiac rehabilitation, telemonitoring, and RAAS inhibitors could reduce (re)hospitalization. Additionally, limited evidence suggested that multidisciplinary clinic or self-management promotion programs, beta-blockers, statins, and mitral valve therapy could reduce HF hospitalization. No, or conflicting evidence was found for the effects of cell therapy or anticoagulation. This umbrella review highlights different levels of evidence regarding the effectiveness of several interventions in reducing HF-related (re)hospitalization in HFrEF patients. It could guide future guideline development in optimizing care pathways for heart failure patients.

The Efficacy of Various Pharmacological Agents on Long-Term Outcomes in Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Control Trials

The beneficial impacts of various drugs on long-term outcomes in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) have been a matter of controversy. The aim of this meta-analysis was to systematically review randomized control trials (RCTs) involving patients with heart failure with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and identify the effects of various treatment options [angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, beta-blockers, angiotensin receptor blockers, and aldosterone receptor blockers] on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and hospitalization due to cardiovascular reasons. The current meta-analysis has been conducted as per the Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A comprehensive literature search was performed without any restrictions on language by using the electronic databases Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and PubMed up to July 20, 2022. The outcomes assessed in this meta-analysis included all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and hospitalization due to cardiovascular reasons. Overall, 10 articles were included in the current meta-analysis with a pooled sample size of 13,336 patients with HFpEF. In comparison to the placebo, among all four pharmacological agents, beta-blockers were the only agent that decreased the risk of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular outcomes. On the other hand, a significant reduction in hospitalization due to cardiac-related reasons was reported in patients on ACE inhibitors as compared to placebo. No other pharmacological agent had an impact on hospitalization due to cardiac-related reasons. The current meta-analysis indicates the possible benefits of beta-blockers in HFpEF in terms of reducing cardiovascular death and all-cause mortality.

Network meta-analysis of medical therapy efficacy in more than 90,000 patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction

BACKGROUND

Following the availability of new drugs for chronic heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), we sought to provide an updated and comparative synthesis of the evidence on HFrEF pharmacotherapy efficacy.

METHODS

We performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis of phase 2 and 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of medical therapy in HFrEF patient cohorts with more than 90% of the participants with left ventricular ejection fraction less than 45% and all-cause mortality reported.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine RCTs, accounting for 91,741 subjects, were evaluated. The step-wise introduction of new drugs progressively decreased the risk of all-cause death, up to reaching a random-effects hazard ratio (HR) of 0.43 (95% credible intervals [CrI] 0.27-0.63) with beta blockers (BB), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi), and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) versus placebo. The risk was further reduced by adding sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i; HR 0.38, 95% CrI 0.22-0.60), ivabradine (HR 0.39, 95% CrI 0.21-0.64), or vericiguat (HR 0.40, 95% CrI 0.22-0.65) to neurohormonal inhibitors, and by angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), BB, and MRA (HR 0.36, 95% CrI 0.20-0.60). In a sensitivity analysis considering the ARNI and non-ARNI subgroups of SGLT2i RCTs, the combination SGLT2i + ARNI + BB + MRA was associated with the lowest HR (0.28, 95% CrI 0.16-0.45 vs. 0.40, 95% CrI 0.24-0.60 for SGLT2i + BB + ACEi + MRA). Consistent results were obtained in sensitivity analyses and by calculating surface under the cumulative ranking area, as well as for cardiovascular mortality (information available for 56 RCTs), HF hospitalization (45 RCTs), and all-cause hospitalization (26 RCTs).

CONCLUSIONS

Combination medical therapy including neurohormonal inhibitors and newer drugs, especially ARNI and SGLT2i, confers the maximum benefit with regard to HFrEF prognosis.

Initiating ivabradine during hospitalization in patients with acute heart failure: A real‐world experience in China

Background

Initiating ivabradine in acute heart failure (HF) is still controversial.

Hypothesis

Ivabradine might be effective to be added in acute but hemodynamically stable HF.

Methods

A retrospective cohort of hemodynamically stable acute HF patients was enrolled from January 2018 to January 2020 and followed until July 2020. The primary endpoints were all‐cause mortality and rehospitalization for HF. Secondary endpoints included heart rate (HR), cardiac function measured by New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and adverse events, which were compared between patients with or without ivabradine.

Results

A total of 126 patients were enrolled (50 males, median age 54 years, 81% with decompensated HF, median follow‐up of 9 months). In patients treated with ivabradine, although baseline HRs were higher than the reference group (96 vs. 80 bpm), they were comparable after 3 months; more patients tolerated high doses of β‐blockers (27% vs. 7.9%), improved to NYHA class I function (55.6% vs. 23.8%) and exhibited normal LVEFs (37.8% vs. 14.3%) than the reference group (all p < .05). Ivabradine was associated with a significant reduction of rehospitalization for HF than the reference group (25.4% vs.61.9%), with longer event‐free survival times (hazard ratio: 0.45, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.25–0.79), and was related with primary endpoints negatively (hazard ratio 0.51, 95% CI: 0.28–0.91) (all p < .05).

Conclusion

In patients with acute but hemodynamically stable HF, ivabradine may significantly reduce HR, improve cardiac function, and reduce HF rehospitalization.

Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor Dose Optimization and Its Associated Factors at Felege Hiwot Comprehensive Specialized Hospital, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia

INTRODUCTION

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors dose optimizations (ACEIs) are essential to boost the treatment outcome in heart failure patients (HF) with reduced ejection fraction. Therefore, the main purpose of this study was to evaluate dose optimization and associated factors of ACEIs among HF patients.

METHOD

An institutional-based retrospective study was conducted on 256 study participants from May 20 to August 30, 2020 in ambulatory care clinic at Felege Hiwot Comprehensive Specialized Hospital. A systematic random sampling method was carried out to select study participants. Data were collected from the patient interview and the review of medical records. Epidata and SPSS version 22 were used for data entry and analysis. A bivariate logistic regression analysis was done to determine the association of independent variables with a dose optimization of ACEIs.

RESULTS

The mean age of the subjects in the study was 53.82 years with a standard deviation (SD) of 17.067 and more than half of (60.9%) the patients were unable to read and write. Among participants who were receiving ACEIs, only 30.6% were taking an optimal dose. Age ≥65 years (AOR 5.04 (2.81-12.56)) and a dose of furosemide ≥40 mg (AOR, 2.62 (1.28-16.74)) were significantly associated with the suboptimal dose of ACEIs.

CONCLUSION

Only one-third of patients received the optimum dose of ACEIs. Older age and dose of furosemide greater >40 mg were significantly associated with suboptimal dosing of ACEIs. Therefore, more attention must be given to older patients with HF in order to optimize the dose of ACEIs administered.

Development of vericiguat: The first soluble guanylate cyclase (sGC) stimulator launched for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF)

In recent years, with improvements in treatments for heart failure (HF), the survival period of patients has been extended. However, the emergence of some patients with repeated hospitalizations due to their worsening conditions and low survival rates followed. Currently, few drugs are available for such patients. Vericiguat was first drug approved for the treatment of symptomatic patients with chronic HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) to reduce the occurrence of worsening HF. This article provides comprehensive information about vericiguat in terms of drug design and development, structure-activity relationship (SAR), synthesis, pharmacological efficacy, and clinical practice. In addition, insights into the current vericiguat trials and treatments of HF are also discussed.

Association between dosing and combination use of medications and outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: data from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry

AIMS

To assess the association between combination, dose and use of current guideline-recommended target doses (TD) of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi), angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNi) and β-blockers, and outcomes in a large and unselected contemporary cohort of patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced ejection fraction.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Overall, 17 809 outpatients registered in the Swedish Heart Failure Registry (SwedeHF) from May 2000 to December 2018, with ejection fraction <40% and duration of HF ≥90 days were selected. Primary outcome was a composite of time to cardiovascular death and first HF hospitalization. Compared with no use of RASi or ARNi, the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 0.83 (0.76-0.91) with <50% of TD, 0.78 (0.71-0.86) with 50%-99%, and 0.73 (0.67-0.80) with ≥100% of TD. Compared with no use of β-blockers, the adjusted HR (95% CI) was 0.86 (0.76-0.91), 0.81 (0.74-0.89) and 0.74 (0.68-0.82) with <50%, 50%-99% and ≥100% of TD, respectively. Patients receiving both an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi)/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB)/ARNi and a β-blocker at 50%-99% of TD had a lower adjusted risk of the primary outcome compared with patients only receiving one drug, i.e. ACEi/ARB/ARNi or β-blocker, even if this was at ≥100% of TD.

CONCLUSION

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction patients using higher doses of RASi or ARNi and β-blockers had lower risk of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization. Use of two drug classes at 50%-99% of TD dose was associated with lower risk than one drug class at 100% of TD.

The PONTE (PDTA FOR INTEGRATED FOLLOW-UP TERRITORY HOSPITAL OF THE PATIENT WITH CARDIAC HEART FAILURE) (BRIDGE) Heart Failure project: increased adherence to guideline-recommended therapies through web-based shared clinical database

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects on the adherence of drug prescription to the guideline recommendations of a chronic care model based on the close interaction between hospital and local healthcare district cardiologists through a shared web-based database. From 2018 to 2021, patients hospitalized for an episode of acute decompensated heart failure (HF) (de novo or worsening) in cardiology wards from the healthcare district of Bari, Italy, were enrolled. The follow-up programme was based on a first visit after discharge within 1 month; patients were therefore addressed to the local health district cardiologist outpatient clinics when not requiring further invasive investigations and haemodynamically stable and followed-up with at least one visit every 6 months. In order to share in-hospital patients' data with outpatient clinics, at discharge, they were entered in a web-based database accessible for all cardiologists and centres participating in the Ponte Project. The group of patients affected by HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) were considered for the analyses. Drug prescription rates at 1-year follow-up were analysed as endpoint, as well as the re-admission for HF worsening. Out of 1200 HF patients enrolled in the project until December 2021, 56% were affected by HFrEF. At 1-year follow-up, 91% of patients were assuming beta-blockers, 86% mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, 98% angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor antagonists/neprilysin angiotensin receptor antagonists, and 13% ARNI. Compared to patients enrolled before 2020, ARNI prescription increased in 2021 (60% vs. 13%, respectively, P < 0.001). In 30% of patients, ARNI were prescribed before hospital discharge. Furthermore, in 10% of the population (most diabetics), sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors were also prescribed. The implementation of the PONTE project was associated with an improved adherence to guidelines recommendations.

National trend in heart failure hospitalization and outcome under public health insurance system in Thailand 2008-2013

Background

There are limited data on the burden, characteristics, and outcomes of hospitalized heart failure (HF) patients in Thailand. The aim of this study was to investigate national trend in HF hospitalization rate, in-hospital and 1-year mortality rate, and rehospitalization rate in Thailand.

Methods

We analyzed the claims data of hospitalized patients obtained from the three major Thailand public health reimbursement systems between 2008 and 2013. Patients aged ≥ 18 years with a principal diagnosis of HF by the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Thai modification were included. Comorbidities were identified by secondary diagnosis codes. The annual rate of HF hospitalization was calculated per 100,000 beneficiaries. Records of subsequent hospitalization of discharged patients were retrieved. For 1-year mortality rate, vital status of each patient was obtained from Thai Civil Registration of Death database. All outcomes were tested for linear trends across calendar years.

Results

Between 2008 and 2013, 434,933 HF hospitalizations were identified. The mean age was 65.3 years (SD 14.6), and 58.1% were female. The HF hospitalization rate increased from 138 in 2008 to 168 per 100,000 beneficiaries in 2013 (P for trend < 0.001). Nearly half (47.4%) had had a prior HF admission within 1 year. A small proportion of patients (7.4%) received echocardiography during hospitalization. The median length of hospital stay was 3 days. In-hospital mortality declined from 4.4 to 3.8% (P for trend < 0.001). The overall 30-day and 1-year rehospitalization rates were 34 and 73%, respectively, without significant trends over the study period. Most common cause of 30-day rehospitalization was HF (42%). One-year mortality decreased from 31.8% in 2008 to 28.5% in 2012 (P for trend < 0.001).

Conclusion

Between 2008 and 2013, HF hospitalization rate in Thailand increased. The in-hospital and 1-year mortality rates decreased slightly. However, the rehospitalization rate remained high mainly due to recurrent HF hospitalization.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12872-022-02629-2.

Conventional medical therapy in heart failure patients eligible for the PARADIGM-HF, DAPA-HF, and SHIFT trials

BACKGROUND

Recent trials on novel heart failure (HF) treatments (angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor, and ivabradine) emphasize the use of conventional medical therapy (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, beta-blockers [BB], and mineral corticosteroid receptor antagonists). We aimed to evaluate the prescription rate of conventional medical therapy and its association with long-term outcomes in patients eligible for recent trials.

METHODS

We examined 1295 consecutive patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) from a multicenter registry (WET-HF registry). We assessed conventional medical therapy implementation among patients meeting the PARADIGM-HF/DAPA-HF and SHIFT enrollment criteria. We also examined the association between conventional medical therapy use and long-term outcomes within each enrollment criterion.

RESULTS

Overall, 62.2% and 35.3% of HFrEF patients met the enrollment criteria of the PARADIGM-HF/DAPA-HF and SHIFT trials. Only 33.9% and 31.9% received full conventional medical therapy within each patient subset. Notably, 84.2% of patients who met the SHIFT enrollment criteria were on BB, and only 23.0% and 4.4% were on ≥50% or the full recommended dose, respectively. Implementation of full conventional medical therapy use was associated with lower 2-year mortality and HF readmission rates in the PARADIGM-HF/ DAPA-HF eligible group (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.50-0.92). The use of BB at ≥50% of the recommended dose was associated with lower 2-year mortality and HF readmission rates in the SHIFT-eligible group (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.30-0.84).

CONCLUSIONS

Conventional medical therapy was underutilized among patients eligible for novel trials within a Japanese HF registry. Further efforts to optimize conventional medical therapy are needed.

Advanced heart failure: guideline-directed medical therapy, diuretics, inotropes, and palliative care

Heart failure (HF) is a major cause of mortality, hospitalizations, and reduced quality of life and a major burden for the healthcare system. The number of patients that progress to an advanced stage of HF is growing. Only a limited proportion of these patients can undergo heart transplantation or mechanical circulatory support. The purpose of this review is to summarize medical management of patients with advanced HF. First, evidence-based oral treatment must be implemented although it is often not tolerated. New therapeutic options may soon become possible for these patients. The second goal is to lessen the symptomatic burden through both decongestion and haemodynamic improvement. Some new treatments acting on cardiac function may fulfil both these needs. Inotropic agents acting through an increase in intracellular calcium have often increased risk of death. However, in the recent Global Approach to Lowering Adverse Cardiac Outcomes Through Improving Contractility in Heart Failure (GALACTIC-HF) trial, omecamtiv mecarbil was safe and effective in the reduction of the primary outcome of cardiovascular death or HF event compared with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.86-0.99; P = 0.03) and its effects were larger in those patients with more severe left ventricular dysfunction. Patients with severe HF who received omecamtiv mecarbil experienced a significant treatment benefit, whereas patients without severe HF did not (P = 0.005 for interaction). Lastly, clinicians should take care of the end of life with an appropriate multidisciplinary approach. Medical treatment of advanced HF therefore remains a major challenge and a wide open area for further research.

Heart Failure Treatments Such As Angiotensin Receptor/Neprilysin Inhibitor Improve Heart Failure Status and Glucose Metabolism

A recent study suggested that angiotensin receptor/neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI; sacubitril/valsartan) can improve functional capacity and cardiac reverse remodeling in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Another study suggested that ARNI reduced glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) in patients with diabetes and HFrEF; however, the details of its efficacy are unknown. We herein report a case of HFrEF with abnormal glucose metabolism in which ARNI was initiated. On the 7^th day of admission (before the initiation of ARNI), blood tests showed an abnormal glucose metabolism as follows: fasting blood glucose 134 mg/dL; and fasting blood insulin 11.4 µU/mL (homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) index 3.77; homeostasis model assessment of β-cell function (HOMA-β), 57.8%). On the 23^rd day after the initiation of ARNI, even though the patient was not using hypoglycemic drugs, his fasting blood glucose markedly decreased to 70 mg/dL without hypoglycemic symptoms, and his fasting blood insulin decreased to 5.4 µU/mL (HOMA-IR decreased to 0.93, HOMA-β increased to 277.7%). These results imply that ARNI has the potential to improve insulin resistance and the islet beta-cell function in patients with heart failure, in addition to the original effect of improving the hemodynamics, although the effect of improving the glucose metabolism is also considered to have been influenced by the improvement of the heart failure status and other drugs that the patient was taking.

Comparative Efficacy of Medical Treatments for Chronic Heart Failure: A Network Meta-Analysis

Background: The medical treatments of chronic heart failure have made remarkable progress in recent years. It is crucial to determine the optimal drug combination based on current evidence.

Methods: A search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases was conducted for studies on angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs), sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), beta-blockers (BBs), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), and ivabradine (IVA) between 1987 and 2021. The network meta-analysis was performed to compare the efficacy of drug therapies in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

Results: Forty-eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which overall included 68,074 patients with HF and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 40%, were identified and included in the network meta-analysis. The efficacies of 13 intervention classes, including monotherapies or combinations of ACEI, ARB, ARNI, BB, MRA, SGLT2i, IVA, and placebo, on hospitalization for HF, cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality were compared. Among the 13 included interventions, ARNI+BB+MRA, SGLT2i+ACEI+BB+MRA, and IVA+ACEI+BB+MRA were found to be best in terms of all three outcomes. Compared with placebo, these three drug combinations were associated with significant reductions in the risk of all-cause death, cardiovascular mortality and hospitalization for HF.

Conclusions: ARNI+BB+MRA, SGLT2i+ACEI+BB+MRA, and IVA+ACEI+BB+MRA were the top three therapies for patients with HFrEF. The increasing use of combinations of conventional and novel drugs contributed to progressive reductions in hospitalization and mortality in patients with HFrEF.

A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Pharmacological Treatment of Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to estimate and compare the aggregate treatment benefit of pharmacological therapy for heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction.

BACKGROUND

The estimated treatment effects of various combinations of contemporary HF medical therapies are not well characterized.

METHODS

We performed a systematic network meta-analysis, using MEDLINE/EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized controlled trials published between January 1987 and January 2020. We included angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, beta-blockers (BB), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), digoxin, hydralazine-isosorbide dinitrate, ivabradine, angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNi), sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i), vericiguat, and omecamtiv-mecarbil. The primary outcome was all-cause death. We estimated the life-years gained in 2 HF populations (BIOSTAT-CHF [BIOlogy Study to TAilored Treatment in Chronic Heart Failure] and ASIAN-HF [Asian Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Registry]).

RESULTS

We identified 75 relevant trials representing 95,444 participants. A combination of ARNi, BB, MRA, and SGLT2i was most effective in reducing all-cause death (HR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.31-0.49); followed by ARNi, BB, MRA, and vericiguat (HR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.32-0.53); and ARNi, BB, and MRA (HR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.36-0.54). Results were similar for the composite outcome of cardiovascular death or first hospitalization for HF (HR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.29-0.46 for ARNi, BB, MRA, and SGLT2i; HR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.35-0.56 for ARNi, BB, MRA, and omecamtiv-mecarbil; and HR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.34-0.55 for ARNi, BB, MRA, and vericiguat). The estimated additional number of life-years gained for a 70-year-old patient on ARNi, BB, MRA, and SGLT2i was 5.0 years (2.5-7.5 years) compared with no treatment in secondary analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction, the estimated aggregate benefit is greatest for a combination of ARNi, BB, MRA, and SGLT2i.

Rational drug therapy of chronic heart failure: the role of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists: review

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) are part of basic medical therapy for heart failure. The clinical efficacy of MRAs has been proven by randomized clinical trials. To review comparative efficacy and tolerability data between the two main MRAs, spironolactone and eplerenone, in patients with systolic heart failure.

Heart Failure Spending Function: An Investment Framework for Sequencing and Intensification of Guideline-Directed Medical Therapies

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction is managed with increasing numbers of guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMT). Benefits tend to be additive. Burdens can also be additive. We propose a heart failure spending function as a conceptual framework for tailored intensification of GDMT that maximizes therapeutic opportunity while limiting adverse events and patient burden. Each patient is conceptualized to have reserve in physiological and psychosocial domains, which can be spent for a future return on investment. Key domains are blood pressure, heart rate, serum creatinine, potassium, and out-of-pocket costs. For each patient, GDMT should be initiated and intensified in a sequence that prioritizes medications with the greatest expected cardiac benefit while drawing on areas where the patient has ample reserves. When reserve is underspent, patients fail to gain the full benefit of GDMT. Conversely, when a reserve is fully spent, addition of new drugs or higher doses that draw upon a domain will lead to patient harm. The benefit of multiple agents drawing upon varied physiological domains should be balanced against cost and complexity. Thresholds for overspending are explored, as are mechanisms for implementing these concepts into routine care, but further health care delivery research is needed to validate and refine clinical use of the spending function. The heart failure spending function also suggests how newer therapies may be considered in terms of relative value, prioritizing agents that draw on different spending domains from existing GDMT.

Comparison of Pharmacological Treatment Effects on Long-Time Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Beneficial effects of therapeutic drugs are controversial for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate and compare the interactive effects of different therapeutic drugs and placebo in patients with HFpEF. A comprehensive search was conducted using PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central Register to identify related articles published before March 2021. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were cardiovascular mortality, heart failure (HF) hospitalization, and worsening HF events. A total of 14 randomized controlled trials, comprising 19,573 patients (intervention group, n = 9,954; control group, n = 9,619) were included in this network meta-analysis. All-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and worsening HF events among therapeutic drugs and placebo with follow-up of 0.5–4 years were not found to be significantly correlated. The angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) significantly reduced the HF hospitalizations compared with placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.60–0.87 and HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.43–0.96, respectively), without heterogeneity among studies. The ARNI was superior to angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) in reducing HF hospitalizations (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.71–0.91), and vericiguat 10 mg ranked worse than beta-blockers for reducing all-cause mortality in patients with HFpEF (HR 3.76, 95% CI 1.06–13.32). No therapeutic drugs can significantly reduce mortality, but the ARNI or ACEI is associated with the low risk of HF hospitalizations for patients with HFpEF.

Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42021247034

Navigating between Scylla and Charybdis: challenges and strategies for implementing guideline-directed medical treatment in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) has the potential to reduce the risks of mortality and hospitalisation in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, real-world data indicate that many patients with HFrEF do not receive optimised GDMT, which involves several different medications, many of which require up-titration to target doses. There are many challenges to implementing GDMT, the most important being patient-related factors (comorbidities, advanced age, frailty, cognitive impairment, poor adherence, low socioeconomic status), treatment-related factors (intolerance, side-effects) and healthcare-related factors that influence availability and accessibility of HF care. Accordingly, international disparities in resources for HF management and limited public reimbursement of GDMT, coupled with clinical inertia for treatment intensification combine to hinder efforts to provide GDMT. In this review paper, authors aim to provide solutions based on available evidence, practical experience, and expert consensus on how to utilise evolving strategies, novel medications, and patient profiling to allow the more comprehensive uptake of GDMT. Authors discuss professional education, motivation, and training, as well as patient empowerment for self-care as important tools to overcome clinical inertia and boost GDMT implementation. We provide evidence on how multidisciplinary care and institutional accreditation can be successfully used to increase prescription rates and adherence to GDMT. We consider the role of modern technologies in advancing professional and patient education and facilitating patient-provider communication. Finally, authors emphasise the role of novel drugs (especially sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors), and a tailored approach to drug management as evolving strategies for the more successful implementation of GDMT. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Ischemic versus Non-Ischemic Cardiomyopathy after Angiotensin-Neprilysin Inhibition Therapy

Background: The angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) decreases cardiovascular mortality in patients with chronic heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Data regarding the impact of ARNI on the outcome in HFrEF patients according to heart failure etiology are limited. Methods and results: One hundred twenty-one consecutive patients with HFrEF from the years 2016 to 2017 were included at the Medical Centre Mannheim Heidelberg University and treated with ARNI according to the current guidelines. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was numerically improved during the treatment with ARNI in both patient groups, that with ischemic cardiomyopathy (n = 61) (ICMP), and that with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (n = 60) (NICMP); p = 0.25. Consistent with this data, the NT-proBNP decreased in both groups, more commonly in the NICMP patient group. In addition, the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and creatinine changed before and after the treatment with ARNI in both groups. In a one-year follow-up, the rate of ventricular tachyarrhythmias (ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation) tended to be higher in the ICMP group compared with the NICMP group (ICMP 38.71% vs. NICMP 17.24%; p = 0.07). The rate of one-year all-cause mortality was similar in both groups (ICMP 6.5% vs. NICMP 6.6%; log-rank = 0.9947). Conclusions: This study shows that, although the treatment with ARNI improves the LVEF in ICMP and NICMP patients, the risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmias remains higher in ICMP patients in comparison with NICMP patients. Renal function is improved in the NICMP group after the treatment. Long-term mortality is similar over a one-year follow-up.

Shen Qi Li Xin formula improves chronic heart failure through balancing mitochondrial fission and fusion via upregulation of PGC-1α

BACKGROUND

Our previous study proved that Shen Qi Li Xin formula (SQLXF) improved the heart function of chronic heart failure (CHF) patients, while the action mechanism remains unclear.

METHODS

H&E staining and TUNEL staining were performed to measure myocardial damages. Western blot was used to examine the expression of proteins. Moreover, CCK-8 assay and flow cytometry were used to measure cell viability and cell apoptosis, respectively. Concentrations of ATP and ROS in cells, and mitochondrial membrane potential (MMP) were detected to estimate oxidative stress.

RESULTS

In vivo, we found that SQLXF improved cardiac hemodynamic parameters, reduced LDH, CK-MB and BNP production, and attenuated myocardial damages in CHF rats. Besides, SQLXF promoted mitochondrial fusion-related proteins expression and inhibited fission-related proteins expression in CHF rats and oxygen glucose deprivation/reoxygenation (OGD/R)-induced cardiac myocytes (CMs). In vitro, our data show that certain dose of SQLXF inhibited OGD/R-induced CMs apoptosis, cell viability decreasing and oxidative stress.

CONCLUSION

Overall, certain dose of SQLXF could effectively improve the cardiac function of CHF rats through inhibition of CMs apoptosis via balancing mitochondrial fission and fusion. Our data proved a novel action mechanism of SQLXF in CHF improvement, and provided a reference for clinical.

Drug Layering in Heart Failure: Phenotype-Guided Initiation

Medications with proven benefit in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction are recommended, according to prospective large clinical trials, in the stable patient after careful up-titration in a strict sequential order. Although the relevance of careful clinical up-titration is unproven, there is evidence that after recompensation and shortly after hospital discharge, the rate of cardiovascular death and hospitalization is high. Clinical studies provided evidence that the onset of treatment effects is rapid, occurring within 28 days with most of these drugs used, and in some trials, early treatment after discharge or already started in the hospital has provided benefits. Therefore, early treatment without deferring it to the stable outpatient may be useful to reduce cardiac-related events further. This expert opinion proposes treatment layering according to individual patient phenotypes involving heart rate, blood pressure, impaired renal function, and electrolyte disturbances, as well as dedicated subgroups of patients with specific requirements for treatment initiation. This complements other approaches that suggest starting sequential treatment according to the size of treatment effects of drugs, specific cardiac diseases, and patient wishes. Patient phenotyping may guide personalized drug layering in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction that provides the best outcomes, whereas pragmatic clinical trials are warranted to scrutinize the effectiveness of these approaches.

The Use of β-Blockers in Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction

Treatment with β-blockers is the main strategy for managing patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction because of their ability to reverse the neurohumoral effects of the sympathetic nervous system, with consequent prognostic and symptomatic benefits. However, to date, they are underused, mainly because of the misconception that hypotension and bradycardia may worsen the haemodynamic status of patients with HFrEF and because of the presence of comorbidities falsely believed to be absolute contraindications to their use. To promote proper use of β-blockers in this article, we review the clinical pharmacology of β-blockers, the evidence of the beneficial effects of these drugs in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, and the current guidelines for their use in clinical practice and in the presence of comorbidities (e.g., pulmonary disease, diabetes, atrial fibrillation, peripheral arterial disease, etc.). It is hoped that the practical approach discussed in this review will allow for a proper diffusion of knowledge about the correct use of β-blockers and the drug-disease interactions to achieve their increased use and titration, as well as for the selection of a specific agent with a view to a properly tailored approach for HFrEF patients.

Timely and individualized heart failure management: need for implementation into the new guidelines

Due to remarkable improvements in heart failure (HF) management over the last 30 years, a significant reduction in mortality and hospitalization rates in HF patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has been observed. Currently, the optimization of guideline-directed chronic HF therapy remains the mainstay to further improve outcomes for patients with HFrEF to reduce mortality and HF hospitalization. This includes established device therapies, such as implantable defibrillators and cardiac resynchronization therapies, which improved patients' symptoms and prognosis. Over the last 10 years, new HF drugs have merged targeting various pathways, such as those that simultaneously suppress the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system and the breakdown of endogenous natriuretic peptides (e.g., sacubitril/valsartan), and those that inhibit the If channel and, thus, reduce heart rate (e.g., ivabradine). Furthermore, the treatment of patient comorbidities (e.g., iron deficiency) has shown to improve functional capacity and to reduce hospitalization rates, when added to standard therapy. More recently, other potential treatment mechanisms have been explored, such as the sodium/glucose co-transporter inhibitors, the guanylate cyclase stimulators and the cardiac myosin activators. In this review, we summarize the novel developments in HFrEF pharmacological and device therapy and discuss their implementation strategies into practice to further improve outcomes.

Medical treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: the dawn of a new era of personalized treatment?

Recent trials have shown the efficacy of new drugs for the medical therapy of heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) reduced hospitalizations for HF, HF events, and cardiovascular death in patients with HFrEF or hospitalized for HF. Iron repletion with ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) improved symptoms, functional capacity, and quality of life in chronic HFrEF patients, and decreased the risk of subsequent HF hospitalizations in subjects with acutely decompensated HF. New-generation potassium binders may allow initiation and up-titration of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RASi). Lastly, the guanylate cyclase stimulator vericiguat and the myosin activator omecamtiv mecarbil reduced the primary endpoint in two major controlled trials. These results open novel pathways for the treatment of HFrEF. This review discusses new opportunities of an individualized approach to HFrEF pharmacotherapy, where new compounds expand a spectrum of drugs that target primarily neuroendocrine activation. SGLT2i can be safely applied once daily at a fixed dose to the vast majority of patients with HFrEF, including those with moderate renal dysfunction and/or systolic blood pressure as low as 95-100 mmHg. Additional medications are suitable for more specific phenotypes, with ivabradine providing benefit in patients with sinus rhythm and heart rates ≥70 beats per minute, FCM in the presence of iron deficiency, and potassium-lowering agents to implement RASi when hyperkalaemia occurs. Vericiguat and omecamtiv mecarbil also have potential for tailored approaches towards the hemodynamic status. Thus, a new era is starting for a more personalized medical treatment of HFrEF.

Patient profiling in heart failure for tailoring medical therapy. A consensus document of the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology

Despite guideline recommendations and available evidence, implementation of treatment in heart failure (HF) is poor. The majority of patients are not prescribed drugs at target doses that have been proven to positively impact morbidity and mortality. Among others, tolerability issues related to low blood pressure, heart rate, impaired renal function or hyperkalaemia are responsible. Chronic kidney disease plays an important role as it affects up to 50% of patients with HF. Also, dynamic changes in estimated glomerular filtration rate may occur during the course of HF, resulting in inappropriate dose reduction or even discontinuation of decongestive or neurohormonal modulating therapy in clinical practice. As patients with HF are rarely naïve to pharmacologic therapies, the challenge is to adequately prioritize or select the most appropriate up-titration schedule according to patient profile. In this consensus document, we identified nine patient profiles that may be relevant for treatment implementation in HF patients with a reduced ejection fraction. These profiles take into account heart rate (<60 bpm or >70 bpm), the presence of atrial fibrillation, symptomatic low blood pressure, estimated glomerular filtration rate (<30 or >30 mL/min/1.73 m² ) or hyperkalaemia. The pre-discharge patient, frequently still congestive, is also addressed. A personalized approach, adjusting guideline-directed medical therapy to patient profile, may allow to achieve a better and more comprehensive therapy for each individual patient than the more traditional, forced titration of each drug class before initiating treatment with the next.

Combination of ivabradine and sacubitril/valsartan in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction

AIMS

Ivabradine and sacubitril/valsartan are second-line therapies for patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) based on guideline recommendations. We aimed to evaluate the synergistic effects of these two medications.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients' data were extracted from a multicentre database between 2016 and 2018. Patients were classified into (1) Simultaneous group: simultaneous prescription of ivabradine and sacubitril/valsartan within 6 weeks; (2A) Sequential group, ivabradine-first: ivabradine was prescribed first, followed by sacubitril/valsartan; and (2B) Sequential group, sacubitril/valsartan-first: sacubitril/valsartan was prescribed first, followed by ivabradine. A total of 464 patients with HFrEF were enrolled. Cardiovascular death and/or unplanned re-hospitalizations for HF were less frequent (28.6% vs. 44.8%, P = 0.01), and the improvement of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was significantly greater in patients from the Simultaneous group than those from the Sequential group (∆LVEF 12.8 ± 12.9% vs. 9.3 ± 12.6%, P = 0.007). Among Sequential subgroups, the ivabradine-first treatment decreased heart rate and increased systolic blood pressure (SBP) compared with sacubitril/valsartan-first treatment (∆heart rate -9.1 ± 12.9 b.p.m. vs. 2.6 ± 16.0 b.p.m., P < 0.001; ∆SBP 4.6 ± 16.5 mmHg vs. -4.8 ± 17.2 mmHg, P < 0.001), whereas sacubitril/valsartan-first treatment showed a higher degree of LVEF improvement (∆LVEF 3.6 ± 7.8% vs. 0.7 ± 7.7%, P = 0.002) than ivabradine-first treatment. At the end of follow-up, SBP, LVEF, and left ventricular volume were comparable between two Sequential subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with HFrEF, simultaneous rather than sequential treatment with sacubitril/valsartan and ivabradine was a better strategy to reduce adverse events and achieve left ventricular reverse remodelling. Ivabradine treatment had a more significant benefit on improving haemodynamic stability, whereas sacubitril/valsartan treatment showed a more significant effect on improving LVEF.

Chronic heart failure in the Russian Federation: what has changed over 20 years of follow-up? Results of the EPOCH-CHF study

Aim    To study the etiology and the dynamics of prevalence and mortality of CHF; to evaluate the treatment coverage of such patients in a representative sample of the European part of the Russian Federation for a 20-year period. Material and methods    A representative sample of the European part of the Russian Federation followed up for 2002 through 2017 (n=19 276); a representative sample of the population of the Nizhny Novgorod region examined in 1998 (n=1922).Results    During the observation period since 2002, the incidence of major CHF symptoms (tachycardia, edema, shortness of breath, weakness) tended to decrease while the prevalence of cardiovascular diseases has statistically significantly increased. During the period from 1998 through 2017, the prevalence of I-IV functional class (FC) CHF increased from 6.1 % to 8.2 % whereas III-IV FC CHF increased from 1.8 % to 3.1 %. The main causes for the development of CHF remained arterial hypertension and ischemic heart disease; the role of myocardial infarction and diabetes mellitus as causes for CHF was noted. For the analyzed period, the number of treatment components and the coverage of basic therapy for patients with CHF increased, which probably accounts for a slower increase in the disease prevalence by 2007-2017. The prognosis of patients was unfavorable: in I-II FC CHF, the median survival was 8.4 (95 % CI: 7.8-9.1) years and in III-IV FC CHF, the median survival was 3.8 (95 % CI: 3.4-4.2) years.

Combination pharmacotherapies for cardiac reverse remodeling in heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Pharmacotherapies, including angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin receptor II blockers (ARBs), β-blockers (BBs), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) and angiotensin receptor blocker-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), have played a pivotal role in reducing in-hospital and mortality in heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, effects of the five drug categories used alone or in combination for cardiac reverse remodeling (CRR) in these patients have not been systematically evaluated. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted based on 55 randomized controlled trials published between 1989 and 2019 involving 12,727 patients from PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov. The study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020170457). Our primary outcomes were CRR indicators, including changes of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) and end-systolic volume (LVESV), indexed LVEDV (LVEDVI) and LVESV (LVESVI), and left ventricular end-diastolic dimension (LVEDD) and end-systolic dimension (LVESD); Secondary outcomes were functional capacity comprising New York Heart Association (NYHA) class and 6-min walking distance (6MWD); cardiac biomarkers involving B type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal pro-BNP (NT-proBNP). The effect sizes were presented as the mean difference with 95% credible intervals. According to the results, all dual-combination therapies except ACEI+ARB were significantly more associated with LVEF or NYHA improvement than placebo, ARB+BB and ARNI+BB were the top two effective dual-combinations in LVEF improvement (+7.59% [+4.27, +11.25] and +7.31% [+3.93, +10.97] respectively); ACEI+BB was shown to be superior to ACEI in reducing LVEDVI and LVESVI (-6.88 mL/m² [-13.18, -1.89] and -10.64 mL/m² [-18.73, -3.54] respectively); ARNI+BB showed superiority over ACEI+BB in decreasing the level of NT-proBNP (-240.11 pg/mL [-456.57, -6.73]). All tri-combinations were significantly more effective than placebo in LVEF improvement, and ARNI+BB+MRA ranked first (+21.13% [+14.34, +28.13]); ACEI+BB+MRA was significantly more associated with a decrease in LVEDD than ACEI (-6.57 mm [-13.10, -0.84]). A sensitivity analysis ignoring concomitant therapies for LVEF illustrated that all the five drug types except ARB were shown to be superior to placebo, and ARNI ranked first (+4.83% [+1.75, +7.99]). In conclusion, combination therapies exert more benefits on CRR for patients with HFrEF. Among them, ARNI+BB, ARB+BB, ARNI+BB+MRA and ARB+BB+MRA were the top two effective dual and triple combinations in LVEF improvement, respectively; The new "Golden Triangle" of ARNI+BB+MRA was shown to be superior to ACEI+BB+MRA or ARB+BB+MRA in LVEF improvement.