Effect of sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril on changes in heart failure therapies over time: the PARADIGM-HF trial

Practical Guidance for the Use of SGLT2 Inhibitors in Heart Failure

Despite continuous advances in both diagnosis and management, heart failure (HF) still represents a major worldwide health issue. Recently, sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) have demonstrated to reduce cardiovascular death and hospitalization for HF across the entire spectrum of left ventricular ejection fraction. Therefore, dapagliflozin, empagliflozin and sotagliflozin are now recommended as part of the foundational therapy of HF. These agents are characterized by limited contraindications, low cost, non-relevant adverse effects and no need for titration. Although they have a prominent role in the latest recommendations for HF, drug prescriptions are definitely lower than the number of potentially eligible patients. In fact, awareness gaps, therapeutic inertia, concerns about safety and simultaneous initiation of comprehensive medical therapy may represent barriers to their use. This article aims to offer an overview of current knowledge on SGLT2i in HF and provide a comprehensive and updated practical guide on their use in de novo and chronic HF, including potential scenarios that a clinician, cardiologist or others, may face in everyday clinical practice.

Management of Worsening Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: JACC Focus Seminar 3/3

Despite worsening heart failure (HF) being extremely common, expensive, and associated with substantial risk of death, there remain no dedicated clinical practice guidelines for the specific management of these patients. The lack of a management guideline is despite a rapidly evolving evidence-base, as a number of recent clinical trials have demonstrated multiple therapies to be safe and efficacious in this high-risk population. Herein, we propose a framework for treating worsening HF with reduced ejection fraction with the sense of urgency it deserves. This includes treating congestion; managing precipitants; and establishing a foundation of rapid-sequence, simultaneous, and/or in-hospital initiation of quadruple medical therapy for HF with reduced ejection fraction, with the top priority being at least low doses of all 4 medications. Moreover, to maximally reduce residual clinical risk, we further propose consideration of upfront simultaneous use of vericiguat (ie, quintuple medical therapy) and administration of intravenous iron for those who are iron deficient.

Sacubitril/Valsartan in Heart Failure Hospitalization: Two Pills a Day to Keep Hospitalizations Away?

Heart failure (HF) is a clinical syndrome with signs and symptoms that result from any structural or functional deterioration of ventricular filling or ejection of blood. It is the final stage of various cardiovascular diseases (e.g., coronary artery disease, hypertension, previous myocardial infarction) and remains one of the leading causes of hospitalization. It poses severe health and economic burden worldwide. Patients usually present with shortness of breath due to impaired cardiac ventricular filling and decreased cardiac output. Cardiac remodeling due to the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system overactivation is the final pathological mechanism leading to these changes. The natriuretic peptide system is also activated to stop the remodeling. Sacubitril/valsartan, an angiotensin-receptor neprilysin inhibitor, has prompted a substantial conceptual change in HF treatment. Its primary mechanism is the inhibition of cardiac remodeling and the prevention of natriuretic peptide degradation by inhibiting the enzyme neprilysin. It is an efficacious, safe, and cost-effective therapy that improves the quality of life and survival rate in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and HF with preserved ejection fraction. It has been demonstrated to significantly reduce hospitalization rates and rehospitalization for HF when compared to enalapril. In this review, we have discussed the benefits of sacubitril/valsartan in treating patients with HFrEF, particularly in reducing hospitalizations and readmissions. We have also compiled studies to examine the drug's effect on adverse cardiac events. Finally, the cost benefits of the drug and optimal dosing strategies are also reviewed. Our review article, combined with the recommendations of the 2022 American Heart Association guidelines for heart failure, strongly suggests that sacubitril/valsartan is a cost-effective strategy that reduces hospitalizations for HFrEF patients when started early with optimal doses. There is still much uncertainty regarding the optimal usage of this drug, its use in HFrEF, and the cost benefits when used alone compared with enalapril.

Management of Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is a complex and progressive clinical condition characterized by dyspnea and functional impairment. HFrEF has a high burden of mortality and readmission rate making it one of the most significant public health challenges. Basic treatment strategies include diuretics for symptom relief and use of quadruple therapy (Angiotensin receptor blocker/neprilysin inhibitors, evidence-based beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors) for reduction in hospitalizations, all-cause mortality, and cardiovascular mortality. Despite compelling evidence of clinical benefit, guideline directed medical therapy is vastly underutilized in the real-world clinical practice. Other medications such as intravenous iron, ivabradine, hydralazine/nitrates and vericiguat may also have a role in certain subgroup of HFrEF patients. Specific groups of patients with HFrEF may also be candidates for various device therapies such as implanted cardioverter defibrillators, cardiac resynchronization therapy and trans catheter mitral valve repair. This review provides a comprehensive overview of drug and device management approaches for patients with HFrEF, recommendations for initiation and titrations of therapies, and challenges associated with guideline directed medical therapy in the management of patients with HFrEF (Graphical abstract).

Defining the gap in heart failure treatment in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices

BACKGROUND

The use of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) is poorly described in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and/or implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs).

OBJECTIVE

To define the eligibility, uptake, dose, contraindications, and barriers to uptake of contemporary medical therapy in this population.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of consecutive adults with ICD and/or CRT attending two Canadian tertiary centre device clinics between 1 March and 31 May 2021.

RESULTS

From 1005 device clinic consultations, 227 (22.6%) patients with HFrEF and CRT and/or ICD were included. GDMT eligibility was high: beta-blockers (99.6%), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA) (89.0%), angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI) (84.6%), and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2I) (87.7%). Contraindications were rare: beta-blockers (0.4%), MRA (11.0%), ARNI (15.4%), and SGLT2I (12.3%). Uptake of GDMT was high for beta-blockers (97.4%) but low for other medications: MRA (63.0%), ARNI (46.7%), SGLT2I (22.9%). Except for SGLT2I (84.6%) and beta-blockers (57.9%), less than one-half of patients were prescribed target-doses of MRA (10.5%), and ARNI (47.7%). Of the visits, GDMT was already optimal in 16%, electrophysiologists acted in 33% (21% prescribed, 7% ordered investigations, 5% referred to heart function services), and in the remaining visits, optimization was either deferred to another cardiologist (20%) or no plan was mentioned (25%), besides other reasons (4%).

CONCLUSION

Despite broad eligibility for GDMT in patients with HFrEF and ICD/CRT, significant gaps in prescription and titration exist. Our results highlight the need to embed quality assurance initiatives in cardiac device clinics to improve HFrEF care.

Heart failure: an update from the last years and a look at the near future

In the last years, major progress occurred in heart failure (HF) management. Quadruple therapy is now mandatory for all the patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction. Whilst verciguat is becoming available across several countries, omecamtiv mecarbil is waiting to be released for clinical use. Concurrent use of potassium-lowering agents may counteract hyperkalaemia and facilitate renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor implementations. The results of the EMPagliflozin outcomE tRial in Patients With chrOnic heaRt Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (EMPEROR-Preserved) trial were confirmed by the Dapagliflozin in Heart Failure with Mildly Reduced or Preserved Ejection Fraction (DELIVER) trial, and we now have, for the first time, evidence for treatment of also patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction. In a pre-specified meta-analysis of major randomized controlled trials, sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors reduced all-cause mortality, cardiovascular (CV) mortality, and HF hospitalization in the patients with HF regardless of left ventricular ejection fraction. Other steps forward have occurred in the treatment of decompensated HF. Acetazolamide in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure with Volume Overload (ADVOR) trial showed that the addition of intravenous acetazolamide to loop diuretics leads to greater decongestion vs. placebo. The addition of hydrochlorothiazide to loop diuretics was evaluated in the CLOROTIC trial. Torasemide did not change outcomes, compared with furosemide, in TRANSFORM-HF. Ferric derisomaltose had an effect on the primary outcome of CV mortality or HF rehospitalizations in IRONMAN (rate ratio 0.82; 95% confidence interval 0.66-1.02; P = 0.070). Further options for the treatment of HF, including device therapies, cardiac contractility modulation, and percutaneous treatment of valvulopathies, are summarized in this article.

Promising directions in the treatment of chronic heart failure: improving old or developing new ones?

Unprecedented advances of recent decades in clinical pharmacology, cardiac surgery, arrhythmology, and cardiac pacing have significantly improved the prognosis in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). However, unfortunately, heart failure continues to be associated with high mortality. The solution to this problem consists in simultaneous comprehensive use in clinical practice of all relevant capabilities of continuously improving methods of heart failure treatment proven to be effective in randomized controlled trials (especially when confirmed by the results of studies in real clinical practice), on the one hand, and in development and implementation of innovative approaches to CHF treatment, on the other hand. This is especially relevant for CHF patients with mildly reduced and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction, as poor evidence base for the possibility of improving the prognosis in such patients cannot justify inaction and leaving them without hope of a clinical improvement in their condition. The lecture consistently covers the general principles of CHF treatment and a set of measures aimed at inotropic stimulation and unloading (neurohormonal, volumetric, hemodynamic, and immune) of the heart and outlines some promising areas of disease-modifying therapy.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of sacubitril-valsartan in the treatment of ventricular remodeling in patients with heart failure after acute myocardial infarction

Objective

To systematically review the efficacy and safety of sacubitril and valsartan in treating acute myocardial infarction complicated with heart failure and to observe whether it can further improve patients' cardiac function, delay left ventricular remodeling, and reduce major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs).

Methods

Electronic databases including Pubmed, Embase, the Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Scopus, CNKI, Wanfang Data, and VIP were searched. The search period was from the establishment of the database to March 2022 to search for relevant controlled trials. Two investigators independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. Revman5.3 and Stata14 software were used for statistical analysis.

Results

A total of 13 studies, with 6,968 patients were included. Meta-analysis results showed that sacubitril-valsartan increased left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and decreased NT-proBNP level was better at 6 months and within 3 months of follow-up compared with the control group (P < 0.00001), but there was no significant difference at the 12-month follow-up (P > 0.05). Sacubitril-valsartan reducing LVEDD [MD = -2.55, 95%CI(-3.21, -1.88), P < 0.00001], LVEDVI [MD = -3.61, 95%CI(-6.82, -0.39), P = 0.03], LVESVI [MD = -3.77, 95%CI(-6.05, -1.49), P = 0.001], and increasing the distance of the 6-min walk test [MD = 48.20, 95%CI(40.31, 56.09), P < 0.00001] were more effective. Compared with ACEI/ARB, the use of ARNI can further reduce the total incidence of adverse cardiovascular events [RR = 0.72, 95%CI(0.62, 0.84), P<0.0001] and the rate of HF rehospitalization [RR = 0.73, 95%CI(0.61, 0.86), P = 0.0002] in patients with acute myocardial infarction and heart failure; there was no significant difference in the incidence of cardiac death, recurrence of myocardial infarction, and malignant arrhythmia between the experimental group and the control group (P > 0.05). In terms of the incidence of adverse reactions, the incidence of cough in ARNI was lower than that in ACEI/ARB group [RR = 0.69, 95%CI(0.60, 0.80), P < 0.00001], but the incidence of hypotension was higher [RR = 1.29, 95%CI(1.18, 1.41), P < 0.00001], and the adverse reactions of hyperkalemia, angioedema and renal insufficiency were not increased (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

The use of sacubitril-valsartan sodium in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated with heart failure can significantly improve cardiac function and reverse ventricular remodeling, reducing the risk of re-hospitalization for heart failure. There is no apparent adverse reaction except easy cause hypotension.

Systematic trial registration

[www.ClinicalTrials.gov], identifier [CRD42022322901].

Sacubitril/valsartan in heart failure: efficacy and safety in and outside clinical trials

Heart failure (HF) treatment has changed substantially over the last 30 years, leading to significant reductions in mortality and hospital admissions in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Currently, the optimization of guideline-directed chronic HF therapy remains the mainstay to further improve quality of life, mortality, and HF hospitalizations for patients with HFrEF. The angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor sacubitril/valsartan (S/V) has an important role in the treatment of patients with HFrEF. The PARADIGM-HF (Prospective Comparison of ARNI with ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure) randomized controlled trial has established solid evidence for the treatment of HFrEF in various subgroups. Apart from HFrEF, several studies have been conducted using S/V in various indications: patients hospitalized with acute decompensated HF, HF with preserved ejection fraction, acute myocardial infarction with reduced ejection fraction, uncontrolled and resistant hypertension, and chronic kidney disease. Data from the German Institute for Drug Use Evaluation reveal that implementation of S/V has increased steadily over time and, by the end of 2021, an estimated 266 000 patients were treated with S/V in Germany. The estimated cumulative real-world patient exposure is >5.5 million patient-treatment years worldwide. The number of patients treated with S/V largely exceeds the number of patients treated in clinical trials, and the current indication for S/V is larger than the strict inclusion/exclusion criteria of the randomized trials. Especially elderly patients, women, and patients with more and more severe comorbidities are underrepresented in the clinical trials. We therefore aimed to summarize the importance of S/V in HF in terms of efficacy and safety in clinical trials and daily clinical practice.

Optimizing Foundational Therapies in Patients With HFrEF

•

Clinical practice guidelines emphasize the need for guideline-directed medical therapy in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

•

Recently, international guidelines and the American College of Cardiology Expert Consensus Decision Pathway recommended quadruple therapy for these patients, including angiotensin receptor blockers/neprilysin inhibitors, beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and sodium–glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors.

•

Strategies to optimize use of novel therapies, achieving target doses and management of side effects and tolerability, are needed to achieve this goal.

•

Future prospective studies aimed at guiding optimal implementation of quadruple therapy are needed.

Given the high risk of adverse outcomes in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), there is an urgent need for the initiation and titration of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) that can reduce the risk of morbidity and mortality. Clinical practice guidelines are now emphasizing the need for early and rapid initiation of therapies that have cardiovascular benefit. Recognizing that there are many barriers to GDMT initiation and optimization, health care providers should aim to introduce the 4 pillars of quadruple therapy now recommended by most clinical practice guidelines: angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitors, beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and sodium–glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors. A large proportion of patients with HFrEF do not have clinical contraindications to GDMT but are not treated with these therapies. Early initiation of low-dose combination therapy should be tolerated by most patients. However, patient-related factors such as hemodynamics, frailty, and laboratory values will need consideration for maximum tolerated GDMT. GDMT initiation in acute heart failure hospitalization represents another important avenue to improve use of GDMT. Finally, removal of therapies that do not have clear cardiovascular benefit should be considered to lower polypharmacy and reduce the risk of adverse side effects. Future prospective studies aimed at guiding optimal implementation of quadruple therapy are warranted to reduce morbidity and mortality in patients with HFrEF.

The year in cardiovascular medicine 2021: heart failure and cardiomyopathies

In the year 2021, the universal definition and classification of heart failure (HF) was published that defines HF as a clinical syndrome with symptoms and/or signs caused by a cardiac abnormality and corroborated by elevated natriuretic peptide levels or objective evidence of cardiogenic congestion. This definition and the classification of HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), mildly reduced, and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is consistent with the 2021 ESC Guidelines on HF. Among several other new recommendations, these guidelines give a Class I indication for the use of the sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors dapagliflozin and empagliflozin in HFrEF patients. As the first evidence-based treatment for HFpEF, in the EMPEROR-Preserved trial, empagliflozin reduced the composite endpoint of cardiovascular death and HF hospitalizations. Several reports in 2021 have provided novel and detailed analyses of device and medical therapy in HF, especially regarding sacubitril/valsartan, SGLT2 inhibitors, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, ferric carboxymaltose, soluble guanylate cyclase activators, and cardiac myosin activators. In patients hospitalized with COVID-19, acute HF and myocardial injury is quite frequent, whereas myocarditis and long-term damage to the heart are rather uncommon.