The effect of cardiac resynchronization therapy on arterial stiffness and central hemodynamic parameters

Implications of pulse wave velocity and central pulse pressure in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

BACKGROUND

Carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV) and central pulse pressure (PP) are recognised as significant indicators of vascular health and predictors of cardiovascular outcomes. In this study, associations between central hemodynamics and left ventricular (LV) echocardiographic parameters were investigated in subjects with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), comparing the results to healthy individuals.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This cross-sectional prospective controlled study included 50 subjects with HFrEF [mean LV ejection fraction (EF) 26 ± 6.5%] and 30 healthy controls (mean LVEF 65.9 ± 5.3%). Pulse wave analysis (PWA) and carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV) were used to measure central hemodynamics and arterial stiffness. The HFrEF group displayed higher cfPWV (8.2 vs. 7.2 m/s, p = 0.007) and lower central (111.3 vs. 121.7 mmHg, p = 0.001) and peripheral (120.1 vs. 131.5 mmHg, p = 0.002) systolic blood pressure. Central pulse pressure (PP) was comparable between the two groups (37.6 vs. 40.4 mmHg, p = 0.169). In the HFrEF group, cfPWV significantly correlated with left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) index (mL/m2) and LVEF, with LVEDV index being a significant independent predictor of cfPWV (R2 = 0.42, p = 0.003). Central PP was significantly associated with heart rate, LVEF and LVEDV index, with the latter being a significant independent predictor of central PP (R2 = 0.41, p < 0.001). These correlations were not observed in healthy controls.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant associations between central hemodynamic measures and LV echocardiographic parameters were identified, suggesting the potential to use PWA and cfPWV as possible tools for managing HFrEF.

Effects of Turmeric Concentrate on Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Exercise-Induced Oxidative Stress in Healthy Volunteers; an Exploratory Study

Purpose

Evidence suggests that turmeric intake can improve antioxidant defense, blood pressure (BP), ageing and gut microbiota. The effects of turmeric concentrate (curcumin) intake on cardiovascular risk factors and exercise induced oxidative stress were investigated.

Methods

A randomized placebo-controlled study was performed to assess the effects of turmeric extract in healthy volunteers before and after a 30 min exercise bout. Participants (n=22) were given either turmeric concentrate or placebo supplements. Anthropometry, BP, pulse wave velocity (PWV), biomarkers of oxidative stress, perceived exertion and lipid peroxidation were assessed.

Results

In the turmeric group, the expected BP response to exercise following turmeric was blunted and the increase was not significant compared to basal values followed by a decrease in final BP and PWV values. There were no significant differences in all baseline parameters between the placebo and the curcumin groups (P>0.05). A significant increase was observed in urinary antioxidant power (P=0.031) and total polyphenol levels (P=0.022) post turmeric intervention. The distance ran by the participants taking turmeric was significantly longer (P=0.005) compared to basal value. Those who took the placebo did not show significant changes.

Conclusion

Our study suggests that turmeric concentrate intake can reduce BP and improve antioxidant, anti-inflammatory status and arterial compliance. Turmeric may improve exercise performance and ameliorates oxidative stress. Larger studies are warranted to validate these findings and test more cardiovascular risk factors.

The Association Between On-treatment Ambulatory Central Blood Pressure and Left Ventricular Reverse Remodeling in Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Compared to office blood pressure (OBP), central blood pressure (CBP) and ambulatory blood pressure (BP) are known to be better markers for predicting cardiovascular events. We evaluated the association between left ventricular reverse remodeling (LVRR) and ambulatory CBP in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

METHODS

This study retrospectively analyzed 93 patients who performed ambulatory CBP and brachial BP (BBP) monitoring from 2018 to 2020 within 1 year after diagnosis of HFrEF at a single tertiary center. We analyzed the association between on-treatment ambulatory BPs and LVRR on follow-up echocardiography.

RESULTS

The mean age of participants was 59 years; 65.6% were men; mean LVEF was 29%. Ambulatory BP and follow-up echocardiography were done at 143 days (interquartile range [IQR], 64-267) and 454 days (IQR, 281-600) after diagnosis of HF, respectively. Baseline OBP was not different between 2 groups, but ambulatory systolic CBP was significantly higher in the LVRR group than the non-LVRR group (p=0.005). Systolic OBP (odds ratio [OR], 1.029; confidence interval [CI], 1.004-1.055; p=0.026), 24-hour ambulatory systolic CBP (OR, 1.048; CI, 1.015-1.082; p=0.004), and 24-hour ambulatory systolic BBP (OR, 1.049; CI,1.017-1.082; p=0.003) were associated with LVRR. Compared to ambulatory systolic CBP of 110-119 mmHg, 90-99 mmHg showed lower OR for LVRR.

CONCLUSIONS

Low on-treatment ambulatory systolic CBP was closely related to a lower likelihood of LVRR in HFrEF than the normal range. Ambulatory CBP measured during treatment of patients with HFrEF appears to be useful in predicting outcomes.

Endothelial, Vascular and Sympathetic Alterations as Therapeutic Targets in Chronic Heart Failure

Vascular and sympathetic abnormalities characterize chronic heart failure (CHF). Alterations include (1) a reduction in arterial distensibility, (2) endothelial dysfunction, (3) a decrease in arterial compliance and a parallel increase in arterial stiffness, and (4) sympathetic cardiovascular activation. Altogether, these alterations represent important targets in therapeutic interventions, because they display an independent negative impact on the disease prognosis, favouring disease progression and the development of cardiovascular complications with direct and indirect mechanisms. The present review will examine the effects of the different therapeutic interventions targeting the vascular/sympathetic alterations detected in CHF. Non-pharmacological, pharmacological and device-based treatments will be discussed in detail, highlighting the possible mechanisms responsible for the vascular/sympathetic effects of each intervention. Finally, the unmet goals in treatment in relation to endothelial and adrenergic targets will be also discussed.

The Analysis of Arterial Stiffness in Heart Failure Patients: The Prognostic Role of Pulse Wave Velocity, Augmentation Index and Stiffness Index

Background: The role of arterial stiffness in the pathogenesis and clinical outcome of heart failure (HF) patients has to be clarified. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic role of arterial stiffness in HF patients discharged after acute episode of decompensation by evaluating cut-off values for clinical assessment. Methods: Patients admitted for decompensated heart failure (ADHF) underwent pre-discharge evaluation. Arterial stiffness was measured by aortic pulse wave velocity (aPWV), augmentation index (AIx75) and stiffness index (β0). Patients were also evaluated after discharge for a variable follow-up time. Results: We observed 199 patients (male 61.3%, age 76.2 ± 10.7 years) after discharge for a median of 437 days (IQR 247-903), 69 (34.7%) patients suffered HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), 45 (22.6%) patients experienced HF with mid-range ejection fraction (HFmEF) and 85 (42.7%) reported an HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). After the adjustment for principal confounders, aPWV, AIx75 and β0 were inversely correlated with free-event survival (p = 0.006, p < 0.001, p = 0.001): only β0 was inversely correlated with overall survival (p = 0.03). Analysing the threshold, overall survival was inversely correlated with β0 ≥3 (HR 2.1, p = 0.04) and free-event survival was inversely correlated with aPWV ≥10 m/s (HR 1.7, p = 0.03), AIx75 ≥ 25 (HR 2.4, p < 0.001), and β0 ≥ 3 (HR 2.0, p = 0.009). Dividing HF patients for LV ejection fraction, β0 and AIx75 appeared to be accurate prognostic predictors among the three different classes according to free-event survival. Conclusions: The non-invasive measurements of arterial stiffness proved to be strong prognostic parameters in HF patients discharged after an acute HF decompensation.