Low-dose enalapril in severe chronic heart failure

Beta-blockers and inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin aldosterone system for chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

BACKGROUND

Beta-blockers and inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system improve survival and reduce morbidity in people with heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF); a review of the evidence is required to determine whether these treatments are beneficial for people with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists in people with HFpEF.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and one clinical trial register on 14 May 2020 to identify eligible studies, with no language or date restrictions. We checked references from trial reports and review articles for additional studies.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials with a parallel group design, enrolling adults with HFpEF, defined by LVEF greater than 40%.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 41 randomised controlled trials (231 reports), totalling 23,492 participants across all comparisons. The risk of bias was frequently unclear and only five studies had a low risk of bias in all domains. Beta-blockers (BBs) We included 10 studies (3087 participants) investigating BBs. Five studies used a placebo comparator and in five the comparator was usual care. The mean age of participants ranged from 30 years to 81 years. A possible reduction in cardiovascular mortality was observed (risk ratio (RR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 to 0.99; number needed to treat for an additional benefit (NNTB) 25; 1046 participants; three studies), however, the certainty of evidence was low. There may be little to no effect on all-cause mortality (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.00; 1105 participants; four studies; low-certainty evidence). The effects on heart failure hospitalisation, hyperkalaemia, and quality of life remain uncertain. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) We included 13 studies (4459 participants) investigating MRA. Eight studies used a placebo comparator and in five the comparator was usual care. The mean age of participants ranged from 54.5 to 80 years. Pooled analysis indicated that MRA treatment probably reduces heart failure hospitalisation (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.98; NNTB = 41; 3714 participants; three studies; moderate-certainty evidence). However, MRA treatment probably has little or no effect on all-cause mortality (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.06; 4207 participants; five studies; moderate-certainty evidence) and cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.11; 4070 participants; three studies; moderate-certainty evidence). MRA treatment may have little or no effect on quality of life measures (mean difference (MD) 0.84, 95% CI -2.30 to 3.98; 511 participants; three studies; low-certainty evidence). MRA treatment was associated with a higher risk of hyperkalaemia (RR 2.11, 95% CI 1.77 to 2.51; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) = 11; 4291 participants; six studies; high-certainty evidence). Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) We included eight studies (2061 participants) investigating ACEIs. Three studies used a placebo comparator and in five the comparator was usual care. The mean age of participants ranged from 70 to 82 years. Pooled analyses with moderate-certainty evidence suggest that ACEI treatment likely has little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.42; 945 participants; two studies), all-cause mortality (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.45; 1187 participants; five studies) and heart failure hospitalisation (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.15; 1019 participants; three studies), and may result in little or no effect on the quality of life (MD -0.09, 95% CI -3.66 to 3.48; 154 participants; two studies; low-certainty evidence). The effects on hyperkalaemia remain uncertain. Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) Eight studies (8755 participants) investigating ARBs were included. Five studies used a placebo comparator and in three the comparator was usual care. The mean age of participants ranged from 61 to 75 years. Pooled analyses with high certainty of evidence suggest that ARB treatment has little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.02, 95% 0.90 to 1.14; 7254 participants; three studies), all-cause mortality (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.11; 7964 participants; four studies), heart failure hospitalisation (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.02; 7254 participants; three studies), and quality of life (MD 0.41, 95% CI -0.86 to 1.67; 3117 participants; three studies). ARB was associated with a higher risk of hyperkalaemia (RR 1.88, 95% CI 1.07 to 3.33; 7148 participants; two studies; high-certainty evidence). Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs) Three studies (7702 participants) investigating ARNIs were included. Two studies used ARBs as the comparator and one used standardised medical therapy, based on participants' established treatments at enrolment. The mean age of participants ranged from 71 to 73 years. Results suggest that ARNIs may have little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.15; 4796 participants; one study; moderate-certainty evidence), all-cause mortality (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.11; 7663 participants; three studies; high-certainty evidence), or quality of life (high-certainty evidence). However, ARNI treatment may result in a slight reduction in heart failure hospitalisation, compared to usual care (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.00; 7362 participants; two studies; moderate-certainty evidence). ARNI treatment was associated with a reduced risk of hyperkalaemia compared with valsartan (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.01; 5054 participants; two studies; moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that MRA and ARNI treatment in HFpEF probably reduces heart failure hospitalisation but probably has little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality and quality of life. BB treatment may reduce the risk of cardiovascular mortality, however, further trials are needed. The current evidence for BBs, ACEIs, and ARBs is limited and does not support their use in HFpEF in the absence of an alternative indication. Although MRAs and ARNIs are probably effective at reducing the risk of heart failure hospitalisation, the treatment effect sizes are modest. There is a need for improved approaches to patient stratification to identify the subgroup of patients who are most likely to benefit from MRAs and ARNIs, as well as for an improved understanding of disease biology, and for new therapeutic approaches.

Beta-blockers and inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin aldosterone system for chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

BACKGROUND

Beta-blockers and inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin aldosterone system improve survival and reduce morbidity in people with heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. There is uncertainty whether these treatments are beneficial for people with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and a comprehensive review of the evidence is required.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of beta-blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists in people with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and two clinical trial registries on 25 July 2017 to identify eligible studies. Reference lists from primary studies and review articles were checked for additional studies. There were no language or date restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials with a parallel group design enrolling adult participants with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, defined by a left ventricular ejection fraction of greater than 40 percent.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted data. The outcomes assessed included cardiovascular mortality, heart failure hospitalisation, hyperkalaemia, all-cause mortality and quality of life. Risk ratios (RR) and, where possible, hazard ratios (HR) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes. For continuous data, mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) were calculated. We contacted trialists where neccessary to obtain missing data.

MAIN RESULTS

37 randomised controlled trials (207 reports) were included across all comparisons with a total of 18,311 participants.Ten studies (3087 participants) investigating beta-blockers (BB) were included. A pooled analysis indicated a reduction in cardiovascular mortality (15% of participants in the intervention arm versus 19% in the control arm; RR 0.78; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 to 0.99; number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) 25; 1046 participants; 3 studies). However, the quality of evidence was low and no effect on cardiovascular mortality was observed when the analysis was limited to studies with a low risk of bias (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.50 to 1.29; 643 participants; 1 study). There was no effect on all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalisation or quality of life measures, however there is uncertainty about these effects given the limited evidence available.12 studies (4408 participants) investigating mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA) were included with the quality of evidence assessed as moderate. MRA treatment reduced heart failure hospitalisation (11% of participants in the intervention arm versus 14% in the control arm; RR 0.82; 95% CI 0.69 to 0.98; NNTB 41; 3714 participants; 3 studies; moderate-quality evidence) however, little or no effect on all-cause and cardiovascular mortality and quality of life measures was observed. MRA treatment was associated with a greater risk of hyperkalaemia (16% of participants in the intervention group versus 8% in the control group; RR 2.11; 95% CI 1.77 to 2.51; 4291 participants; 6 studies; high-quality evidence).Eight studies (2061 participants) investigating angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) were included with the overall quality of evidence assessed as moderate. The evidence suggested that ACEI treatment likely has little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalisation, or quality of life. Data for the effect of ACEI on hyperkalaemia were only available from one of the included studies.Eight studies (8755 participants) investigating angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) were included with the overall quality of evidence assessed as high. The evidence suggested that treatment with ARB has little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalisation, or quality of life. ARB was associated with an increased risk of hyperkalaemia (0.9% of participants in the intervention group versus 0.5% in the control group; RR 1.88; 95% CI 1.07 to 3.33; 7148 participants; 2 studies; high-quality evidence).We identified a single ongoing placebo-controlled study investigating the effect of angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI) in people with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that MRA treatment reduces heart failure hospitalisation in heart failure with preserverd ejection fraction, however the effects on mortality related outcomes and quality of life remain unclear. The available evidence for beta-blockers, ACEI, ARB and ARNI is limited and it remains uncertain whether these treatments have a role in the treatment of HFpEF in the absence of an alternative indication for their use. This comprehensive review highlights a persistent gap in the evidence that is currently being addressed through several large ongoing clinical trials.

ACE inhibitors and ARBs in chronic heart failure: the established, the expected, and the pragmatic

ACE inhibitors have been shown to reduce mortality, reduce hospitalization, reduce symptoms, and increase exercise capacity in patients with heart failure and a large heart (low ejection fraction). The evidence is overwhelming. There are some subgroups of patients, such as the very elderly and those with a normal ejection fraction, where uncertainty still exists. The combination of a diuretic and an ACE inhibitor is currently the proper treatment of congestive heart failure; a beta-blocker should be added in selected patients. The evidence for the efficacy of ARB is less persuasive and, for the present, this class of drug should be prescribed only when an ACE inhibitor cannot be tolerated. The results of the trials emphasize an emerging problem in medicine, namely how to evaluate a new treatment that may be as efficacious as current therapy but with fewer side-effects. Proving equivalence in efficacy will be difficult, requiring large studies comparing new drugs with the best current treatment. The most common etiology of heart failure is coronary heart disease. If further studies provide more support for the idea that ACE inhibitors prevent ischemic episodes and delay the onset of heart failure, then a new indication for ACE inhibitors will be the prevention of heart failure.

Use of ejection fraction (or lack thereof), morbidity/mortality and heart failure drug trials: a review

Ejection fraction (EF) is an ejection phase parameter used to assess the performance of the heart in normal individuals and pathologic states such as myocardial infarction, dilated cardiomyopathy, and congestive heart failure (CHF). It can be measured by radionuclide ventriculography, angiocardiography, echocardiography and magnetic resonance imaging. EF is dependent on the loading conditions of the heart as well as contractility of the myocardium which makes it a less useful measure of cardiac performance. Nevertheless, it has been widely utilized and discussed for years. EF has been used as an entry criteria for many trials in CHF and has been used to characterize the hemodynamic effects of various classes of drugs which are used in treating CHF. How predictive an increase in EF on therapy is of morbidity and mortality is a matter of debate. This review outlines the utilization (or lack thereof), of EF in various CHF drug trials, its relationship to symptomatic improvement and morbidity/mortality.

The effects of an angiotensin-converting inhibitor (enalapril) on patients with mild cardiac failure--evaluating cardiac function based on the relationship between daily walking pace and heart rate

BACKGROUND

Heart failure has been evaluated by several methods, the New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification of heart failure based on symptoms being used most frequently. However, the degree of heart failure assessed by these criteria does not always correlate with cardiac function in daily life.

HYPOTHESIS

The aim of the study was to evaluate cardiac function based on the walking pace/heart rate (HR) relationship to assess the effects of enalapril, an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, in patients with mild to moderate cardiac function.

METHODS

To evaluate cardiac function objectively, we developed a method using a pedometer to count the steps walked while simultaneously recording HR using a Holter electrocardiograph (ECG). Step-count walk rate (WR) was recorded on the magnetic tape of the Holter apparatus, and both HR and walking pace were calculated automatically by the Holter ECG analysis system. Data were determined every hour, and mean pace and HR were plotted along the x and y axes, respectively. The slope of HR x WR was calculated using the least squares method. The slope and the total number of steps were regarded as indicators of cardiac function and quality of life, respectively. We analyzed 36 subjects, consisting of 8 normal volunteers, 8 patients in New York Heart Association (NYHA) class I. 11 in class II, and 9 in class III chronic mild heart failure, during maximal exercise work load by bicycle ergometer; furthermore, fractional shortening of the left ventricle on echocardiogram was determined in 14 patients with chronic mild heart failure and was compared with the slope of HR x WR. Enalapril was administered at a daily dose of 2.5-10 mg for 1-24 months (mean 6 months) in 60 patients to evaluate the effects of this drug on these parameters.

RESULTS

There was a significant inverse relationship between maximal work load and the HR x WR slope, and also between the fractional shortening and the slope, suggesting that the slope may reflect the severity of cardiac dysfunction. Furthermore, the slope decreased significantly from 1.8 +/- 1.26 before enalapril to 1.0 +/- 0.94 (mean +/- standard deviation) after drug administration, while the total number of steps increased significantly from 4842 +/- 3581 to 7804 +/- 4793.

CONCLUSION

The slope of the graph relating step count and HR proved to be a good, objective indicator of cardiac function, and enalapril therapy improved this parameter.

Improved hemodynamic function and mechanical efficiency in congestive heart failure with sodium dichloroacetate

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to determine whether sodium dichloroacetate improves hemodynamic performance and mechanical efficiency in congestive heart failure.

BACKGROUND

Congestive heart failure is associated with impaired hemodynamic performance and reduced mechanical efficiency. Dichloroacetate stimulates pyruvate dehydrogenase activity by inhibition of pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase, which results in inhibition of free fatty acid metabolism and stimulation of high respiratory quotient glucose and lactate consumption by the heart. Facilitation of glucose and lactate consumption with dichloroacetate should improve mechanical efficiency of the failing ventricle.

METHODS

Ten patients with New York Heart Association functional class III to IV congestive heart failure were studied. Dichloroacetate (50 mg/kg body weight) was administered intravenously for 30 min, with measurements of hemodynamic variables, coronary sinus blood flow and blood gas, glucose and lactate levels for 2 h. The same patients were also given dobutamine (5 to 12.5 micrograms/kg per min) for comparison.

RESULTS

Therapeutic levels of dichloroacetate were achieved (100 to 160 micrograms/liter of plasma). Myocardial consumption of lactate was stimulated from 29% to 37.4%. Forward stroke volumes increased (+5.3 ml/beat, p < 0.02), as did left ventricular stroke work (+1.8 g-m/m2 per beat, p < 0.02) and left ventricular minute work (from 1.38 to 1.55 kg-m/m2 per min, p < 0.01). Myocardial oxygen consumption decreased (from 19.3 to 16.5 ml/min, p = 0.06) as left ventricular minute work increased. Left ventricular mechanical efficiency thus improved from 15.2% to 20.6% (p = 0.03). Dobutamine administration resulted in the opposite trend with respect to myocardial lactate extraction (from 34% to 15.3%, p < 0.02). Stroke volume increased (+7.4 ml/beat, p = NS vs. dichloroacetate), as did left ventricular minute work (from 1.29 to 1.59 g-m/m2 per min, p < 0.01 vs. dichloroacetate) and myocardial oxygen consumption (from 18.6 to 21.0 ml/min, p = 0.06 vs. dichloroacetate). Left ventricular mechanical efficiency did not change with dobutamine administration (from 16.4% to 15.8%, p = NS).

CONCLUSIONS

Dichloroacetate administration stimulates myocardial lactate consumption and improves left ventricular mechanical efficiency. Forward stroke volume and left ventricular minute work increase significantly, with a simultaneous reduction in myocardial oxygen consumption. Dobutamine administration results in similar hemodynamic improvements but with no change in left ventricular mechanical efficiency and with opposite effects on lactate metabolism. The opposing metabolic actions, yet similar hemodynamic responses, of dichloroacetate and dobutamine suggest that these agents may be complementary in the treatment of congestive heart failure.