Dobutamine Therapy is Associated with Worse Clinical Outcomes Compared with Nesiritide Therapy for Acute Decompensated Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Acute Heart Failure

Heart failure impacts millions of Americans and has an approximate 5-year mortality rate of 50%-55%. Decompensation of this disease state could result in a patient's initial presentation and diagnosis or may reflect a worsening of a chronic condition that is being managed but needs optimization. Secondary to this, it is important for members of the health care team in the emergency department to recognize the presentation of this disease and manage the patient's signs and symptoms appropriately. Patients may be normotensive upon presentation or hemodynamically unstable. Those who are normotensive are often managed with loop diuretics and possibly low-dose vasodilators, whereas those who are hemodynamically unstable require more aggressive, focused care. It is important to note that some patients may present with respiratory failure and with no known history of heart failure. In these cases, a rapid and accurate diagnosis is critical. This article briefly summarizes the common acute clinical presentations of heart failure and the therapies considered first line for treatment based on the primary literature.

Pathophysiology and Therapeutic Approaches to Acute Decompensated Heart Failure

Acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) is one of the leading admission diagnoses worldwide, yet it is an entity with incompletely understood pathophysiology and limited therapeutic options. Patients admitted for ADHF have high in-hospital morbidity and mortality, as well as frequent rehospitalizations and subsequent cardiovascular death. This devastating clinical course is partly due to suboptimal medical management of ADHF with persistent congestion upon hospital discharge and inadequate predischarge initiation of life-saving guideline-directed therapies. While new drugs for the treatment of chronic HF continue to be approved, there has been no new therapy approved for ADHF in decades. This review will focus on the current limited understanding of ADHF pathophysiology, possible therapeutic targets, and current limitations in expanding available therapies in light of the unmet need among these high-risk patients.

The natriuretic peptide system in heart failure: Diagnostic and therapeutic implications

Natriuretic peptides, which are activated in heart failure, play an important cardioprotective role. The most notable of the cardioprotective natriuretic peptides are atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP) and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), which are abundantly expressed and secreted in the atrium and ventricles, respectively, and C-type natriuretic peptide (CNP), which is expressed mainly in the vasculature, central nervous system, and bone. ANP and BNP exhibit antagonistic effects against angiotensin II via diuretic/natriuretic actions, vasodilatory actions, and inhibition of aldosterone secretion, whereas CNP is involved in the regulation of vascular tone and blood pressure, among other roles. ANP and BNP are of particular interest with respect to heart failure, as their levels, most notably BNP and N-terminal proBNP-a cleavage product produced when proBNP is processed to mature BNP-are increased in patients with heart failure. Furthermore, the identification of natriuretic peptides as sensitive markers of cardiac load has driven significant research into their physiological roles in cardiovascular homeostasis and disease, as well as their potential use as both biomarkers and therapeutics. In this review, I discuss the physiological functions of the natriuretic peptide family, with a particular focus on the basic research that has led to our current understanding of its roles in maintaining cardiovascular homeostasis, and the pathophysiological implications for the onset and progression of heart failure. The clinical significance and potential of natriuretic peptides as diagnostic and/or therapeutic agents are also discussed.

Epidemiology of acutely decompensated systolic heart failure over the 2003-2013 decade in Douala General Hospital, Cameroon

AIMS

Acutely decompensated heart failure (HF) (ADHF) is a common cause of hospitalization and mortality worldwide. This study explores the epidemiology and prognostic factors of ADHF in Cameroonian patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This was a retrospective study conducted between January 2003 and December 2013 from the medical files of patients followed at the intensive care and cardiovascular units of Douala General Hospital in Cameroon. Clinical, electrocardiographic, echocardiographic, and biological data were collected from 142 patients (58.5% men; mean age 58 ± 14 years) hospitalized for ADHF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), whose left ventricular ejection fraction was <50%, or alternatively whose shortening fraction was <28%, both assessed by echocardiography. The commonest risk factors associated with HFrEF were hypertension (59.2%), diabetes mellitus (16.2%), tobacco use (14.1%), and dyslipidaemia (7.7%), respectively. The major causes of HF in hospitalized patients were hypertensive heart disease (40%, n = 57); hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (33.8%, n = 48); and ischemic heart disease (21.8%, n = 31). The most frequent comorbid conditions were atrial fibrillation (25.4%, n = 36) and chronic kidney disease (18.3%, n = 26). Major biological abnormalities included increased bilirubinemia >12 mg/L (87.5%, n = 124); hyperuricaemia >70 mg/L (84.9%, n = 121); elevated serum creatinine (65.6%, n = 93); anaemia (59.1%, n = 84); hyperglycaemia on admission >1.8 g/L (42.3%, n = 60); and hyponatraemia <135 mEq/L (26.8%, n = 38). At admission, 33.8% (n = 48) of patients had no pharmacological treatment for HF. The most frequently used therapies upon admission included furosemide (50%, n = 71), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs; 40.1%, n = 57); spironolactone (35.2%, n = 50); digoxin (26%, n = 37); beta-blockers (17.7%, n = 25); angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs; 7%, n = 10); and nitrates (7.0%). The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 20.4%. Factors associated with poor prognosis were systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg [odds ratio (OR) 3.88; confidence interval (CI) 1.36-11.05, P = 0.011], left ventricular ejection fraction <20% (OR 7.48; CI 2.84-19.71, P < 0.001), decreased renal function (OR 1.03; CI 1.00-1.05, P = 0.026), dobutamine use for cardiogenic shock (OR 2.74;CI 1.00-7.47, P = 0.049), pleural fluid effusion (OR 3.46; CI 1.07-11.20, P = 0.038), and prothrombin time <50% (OR 3.60; CI 1.11-11.68, P = 0.033). The use of ACEIs/ARBs was associated with reduced in-hospital mortality rate (OR 0.17; CI 0.02-0.81, P = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Hypertensive heart disease, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, and ischemic heart disease are the commonest causes of HF in this Cameroonian population. ADHF is associated with high in-hospital mortality in Cameroon. Hypotension, severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction, renal function impairment, and dobutamine administration were associated with worst acute HF outcomes. ACEIs/ARBs use was associated with improved survival.

Nesiritide in patients with acute myocardial infarction and heart failure: a meta-analysis

Objective

This meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of nesiritide in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and heart failure.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception through December 2018. Studies including patients with AMI and heart failure who received nesiritide were identified.

Results

Ten trials involving 870 participants were included in this meta-analysis. Nesiritide treatment significantly increased left ventricular ejection fraction, cardiac index, and 24- and 72-hour urine volumes. Additionally, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, right atrial pressure, and brain natriuretic peptide and N-terminal brain natriuretic peptide levels were significantly decreased in patients treated with nesiritide compared with those treated with control drugs. However, patients treated with nesiritide did not have an increased risk of mortality compared with those treated with control drugs. There were no differences between the two groups with respect to heart rate or the risk of readmission, hypotension, or renal dysfunction.

Conclusions

Nesiritide appears to be safe for patients with AMI and heart failure, and it improves global cardiac and systemic function.

Sepsis With Preexisting Heart Failure: Management of Confounding Clinical Features

Preexisting heart failure (HF) in patients with sepsis is associated with worse clinical outcomes. Core sepsis management includes aggressive volume resuscitation followed by vasopressors (and potentially inotropes) if fluid is inadequate to restore perfusion; however, large fluid boluses and vasoactive agents are concerning amid the cardiac dysfunction of HF. This review summarizes evidence regarding the influence of HF on sepsis clinical outcomes, pathophysiologic concerns, resuscitation targets, hemodynamic interventions, and adjunct management (ie, antiarrhythmics, positive pressure ventilatory support, and renal replacement therapy) in patients with sepsis and preexisting HF. Patients with sepsis and preexisting HF receive less fluid during resuscitation; however, evidence suggests traditional fluid resuscitation targets do not increase the risk of adverse events in HF patients with sepsis and likely improve outcomes. Norepinephrine remains the most well-supported vasopressor for patients with sepsis with preexisting HF, while dopamine may induce more cardiac adverse events. Dobutamine should be used cautiously given its generally detrimental effects but may have an application when combined with norepinephrine in patients with low cardiac output. Management of chronic HF medications warrants careful consideration for continuation or discontinuation upon development of sepsis, and β-blockers may be appropriate to continue in the absence of acute hemodynamic decompensation. Optimal management of atrial fibrillation may include β-blockers after acute hemodynamic stabilization as they have also shown independent benefits in sepsis. Positive pressure ventilatory support and renal replacement must be carefully monitored for effects on cardiac function when HF is present.

Inotropes in Acute Heart Failure: From Guidelines to Practical Use: Therapeutic Options and Clinical Practice

Inotropes are pharmacological agents that are indicated for the treatment of patients presenting with acute heart failure (AHF) with concomitant hypoperfusion due to decreased cardiac output. They are usually administered for a short period during the initial management of AHF until haemodynamic stabilisation and restoration of peripheral perfusion occur. They can be used for longer periods to support patients as a bridge to a more definite treatment, such as transplant of left ventricular assist devices, or as part of a palliative care regimen. The currently available inotropic agents in clinical practice fall into three main categories: beta-agonists, phosphodiesterase III inhibitors and calcium sensitisers. However, due to the well-documented potential for adverse events and their association with increased long-term mortality, physicians should be aware of the indications and dosing strategies suitable for different types of patients. Novel inotropes that use alternative intracellular pathways are under investigation, in an effort to minimise the drawbacks that conventional inotropes exhibit.

Randomized double-blind clinical studies of ularitide and other vasoactive substances in acute decompensated heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

Acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) has a poor prognosis and limited treatment options. No direct comparisons between ularitide-a synthetic natriuretic peptide being evaluated in ADHF-and other vasoactive substances are available. The aim of this meta-analysis was to determine haemodynamic effect sizes from randomized double-blind trials in ADHF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Eligible studies enrolled patients with ADHF requiring hospitalization and haemodynamic monitoring. Patients received 24-48 h of infusion with a vasoactive substance or comparator. Primary outcome measure was pulmonary artery wedge pressure (PAWP). Treatment effects were quantified as changes from baseline using mean differences between study drug and comparator. Results were analysed using random-effects (primary analysis) and fixed-effects meta-analyses. Twelve randomized, double-blind studies were identified with data after 3, 6, and 24 h of treatment (n = 622, 644, and 644, respectively). At 6 h, significant PAWP benefits for ularitide over placebo were seen (Hedges' g effect size, -0.979; P < 0.0001). On meta-analysis, treatment difference between ularitide and pooled other agents was statistically significant (-0.501; P = 0.0303). Effect sizes were numerically higher with ularitide than other treatments at 3 and 24 h. After 6 h, a significant difference in effect size between ularitide and all other treatments was observed for right atrial pressure (Hedges' g, -0.797 for ularitide and -0.304 for other treatments; P = 0.0274).

CONCLUSIONS

After 6 h, ularitide demonstrated high effect sizes for PAWP and right atrial pressure. Improvements in these parameters were greater with ularitide vs. pooled data for other vasoactive drugs.

Effects of Widespread Inotrope Use in Acute Heart Failure Patients

Current guidelines recommend that inotropes should not be used in patients with normal systolic blood pressure (SBP). However, this is not supported with concrete evidence. We aimed to evaluate the effect of inotropes in acute heart failure (HF) patients from a nationwide HF registry. A total of 5625 patients from the Korean Acute Heart Failure (KorAHF) registry were analyzed. The primary outcomes were in-hospital adverse events and 1-month mortality. Among the total population, 1703 (31.1%) received inotropes during admission. Inotrope users had a higher event rate than non-users (in-hospital adverse events: 13.3% vs. 1.4%, p < 0.001; 1-month mortality: 5.5% vs. 2.5%, p < 0.001), while inotrope use was an independent predictor for clinical outcomes (in-hospital adverse events: OR_adjusted 5.459, 95% CI 3.622–8.227, p < 0.001; 1-month mortality: HR_adjusted 1.839, 95% CI 1.227–2.757, p = 0.003). Subgroup analysis showed that inotrope use was an independent predictor for detrimental outcomes only in patients with normal initial SBP (≥90 mmHg) (in-hospital adverse events: OR_adjusted 5.931, 95% CI 3.864–9.104, p < 0.001; 1-month mortality: HR_adjusted 3.584, 95% CI 1.280–10.037, p = 0.015), and a propensity score-matched population showed consistent results. Clinicians should be cautious with the usage of inotropes in acute heart failure patients, especially in those with a normal SBP.

Use of Inotropic Agents in Treatment of Systolic Heart Failure

The most common use of inotropes is among hospitalized patients with acute decompensated heart failure, with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction and with signs of end-organ dysfunction in the setting of a low cardiac output. Inotropes can be used in patients with severe systolic heart failure awaiting heart transplant to maintain hemodynamic stability or as a bridge to decision. In cases where patients are unable to be weaned off inotropes, these agents can be used until a definite or escalated supportive therapy is planned, which can include coronary revascularization or mechanical circulatory support (intra-aortic balloon pump, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, impella, left ventricular assist device, etc.). Use of inotropic drugs is associated with risks and adverse events. This review will discuss the use of the inotropes digoxin, dopamine, dobutamine, norepinephrine, milrinone, levosimendan, and omecamtiv mecarbil. Long-term inotropic therapy should be offered in selected patients. A detailed conversation with the patient and family shall be held, including a discussion on the risks and benefits of use of inotropes. Chronic heart failure patients awaiting heart transplants are candidates for intravenous inotropic support until the donor heart becomes available. This helps to maintain hemodynamic stability and keep the fluid status and pulmonary pressures optimized prior to the surgery. On the other hand, in patients with severe heart failure who are not candidates for advanced heart failure therapies, such as transplant and mechanical circulatory support, inotropic agents can be used for palliative therapy. Inotropes can help reduce frequency of hospitalizations and improve symptoms in these patients.