A Novel Approach to Medical Management of Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

Assessment of adverse events of the novel cardiovascular drug vericiguat: a real-world pharmacovigilance study based on FAERS

BACKGROUND

This study aims to analyze the adverse event reports (AERs) to vericiguat using data from the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) and provide evidence for the clinical use.

METHODS

AERs due to vericiguat from 2021Q1 to 2024Q1 identified as the primary suspect were screened, with duplicate reports subsequently eliminated. Various quantitative signal detection methods, including reporting odds ratio (ROR), proportional reporting ratio (PRR), Bayesian confidence propagation neural network, and multi-item gamma poisson shrinker, were then employed for data mining and analysis. Signal strength is represented by the 95% confidence interval, information component (IC), and empirical Bayesian geometric mean (EBGM).

RESULTS

A total of 617 vericiguat-related AERs were identified. Strong signals were observed in 21 system organ classes. Furthermore, the most frequently reported preferred terms (PT) was hypotension (n = 86, ROR 25.92, PRR 24.11, IC 4.59, EBGM 24.07), followed by dizziness (n = 52, ROR 6.44, PRR 6.20, IC 2.63, EBGM 6.20), malaise (n = 25, ROR 3.59, PRR 3.54, IC 1.82, EBGM 3.54), blood pressure decreased (n = 23, ROR 20.00, PRR 19.64, IC 4.29, EBGM 19.61), and anemia (n = 21, ROR 6.67, PRR 6.57, IC 2.72, EBGM 6.57).

CONCLUSIONS

This study extended the adverse reactions documented in the FDA instruction and provided supplementary evidence regarding the clinical safety of vericiguat.

Strategy for an early simultaneous introduction of four-pillars of heart failure therapy: results from a single center experience

INTRODUCTION

The 2021 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Guidelines recommend the use of four different classes of drugs for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF): beta blockers (BB), sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i), angiotensin receptor/neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs). Moreover, the 2023 ESC updated Guidelines suggest an intensive strategy of initiation and rapid up-titration of evidence-based treatment before discharge, based on trials not using the four-pillars. We hypothesized that an early concomitantly administration and up-titration of four-pillars, compared with a conventional stepwise approach, may impact the vulnerable phase after hospitalization owing to HF.

METHODS

This prospective, single center, observational study included consecutive in-hospital patients with HFrEF. After performing propensity score matching, they were divided according to treatment strategy into group 1 (G1), with predischarge start of all four-pillars, with their up-titration within 1 month, and group 2 (G2) with the pre Guidelines update stepwise four-pillars introduction. HF hospitalization, cardiovascular (CV) death, and the composite of both were evaluated between the two groups at 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

The study included a total of 278 patients who completed 6-month follow-up (139 for both groups). There were no differences in terms of baseline features between the two groups. At survival analysis, HF hospitalization risk was significantly lower in G1 compared with G2 (p < 0.001), while no significant differences were observed regarding CV death (p = 0.642) or the composite of CV death and HF hospitalization (p = 0.135).

CONCLUSIONS

In our real-world population, patients with HF treated with a predischarge and simultaneous use of four-pillars showed a reduced risk of HF hospitalization during the vulnerable phase after discharge, compared with  a conventional stepwise approach.

Influence of the medical treatment schedule in new diagnoses patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction

AIMS

Heart failure (HF) guidelines recommend treating all patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) with quadruple therapy, although they do not establish how to start it. This study aimed to evaluate the implementation of these recommendations, analyzing the efficacy and safety of the different therapeutic schedules.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Prospective, observational, and multicenter registry that evaluated the treatment initiated in patients with newly diagnosed HFrEF and its evolution at 3 months. Clinical and analytical data were collected, as well as adverse reactions and events during follow-up. Five hundred and thirty-three patients were included, selecting four hundred and ninety-seven, aged 65.5 ± 12.9 years (72% male). The most frequent etiologies were ischemic (25.5%) and idiopathic (21.1%), with a left ventricular ejection fraction of 28.7 ± 7.4%. Quadruple therapy was started in 314 (63.2%) patients, triple in 120 (24.1%), and double in 63 (12.7%). Follow-up was 112 days [IQI 91; 154], with 10 (2%) patients dying. At 3 months, 78.5% had quadruple therapy (p < 0.001). There were no differences in achieving maximum doses or reducing or withdrawing drugs (< 6%) depending on the starting scheme. Twenty-seven (5.7%) patients had any emergency room visits or admission for HF, less frequent in those with quadruple therapy (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

It is possible to achieve quadruple therapy in patients with newly diagnosed HFrEF early. This strategy makes it possible to reduce admissions and visits to the emergency room for HF without associating a more significant reduction or withdrawal of drugs or significant difficulty in achieving the target doses.

Differences in the Approach to Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy in Patients with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Survey of Cardiologists, Internists, and Pharmacists

Introduction

Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) has significantly improved outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, GDMT prescribing remains suboptimal. The purpose of this study was to survey cardiologists, internists, and pharmacists on their approach to GDMT prescribing.

Methods

A survey containing 20 clinical vignettes of patients with HFrEF was answered by 127 cardiologists, 68 internists, and 89 pharmacists. Each vignette presented options for adjusting GDMT. Responses were dichotomized to the answer of interest. A mixed-effect model was used to calculate the odds of changing GDMT between pharmacists and physicians.

Results

Pharmacists were more likely to make changes to GDMT compared with internists (92.1% vs 82%; odds ratio [OR] 3.02 [1.50-6.06]; p=0.002). In medically-naïve patients, pharmacists were more likely to initiate beta-blockers than internists (45.4% vs 32.0%; OR 2.19 [1.00-4.79], p=0.049). Pharmacists were more likely than both internists and cardiologists to initiate mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (34.4% vs 11.5%; OR 4.95 [2.41-10.18]; p<0.001 and 34.4% vs 13.9%; OR 3.95 [2.16-7.21]; p<0.001). Pharmacists were more likely than both internists and cardiologists to titrate beta-blockers (30.9% vs 16.4%; OR 3.15 [1.92-5.19]; p<0.001 and 30.9% vs 22.0%; OR 1.88 [0.18-2.87]; p=0.0030). Pharmacists were more likely than internists to titrate angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI) (61.8% vs 34.1%; OR 3.54 [1.50-8.39]; p=0.004).

Conclusions

The survey results show pharmacists were more likely to make any adjustments to GDMT than internists and cardiologists. Pharmacists prefer adding spironolactone and titrating beta-blockers compared with cardiologists and internists. Compared with only internists, pharmacists were more likely to initiate beta-blockers and titrate the dose of ARNI.

[Decompensation of Heart Failure in "Fragile" Patients: Clinical Features and Approaches to Therapy]

AIM

To evaluate the impact of frailty syndrome (FS) on the course of acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) and the quality of drug therapy before discharge from the hospital in patients with reduced and moderately reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This open prospective study included 101 patients older than 75 years with reduced and mid-range LVEF hospitalized for decompensated chronic heart failure (CHF). FS was detected during the outpatient follow-up and identified using the Age is Not a Hindrance questionnaire, the chair rise test, and the One Leg Test. The "fragile" group consisted of 54 patients and the group without FS included 47 patients. Clinical characteristics of patients were compared, and the prescribing rate of the main drugs for the treatment of CHF was assessed upon admission to the hospital. The sacubitril/valsartan or dapagliflozin therapy was initiated in the hospital; prescribing rate of the quadruple therapy was assessed upon discharge from the hospital. Patients with reduced LVEF were followed up for 30 days, and LVEF was re-evaluated to reveal possible improvement due to optimization of therapy during hospitalization. Statistical analysis was performed with the SPSS 23.0 software.

RESULTS

The main causes for decompensation did not differ in patients of the compared groups. According to the correlation analysis, FS was associated with anemia (r=0.154; p=0.035), heart rate ≥90 bpm (r=0.185; p=0.020), shortness of breath at rest (r =0.224; p=0.002), moist rales in the lungs (r=0.153; p=0.036), ascites (r=0.223; p=0.002), increased levels of the N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) (r= 0.316; p<0.001), hemoglobin concentration <120 g / l (r=0.183; p=0.012), and total protein <65 g / l (r=0.153; p=0.035) as measured by lab blood tests. Among patients with LVEF ≤40 % in the FS group (n=33) and without FS (n=33), the quadruple therapy was a part of the treatment regimen at discharge from the hospital in 27.3 and 3.0 % of patients, respectively (p=0.006). According to the 30-day follow-up data, improvement of LVEF was detected in 18.2% of patients with LVEF ≤40% in the FS group and 12.1% of patients with LVEF ≤40% in the FS-free group (p=0.020). In patients with LVEF 41-49 % in the FS (n=21) and FS-free (n=14) groups, the prescribing rate of the optimal therapy, including sacubitril/valsartan, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, beta-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, no statistically significant differences were detected (14.3 and 7.1 %, respectively; p=0.515) at discharge from the hospital.

CONCLUSION

Patients with ADHF and FS showed more pronounced clinical manifestations of decompensation, anemia, heart rate ≥90 beats/min, and higher levels of NT-proBNP upon admission. The inpatient therapy with sacubitril/valsartan or dapagliflozin was more intensively initiated in FS patients with reduced LVEF. An individualized approach contributed to achieving a prescribing rate of sacubitril/valsartan of 39.4%, dapagliflozin of 39.4%, and quadruple therapy of 27.3% upon discharge from the hospital.

Optimisation of treatments for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in routine practice: a position statement from a panel of experts

Major international practice guidelines recommend the use of a combination of 4 medication classes in the treatment of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) but do not specify how these treatments should be introduced and up-titrated. Consequently, many patients with HFrEF do not receive an optimized treatment regimen. This review proposes a pragmatic algorithm for treatment optimization designed to be easily applied in routine practice. The first goal is to ensure that all 4 recommended medication classes are initiated as early as possible to establish effective therapy, even at a low dose. This is considered preferable to starting fewer medications at a maximum dose. The second goal is to ensure that the intervals between the introduction of different medications and between different titration steps are as short as possible to ensure patient safety. Specific proposals are made for older patients (> 75 years) who are frail, and for those with cardiac rhythm disorders. Application of this algorithm should allow an optimal treatment protocol to be achieved within 2-months in most patients, which should the treatment goal in HFrEF.

Patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy and mid-wall striae have similar arrhythmic outcomes as ischemic cardiomyopathy

PURPOSE

While implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy provides clear benefit in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM), this is less clear in patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM). Mid-wall striae (MWS) fibrosis is an established cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) risk marker observed in patients with NICM. We evaluated whether patients with NICM and MWS have similar risk of arrhythmia-related cardiovascular events as patients with ICM.

METHODS

We studied a cohort of patients undergoing CMR. The presence of MWS was adjudicated by experienced physicians. The primary outcome was a composite of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implant, hospitalization for ventricular tachycardia, resuscitated cardiac arrest, or sudden cardiac death. Propensity-matched analysis was performed to compare outcomes for patients NICM with MWS and ICM.

RESULTS

A total of 1,732 patients were studied, 972 NICM (706 without MWS, 266 with MWS) and 760 ICM. NICM patients with MWS were more likely to experience the primary outcome versus those without MWS (unadjusted subdistribution hazard ratio (subHR) 2.26, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.51-3.41) with no difference versus ICM patients (unadjusted subHR 1.32, 95% CI 0.93-1.86). Similar results were seen in a propensity-matched population (adjusted subHR 1.11, 95% CI 0.63-1.98, p = 0.711).

CONCLUSION

Patients with NICM and MWS demonstrate significantly higher arrhythmic risk compared to NICM without MWS. After adjustment, the arrhythmia risk of patients with NICM and MWS was similar to patients with ICM. Accordingly, physicians could consider the presence of MWS when making clinical decisions regarding arrhythmia risk management in patients with NICM.

Vericiguat: The Fifth Harmony of Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction is a chronic and progressive syndrome that continues to be a substantial financial burden for health systems in Western countries. Despite remarkable advances in pharmacologic and device-based therapy over the last few years, patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction have a high residual risk of adverse outcomes, even when treated with optimal guideline-directed medical therapy and in a clinically stable state. Worsening heart failure episodes represent a critical event in the heart failure trajectory, carrying high residual risk at discharge and dismal short- or long-term prognosis. Recently, vericiguat, a soluble guanylate cyclase stimulator, has been proposed as a novel drug whose use is already associated with a reduction in heart failure-related hospitalizations in patients in guideline-directed medical therapy. In this review, we summarized the pathophysiology of the nitric oxide-soluble guanylate cyclase-cyclic guanosine monophosphate cascade in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, the pharmacology of vericiguat as well as the evidence regarding their use in patients with HFrEF. Finally, tips and tricks for its use in standard clinical practice are provided.

A Systematic Critical Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines in Heart Failure Using the AGREE II Tool

Multiple clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for heart failure management have been published to provide the best practices regarding the use of foundational therapies to reduce morbidity and mortality in this patient population. However, a critical appraisal of these heart failure guidelines has not been performed. This systematic review aimed to assess the methodological quality of current CPGs in the management of patients with heart failure. A comprehensive search of EMBASE and PubMed was conducted to identify CPGs published between January 1, 2021 and September 8, 2022. Any CPGs published in the last 2 years addressing the management of heart failure were eligible for inclusion. The methodological quality of the CPGs was assessed using the AGREE II (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluate II) instrument. The initial search yielded 3,269 citations, of which, 6 CPGs were included. A total of 2 CPGs were each published by the cardiology associations in North America and Asia and 1 each in Europe and South America. The overall median score for the AGREE II domains were 100% for scope and purpose, 71% for stakeholder involvement, 71% for the rigor of development, 100% for clarity of presentation, 43% for applicability, 100% for editorial independence, and 64% for overall assessment. CPG developers would benefit from the use of a standardized approach to the development of CPGs and use the contents of the AGREE II tool to improve the methodological rigor, reporting, and applicability of CPGs.

Canadian Cardiovascular Society-Canadian Heart Failure Society Focused Clinical Practice Update of Patients With Differing Heart Failure Phenotypes

A number of societies produce heart failure (HF) management guidelines, comprising official recommendations on the basis of recent research discoveries, but their applicability to specific situations encountered in daily practice might be difficult. In this clinical practice update we aim to provide responses to fundamental questions that face health care providers, like appropriate timing for the introduction and optimization of different classes of medication according to specific patient phenotypes, when second-line therapies and valvular interventions should be considered, and management of difficult clinical scenarios such as cardiorenal syndrome and frailty. A consensus-based methodology was used. Approaches to 5 different phenotypes are presented: (1) The wet HF phenotype is the easiest to manage, decongestion being performed alongside introduction of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT); (2) The de novo HF phenotype requires the introduction of the 4 pillars of GDMT, personalizing the order on the basis of the individuals' biological and physiological characteristics; (3) The worsening HF phenotype is a marker of poor prognosis, and therefore should motivate optimization of GDMT, start second-line therapies, and/or reevaluate goals of care/advanced HF therapies; (4) The cardiorenal phenotypes require correct volume assessment, because renal function usually improves with decongestion; and (5) The frail HF phenotype require special attention, careful drug titration, and consideration of cardiac rehabilitation programs. In conclusion, specific common HF phenotypes call for a personalized approach to improve adoption of the HF guidelines into clinical practice.

Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy for the Treatment of Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction

Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) is the cornerstone of pharmacological therapy for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and consists of the four main drug classes: renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, evidence-based β-blockers, mineralocorticoid inhibitors and sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors. The recommendation for use of GDMT is based on the results of multiple major randomized controlled trials demonstrating improved clinical outcomes in patients with HFrEF who are maintained on this therapy. The effect is most beneficial when medications from the four main drug classes are used in conjunction. Despite this, there is an underutilization of GDMT, partially due to lack of awareness of how to safely and effectively initiate and titrate these medications. In this review article, we describe the different drug classes included in GDMT and offer an approach to initiation and effective titration in both the inpatient as well as outpatient setting.

Efficacy of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with heart failure: An overview of systematic reviews

AIMS

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) have been shown to have benefit in patients with heart failure (HF). Multiple systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRs and MAs) of randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing SGLT2i to placebo have been performed. However, there is uncertainty in the quality of the evidence and associated efficacy. We performed an overview of SRs and MAs of RCTs to summarize the evidence related to the efficacy of SGLT2i for the management of HF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A comprehensive search of three databases (the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and PubMed) was conducted until February 21, 2021. All SRs of RCTs evaluating the efficacy of SGLT2i in patients with HF were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Methodological quality was evaluated using the AMSTAR-2 assessment tool. The overall quality of evidence was summarized using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation method. The initial search yielded 3431 references, of which, eight SRs and MAs met the inclusion criteria. The methodological quality ranged from critically low to high. The overall quality of evidence ranged from very low to moderate. Most of the SRs and MAs showed benefits in all-cause mortality, HF-related hospitalizations, and KCCQ score change.

CONCLUSIONS

SGLT2i are possibly beneficial in patients with HF, however, none of the SRs and MAs compared the efficacy between different types of SGLT2i. Furthermore, this paper emphasizes the need for consistent reproducible conduct and reporting of SRs to generate high-quality evidence and facilitate clinical decision-making.

Sequencing of medical therapy in heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction

The management of heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction is a true success story of modern medicine. Evidence from randomised clinical trials provides the basis for an extensive catalogue of disease-modifying drug treatments that improve both symptoms and survival. These treatments have undergone rigorous scrutiny by licensing and guideline development bodies to make them eligible for clinical use. With an increasing number of drug therapies however, it has become a complex management challenge to ensure patients receive these treatments in a timely fashion and at recommended doses. The tragedy is that, for a condition with many life-prolonging drug therapies, there remains a potentially avoidable mortality risk associated with delayed treatment. Heart failure therapeutic agents have conventionally been administered to patients in the chronological order they were tested in clinical trials, in line with the aggregate benefit observed when added to existing background treatment. We review the evidence for simultaneous expedited initiation of these disease-modifying drug therapies and how these strategies may focus the heart failure clinician on a time-defined smart goal of drug titration, while catering for patient individuality. We highlight the need for adequate staffing levels, especially heart failure nurse specialists and pharmacists, in a structure to provide the capacity to deliver this care. Finally, we propose a heart failure clinic titration schedule and novel practical treatment score which, if applied at each heart failure patient contact, could tackle treatment inertia by a constant assessment of attainment of optimal medical therapy.

Is it time to relitigate SGLT2 Inhibitor dose for heart failure?

Over the past 40 years, we have observed the introduction of several medical therapies for heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). More recently, effective medical therapy (goal-directed medical therapy; GDMT) for patients who suffer from HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) has been identified in the form of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors.¹ There has also been recognition that timely and aggressive GDMT titration to target doses leads to better outcomes.² This becomes more complex as the number of drug up-titrations increases (such as with β blockade at 4 doses), and corresponds to lower target dose achievement, even in Canadian centres of excellence.^3,4 Thus, there is interest in use of simplified dosage regimens, provided there is no significant benefit left unrealized.⁵ To define this tension, one must be able to identify the optimal dosage for any given medication.

Cost-effectiveness of immediate initiation of dapagliflozin in patients with a history of heart failure

AIMS

To compare the cost-effectiveness of immediate and 12-month delayed initiation of dapagliflozin treatment in patients with a history of hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) from the UK, Canadian, German, and Spanish healthcare perspectives.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A cost-utility analysis was conducted using a decision-analytic Markov model with health states defined by Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores, type 2 diabetes mellitus status and incidence of heart failure (HF) events. Patient-level data for patients with prior HHF from the Dapagliflozin And Prevention of Adverse-outcomes in Heart Failure (DAPA-HF) trial were used to inform the model inputs on clinical events and utility values. Healthcare costs were sourced from the relevant national reference databases and the published literature. Compared to standard therapy, immediate initiation of dapagliflozin decreased HHF (187 events), urgent HF visits (32 events) and cardiovascular mortality (18 events). Standard therapy was associated with lifetime costs of £13 224 and 4.02 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Twelve-month delayed initiation of dapagliflozin was associated with total discounted lifetime costs and QALYs of £16 660 and 4.61, respectively, compared to £16 912 and 4.66, respectively, for immediate initiation. Compared to standard therapy, immediate and 12-month delayed initiation of dapagliflozin yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £5779 and £5821, respectively. Compared to 12-month delayed initiation, immediate initiation of dapagliflozin had an ICER of £5263. Results were similar from the Canadian, German, and Spanish healthcare perspectives.

CONCLUSION

Both immediate and 12-month delayed initiation of dapagliflozin are cost-effective. However, immediate initiation provides greater clinical benefits, with almost 10% additional QALYs gain, compared to 12-month delayed initiation of dapagliflozin and should be considered standard of care.

Pathophysiology-Based Management of Acute Heart Failure

Even though acute heart failure (AHF) is one of the most common admission diagnoses globally, its pathogenesis is poorly understood, and there are few effective treatments available. Despite an heterogenous onset, congestion is the leading contributor to hospitalization, making it a crucial therapeutic target. Complete decongestion, nevertheless, may be hard to achieve, especially in patients with reduced end organ perfusion. In order to promote a personalised pathophysiological-based therapy for patients with AHF, we will address in this review the pathophysiological principles that underlie the clinical symptoms of AHF as well as examine how to assess them in clinical practice, suggesting that gaining a deeper understanding of pathophysiology might result in significant improvements in HF therapy.

Heart Failure Pharmacological Management: Gaps and Current Perspectives

Proper therapeutic management of patients with heart failure (HF) is a major challenge for cardiologists. Current guidelines indicate to start therapy with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ACEi/ARNI), beta blockers (BB), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) and sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) to reduce the risk of death and hospitalization due to HF. However, certain aspects still need to be defined. Current guidelines propose therapeutic algorithms based on left ventricular ejection fraction values and clinical presentations. However, these last do not always reflect the precise hemodynamic status of patients and pathophysiological mechanisms involved, particularly in the acute setting. Even in the field of chronic management there are still some critical points to discuss. The guidelines do not specify which of the four pillar drugs to start first, nor at what dosage. Some authors suggest starting with SGLT2i and BB, others with ACEi or ARNI, while one of the most recent approach proposes to start with all four drugs together at low doses. The aim of this review is to revise current gaps and perspectives regarding pharmacological therapy management in HF patients, in both the acute and chronic phase.

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).

Contemporary Data on the Status and Medical Management of Acute Heart Failure

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Acute heart failure (AHF) is among the leading causes for unplanned hospital admission. Despite advancements in the management of chronic heart failure, the prognosis of AHF remains poor with high in-hospital mortality and increased rates of unfavorable post-discharge outcomes. With this review, we aim to summarize current data on AHF epidemiology, focus on the different patient profiles and classifications, and discuss management, including novel therapeutic options in this area.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is significant heterogeneity among patients admitted for AHF in their baseline characteristics, heart failure (HF) aetiology and precipitating factors leading to decompensation. A novel classification scheme based on four distinct clinical scenarios has been included in the most recent ESC guidelines, in an effort to better risk stratify patients and guide treatment. Intravenous diuretics, vasodilators, and inotropes remain the cornerstone of management in the acute phase, and expansion of use of mechanical circulatory support has been noted in recent years. Meanwhile, many treatments that have proved their value in chronic heart failure demonstrate promising results in the setting of AHF and research in this field is currently ongoing. Acute heart failure remains a major health challenge with high in-hospital mortality and unfavorable post-discharge outcomes. Admission for acute HF represents a window of opportunity for patients to initiate appropriate treatment as soon as possible after stabilization. Future studies are needed to elucidate which patients will benefit the most by available therapies and define the optimal timing for treatment implementation.

Significance of Gut Microbiota and Short-Chain Fatty Acids in Heart Failure

Heart failure (HF), as the terminal stage of various heart diseases, seriously threatens an individual’s life, health, and quality of life. Emerging evidence has shown that the gut microbiota comprises an important component of human physiology and metabolic homeostasis, and can directly or indirectly affect the metabolic health of the host through metabolites. Upon in-depth study of intestinal microecology, the “gut-heart axis” appears to provide a novel direction for HF research. Thus, this review primarily focuses on the relationship between the gut microbiota and its major metabolites—i.e., short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs)—and HF. It explores the mechanisms underlying HF and its effective treatment by targeting SCFAs to optimize current HF treatment and thus improve the quality of patients’ lives.

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.

Heart failure treatment in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices: Opportunity for improvement

BACKGROUND

Heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is the predominant indication for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation. The care gap and opportunity to optimize guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to define uptake, eligibility, dose, and adherence to GDMT in patients with CRT/ICD and HFrEF.

METHODS

MEDLINE was searched from 2000 to July 2021 for major randomized trials, registries, and cohort studies evaluating GDMT in this population. Thirty-eight studies focused on medical therapy in patients with CRT/ICD devices (CRT = 23, ICD = 11, and both = 4).

RESULTS

In the pivotal device trials, ACEI/ARB and beta-blocker use was high (mean 94%, range 41%-99%; and 83%, range 27%-97%, respectively), but mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists were modest (mean 45%, range 32%-61%), in keeping with guidelines of that era. Similar results were found in observational registries. CRT was associated with beta-blocker uptitration, while the effects on ACEI/ARB were less consistent. For beta blockers, 57%-68% of patients were uptitrated, increasing the mean percent of target dose achieved by 24% from baseline to follow-up. In one study, adherence increased, for ACEI/ARB from 37% to 55% and beta blockers 34% to 58%. Only 1 study assessed potential eligibility at implant for sacubitril-valsartan (72%) or ivabradine (28%), and no study examined sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors. Increased uptake, titration, and dose was associated with reduced mortality, hospitalization, and device therapies.

CONCLUSION

Patients with HFrEF and ICD/CRT are undertreated with respect to GDMT, and there is opportunity to optimize therapy to improve morbidity and mortality.

Pharmacological Management of Heart Failure: A Century of Expert Opinions in Cecil Textbook of Medicine

BACKGROUND

Drug therapy for heart failure influences quality of life and work potential of affected persons and has contributed to decrease in hospitalizations and cardiovascular mortality. The current approach is the result of incremental progress in understanding the pathophysiology of the syndrome, introduction of new molecules, and repurposing existing drugs.

STUDY QUESTION

What are the milestones of the changes in the expert clinicians' approach to the pharmacological management in the past century?

STUDY DESIGN

To determine the changes in the experts' approach to the management of heart failure, as presented in a widely used textbook in the United States.

DATA SOURCES

The chapters on the management of heart failure in the 26 editions of Cecil Textbook of Medicine published from 1927 through 2020.

RESULTS

In 1927, heart failure was treated with powdered leaf or tincture of digitalis, mercury chloride, and theophylline. Patients with acute pulmonary edema received injections of atropine, adrenaline, and ouabain. The therapeutic milestones in heart failure were the introduction of loop diuretics and aldosterone antagonists (1971), vasodilator treatment with hydralazine and nitroglycerine (1979-1985), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers and selective beta-adrenergic blockers (1992-2000), and sacubitril-valsartan (2016). For acute pulmonary edema, the durable milestone was the treatment with morphine and furosemide (1971).

CONCLUSIONS

The pharmacological management of heart failure in the past century has progressed in fits and starts, with latent periods between significant advances lasting 8-40 years. In chronological order, the major advances were efficient diuresis, afterload reduction, and blunting the neurohormonal response to hemodynamic stress and cardiac remodeling.