Myocardial Strain for Identification of β-Blocker Responders in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction

The effect of sustained-release CARvedilol in patients with hypErtension and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial (CARE-preserved HF)

Background

Although beta-blockers improve clinical outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, the benefit of beta-blockers in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is uncertain. Global longitudinal strain (GLS) is a robust predictor of heart failure outcomes, and recent studies have shown that beta-blockers are associated with improved survival in those with low GLS (GLS <14%) but not in those with GLS ≥14% among patients with LVEF ≥40%. Therefore, the objective of this trial is to evaluate the effect of sustained-release carvedilol (carvedilol-SR) on the outcome [N-terminal pro-B-natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) concentration] in patients with hypertension and HFpEF and will assess the differential effects of these drugs on the outcome, according to the GLS categories.

Methods

This prospective randomized double-blind multicenter trial (CARE-preserved HF) will include 100 patients with HFpEF from three tertiary hospitals in South Korea. Patients with HFpEF and hypertension aged ≥20 years who have evidence of functional and structural heart disease on echocardiography and elevated natriuretic peptide will be enrolled. Eligible participants will be randomized 1:1 to either the carvedilol-SR group (n = 50) or the placebo group (n = 50). Patients in the carvedilol-SR group will receive 8, 16, 32, or 64 mg carvedilol-SR once daily for 6 months, and the dose of carvedilol will be up-titrated at the discretion of the treating physicians. The primary efficacy outcome was the time-averaged proportional change in N-terminal pro-B-natriuretic peptide concentration from baseline to months 3 and 6. We will also evaluate the differential effects of carvedilol-SR on primary outcomes according to GLS, using a cut-off of 14% or the median value.

Discussion

This randomized controlled trial will investigate the efficacy and safety of carvedilol-SR in patients with HFpEF and hypertension.

Clinical Trial Registration

ClinicalTrial.gov, identifier NCT05553314.

Beta Blockers in Contemporary Cardiology: Is It Better to Cast Them Out?

Beta blockers are one of the commonest prescription drugs in medicine and they have been thought to revolutionize the treatment of heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in the last century. In addition to HFrEF, they are prescribed for a variety of diseases in cardiology from hypertension to HF, angina, and stable coronary artery disease (CAD). The increased prescription of beta blockers in conditions like HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), and stable CAD may be doing more harm than good as per the data we have so far. The available data shows that beta blockers are associated with increased stroke risk and atrial fibrillation (AF) in hypertension and in patients with HFpEF, they have been associated with decreased exercise capacity. In patients with stable CAD and patients with myocardial infarction with normal systolic functions, beta blockers don't offer any mortality benefit. In this article, we critically review the common indications and the uses of beta blockers in patients with HFpEF, CAD, hypertension and AF and we propose that beta blockers are over-prescribed under the shadow of their beneficial effects in patients with HFrEF.

Revisiting Beta-Blocker Therapy in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a heterogenous disorder and tends to be predominant in elderly, female, and obese patients. HFpEF has been classified using various cut-offs of left ventricular ejection fraction in the published studies with a current cut-off of ≥50%. The evidence of beta-blocker therapy in HFpEF patients showed conflicting findings with variably reported efficacy. This review aims to examine the published studies on the use of beta blockers for the treatment of patients with HFpEF.

Comparative effects of nebivolol and carvedilol on left ventricular diastolic function in older patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction

Background

Although many studies have compared carvedilol and nebivolol in heart failure (HF) patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), such comparative studies for the elderly have not been reported yet. Nebivolol is known to be effective for improving diastolic function of elderly patients with HF. Thus, this study aimed to determine whether nebivolol could improve LV diastolic function to a greater extent than carvedilol in older patients aged over 70 years.

Methods

This trial was a prospective, randomized, open-label, single-center, active-controlled study that enrolled 62 patients with class II or III HF over 70 years of age with an LVEF ≥40%. Patients were randomized into a carvedilol group or a nebivolol group. Transthoracic echocardiography was performed at baseline and 12 months by the same investigator who was blinded to clinical data. The primary endpoint was E/e' measured by echocardiographic evaluation 12 months after treatment.

Results

The median duration of follow-up was 24 months. Baseline clinical characteristics and echocardiographic parameters, such as LV diastolic function indices, did not differ significantly between carvedilol and nebivolol groups. Twelve-month follow-up echocardiography data showed no significant difference in E/e' or other LV diastolic function indices between the two groups. There were no significant changes in echocardiographic parameters over 12 months in either group.

Conclusions

There was no difference between carvedilol and nebivolol for improving diastolic function of elderly HF patients with LVEF ≥40%. This study showed no superiority of nebivolol over carvedilol in elderly patients with HF.

Effects of Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists in Early-Stage Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction

Background

Hospitalization with a first episode of heart failure (HF) is a serious event associated with poor clinical outcomes in HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Identification of HFpEF via detection of elevated left ventricular filling pressure at rest or during exercise may allow early intervention. Benefits of treatment with mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) in established HFpEF have been reported, but use of MRAs is not well studied in early HFpEF without prior HF hospitalization.

Methods

We retrospectively studied 197 patients with HFpEF who did not have prior hospitalization but had been diagnosed by exercise stress echocardiography or catheterization. We examined changes in natriuretic peptide levels and echocardiographic parameters reflecting diastolic function following MRA initiation.

Results

Of the 197 patients with HFpEF, MRA treatment was initiated for 47 patients. After a median 3-month follow-up, reduction in N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels from baseline to follow-up was greater in patients treated with MRA than in those who were not (median, -200 pg/mL [interquartile range, -544 to -31] vs 67 pg/mL [interquartile range, -95 to 456], P < 0.0001 in 50 patients with paired data). Similar results were observed for the changes in B-type natriuretic peptide levels. Reduction in the left atrial volume index was also greater in the MRA-treated group than in the non-MRA-treated group after a median 7-month follow-up (77 patients with paired echocardiographic data). Patients with lower left ventricular global longitudinal strain experienced a greater reduction in N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels following MRA treatment. In the safety assessment, MRA modestly decreased renal function but did not change potassium levels.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that MRA treatment has potential benefits for early-stage HFpEF.

Adiposity and clinical outcomes in East Asian patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction

Background

Despite the obesity paradox, visceral adiposity is associated with poor clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). However, it remains unclear whether a relationship between visceral fat and clinical outcomes exists in Asian patients with HFpEF, in whom obesity is rare.

Methods

Visceral and subcutaneous adipose tissue (VAT and SAT) volume and area were measured using computed tomography (CT) in 196 HFpEF patients. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality or HF hospitalization.

Results

Participants had a normal body mass index (BMI) (22.5 ± 4.4 kg/m²), and obesity (BMI > 30 kg/m²) was rare (4.6 %). The primary outcome was observed in 64 patients during a median follow-up of 11.6 months. Lower VAT and SAT volumes were associated with underweight and malnutrition. Composite outcomes increased as body weight, BMI, and height-indexed SAT volume and area decreased. Lower height-indexed VAT volume and area were also associated with the outcomes. The height-indexed SAT area provided independent and incremental prognostic value over age, BMI, blood pressure, and creatinine and albumin levels.

Conclusions

In lean East Asian patients with HFpEF, a lower VAT volume was associated with poorer clinical outcomes. CT-based assessments of adiposity may provide incremental prognostic value over simple anthropometric indices in lean HFpEF patients.

Prognostic Implications of Mechanical Phenotypes in Heart Failure Characterized by 3-Chamber Strain Echocardiography

Background Heart failure (HF) involves dysfunction of the left ventricle (LV) as well as left atrium and right ventricle. We characterized mechanical phenotypes of HF using 3-chamber strain echocardiography and compared their clinical outcomes. Methods and Results We retrospectively analyzed 3574 patients (median age, 74 years; male 52.8%) with acute HF who underwent 3-chamber strain echocardiography. Patients were classified as with LV, left atrium, or right ventricle myopathy if their corresponding strain values (LV global longitudinal strain, left atrium reservoir strain, and right ventricle global longitudinal strain) were lower than median cutoffs, respectively. The mechanical phenotypes of individual patients were characterized according to the combined myopathy. The primary outcome was a composite end point of 5-year all-cause mortality and HF hospitalization. During follow-up (median, 25.8 months), the primary outcome occurred in 1877 (52.5%) patients. Three-chamber strain values were independent predictors for the primary outcome. An incremental trend was observed for the primary outcome, along with the increasing numbers of combined myopathy. Each mechanical phenotype exhibited an increased risk of the primary outcome, with the highest risk observed in patients with 3-chamber myopathy (hazard ratio, 1.67 [95% CI, 1.42-1.96]). The prognostic significance of the mechanical phenotypes was feasible across the conventional HF subtypes stratified by LV ejection fraction. In HF with preserved ejection fraction, the presence of left atrium and right ventricle myopathy significantly increased the primary outcome, regardless of combined left ventricle myopathy. Conclusions Assessment of 3-chamber strain in HF enables characterization of distinctive mechanical phenotypes, which provides an independent prognostic value that may support long-term risk stratification.

The impact of medical therapy on left ventricular strain: Current state and future perspectives

The speckle tracking strain is becoming a frequently used marker of subclinical left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Despite the wide range of data concerning left ventricular strain variability in the general population and its changes in various pathologic conditions, the information about the impact of medical therapy on left ventricle strain is limited. This article provides an analysis of published studies of left ventricle strain changes in response to different agents and combinations of medical therapies used for hypertension and congestive heart failure.

Myocardial strain for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction but without diastolic dysfunction

AIMS

Some patients with apparent heart failure (HF) have an ejection fraction (EF) ≥ 50% and elevated levels of natriuretic peptides (NPs), but no significant diastolic dysfunction. Among these, some may have HF, others may not. Myocardial strain is an excellent prognostic factor.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Among 4312 consecutive patients with acute HF from three tertiary hospitals, we included 355 patients with EF of ≥50% and elevated levels of NPs, without significant diastolic dysfunction. Patients were classified as having impaired global longitudinal strain (GLS < 16%) or normal GLS (GLS ≥ 16%). The primary endpoint was 5 year all-cause mortality. The mean age was 70.3 years and 49% were female. Overall, 107 patients (30.1%) died at 5 years. As per the definition, 176 (49.6%) patients had impaired GLS and 179 (50.4%) had normal GLS. Patients with normal GLS had lower 5 year all-cause mortality than those with impaired GLS (P < 0.001). When comparing with the 11 365 age-matched and sex-matched controls, patients with normal GLS had the same long-term survival as the controls (P = 0.834), whereas those with impaired GLS had 48% increased risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-1.89).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with apparent HF and preserved EF but without diastolic dysfunction, those with impaired GLS may be considered to have HF.

The roles of global longitudinal strain imaging in contemporary clinical cardiology

Myocardial deformation imaging is now readily available during routine echocardiography and plays an important role in the advanced care of cardiovascular diseases. Its clinical value in detecting subtle myocardial dysfunction, by helping diagnose disease and allowing prediction of disease progression and earlier pharmacological intervention, has been demonstrated. Strain imaging has been the most studied and clinically used technique in the field of cardio-oncology. A relative percent reduction in left ventricular (LV) global longitudinal strain > 15% from baseline is considered a marker of early subclinical LV dysfunction and may have the potential to guide early initiation of cardioprotective therapy. The role of strain imaging is expanding to other fields, such as cardiac amyloidosis, other cardiomyopathies, valvular heart diseases, pulmonary hypertension, and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. It is also used for the evaluation of the right ventricle and atria. This review aims to provide a current understanding of the roles of strain imaging in the evaluation and management of patients with cardiovascular diseases in clinical practice.

Myocardial strain to identify benefit from beta-blockers in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

Aims

Not all patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) benefit equally from beta‐blockers. Previous studies suggest that myocardial strain that reflects myocardial deformation may have a better prognostic value than the left ventricular ejection fraction. We aimed to evaluate the differential effect of beta‐blockers according to the global longitudinal strain (GLS) in patients with HFrEF.

Methods and results

Of the 4312 patients in the Strain for Risk Assessment and Therapeutic Strategies in Patients with Acute Heart Failure registry, we included 2126 HFrEF patients whose data on beta‐blocker use and GLS were available. Patients were categorized into two groups: one group of patients had GLS ≥ 10%, and the other group had GLS < 10%. The primary outcome was 5 year all‐cause mortality according to beta‐blocker use. Of the 2126 patients with HFrEF, 526 (24.7%) and 1600 (75.3%) patients had GLS ≥ 10% and <10%, respectively. Overall, 1399 patients (65.8%) received beta‐blockers, and 864 (40.6%) patients died during the 5 year follow‐up. Beta‐blocker use was associated with improved survival in patients with GLS < 10% in both the inverse probability treatment‐weighted (hazard ratio 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.59–0.83, P < 0.001) and Cox regression analyses (hazard ratio 0.69, 95% confidence interval 0.59–0.81; P < 0.001). However, beta‐blocker use was not associated with better survival in patients with GLS ≥ 10% in the inverse probability treatment‐weighted and Cox regression analyses (both P > 0.05).

Conclusions

Beta‐blocker use appears to be associated with improved survival in patients with HFrEF and GLS < 10%, but this is not the case in patients with GLS ≥ 10%. Therefore, GLS may be used to identify patients who have attenuated benefits from beta‐blockers in HFrEF.

Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03513653 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03513653).

Echocardiography in the diagnostic evaluation and phenotyping of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) represents one of the greatest unmet needs in modern cardiology given its diagnostic difficulty and limited therapeutic options. Echocardiography provides valuable information on cardiac structure, function, and hemodynamics and plays a central role in the evaluation of HFpEF. Echocardiography is crucial in identifying HFpEF among patients with dyspnea, especially when overt congestion is absent. The combination of echocardiographic indices of diastolic function, clinical characteristics, and natriuretic peptide tests has been proposed in the diagnostic evaluation of patients with suspected HFpEF. Echocardiography also provides valuable insight into the pathophysiology and underlying phenotypes of HFpEF. Exercise stress echocardiography can also detect abnormalities that develop only during exercise. This may enhance the diagnosis of HFpEF by demonstrating elevation in the left ventricular filling pressure and may have potential for better pathophysiological characterization. This review focuses on the role of echocardiography in the diagnostic evaluation and phenotyping of HFpEF. We also discuss the potential role of exercise stress echocardiography for the diagnosis and disease phenotyping of HFpEF.

Incremental Value of Global Longitudinal Strain in the Long-Term Prediction of Heart Failure among Patients with Coronary Artery Disease

BACKGROUND

Heart failure (HF) remains a common complication for patients with coronary artery disease (CAD), especially after acute myocardial infarction. Although left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is conventionally used to assess cardiac function for risk stratification, it has been shown in other settings to underestimate the risk of HF compared with global longitudinal strain (GLS). Moreover, most evidence pertains to early-onset HF. We sought the clinical and myocardial predictors for late-onset HF in patients with CAD.

METHODS

We analyzed echocardiograms (including GLS) in 334 patients with CAD (ages 65 ± 11 years, 77% male) who were enrolled in the Nurse-Led Intervention for Less Chronic Heart Failure trial, a prospective, randomized controlled trial that compared standard care with nurse-led intervention to prevent HF in individuals at risk of incident HF. Long-term (9 years) follow-up was obtained via data linkage. Analysis was performed using a competing-risk model.

RESULTS

Baseline LVEF values were normal or mildly impaired (LVEF ≥ 40%) in all subjects. After a median of 9 years of follow-up, 50 (15%) of the 334 patients had new HF admissions, and 68 (20%) died. In a competing-risk model, HF was associated with GLS (hazard ratio = 1.15 [1.05-1.25], P = .001), independent of estimated glomerular filtration rate (hazard ratio = 0.98 [0.97-0.99], P = .045), Charlson comorbidity score (hazard ratio = 1.64 [1.25-2.15], P < .001), or E/e' (hazard ratio = 1.08 [1.02-1.14], P = .01). Global longitudinal strain-but not conventional echocardiographic measures-added incremental value to a clinical model based on age, gender, and Charlson score (area under the curve, 0.78-0.83, P = .01). Global longitudinal strain was still associated with HF development in patients taking baseline angiotensin convertase enzyme inhibitors (hazard ratio = 1.21 [1.11-1.31], P < .01) and baseline beta-blockers (1.17 [1.09, 1.26]; P < .01). Mortality was associated with older men, risk factors (hypertension or diabetes), and comorbidities (AF and chronic kidney disease).

CONCLUSIONS

Global longitudinal strain is independently associated with risk of incident HF in patients admitted with CAD and provides incremental prognostic value to standard markers. Identifying an at-risk subgroup using GLS may be the focus of future randomized controlled trails to enable targeted therapeutic intervention.

Treatment of Heart Failure with Mid-Range Ejection Fraction: What Is the Evidence

In this review, we briefly outline our current knowledge on the epidemiology, outcomes, and pathophysiology of heart failure (HF) with mid-range ejection fraction (HFmrEF), and discuss in more depth the evidence on current treatment options for this group of patients. In most studies, the clinical background of patients with HFmrEF is intermediate between that of patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and patients with HF and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) in terms of demographics and comorbid conditions. However, the current evidence, stemming from observational studies and post hoc analyses of randomized controlled trials, suggests that patients with HFmrEF benefit from medications that target the neurohormonal axes, a pathophysiological behavior that resembles that of HFrEF. Use of β-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and sacubitril/valsartan is reasonable in patients with HFmrEF, whereas evidence is currently scarce for other therapies. In clinical practice, patients with HFmrEF are treated more like HFrEF patients, potentially because of history of systolic dysfunction that has partially recovered. Assessment of left ventricular systolic function with contemporary noninvasive modalities, e.g., echocardiographic strain imaging, is promising for the selection of patients with HFmrEF who will benefit from neurohormonal antagonists and other HFrEF-targeted therapies.

Heart Failure With Midrange Ejection Fraction-What Is It, If Anything?

The patient cohort with left ventricular ejection fractions (LVEFs) of 41%-49%, which has been defined as heart failure with midrange ejection fraction (HFmrEF), represent a significant proportion of the heart failure (HF) population. Despite the clear cutoffs established by different society guidelines, confusion remains regarding the exact significance of midrange LVEF within the HF syndrome. Patients with LVEF 41%-49% represent a heterogeneous group of patients sharing pathophysiologic mechanisms, biomarker profiles, comorbidities, and clinical characteristics with patients with preserved and reduced LVEF. In this clinical review, we discuss the underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms that culminate in the clinical syndrome of HF and contribute to the disparities observed between HFpEF, HFrEF, and HFmrEF. We highlight differences and similarities in clinical characteristics and imaging features between HFpEF and HFrEF in an effort to disentangle the heterogeneous group of patients with midrange LVEF, but ultimately we conclude that LVEF should be seen as simply one important element of a continuum throughout the HF syndrome, and that although is useful, it is an oversimplification, because HF syndrome is more of a continuum. The underlying pathophysiology, etiology, and comorbidities of patients presenting with HF is becoming ever more important as the limitations of a classification solely based on LVEF are being better recognised, and as patient-specific personalisation of care is becoming ever more important.

Characteristics, prognosis and treatment response in distinct phenogroups of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

BACKGROUND

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a heterogeneous syndrome. We aimed to derive HFpEF phenotype-based groups based on clinical features using machine learning, and to compare clinical characteristics, outcomes and treatment response across the phenogroups.

METHODS

We applied model-based clustering to 11 clinical and laboratory variables collected in 970 HFpEF patients. An additional 290 HFpEF patients was enrolled as a validation cohort. During 5-year follow-up, all-cause mortality was used as the primary endpoints, and composite endpoints (all-cause mortality or HF hospitalization) were set as the secondary endpoint.

RESULTS

We identified three phenogroups, for which significant differences in the age and gender, the prevalence of concomitant ischaemic heart disease, atrial fibrillation and type 2 diabetes mellitus, the burden of B-type natriuretic peptide level and HF symptoms. Patients with phenogroup 3 had higher all-cause mortality or composite endpoints, whereas patients in phenogroup 1 had less adverse events after 5-year follow-up. Moreover, it was indicated that beta-blockers or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blocker (ACEI/ARB) use was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality or composite endpoints in phenogroup 3, instead of the other phenogroups. This HFpEF phenogroup classification, including its ability to stratify risk, was successfully replicated in a prospective validation cohort.

CONCLUSION

Machine-learning based clustering strategy is used to identify three distinct phenogroups of HFpEF that are characterized by significant differences in comorbidity burden, underlying cardiac abnormalities, and long-term prognosis. Beta-blockers or ACEI/ARB therapy is associated with a lower risk of adverse events in specific phenogroup.

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: insights from recent clinical researches

Heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) accounts for nearly half of the cases of HF and its incidence might be increasing with the aging society. Patients with HFpEF present with significant symptoms, including exercise intolerance, impaired quality of life, and have a poor prognosis as well as frequent hospitalization and increased mortality compared with HF with reduced ejection fraction. The concept of HFpEF is still evolving and may be a virtual complex rather than a real systemic disorder. Thus, beyond solely targeting cardiac abnormalities management strategies need to be extended, such as left ventricular diastolic dysfunction. In this review, we examine new diagnostic algorithms, pathophysiology, current management status, and ongoing trials based on heterogeneous pathophysiology and etiology in HFpEF.