Beta-blockers in older patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction: class, dosage, and outcomes

Drug Therapy for Acute and Chronic Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction with Hypertension: A State-of-the-Art Review

In this comprehensive state-of-the-art review, we provide an evidence-based analysis of current drug therapies for patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) in the acute and chronic phases with concurrent hypertension. Additionally, we explore the latest developments and emerging evidence on the efficacy, safety, and clinical outcomes of common and novel drug treatments in the management of HFpEF with concurrent hypertension. During the acute phase of HFpEF, intravenous diuretics, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), and vasodilators are pivotal, while in the chronic phase, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers have proven effective in enhancing clinical outcomes. However, the use of calcium channel blockers in HFpEF with hypertension should be approached with caution, owing to their potential negative inotropic effects. We also explored emerging drug therapies for HFpEF, such as sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), soluble guanylate cyclase (sGC) stimulators, novel MRAs, and ivabradine. Notably, SGLT2 inhibitors have shown promise in reducing heart failure hospitalizations and cardiovascular mortality in patients with HFpEF, regardless of their diabetic status. Additionally, ARNI and sGC stimulators have demonstrated potential in improving symptoms, functional capacity, and quality of life. Nonetheless, additional research is necessary to pinpoint optimal treatment strategies for HFpEF with concurrent hypertension. Furthermore, long-term studies are essential to assess the durability and sustained benefits of emerging drug therapies. Identification of novel targets and mechanisms underlying HFpEF pathophysiology will pave the way for innovative drug development approaches in the management of HFpEF with concurrent hypertension.

How to Manage Beta-Blockade in Older Heart Failure Patients: A Scoping Review

Beta blockers (BBs) play a crucial role in enhancing the quality of life and extending the survival of patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Initiating the therapy at low doses and gradually titrating the dose upwards is recommended to ensure therapeutic efficacy while mitigating potential adverse effects. Vigilant monitoring for signs of drug intolerance is necessary, with dose adjustments as required. The management of older HF patients requires a case-centered approach, taking into account individual comorbidities, functional status, and frailty. Older adults, however, are often underrepresented in randomized clinical trials, leading to some uncertainty in management strategies as patients with HF in clinical practice are older than those enrolled in trials. The present article performs a scoping review of the past 25 years of published literature on BBs in older HF patients, focusing on age, outcomes, and tolerability. Twelve studies (eight randomized-controlled and four observational) encompassing 26,426 patients were reviewed. The results indicate that BBs represent a viable treatment for older HFrEF patients, offering benefits in symptom management, cardiac function, and overall outcomes. Their role in HF with preserved EF, however, remains uncertain. Further research is warranted to refine treatment strategies and address specific aspects in older adults, including proper dosing, therapeutic adherence, and tolerability.

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.

Association between the beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, all-cause mortality and length of hospitalization in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

To establish an association between beta-blockers (BBs), calcium channel blockers (CCBs), all-cause mortality, and hospitalization in patients with Heart failure with preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF).

METHODS

The present meta-analysis has been performed as per the guidelines of (PRISMA). An inclusive literature search was made without any limitations on language using the electronic databases Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and PubMed up to November 2022. The outcomes evaluated in this meta-analysis involved all-cause mortality and hospitalization due to heart failure. The number of patients with HFpEF and their positive outcomes was extracted and analyzed using RevMan software.

RESULTS

In total, 10 articles were included in the present meta-analysis, with a pooled sample size of 12 940 HFpEF patients. In comparison with placebo, both BB and CCB substantially reduced the risk of all-cause mortality and hospitalization. However, BB are more effective because they provide a significant reduction in all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR) = 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.43-0.83; p = .002] and hospitalization (RR = 0.54; 95% CI = 0.37-0.80; p = .002) as compared with CCB with a risk ratio of all-cause mortality (RR = 0.77; 95% CI = 0.60-0.98; p = .03) and hospitalization (RR = 0.63; 95% CI = 0.44-0.90; p < .00001). A random-effects model was used because of high heterogeneity between the studies (I2  > 70%).

CONCLUSIONS

The current meta-analysis suggests that BBs were more beneficial than CCB in reducing all-cause mortality and hospitalization duration in patients with HFpEF.

Beta-Blocker Use and Heart Failure Outcomes in Mildly Reduced and Preserved Ejection Fraction

BACKGROUND

Although studies consistently show that beta-blockers reduce morbidity and mortality in patients with reduced ejection fraction (EF), data are inconsistent in patients with heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) and suggest potential negative effects in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to examine the association of beta-blockers with heart failure (HF) hospitalization and death in patients with HF and EF ≥40% METHODS: Beta-blocker use was assessed at first encounter in outpatients ≥65 years of age with HFmrEF and HFpEF in the U.S. PINNACLE Registry (2013-2017). The associations of beta-blockers with HF hospitalization, death, and the composite of HF hospitalization/death were assessed using propensity-score adjusted multivariable Cox regression models, including interactions of EF × beta-blocker use.

RESULTS

Among 435,897 patients with HF and EF ≥40% (HFmrEF, n = 75,674; HFpEF = 360,223), 289,377 (66.4%) were using a beta-blocker at first encounter; more commonly in patients with HFmrEF vs HFpEF (77.7% vs 64.0%; P < 0.001). There were significant interactions between EF × beta-blocker use for HF hospitalization, death, and composite of HF hospitalization/death (P < 0.001 for all), with higher risk with beta-blocker use as EF increased. Beta-blockers were associated with decreased risk of HF hospitalization and death in patients with HFmrEF but a lack of survival benefit and a higher risk of HF hospitalization in patients with HFpEF, particularly when EF was >60%.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large, real-world, propensity score-adjusted cohort of older outpatients with HF and EF ≥40%, beta-blocker use was associated with a higher risk of HF hospitalization as EF increased, with potential benefit in patients with HFmrEF and potential risk in patients with higher EF (particularly >60%). Further studies are needed to understand the appropriateness of beta-blocker use in patients with HFpEF in the absence of compelling indications.

Effect of Personalized Accelerated Pacing on Quality of Life, Physical Activity, and Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Preclinical and Overt Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: The myPACE Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) with a pacemaker may benefit from a higher, more physiologic backup heart rate than the nominal 60 beats per minute (bpm) setting.

Objective

To assess the effects of a moderately accelerated personalized backup heart rate compared with 60 bpm (usual care) in patients with preexisting pacemaker systems that limit pacemaker-mediated dyssynchrony.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This blinded randomized clinical trial enrolled patients with stage B and C HFpEF from the University of Vermont Medical Center pacemaker clinic between June 2019 and November 2020. Analysis was modified intention to treat.

Interventions

Participants were randomly assigned to personalized accelerated pacing or usual care and were followed up for 1 year. The personalized accelerated pacing heart rate was calculated using a resting heart rate algorithm based on height and modified by ejection fraction.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the serial change in Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) score. Secondary end points were changes in N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels, pacemaker-detected physical activity, atrial fibrillation from baseline, and adverse clinical events.

Results

Overall, 107 participants were randomly assigned to the personalized accelerated pacing (n = 50) or usual care (n = 57) groups. The median (IQR) age was 75 (69-81) years, and 48 (48%) were female. Over 1-year follow-up, the median (IQR) pacemaker-detected heart rate was 75 (75-80) bpm in the personalized accelerated pacing arm and 65 (63-68) bpm in usual care. MLHFQ scores improved in the personalized accelerated pacing group (median [IQR] baseline MLHFQ score, 26 [8-45]; at 1 month, 15 [2-25]; at 1 year, 9 [4-21]; P < .001) and worsened with usual care (median [IQR] baseline MLHFQ score, 19 [6-42]; at 1 month, 23 [5-39]; at 1 year, 27 [7-52]; P = .03). In addition, personalized accelerated pacing led to improved changes in NT-proBNP levels (mean [SD] decrease of 109 [498] pg/dL vs increase of 128 [537] pg/dL with usual care; P = .02), activity levels (mean [SD], +47 [67] minutes per day vs -22 [35] minutes per day with usual care; P < .001), and device-detected atrial fibrillation (27% relative risk reduction compared with usual care; P = .04) over 1-year of follow-up. Adverse clinical events occurred in 4 patients in the personalized accelerated pacing group and 11 patients in usual care.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, among patients with HFpEF and pacemakers, treatment with a moderately accelerated, personalized pacing rate was safe and improved quality of life, NT-proBNP levels, physical activity, and atrial fibrillation compared with the usual 60 bpm setting.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04721314.

Impact of β-Blockers on Heart Rate and Oxygen Uptake During Exercise and Recovery in Older Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction

PURPOSE

The study aimed to investigate the differences in oxygen uptake ((Equation is included in full-text article.)O2) and heart rate (HR) (at rest, submaximal exercise, peak exercise, and recovery) in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) with β-blockers (BB) or without BB treatment (NBB) and to analyze the relationship between HR reserve (HRresv) and peak (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2 ((Equation is included in full-text article.)O2peak) in BB and NBB.

METHODS

A total of 174 HFpEF patients (>65 yr; BB, n = 59; NBB, n = 115) were assessed with a cardiopulmonary exercise test to peak exertion using an incremental protocol. After 5 min of supine rest, HR and (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2 (HRrest, (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2rest) at submaximal exercise (HRsubmax, (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2submax), at peak exercise (HRpeak, (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2peak), at 1 min of passive recovery (HRrec1), HRresv (HRpeak- HRrest), and HR recovery (HRrecov = HRpeak- HRrec1) were evaluated.

RESULTS

Analysis showed that HRrest (66.0 ± 12.2 vs 69.7 ± 10.6 bpm), HRsubmax (91.7 ± 16.2 vs 98.6 ± 15.2 bpm), and HRrec1 (102.9 ± 18.9 vs 109.4 ± 16.9 bpm) were significantly lower (P ≤ .05) in BB than in NBB, respectively. However, there were no significant differences (P > .05) between the BB and the NBB for HRpeak, HRresv, HRrecov, (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2rest, (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2submax, and (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2peak. A significant relationship was found between HRresv and (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2peak values in both groups (BB, r = 0.52; NBB, r = 0.49, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The nonsignificant differences in HRpeak, HRresv, HRrecov, or (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2 values between BB and NBB HFpEF patients, along with significant correlation between HRresv and (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2peak, suggest that these measures may have equal utility in prognostic and functional assessment as well as clinical applications, including the prescription of exercise, in elderly HFpEF patients.

Sex-related differences in the pharmacological treatment of heart failure

Heart failure (HF) represents a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. However, HF trials highlighted many differences between men and women with HF. Thus, women represent approximately a quarter of people with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), while they account for over half of those with HF with preserved EF (HFpEF). There are also sex-related differences (SRDs) in the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and safety profile of some guideline-recommended drugs for the treatment of HF. As compared with men, women with HFrEF are less often treated with guideline-recommended HF drugs, experience more frequent and severe adverse reactions when these drugs are prescribed at the same doses in both sexes, and recent evidence suggests that women might need lower doses than men, bringing into question which are the optimal doses of HF drugs in women and men separately. However, information on SRDs in drug efficacy and safety in patients with HFrEF is very limited due to the underrepresentation of women and the lack of sex-specific evaluations of drug efficacy and safety in HF clinical trials. As a consequence, current clinical guidelines do not provide sex-specific recommendations, even when significant differences exist, at least, in drug safety. The aim of this article is to review the SRDs in the pharmacokinetics, efficacy and safety of guideline-recommended HF drugs and to identify emerging areas of research to improve our understanding of the SRDs, because a better understanding of these differences is the first step to achieve a personalized treatment of HF in women and men.

Treatment of Heart Failure With Mid-Range Ejection Fraction: A Summary of Current Evidence

Heart failure (HF) is a complex syndrome causing heavy burden in public health, and the modern objective assessment of it is based on the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). In 2016, the European Society of Cardiology classified the “gray area” in HF with LVEF of 40–49% as a new HF phenotype (HFmrEF) in an attempt to uncover the specific characteristics and treatment of these patients, which might recover or worsen to HFpEF or HFrEF, respectively, or conversely from these two subtypes. Up to now, many studies have demonstrated that patients with HFmrEF would possibly gain more benefits from some targeted therapies with HFrEF than those with HFpEF. This review summarizes what is known about the findings in the treatment of HFmrEF and discusses what should be done to better define the peculiar HF phenotype in the future.

Digoxin Initiation and Outcomes in Patients with Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction

BACKGROUND

Digoxin reduces the risk of heart failure hospitalization in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Less is known about this association in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), the examination of which was the objective of the current study.

METHODS

In the Medicare-linked OPTIMIZE-HF registry, 7374 patients hospitalized for HF had ejection fraction ≥50% and were not receiving digoxin prior to admission. Of these, 5675 had a heart rate ≥50 beats per minute, an estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥30 mL/min/1.73 m2 or did not receive inpatient dialysis, and digoxin was initiated in 524 of these patients. Using propensity scores for digoxin initiation, calculated for each of the 5675 patients, we assembled a matched cohort of 513 pairs of patients initiated and not initiated on digoxin, balanced on 58 baseline characteristics (mean age, 80 years; 66% women; 8% African American). Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for outcomes associated with digoxin initiation were estimated in the matched cohort.

RESULTS

Among the 1026 matched patients with HFpEF, 30-day heart failure readmission occurred in 6% and 9% of patients initiated and not initiated on digoxin, respectively (HR 0.70; 95% CI, 0.45-1.10; P = .124). HRs (95% CIs) for 30-day all-cause readmission and all-cause mortality associated with digoxin initiation were 0.95 (0.73-1.23; P = .689) and 0.93 (0.55-1.56; P = .773), respectively. Digoxin initiation had no association with 6-year outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Digoxin initiation prior to hospital discharge was not associated with 30-day or 6-year outcomes in older hospitalized patients with HFpEF.

[Frequency of use and Indications for Beta-Blockers in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction]

Aim      To evaluate trends in beta-blocker prescribing and incidence of possible reasons for beta-blocker administration, including arterial hypertension (AH), atrial fibrillation (AF), ischemic heart disease (IHD), and myocardial infarction, in participants of clinical studies enrolling patients with chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (CHF-PEF).Material and methods  A systematic literature search was performed in the PubMed and EMBASE databases. The study included RCSs of pharmacological therapies for patients with CHF-PEF conducted from 1993 through 2019. Studies of beta-blocker efficacy or those including a specific population (CHF-PEF+IHD or CHF-PEF+AH, etc.) were excluded from the analysis. Baseline characteristics of patients, incidence rate of beta-blocker prescribing, and prevalence of AH, AF, IHD, and MI were recorded. Trends in prevalence of concomitant diseases and the proportion of patients using beta-blockers by the year of enrollment to the study were analyzed with the Mann-Kendall test.Results 14 RCSs of 718 selected publications completely met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Beta-blocker prescribing significantly increased between 1993 and 2019 (tau=0.51; p=0.014) and reached 80 % in recent studies. Furthermore, prevalence of IHD, MI, AH, and AF did not significantly change among the RCS participants (p&gt;0.05 for all). However, while for AH and AF, a tendency toward an increasing prevalence (tau=0.4; p=0.055 and tau=0.043; p=0.063, respectively) could be considered and became statistically significant for AF when the ALDO-DHF study was excluded from the analysis (tau=0.5; p=0.042), the MI prevalence tended to decrease (tau= -0.73; p=0.06).Conclusion      Beta-blocker prescribing to patients upon inclusion into RCSs for CHF-PEF has significantly increased for the recent 20 years while the incidence of formal reasons for beta-blocker administration (AF, AH, MI, IHD) did not significantly change.

Beta-blockers withdrawal in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and chronotropic incompetence: Effect on functional capacity rationale and study design of a prospective, randomized, controlled trial (The Preserve-HR trial)

Background

The pathophysiology of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is complex and multifactorial. Chronotropic incompetence (ChI) has emerged as a crucial pathophysiological mechanism. Beta‐blockers, drugs with negative chronotropic effects, are commonly used in HFpEF, although current evidence does not support its routine use in these patients.

Hypothesis

We postulate beta‐blockers may have deleterious effects in HFpEF and ChI. This work aims to evaluate the short‐term effect of beta‐blockers withdrawal on functional capacity assessed by the maximal oxygen uptake (peakVO2) in patients with HFpEF and ChI.

Methods

This is a prospective, crossover, randomized (1:1) and multicenter study. After randomization, the clinical and cardiac rhythm will be continuously registered for 30 days. PeakVO2 is assessed by cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) at 15 and 30 days in both groups. Secondary endpoints include quality of life, cognitive, and safety assessment. Patients with stable HFpEF, functional class New York Heart Association (NYHA) II‐III, chronic treatment with beta‐blockers, and ChI will be enrolled. A sample size estimation [alfa: 0.05, power: 90%, a 20% loss rate, and delta change of mean peakVO2: +1.2 mL/kg/min (SD ± 2.0)] of 52 patients is necessary to test our hypothesis.

Results

Patients started enrolling in October 2018. As January 14th, 2020, 28 patients have been enrolled. It is projected to enroll the last patient at the end of July 2020.

Conclusions

Optimizing therapy that improves functional capacity remains an unmeet priority in HFpEF. Deprescribing beta‐blockers in patients with HFpEF and ChI seems a plausible intervention to improve functional capacity. This trial is an attempt towards precision medicine in this complex syndrome.

Trial registration

http://clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03871803.

Association between bisoprolol plasma concentration and worsening of heart failure: (CVI ARO 6)

BACKGROUND

Although bisoprolol has been established to prevent heart failure (HF), finding the optimal dose remains a challenge. It is crucial to understand the distribution of bisoprolol plasma concentration (Bis-PC) and association with outcomes.

METHODS

This was a single-center observational study in 114 HF patients under once-daily bisoprolol. After obtaining trough Bis-PC, patients were followed-up for 1 year. The primary endpoint was worsening of HF. Patients were divided according to the tertiles of Bis-PC.

RESULTS

In multivariate logistic regression analysis, independent predictors of high Bis-PC (1st tertile: ≥ 5.38 ng/mL) were age, eGFR, and bisoprolol dose. The cumulative incidence rates of the primary endpoint were 10.5%/13.2%/26.3% in low/middle/high Bis-PC categories, respectively (log rank test, p = 0.087). Bis-PC was independently associated with the primary endpoint (hazard ratio [HR], 1.19 [per ng/mL], 95% CI 1.03-1.36). In subgroups, high Bis-PC was independently associated with the primary endpoint in elderly (HR 6.32, 95% CI 1.34-29.83) and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) (HR 3.52, 95% CI 1.06-11.70).

CONCLUSIONS

Bis-PC was increased by age and renal dysfunction, and high Bis-PC was associated with worsening of HF in elderly and HFpEF patients. Care should be taken to avoid overdose.

Heart Failure With Mid-range Ejection Fraction

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To describe the epidemiology, pathophysiology, management, and prognosis of patients with heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction (HFmrEF).

RECENT FINDINGS

In 2013, The American Heart Association (AHA)/American College of Cardiology (ACC) assigned an ejection fraction (EF) range to heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF, EF ≤ 40%) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF, EF ≥50%). This classification created a "gray zone" of patients with EFs between 41% and 49% that ultimately came to be known as heart failure with borderline or mid-range ejection fraction. HFmrEF patients represent a group with heterogeneous clinical characteristics that at times resembles HFrEF, at others HFpEF, and at others still a unique phenotype altogether. No randomized controlled trials exist in those with HFmrEF, though HFrEF and HFpEF studies that include overlap suggest some potential benefit of beta blockers, angiotensin receptor blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors. Mortality rates among the HFmrEF population are significant, and are similar to those in patients with HFrEF and HFpEF. HFmrEF is a complex disorder that remains poorly understood. Future research is needed to better elucidate the pathophysiology, management, and prognosis of this condition.

The progress and controversial of the use of beta blockers in patients with heart failure with a preserved ejection fraction

Beta blockers are a recommended therapy in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction(HFrEF). Beta blockers markedly and unequivocally reduce mortality in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. However, the beneficial effects of beta blockers in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction(HFpEF) are not well established. In this review, we will assess the evidence basis of the recommendations for beta blockers and discuss emerging concerns about the use of beta blockers in patients with HFpEF. The available evidence for beta blockers is limited and it remains uncertain whether beta blockers have a beneficial role in the treatment of HFpEF in the absence of an alternative indication for their use.

Improved outcome with standardized plan for clinical management of acute decompensated chronic heart failure

Background

Our overall goal is to improve clinical care for inpatients with chronic heart failure (CHF). A retrospective assessment of CHF patients admitted to our hospital over the past decade (2005 vs. 2014) indicated a need for better strategies to evaluate clinical treatment, implement best practices and achieve optimal patient outcome. To that purpose, we developed a standardized plan to improve in-hospital treatment of acute decompensated CHF patients.

Methods & Results

Retrospective chart reviews were conducted to compare three cohorts of CHF patients admitted to the University Hospital of Lund at different time points over a 12-year period: 2005 (365 patients), 2014 (172 patients) and 2017-2018 (57 patients). Little improvement was seen between 2005 and 2014 with respect to one-year mortality (35% vs. 34%) and adequate treatment with recommended medications, e.g., use of renin-angiotensin system blockers (45% vs. 51%). A standardized treatment plan was devised to improve outcomes. A third cohort, treated under the plan (2017-2018), was compared with the 2014 cohort. One-year mortality (18% vs. 34%) and 30-day readmission (5% vs. 30%) were dramatically decreased, and adherence to medication guidelines was achieved. Key elements of the plan included well-defined treatment procedures, enhanced communication and teamwork, education, adequate time for treatment (5 days) and post-discharge follow-up as necessary. Natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels were useful for assessing patient status, prognosis and response to treatment.

Conclusion

Development of a standard plan for clinical management of acute decompensated CHF patients resulted in significant improvements in patient outcome, as reflected in decreased rates of 30-day readmission and one-year mortality.

Pulmonary artery denervation improves hemodynamics and cardiac function in pulmonary hypertension secondary to heart failure

This study aimed to determine the benefits and correlated mechanisms of pulmonary artery denervation (PADN) for heart failure (HF) pulmonary hypertension (PH). PH secondary to HF is associated with poor clinical outcomes because there is no proper therapy for it. PADN showed improved outcomes for patients with HF-PH. However, the underlying mechanisms remain unknown. Supracoronary aortic banding (SAB) was used to create HF-PH models. Sprague-Dawley rats were randomly assigned to control, SAB, sham, SAB with PADN, and SAB without PADN groups. Surgical (longitudinally damaging vessel nerves) and chemical (10% phenol applied to the surface of nerves) PADN was performed for animals in the SAB with PADN group. Morphological, echocardiographic, hemodynamic, and protein expression changes were measured four weeks thereafter. Adrenergic receptor (AR) expressions of pulmonary arteries from four HF-PH patients and four patients without PH were measured. Ten HF-PH patients who underwent PADN were followed-up for six months. SAB-induced HF-PH was achieved by 50% of animals. Surgical and chemical PADN was associated with significant improvements in pulmonary artery muscularization, hemodynamics, and right ventricular functions. In pulmonary arterial specimens from HF-PH patients, β2-AR and α1A/B-AR, as well as eNOS, were downregulated and α1D-AR was upregulated compared to those from patients without PH. PADN led to a mean increase of 84 m during the 6-min walk distance for HF-PH patients at six-month follow-up. HF-PH was characterized by downregulated β2-AR, α1A-AR, and α1B-AR and by upregulated α1D-AR. PADN is associated with significant improvements in hemodynamics and pulmonary artery remodeling.

Association is not causation: treatment effects cannot be estimated from observational data in heart failure

Aims

Treatment 'effects' are often inferred from non-randomized and observational studies. These studies have inherent biases and limitations, which may make therapeutic inferences based on their results unreliable. We compared the conflicting findings of these studies to those of prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in relation to pharmacological treatments for heart failure (HF).

Methods and results

We searched Medline and Embase to identify studies of the association between non-randomized drug therapy and all-cause mortality in patients with HF until 31 December 2017. The treatments of interest were: angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), statins, and digoxin. We compared the findings of these observational studies with those of relevant RCTs. We identified 92 publications, reporting 94 non-randomized studies, describing 158 estimates of the 'effect' of the six treatments of interest on all-cause mortality, i.e. some studies examined more than one treatment and/or HF phenotype. These six treatments had been tested in 25 RCTs. For example, two pivotal RCTs showed that MRAs reduced mortality in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction. However, only one of 12 non-randomized studies found that MRAs were of benefit, with 10 finding a neutral effect, and one a harmful effect.

Conclusion

This comprehensive comparison of studies of non-randomized data with the findings of RCTs in HF shows that it is not possible to make reliable therapeutic inferences from observational associations. While trials undoubtedly leave gaps in evidence and enrol selected participants, they clearly remain the best guide to the treatment of patients.

Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes in the Very Elderly Patients Hospitalized for Acute Heart Failure: Importance of Pharmacologic Guideline Adherence

The prognostic factors and pharmacological effects of the very elderly patients (aged ≥80 years) with acute heart failure (AHF) remain unclear. The study, therefore, investigated the prognostic impacts of the guideline-recommended pharmacological therapy in these patients. A cohort of 1297 very elderly patients [85.1 ± 4.0 years, 69.7% male, 32.6% heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), HFrEF], hospitalized for AHF, was studied. The percentage of the recommended prescription for HFrEF at discharge, including renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, β-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, was calculated as guideline adherence indicator (GAI). Among the 1233 survivors at discharge, 495 subjects (40.1%) died during a mean follow-up of 27.1 ± 23.9 months. Mean GAIs in HFrEF and HFpEF were 70.6 ± 34.9% and 64.1 ± 35.9%, respectively. A higher GAI was associated with less overall mortality [hazard ratio and 95% confidence interval per-1SD: 0.781, 0.655–0.930] and cardiovascular death (0.718, 0.558–0.925), independent of age, gender, diabetes, hypertension, mean blood pressure, LVEF, eGFR, sodium, and NT-proBNP. A GAI of 100% was associated with a better survival in both HFrEF and HFpEF. A prescription of the three recommended medications for HFrEF to the very elderly AHF patients was associated with a better survival after discharge.

Pharmacological heart rate lowering in patients with a preserved ejection fraction-review of a failing concept

Epidemiological studies have demonstrated that high resting heart rates are associated with increased mortality. Clinical studies in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction have shown that heart rate lowering with beta-blockers and ivabradine improves survival. It is therefore often assumed that heart rate lowering is beneficial in other patients as well. Here, we critically appraise the effects of pharmacological heart rate lowering in patients with both normal and reduced ejection fraction with an emphasis on the effects of pharmacological heart rate lowering in hypertension and heart failure. Emerging evidence from recent clinical trials and meta-analyses suggest that pharmacological heart rate lowering is not beneficial in patients with a normal or preserved ejection fraction. This has just begun to be reflected in some but not all guideline recommendations. The detrimental effects of pharmacological heart rate lowering are due to an increase in central blood pressures, higher left ventricular systolic and diastolic pressures, and increased ventricular wall stress. Therefore, we propose that heart rate lowering per se reproduces the hemodynamic effects of diastolic dysfunction and imposes an increased arterial load on the left ventricle, which combine to increase the risk of heart failure and atrial fibrillation. Pharmacologic heart rate lowering is clearly beneficial in patients with a dilated cardiomyopathy but not in patients with normal chamber dimensions and normal systolic function. These conflicting effects can be explained based on a model that considers the hemodynamic and ventricular structural effects of heart rate changes.

Effects of carvedilol therapy in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction - Results from the Croatian heart failure (CRO-HF) registry

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

According to recent guidelines, the best approach for treatment of heart failure patients with preserved ejection function is still not defined. The aim of this study was to investigate how carvedilol therapy influences the survival rate, ejection fraction and NYHA class in these patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted study on heart failure patients with preserved systolic function from the Croatian heart failure registry who were hospitalized in the period between 2005 and 2010. We enrolled patients with carvedilol listed as treatment on their discharge letters and patients who had been using carvedilol for at least 4 years, while for the control group we selected patients with no beta-blockers on their discharge letters (113 vs 204 respectively). The primary outcome was the overall survival rate and the secondary outcome was the change in ejection fraction of the left ventricle and NYHA class during the study.

RESULTS

Patients in the carvedilol group had a higher overall survival rate compared to patients in the control group (chi-square=14.1, P<0.001). Patients in the carvedilol group in two measurements had a significantly higher ejection fraction compared to the control group (F=148.04, P<0.001). Also, patients in the carvedilol group showed improvement in NYHA class (chi-square=29.768, P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Long term carvedilol therapy appears to be associated with a higher overall survival rate, improvement in ejection fraction and NYHA class in heart failure patients with preserved ejection fraction.

Heart Rate and Outcomes in Hospitalized Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction

BACKGROUND

A lower heart rate is associated with better outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (EF). Less is known about this association in patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this study were to examine associations of discharge heart rate with outcomes in hospitalized patients with HFpEF.

METHODS

Of the 8,873 hospitalized patients with HFpEF (EF ≥50%) in the Medicare-linked OPTIMIZE-HF (Organized Program to Initiate Lifesaving Treatment in Hospitalized Patients with Heart Failure) registry, 6,286 had a stable heart rate, defined as ≤20 beats/min variation between admission and discharge. Of these, 2,369 (38%) had a discharge heart rate of <70 beats/min. Propensity scores for discharge heart rate <70 beats/min, estimated for each of the 6,286 patients, were used to assemble a cohort of 2,031 pairs of patients with heart rate <70 versus ≥70 beats/min, balanced on 58 baseline characteristics.

RESULTS

The 4,062 matched patients had a mean age of 79 ± 10 years, 66% were women, and 10% were African American. During 6 years (median 2.8 years) of follow-up, all-cause mortality was 65% versus 70% for matched patients with a discharge heart rate <70 versus ≥70 beats/min, respectively (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.80 to 0.93; p < 0.001). A heart rate <70 beats/min was also associated with a lower risk for the combined endpoint of HF readmission or all-cause mortality (HR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.84 to 0.96; p = 0.002), but not with HF readmission (HR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.85 to 1.01) or all-cause readmission (HR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.95 to 1.08). Similar associations were observed regardless of heart rhythm or receipt of beta-blockers.

CONCLUSIONS

Among hospitalized patients with HFpEF, a lower discharge heart rate was independently associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality, but not readmission.

Reduced Myocardial Flow in Heart Failure Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction

BACKGROUND

There remains limited insight into the pathophysiology and therapeutic advances directed at improving prognosis for patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Recent studies have suggested a role for coronary microvascular dysfunction in HFpEF. Rb-82 cardiac positron emission tomography imaging is a noninvasive, quantitative approach to measuring myocardial flow reserve (MFR), a surrogate marker for coronary vascular health. The aim of this study was to determine whether abnormalities exist in MFR in patients with HFpEF without epicardial coronary artery disease.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 376 patients with ejection fraction ≥50%, no known history of obstructive coronary artery disease, and a confirmed diagnosis of heart failure (n=78) were compared with patients with no evidence of heart failure (n=298), further stratified into those with (n=186) and without (n=112) hypertension. Global and regional left ventricular MFR was calculated as stress/rest myocardial blood flow using Rb-82 positron emission tomography. Patients with HFpEF were more likely to be older, female, and have comorbid hypertension, diabetes mellitus, dyslipidemia, atrial fibrillation, anemia, and renal dysfunction. HFpEF was associated with a significant reduction in global MFR (2.16±0.69 in HFpEF versus 2.54±0.80 in hypertensive controls; P<0.02 and 2.89±0.70 in normotensive controls; P<0.001). A diagnosis of HFpEF was associated with 2.62 times greater unadjusted odds of having low global MFR (defined as <2.0) and remained a significant predictor of reduced global MFR after adjusting for comorbidities.

CONCLUSIONS

HFpEF, in the absence of known history for obstructive epicardial coronary artery disease, is associated with reduced MFR independent of other risk factors.

Diagnosis and Management of Heart Failure in Older Adults

Aging is characterized by heterogeneity, both in health and illness. Older adults with heart failure often have preserved ejection fraction and atypical and delayed clinical manifestations. After diagnosis of heart failure is established, a cause should be sought. The patient's comorbidities may provide clues. An elevated jugular venous pressure is the most reliable clinical sign of fluid volume overload and should be carefully evaluated. Left ventricular ejection fraction must be determined to assess prognosis and guide therapy. These 5 steps, namely, diagnosis, etiologic factor, fluid volume, ejection fraction, and therapy for heart failure may be memorized by mnemonic: DEFEAT-HF.

Interatrial shunt devices for heart failure with normal ejection fraction: a technology update

Heart failure with normal ejection fraction (HeFNEF) accounts for ~50% of heart failure admissions. Its pathophysiology and diagnostic criteria are yet to be defined clearly which may hinder the search for effective treatments. The clinical hallmark of HeFNEF is exertional breathlessness, often due to an abnormal increase in left atrial pressure during exercise. Creation of an interatrial communication to offload the left atrium is a possible therapeutic approach. There are two percutaneously delivered devices currently under investigation which are discussed in this review.

Older adults with heart failure treated with carvedilol, bisoprolol, or metoprolol tartrate: risk of mortality

PURPOSE

The long-term use of β-blockers has been shown to improve clinical outcomes among patients with heart failure (HF). However, a lack of data persists in assessing whether carvedilol or bisoprolol are superior to metoprolol tartrate in clinical practice. We endeavored to compare the effectiveness of β-blockers among older adults following a primary hospital admission for HF.

METHODS

We conducted a cohort study using Quebec administrative databases to identify patients who were using β-blockers, carvedilol, bisoprolol, or metoprolol tartrate after the diagnosis of HF. We characterized the patients by the type of β-blocker prescribed at discharge of their first HF hospitalization. An adjusted multivariate Cox proportional hazards model was used to compare the primary outcome of all-cause mortality. We also conducted analyses by matching for a propensity score for initiation of β-blocker therapy and assessed the effect on primary outcome.

RESULTS

Among 3197 patients with HF with a median follow-up of 2.8 years, the crude annual mortality rates (per 100 person-years) were at 16, 14.9, and 17.7 for metoprolol tartrate, carvedilol, and bisoprolol, respectively. Adjusted hazard ratios of carvedilol (hazard ratio 0.92; 0.78-1.09) and bisoprolol (hazard ratio 1.04; 0.93-1.16) were not significantly different from that of metoprolol tartrate in improving survival. After matching for propensity score, carvedilol and bisoprolol showed no additional benefit with respect to all-cause mortality compared with metoprolol tartrate.

CONCLUSIONS

Our evidence suggests no differential effect of β-blockers on all-cause mortality among older adults with HF. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The effect of beta-blockers on mortality in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: A meta-analysis of observational cohort and randomized controlled studies

BACKGROUND

Nearly half of patients with heart failure (HF) have preserved ejection fraction (EF) and the mortality of patients with HF with preserved EF (HFpEF) is high. However, there is no therapy to improve survival in HFpEF. Although observational cohort studies (OCSs) have examined the survival benefit of beta-blockers in HFpEF, the results are inconsistent due to limited power with small sample sizes and/or lack of adjustment for known confounders. Furthermore, recent randomized controlled trial (RCT)s failed to show the mortality benefit of beta-blockers in HFpEF. However, these RCTs were not adequately powered and thus the definite conclusion cannot be drawn.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis of the effect of beta-blockers on mortality in HFpEF. The search of electronic databases identified 5 OCSs with propensity score (PS) analysis (12,315 patients), 6 OCSs without PS analysis (15,275 patients), and 3 RCTs (1046 patients). Beta-blocker use was associated with improved survival in the pooled analysis of OCSs with PS analysis (RR [95% CI]=0.79 [0.66-0.95]) and in that of OCSs without PS analysis (0.70 [0.52-0.94]). In the pooled analysis of RCTs, beta-blocker use was associated with non-significant reduced risk for mortality (RR [95% CI]=0.80 [0.61-1.05]). Overall, use of beta-blockers reduced the risk of mortality by 21% (RR [95% CI]=0.79 [0.71-0.88]).

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis suggests the potential mortality benefit of beta-blockers in HFpEF. Well-designed and powered RCTs should be planned to confirm our observed potential survival benefit of beta-blockers in HFpEF.

Achievement of a target dose of bisoprolol may not be a preferred option for attenuating pressure overload-induced cardiac hypertrophy and fibrosis

Bisoprolol is a drug that acts via the mechanism of specifically and selectively inhibiting the β1-adrenoreceptor in cardiac myocytes, and provides a pure reduction of heart rate without changing other cardiac parameters. It has long been clinically used to treat cerebrovascular and cardiovascular illnesses. However, there is little information available on whether the role of bisoprolol in the attenuation of ventricular remodeling is dependent upon the achievement of a target dose, and whether it must be used as a preferred option. The aim of the present study was to clarify the underlying benefits of bisoprolol in the attenuation of pressure overload-induced cardiac hypertrophy and fibrosis at different doses. C57BL/6J male mice, aged 6-8 weeks, were treated with saline or one of three different doses of bisoprolol (Biso: 2.5, 5 or 10 mg/kg/day) for 8 weeks from day 1 after aortic banding (AB). A number of mice underwent sham surgery and were treated with saline or bisoprolol. The mice were randomly assigned into the sham (n=24) and AB (n=62) groups. The results revealed that bisoprolol had a protective role against the cardiac hypertrophy, fibrosis and dysfunction caused by AB. This was determined on the basis of heart/body and lung/body weight ratios and heart weight/tibia length ratios, as well as echocardiographic and hemodynamic parameters, histological analysis, and the gene expression levels of hypertrophic and fibrotic markers. The present study revealed that administration of bisoprolol for a long time period may enhance its role in the prevention of cardiac hypertrophy and fibrosis induced by AB, whereas no statistically significant difference was observed between the middle- and high-doses. These observations indicated that the function of bisoprolol in protecting against cardiac hypertrophy, fibrosis and dysfunction is time-dependent. Furthermore, it is proposed that a middle dose of bisoprolol may be a better option for patients with cardiovascular illnesses, particularly those undertaking coronary artery bypass graft and cardiac pacemaker surgeries. These promising results require further clinical investigation.

Prognosis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction treated with β-blockers: A propensity matched study in the community

BACKGROUND

The effect of treatment with β-blockers on the prognosis of patients newly diagnosed with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the relationship of commencing treatment with the β-blockers bisoprolol or carvedilol (CT-βB) with the prognosis of newly diagnosed HFpEF.

METHODS

Prospective study over 10years on 2704 patients with HFpEF. Main outcomes were mortality (all-cause and cardiovascular), hospitalizations for HF worsening, and visits. The independent relationship between CT-βB and the prognosis, stratifying patients for cardiovascular co-morbidity after propensity score-matching (985 patients CT-βB vs. another 985 patients non-CT-βB), was analyzed.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up of 1877.4days (interquartile range, 1-3651.2) 1600 died (81.2%), and 1702 were hospitalized (86.4%). CT-βB was associated with a lower risk of mortality (all-cause: HR [CI 95%] 0.78 [0.71 to 0.85], and cardiovascular: 0.75 [0.69 to 0.82]), a lower hospitalization rate (per 100 persons-year), 15.8 vs. 19.2, and a lower 30-day readmission rate (per 100 persons-year), 4.0 vs. 5.8, (P<0.001 in all cases), even after adjustment for the propensity to take β-blockers or other medications, comorbidities, and other potential confounders. These effects of CT-βB were independent of gender, and were observed in both patients taking high dose βB (over the median dose) and lower dose βB (under or equal to the median dose).

CONCLUSIONS

In this propensity matched study, commencing treatment with bisoprolol or carvedilol, both at high and at lower doses, is associated with an improved prognosis of patients newly diagnosed with HFpEF.

Ambulatory Blood Pressure Parameters and Heart Failure With Reduced or Preserved Ejection Fraction in Elderly Treated Hypertensive Patients

BACKGROUND

The association between ambulatory blood pressure (BP) and future risk of heart failure (HF) is unclear. We investigated the association between ambulatory BP parameters and risk of HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFREF) or preserved ejection fraction (HFPEF) in elderly treated hypertensive patients.

METHODS

The occurrence of HFREF and HFPEF was evaluated in 1,191 elderly treated hypertensive patients who underwent clinical and instrumental evaluation, including ambulatory BP monitoring to evaluate daytime, nighttime, and 24-hour BP, dipping status, and morning surge (MS) of BP.

RESULTS

During the follow-up (9.1±4.9 years, range 0.4-20 years), 123 patients developed HF, of whom 56 had HFREF and 67 had HFPEF. After adjustment for other covariates, Cox regression analysis showed that 24-hour systolic BP, but not clinic BP, was independently associated with risk of both HFREF (hazard ratio (HR): 1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.14-1.63, per 10mm Hg increment) and HFPEF (HR: 1.35, 95% CI: 1.13-1.61, per 10mm Hg increment); moreover, high MS of BP (>23mm Hg) in dippers was independently associated with risk of HFREF (HR: 2.27, 95% CI: 1.00-5.15) and nondipping was independently associated with risk of HFPEF (HR: 2.78, 95% CI: 1.38-5.63).

CONCLUSIONS

In elderly treated hypertensive patients, 24-hour systolic BP is independently associated with future risk of both HFREF and HFPEF, whereas high MS is independently associated with risk of HFREF and nondipping is independently associated with risk of HFPEF.

Outcomes in patients hospitalized for heart failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: differences in clinical profile and treatment between 2002 and 2009

AIMS

Heart failure (HF) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) frequently co-exist, and each is a major public health issue. In a large cohort of hospitalized HF patients, we evaluated: (i) the impact of COPD on clinical outcomes; (ii) whether outcomes and treatments changed from 2002 to 2009; and (iii) the relationship between outcomes and treatments focusing on beta-blockers (BBs) and bronchodilators (BDs).

METHODS AND RESULTS

From linkable Lombardy administrative health databases, we selected individuals with a discharge diagnosis of HF with or without concomitant COPD (HF yesCOPD and HF noCOPD) in 2002 and 2009. Patients were followed up for 4 years. Outcomes were total mortality, first readmission for HF, and their combination. Unadjusted and adjusted Cox proportional models and competing risk analyses were used. We identified 11 274 patients with HF noCOPD and 2837 with HF yesCOPD. HF yesCOPD patients in 2002 and 2009 had a 20% higher risk of the outcomes. From 2002 to 2009, BB and BD prescriptions increased significantly. In HF noCOPD patients, risks for mortality [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.86-0.97], first HF readmission (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.74-0.85), and the combined endpoint (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.84-0.92) declined (all P < 0.003) while in HF yesCOPD only the risk for first HF readmission dropped (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.76-0.97; P = 0.018). BBs were associated with significantly lower mortality in both groups, but with a higher risk for first HF readmission in HF noCOPD. Outcomes did not significantly differ in HF yesCOPD treated or not with BDs.

CONCLUSIONS

The prognosis of patients hospitalized for HF, either with or without COPD, seemed to improve between 2002 and 2009, with possibly better survival of those on BBs. Because of residual confounding in observational studies, a randomized controlled trial should be considered to confirm these results.

Targeting heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: current status and future prospects

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) portrays a significant burden in terms of prevalence, morbidity, mortality, and health care costs. There is a lack of consensus on the basic pathophysiology, definition, and therapeutic targets for therapy for this syndrome. To date, there are no approved therapies available for reducing mortality or hospitalization for these patients. Several clinical trials have recently started to try and bridge this major gap. There is an urgent need to focus on drug and device development for HFpEF as well as to understand HFpEF pathophysiology.

Long-term prescription of beta-blocker delays the progression of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in patients with hypertension: A retrospective observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Hypertension complicated with left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) and diastolic dysfunction is one of the most common risks for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). This study was designed to evaluate the influences of long-term beta-blocker prescription in these patients.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis included eligible patients diagnosed with hypertension, LVH (left ventricular (LV) mass index >125 g/m(2) for men and >110 g/m(2) for women) and suspected diastolic dysfunction (E/E' ratio between 8 and 15) and without clinical signs or symptoms of heart failure in our hospital medical record database (January 2005-December 2009). A total of eligible 1498 patients were enrolled, of whom 803 received beta-blocker prescription and 695 accepted non-beta-blocker therapy.

RESULTS

With a median follow-up of 7.2 years, the new-onset symptomatic HFpEF occurred in 48 of 803 patients in the beta-blocker group (6.0%) and 92 of 695 patients in the non-beta-blocker group (13.2%, p < 0.001). Beta-blockers also generated more prominent improvement in diastolic function and LVH. And Cox proportional hazards model revealed that beta-blocker (hazard ratio (HR) 0.327, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.121-0.540, p = 0.009) or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blocker (ACEI/ARB) exposure (HR 0.422, 95% CI: 0.210-0.699, p = 0.015) was associated with a reduced risk of new onset of symptomatic HFpEF, and the elevation of LVMI (HR 1.210, 95% CI: 1.069-1.362, p = 0.040) or E/E' (HR 1.398, 95% CI: 1.306-1.541, p = 0.032) was associated with a high risk of new onset of symptomatic HFpEF.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term beta-blocker exposure was associated with protective effects in terms of the incidence of new-onset symptomatic HFpEF, LV diastolic dysfunction and LVH, which might be beneficial for the delay of HFpEF progression.