Aspirin inhibits the acute venodilator response to furosemide in patients with chronic heart failure

Unexpected extra-renal effects of loop diuretics in the preterm neonate

The loop diuretics furosemide and bumetanide are commonly used in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). Furosemide, because of its actions on the ubiquitous Na(+) -K(+) -2Cl(-) isoform cotransporter and its promotion of prostanoid production and release, also has non-diuretic effects on vascular smooth muscle, airways, the ductus arteriosus and theoretically the gastrointestinal tract. Loop diuretics also affect the central nervous system through modulation of the GABA-A chloride channel.

CONCLUSION

  The loop diuretics have a variety of biological effects that are potentially harmful as well as beneficial. Care should be taken with the use of these agents because the range of their effects may be broader than the single action sought by the prescribing physician.

Differences in arterial compliance, microvascular function and venous capacitance between patients with heart failure and either preserved or reduced left ventricular systolic function

BACKGROUND

Up to 50% of patients with the clinical syndrome of heart failure have preserved left ventricular systolic function (HF-PSF). These patients may have abnormalities of ventriculo-vascular coupling, due to increased vascular and ventricular stiffness.

METHODS

We compared arterial compliance, microvascular vasodilator function and venous capacitance (VC) in 3 groups of patients (n=12 each) matched for the presence of coronary heart disease: 1) HF and preserved systolic function (HF-PSF), 2) HF and reduced systolic function (HF-RSF) and 3) controls (no HF, PSF). Arterial compliance was assessed by measuring aortic pulse wave velocity (PWV) with applanation tonometry. Cutaneous microvascular function was assessed using Laser Doppler imaging (LDI) coupled with iontophoresis of endothelium-dependent (acetylcholine) and -independent (sodium nitroprusside) vasodilators. VC was measured using venous occlusion plethysmography.

RESULTS

PWV was significantly higher in HF-PSF subjects than in both HF-RSF and control groups (10.7 [1.1], 8.9 [1.7] and 8.6 [2.1] m/s respectively, p<0.05). Acetylcholine and nitroprusside induced vasodilatation were equally impaired in HF-PSF and HF-RSF, as compared to controls (p<0.01). VC was higher in HF-RSF subjects compared with HF-PSF subjects (1.75 [0.41], 1.34 [0.34] ml/100 ml forearm vol. respectively, p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings are consistent with a more marked increase in vascular stiffness in HF-PSF than in HF-RSF and suggest that arterial stiffness, dynamic vasodilator function and venous abnormalities may be implicated in the complex pathophysiology of HF-PSF.

Practical applications of intravenous diuretic therapy in decompensated heart failure

Intravenous (IV) loop diuretics play an important role in the treatment of decompensated heart failure (DHF). They inhibit the Na(+)-K(+)-2Cl(-) reabsorptive pump in the thick ascending limb of the loop of Henle, and the resultant natriuresis and diuresis decreases volume load, improves hemodynamics, and reduces DHF symptoms. However, loop diuretics have a short half-life and their efficacy may be limited by postdiuretic sodium rebound during the period between doses in which the tubular diuretic concentration is subtherapeutic. Moreover, they can produce electrolyte abnormalities, neurohormonal activation, intravascular volume depletion, and renal dysfunction. Several studies have reported an association between diuretic therapy and increased morbidity and mortality. In addition, many patients, especially those with more advanced forms of heart failure (HF), are resistant to standard doses of loop diuretics. These high-risk, resistant patients may benefit from pharmacologic and/or nonpharmacologic interventions to improve hemodynamic performance, treatment of renovascular disease, discontinuation of aspirin and other sodium-retaining drugs, manipulation of the route of delivery or combination of diuretic classes, or hemofiltration. Despite >50 years of use, many questions regarding the use of intravenous diuretic agents in patients with DHF are still unanswered, and there remains a compelling need for well-designed randomized, controlled clinical trials to establish appropriate treatment regimens that maximize therapeutic benefit while minimizing morbidity and mortality.

Aspirin Inhibits the Acute Arterial and Venous Vasodilator Response to Captopril in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure

PURPOSE

The potentially beneficial hemodynamic effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors in heart failure may relate, in part, to their ability to increase the production of vasodilator prostanoids. Low dose aspirin is commonly prescribed in CHF and may attenuate the vasodilator effects of ACE inhibitors. We sought to determine the effects of low dose aspirin on the peripheral hemodynamic effects of captopril in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF).

METHODS

Nine patients with chronic heart failure were randomized in a placebo controlled, cross over study, to 75 mg of aspirin daily or placebo. After 7 days treatment the response to 25 mg of captopril was evaluated over 180 min using venous occlusion plethysmography. Forearm blood flow (FBF) and forearm venous capacitance (FVC) were measured.

RESULTS

Mean arterial pressure and heart rate did not change. After placebo, FBF increased in response to captopril (+18%, 95%CI 24.2, 11.8), a response inhibited by aspirin (-1.4%, 2.9, -5.7), p < 0.005. After placebo, FVC increased in response to captopril (+7.6%, 9.8, 5.4), which was also inhibited by aspirin (+2.0%, 4.6, -0.6), aspirin vs. placebo, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

In patients with chronic heart failure even low dose aspirin inhibits both the acute arterial and venous dilator responses to captopril. This action of aspirin may reduce the long-term clinical benefits of ACE inhibitors.

Aspirin Use in Chronic Heart Failure

There has been ongoing controversy as to whether aspirin should be used in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). The argument for aspirin is that many patients have underlying coronary disease, and aspirin prevents reinfarction and other vascular events. Arguments against the routine use of aspirin are that many CHF patients do not have underlying coronary disease, and that the benefit of aspirin lessens after the first 6 to 12 months after infarction. Also, several analyses suggest that aspirin may actually worsen outcomes in CHF patients, possibly because it inhibits prostaglandins, with resulting adverse hemodynamic and renal effects. Two recent prospective randomized studies have found that aspirin is associated with more frequent hospitalizations for worsening heart failure, although it did not have an adverse effect on vascular events. These results suggest that aspirin should not be routinely used in CHF patients and be avoided in those with refractory CHF, but that it may be beneficial in patients with recent infarction or multiple vascular risk factors.

The effect of aspirin on the ventilatory response to exercise in chronic heart failure

INTRODUCTION

Patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) experience breathlessness and fatigue on exercise. One of the abnormalities seen on maximal exercise testing is an increased ventilatory response to exercise (VE/VCO(2) slope). The cause of this is unknown, but is likely to be due to a combination of interacting peripheral and central factors. Recent data have demonstrated a relation between VE/VCO(2) slope and prostaglandin levels in contracting muscles. The present study examined the influence of the presence of a potent non-selective prostaglandin inhibitor, aspirin, on the ventilatory response to exercise in a group of patients with CHF.

METHODS

We investigated the ventilatory response to exercise of 120 consecutive patients in sinus rhythm attending a specialist heart failure clinic. We excluded those taking clopidogrel (six patients) and those on both warfarin and aspirin or taking other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents (five patients). The other 109 patients were grouped according to whether they were taking aspirin (n=52 (48%)) or not (n=57 (52%)). Each patient underwent echocardiography to assess left ventricular function, and exercise testing with metabolic gas exchange to derive peak oxygen consumption (pVO(2)) and the VE/VCO(2) slope.

RESULTS

The groups were similar in terms of age, (67 (13) vs. 66 (12) years; P=0.34) drug use, heart failure aetiology, left ventricular function (ejection fraction; 33.3 (9.4) vs. 31.8 (9.9)%; P=0.05)) and exercise tolerance (pVO(2); 20.4 (5.3) vs. 19.9 (6.0); P=0.68, and VE/VCO(2) slope; 35.4 (6.2) vs. 35.7 (9.3); P=0.73). There was no difference in the ventilatory response to exercise or the symptoms of breathlessness between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Aspirin does not appear to affect exercise performance in CHF.

Cardiovascular risk in stage 4 and 5 nephropathy

Severity of heart disease of almost all types, as well as mortality risk associated with heart disease, increases in step with severity of kidney disease, although not necessarily in a linear fashion. Heart failure is more common and just as lethal as ischemic heart disease in patients with severe chronic kidney disease (CKD). The incidence of nonfatal heart disease in dialysis and transplant populations has now been described in detail. Although standard risk factors for heart disease that are more common among patients with CKD than in the general population do not adequately explain the greatly increased risk of heart disease in patients with severe CKD, neither do as yet identified "nontraditional" risk factors. However, in addition to the factors not common in the general population, such as anemia, hyperphosphatemia, and markers of systemic inflammation, patients with CKD in the modern era may also exhibit excessive thrombotic tendencies. Screening for heart disease in this population relies mainly on dobutamine stress echocardiography or nuclear scintigraphy. The role of electron beam CT (EBCT) scanning is currently controversial. The indications for coronary angiography are the same for patients with CKD as for the general population, but patients with CKD are at greatly increased risk for contrast-associated nephropathy, the least controversial preventive therapy, which consists of isotonic saline and N-acetylcysteine. Finally, patients with CKD do not currently receive adequate medical therapy for prevention and treatment of heart disease.

Prolonged aspirin inhibition of anodal vasodilation is not due to the trafficking delay of neural mediators

We previously reported that forearm vasodilation to a delivered all-at-once over 5 min or a 1-min repeated monopolar anodal 0.10-mA current application is aspirin sensitive and that a single high-dose aspirin exerts a long-lived effect in the former case. We hypothesized that 1) in the latter case, the effect of aspirin would also be long lived and 2) the time required to resupply nerve endings with unblocked cyclooxygenase through axonal transport could explain this phenomenon. We studied the time course for the recovery of vasodilation to repeated current application after placebo or 1-g aspirin treatment. We then searched for a difference at a proximal vs. distal site in the recovery of the response. Aspirin abolished current-induced vasodilation at 2 h, 10 h, and 3 days, with a progressive recovery thereafter, but no difference between distal and proximal site was observed for the recovery of the response. This suggests that, although neural cyclooxygenase could participate in the response, the time course of aspirin inhibition of current-induced cutaneous vasodilation is not due to the time required through neural transport to resupply nerve endings with unblocked proteins.

Is aspirin "the weakest link" in cardiovascular prophylaxis? The surprising lack of evidence supporting the use of aspirin for cardiovascular disease

It is currently fashionable to prescribe aspirin, long-term to people with or at high risk of vascular events due to atherosclerosis. There is a moderately conclusive evidence for a short-term benefit after an acute vascular event. However, there is remarkably little evidence that long-term aspirin is effective for the prevention of vascular events and managing side effects may be expensive. Reductions in nonfatal vascular events may reflect an ability of aspirin to alter cosmetically the presentation of disease without exerting real benefit. Cardiovascular medicine appears prone to fads and fashions that are poorly substantiated by evidence. The current fashion for prescribing aspirin is reminiscent of the now discredited practice of widespread prescription of class I anti-arrhythmic drugs for ventricular ectopics. We should learn from experience.