A Research Agenda to Improve Outcomes in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Cardiovascular Disease: An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement

Background: Individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are often at risk for or have comorbid cardiovascular disease and are likely to die of cardiovascular-related causes. Objectives: To prioritize a list of research topics related to the diagnosis and management of patients with COPD and comorbid cardiovascular diseases (heart failure, atherosclerotic vascular disease, and atrial fibrillation) by summarizing existing evidence and using consensus-based methods. Methods: A literature search was performed. References were reviewed by committee co-chairs. An international, multidisciplinary committee, including a patient advocate, met virtually to review evidence and identify research topics. A modified Delphi approach was used to prioritize topics in real time on the basis of their potential for advancing the field. Results: Gaps spanned the translational science spectrum from basic science to implementation: 1) disease mechanisms; 2) epidemiology; 3) subphenotyping; 4) diagnosis and management; 5) clinical trials; 6) care delivery; 7) medication access, adherence, and side effects; 8) risk factor mitigation; 9) cardiac and pulmonary rehabilitation; and 10) health equity. Seventeen experts participated, and quorum was achieved for all votes (>80%). Of 17 topics, ≥70% agreement was achieved for 12 topics after two rounds of voting. The range of summative Likert scores was -15 to 25. The highest priority was "Conduct pragmatic clinical trials with patient-centered outcomes that collect both pulmonary and cardiac data elements." Health equity was identified as an important topic that should be embedded within all research. Conclusions: We propose a prioritized research agenda with the purpose of stimulating high-impact research that will hopefully improve outcomes among people with COPD and cardiovascular disease.

Multidisciplinary Management of Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Cardiovascular Disease

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and cardiovascular disease (CVD) frequently coexist, increasing the prevalence of both entities and impacting on symptoms and prognosis. CVD should be suspected in patients with COPD who have high/very high risk scores on validated scales, frequent exacerbations, precordial pain, disproportionate dyspnea, or palpitations. They should be referred to cardiology if they have palpitations of unknown cause or angina pain. COPD should be suspected in patients with CVD if they have recurrent bronchitis, cough and expectoration, or disproportionate dyspnea. They should be referred to a pulmonologist if they have rhonchi or wheezing, air trapping, emphysema, or signs of chronic bronchitis. Treatment of COPD in cardiovascular patients should include long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (LAMA) or long-acting beta-agonists (LABA) in low-risk or high-risk non-exacerbators, and LAMA/LABA/inhaled corticosteroids in exacerbators who are not controlled with bronchodilators. Cardioselective beta-blockers should be favored in patients with CVD, the long-term need for amiodarone should be assessed, and antiplatelet drugs should be maintained if indicated.

Efficacy and Safety of Bisoprolol in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Purpose

To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of bisoprolol in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

Research Methods

This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statements. The primary outcome measures analyzed included: Pulmonary function(FEV1, FEV1%, FVC), 6-minute walking distance (6MWD), adverse events and inflammatory cytokines(IL-6, IL-8, CRP).

Results

Thirty-five studies were included with a total of 3269 study participants, including 1650 in the bisoprolol group and 1619 in the control group. The effect of bisoprolol on lung function in patients with COPD, FEV1, MD (0.46 [95% CI, 0.27 to 0.65], P=0.000), FEV1%, MD (-0.64 [95% CI, 0.42 to 0.86], P=0.000), FVC, MD (0.20 [95% CI, 0.05 to 0.34], P=0.008), the results all showed a statistically significant result. The effect of bisoprolol on 6MWD in COPD patients, MD (1.37 [95% CI, 1.08 to 1.66], P=0.000), which showed a statistically significant result. The occurrence of adverse events in COPD patients treated with bisoprolol, RR (0.83 [95% CI, 0.54 to 1.26], P=0.382), resulted in no statistical significance. The effect of bisoprolol on inflammatory cytokines in COPD patients, IL-6, MD (-1.16 [95% CI, -1.67 to -0.65], P=0.000), IL-8, MD (-0.94 [95% CI, -1.32 to -0.56], P=0.000), CRP, MD (-1.74 [95% CI, -2.40 to -1.09], P=0.000), the results were statistically significant. We performed a subgroup analysis of each outcome indicator according to whether the patients had heart failure or not, and the results showed that the therapeutic effect of bisoprolol on COPD did not change with the presence or absence of heart failure.

Conclusion

Bisoprolol is safe and effective in the treatment of COPD, improving lung function and exercise performance in patients with COPD, and also reducing inflammatory markers in patients with COPD, and this effect is independent of the presence or absence of heart failure.

Epidemiology and treatment of heart failure with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Canadian primary care

AIMS

Heart failure (HF) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are largely managed in primary care, but their intersection in terms of disease burden, healthcare utilization, and treatment is ill-defined.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We examined a retrospective cohort including all patients with HF or COPD in the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network from 2010 to 2018. The population size in 2018 with HF, COPD, and HF with COPD was 15 778, 27 927, and 4768 patients, respectively. While disease incidence declined, age-sex-standardized prevalence per 100 population increased for HF alone from 2.33 to 3.63, COPD alone from 3.44 to 5.96, and COPD with HF from 12.70 to 15.67. Annual visit rates were high and stable around 8 for COPD alone but declined significantly over time for HF alone (9.3-8.1, P = 0.04) or for patients with both conditions (14.3-11.9, P = 0.006). For HF alone, cardiovascular visits were common (29.4%), while respiratory visits were infrequent (3.5%), with the majority of visits being non-cardiorespiratory. For COPD alone, respiratory and cardiovascular visits were common (16.4% and 11.3%) and the majority were again non-cardiorespiratory. For concurrent disease, 39.0% of visits were cardiorespiratory. The commonest non-cardiorespiratory visit reasons were non-specific symptoms or signs, endocrine, musculoskeletal, and mental health. In patients with HF with and without COPD, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor use was similar, while mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist use was marginally higher with concurrent COPD. Beta-blocker use was initially lower with concurrent COPD compared with HF alone (69.3% vs. 74.0%), but this progressively declined by 2018 (74.5% vs. 73.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of HF and COPD continues to rise. Although patients with either or both conditions are high utilizers of primary care, the majority of visits relate to non-cardiorespiratory comorbidities. Medical therapy for HF was similar and the initially lower beta-blocker utilization disappeared over time.

Role of β-blockers in the cardiovascular disease continuum: a collaborative Delphi survey-based consensus from Asia-Pacific

OBJECTIVE

This Delphi method of consensus was designed to develop scientific statements for β-blockers in the continuum of cardiovascular diseases with a special focus on the role of bisoprolol.

METHODS

Eleven experienced cardiologists from across the Asia-Pacific countries participated in two rounds of the survey. In the first round, experts were asked to rate agreement/disagreement with 35 statements across seven domains regarding the use of β-blockers for treating hypertension, heart failure, coronary artery diseases, co-morbidities, as well as their safety profile, usage pattern, and pharmacokinetic variability. A consensus for a statement could be reached with >70% agreement.

RESULTS

Except for seven statements, all attained consensus in the first round. In the second round that was conducted virtually, the experts re-appraised their ratings for the seven statements along with a critical appraisal of two additional statements that were suggested by experts in the preceding round. At the end of the second round, the final version included 36 statements (34 original statements, two statements suggested by experts, and the omission of one statement that did not attain consensus). The final version of statements in the second round was disseminated among experts for their approval followed by manuscript development.

CONCLUSION

Attainment of consensus for almost all statements reconfirms the clinical benefits of β-blockers, particularly β1-selective blockers for the entire spectrum of cardiovascular diseases.

Impact of bisoprolol and amlodipine on cardiopulmonary responses and symptoms during exercise in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) often have exercise intolerance. The prevalence of hypertension in COPD patients ranges from 39-51%, and β-blockers and amlodipine are commonly used drugs for these patients.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to study the impact of β-blockers and amlodipine on cardiopulmonary responses during exercise.

METHODS

A total 81 patients with COPD were included and the patients underwent spirometry, cardiopulmonary exercise tests, and symptoms questionnaires.

RESULTS

There were 14 patients who took bisoprolol and 67 patients who did not. Patients with COPD taking ß-blockers had lower blood oxygen concentration (SpO2) and more leg fatigue at peak exercise but similar exercise capacity as compared with patients not taking bisoprolol. There were 18 patients treated with amlodipine and 63 patients without amlodipine. Patients taking amlodipine had higher body weight, lower blood pressure at rest, and lower respiratory rates during peak exercise than those not taking amlodipine. Other cardiopulmonary parameters, such as workload, oxygen consumption at peak exercise, tidal volume at rest or exercise, cardiac index at rest or exercise were not significantly different between patients with or without bisoprolol or amlodipine. Smoking status did not differ between patients with or without bisoprolol or amlodipine.

CONCLUSIONS

COPD is often accompanied by hypertension, and β-blockers and amlodipine are commonly used antihypertensive drugs for these patients. Patients with COPD taking bisoprolol had lower SpO2 and more leg fatigue during peak exercise. Patients taking amlodipine had lower respiratory rates during exercise than those not taking amlodipine. Exercise capacity, tidal volume, and cardiac index during exercise were similar between patients with and without bisoprolol or amlodipine.

Holistic approach to drug therapy in a patient with heart failure

Heart failure (HF) is a growing global public health problem affecting at least 26 million people worldwide. The evidence-based landscape for HF treatment has changed at a rapid rate over the last 30 years. International guidelines for the management of HF now recommend the use of four pillars in all patients with reduced ejection fraction: angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors or ACE inhibitors, beta blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists and sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors. Beyond the main four pillar therapies, numerous further pharmacological treatments are also available in specific patient subtypes. These armouries of drug therapy are impressive, but where does this leave us with individualised and patient-centred care? This paper reviews the common considerations needed to provide a holistic, tailored and individual approach to drug therapy in a patient with HF with reduced ejection fraction, including shared decision making, initiating and sequencing of HF pharmacotherapy, drug-related considerations, polypharmacy and adherence.

Beta-blocker use in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A systematic review: A systematic review of βB in COPD

Beta-blockers (βB) are a frequently used class of medications. Although βB have many indications, those related to cardiovascular disease are among the most common and important. However, in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), βB are used less often due to concerns about an unfavorable impact on respiratory morbidity and mortality. We performed a systematic review to assess the safety of βB in patients with COPD. We included a total of 2 randomized controlled trials and 28 observational studies. The majority found statistically significant reductions in mortality. The two higher quality observational studies reported increased mortality with βB. The risk of COPD exacerbations was reduced in about half of the studies. Nonetheless, there were significant biases that confounded the results. The highest quality RCT found a significant increase in severe and very severe COPD exacerbations with βB use. In conclusion, data on the safety of βB in patients with COPD are conflicting. However, given higher quality evidence showed harm with their use, βB should be prescribed with caution in patients with COPD, including patients with cardiac indication for βB.

Beta-Blocker Use in Older Hospitalized Patients Affected by Heart Failure and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: An Italian Survey From the REPOSI Register

Beta (β)-blockers (BB) are useful in reducing morbidity and mortality in patients with heart failure (HF) and concomitant chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Nevertheless, the use of BBs could induce bronchoconstriction due to β2-blockade. For this reason, both the ESC and GOLD guidelines strongly suggest the use of selective β1-BB in patients with HF and COPD. However, low adherence to guidelines was observed in multiple clinical settings. The aim of the study was to investigate the BBs use in older patients affected by HF and COPD, recorded in the REPOSI register. Of 942 patients affected by HF, 47.1% were treated with BBs. The use of BBs was significantly lower in patients with HF and COPD than in patients affected by HF alone, both at admission and at discharge (admission, 36.9% vs. 51.3%; discharge, 38.0% vs. 51.7%). In addition, no further BB users were found at discharge. The probability to being treated with a BB was significantly lower in patients with HF also affected by COPD (adj. OR, 95% CI: 0.50, 0.37–0.67), while the diagnosis of COPD was not associated with the choice of selective β1-BB (adj. OR, 95% CI: 1.33, 0.76–2.34). Despite clear recommendations by clinical guidelines, a significant underuse of BBs was also observed after hospital discharge. In COPD affected patients, physicians unreasonably reject BBs use, rather than choosing a β1-BB. The expected improvement of the BB prescriptions after hospitalization was not observed. A multidisciplinary approach among hospital physicians, general practitioners, and pharmacologists should be carried out for better drug management and adherence to guideline recommendations.

[Possibilities and limitations of the use of beta-blockers in patients with cardiovascular disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease]

In medical literature, increasing attention is paid to comorbidities in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In clinical practice, physicians often hesitate to prescribe beta-blockers (β1-adrenoblockers) to COPD patients. This article summarized new results of using beta-blockers in patients with COPD. According to reports, the selective β1-blocker treatment considerably increases the survival rate of patients with COPD and ischemic heart disease, particularly after myocardial infarction (MI), and with chronic heart failure (CHF). The benefit of administering selective β1-blockers to patients with CHF and/or a history of MI overweighs a potential risk related with the treatment even in patients with severe COPD. Convincing data in favor of the β1-blocker treatment in COPD patients without the above-mentioned comorbidities are not available. At present, the selective β1-blocker treatment is considered safe for patients with cardiovascular diseases and COPD. For this reason, selective β1-blockers, such as bisoprolol, metoprolol or nebivolol can be used in managing this patient cohort. Nonselective β1-blockers may induce bronchospasm and are not recommended for COPD patients. For the treatment with β-blockers with intrinsic sympathomimetic activity, the probability of bronchial obstruction in COPD patients is lower; however, drugs of this pharmaceutical group have not been compared with cardioselective beta-blockers. For safety reasons, the beta-blocker treatment should be started outside exacerbation of COPD and from a small dose. Careful monitoring is recommended for possible new symptoms, such as emergence/increase of shortness of breath, cough or changes in dosing of other drugs (for example, increased frequency of using short-acting bronchodilators).

Preventing adverse cardiac events (PACE) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): study protocol for a double-blind, placebo controlled, randomised controlled trial of bisoprolol in COPD

INTRODUCTION

Heart disease in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common but neglected comorbidity. Patients with COPD are frequently excluded from clinical trials of treatments aimed at reducing cardiac morbidity and mortality, which has led to undertreatment of cardiovascular disease in patients with COPD. A particular concern in COPD is the underuse of beta (β)-blockers. There is observational evidence that cardioselective β-blockers are safe and may even reduce mortality risk in COPD, although some evidence is conflicting. There is an urgent need to answer the research question: Are cardioselective β-blockers safe and of benefit in people with moderately severe COPD? The proposed study will investigate whether cardioselective β-blocker treatment in patients with COPD reduces mortality and cardiac and respiratory morbidity.

METHODS AND ANALYSES

This is a double-blind, randomised controlled trial to be conducted in approximately 26 sites in Australia, New Zealand, India, Sri Lanka and other countries as required. Participants with COPD will be randomised to either bisoprolol once daily (range 1.25-5 mg, dependent on tolerated dose) or matched placebo, in addition to receiving usual care for their COPD over the study duration of 24 months.The study will enrol 1164 participants with moderate to severe COPD, aged 40-85 years. Participants will be symptomatic from their COPD and have a postbronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) ≥30% and ≤70% predicted and a history of at least one exacerbation requiring systemic corticosteroids, antibiotics or both in the prior 24 months.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study protocol has been approved by the Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee at The Concord Repatriation General Hospital.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

NCT03917914; CTRI/2020/08/027322.

Tailored or adapted interventions for adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and at least one other long-term condition: a mixed methods review

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a chronic respiratory condition characterised by shortness of breath, cough and recurrent exacerbations. People with COPD often live with one or more co-existing long-term health conditions (comorbidities). People with more severe COPD often have a higher number of comorbidities, putting them at greater risk of morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of any single intervention for COPD adapted or tailored to their comorbidity(s) compared to any other intervention for people with COPD and one or more common comorbidities (quantitative data, RCTs) in terms of the following outcomes: Quality of life, exacerbations, functional status, all-cause and respiratory-related hospital admissions, mortality, pain, and depression and anxiety. To assess the effectiveness of an adapted or tailored single COPD intervention (simple or complex) that is aimed at changing the management of people with COPD and one or more common comorbidities (quantitative data, RCTs) compared to usual care in terms of the following outcomes: Quality of life, exacerbations, functional status, all-cause and respiratory-related hospital admissions, mortality, pain, and depression and anxiety. To identify emerging themes that describe the views and experiences of patients, carers and healthcare professionals when receiving or providing care to manage multimorbidities (qualitative data).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched multiple databases including the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL, to identify relevant randomised and qualitative studies. We also searched trial registries and conducted citation searches. The latest search was conducted in January 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs) compared a) any single intervention for COPD adapted or tailored to their comorbidity(s) compared to any other intervention, or b) any adapted or tailored single COPD intervention (simple or complex) that is aimed at changing the management of people with COPD and one or more comorbidities, compared to usual care. We included qualitative studies or mixed-methods studies to identify themes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods for analysis of the RCTs. We used Cochrane's risk of bias tool for the RCTs and the CASP checklist for the qualitative studies. We planned to use the Mixed Methods Appraisal tool (MMAT) to assess the risk of bias in mixed-methods studies, but we found none. We used GRADE and CERQual to assess the quality of the quantitative and qualitative evidence respectively. The primary outcome measures for this review were quality of life and exacerbations.

MAIN RESULTS

Quantitative studies We included seven studies (1197 participants) in the quantitative analyses, with interventions including telemonitoring, pulmonary rehabilitation, treatment optimisation, water-based exercise training and case management. Interventions were either compared with usual care or with an active comparator (such as land-based exercise training). Duration of trials ranged from 4 to 52 weeks. Mean age of participants ranged from 64 to 72 years and COPD severity ranged from mild to very severe. Trials included either people with COPD and a specific comorbidity (including cardiovascular disease, metabolic syndrome, lung cancer, head or neck cancer, and musculoskeletal conditions), or with one or more comorbidities of any type. Overall, we judged the evidence presented to be of moderate to very low certainty (GRADE), mainly due to the methodological quality of included trials and imprecision of effect estimates. Intervention versus usual care Quality of life as measured by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score may improve with tailored pulmonary rehabilitation compared to usual care at 52 weeks (mean difference (MD) -10.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) -12.66 to -9.04; 1 study, 70 participants; low-certainty evidence). Tailored pulmonary rehabilitation is likely to improve COPD assessment test (CAT) scores compared with usual care at 52 weeks (MD -8.02, 95% CI -9.44 to -6.60; 1 study, 70 participants, moderate-certainty evidence) and with a multicomponent telehealth intervention at 52 weeks (MD -6.90, 95% CI -9.56 to -4.24; moderate-certainty evidence). Evidence is uncertain about effects of pharmacotherapy optimisation or telemonitoring interventions on CAT improvement compared with usual care. There may be little to no difference in the number of people experiencing exacerbations, or mean exacerbations with case management compared with usual care (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.57; 1 study, 470 participants; very low-certainty evidence). For secondary outcomes, six-minute walk distance (6MWD) may improve with pulmonary rehabilitation, water-based exercise or multicomponent interventions at 38 to 52 weeks (low-certainty evidence). A multicomponent intervention may result in fewer people being admitted to hospital at 17 weeks, although there may be little to no difference in a telemonitoring intervention. There may be little to no difference between intervention and usual care for mortality. Intervention versus active comparator We included one study comparing water-based and land-based exercise (30 participants). We found no evidence for quality of life or exacerbations. There may be little to no difference between water- and land-based exercise for 6MWD (MD 5 metres, 95% CI -22 to 32; 38 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Qualitative studies One nested qualitative study (21 participants) explored perceptions and experiences of people with COPD and long-term conditions, and of researchers and health professionals who were involved in an RCT of telemonitoring equipment. Several themes were identified, including health status, beliefs and concerns, reliability of equipment, self-efficacy, perceived ease of use, factors affecting usefulness and perceived usefulness, attitudes and intention, self-management and changes in healthcare use. We judged the qualitative evidence presented as of very low certainty overall.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Owing to a paucity of eligible trials, as well as diversity in the intervention type, comorbidities and the outcome measures reported, we were unable to provide a robust synthesis of data. Pulmonary rehabilitation or multicomponent interventions may improve quality of life and functional status (6MWD), but the evidence is too limited to draw a robust conclusion. The key take-home message from this review is the lack of data from RCTs on treatments for people living with COPD and comorbidities. Given the variation in number and type of comorbidity(s) an individual may have, and severity of COPD, larger studies reporting individual patient data are required to determine these effects.

Pharmacotherapy for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and health-related quality of life: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

The aim of this study was to synthesize the evidence on the effect of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) pharmacotherapy on health-related quality of life (HRQoL).

METHODS AND RESULTS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform in June 2020. Randomized placebo-controlled trials evaluating contemporary HFrEF pharmacotherapy and reporting HRQoL as an outcome were included. Two reviewers independently assessed studies for eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and GRADE certainty of evidence. The primary outcome was HRQoL at last available follow-up analysed using a random-effects model. We included 37 studies from 5770 identified articles. Risk of bias was low in 10 trials and high/unclear in 27 trials. High certainty evidence from meta-analyses demonstrated improved HRQoL over placebo with sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors [standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08-0.23] and intravenous iron (SMD 0.52, 95% CI 0.04-1.00). Furthermore, high certainty evidence from ≥1 landmark trial further supported improved HRQoL with angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) (SMD 0.09, 95% CI 0.02-0.17), ivabradine (SMD 0.14, 95% CI 0.04-0.23), hydralazine-nitrate (SMD 0.24, 95% CI 0.04-0.44) vs. placebo, and for angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) compared with an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor (SMD 0.09, 95% CI 0.02-0.17). Findings were inconclusive for ACE inhibitors, beta-blockers, digoxin, and oral iron based on low-to-moderate certainty evidence.

CONCLUSION

ARBs, ARNIs, SGLT2 inhibitors, ivabradine, hydralazine-nitrate, and intravenous iron improved HRQoL in patients with HFrEF. These findings can be incorporated into discussions with patients to enable shared decision-making.

Beta-blocker therapy in patients with COPD: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis with multiple treatment comparison

BACKGROUND

Beta-blockers are associated with reduced mortality in patients with cardiovascular disease but are often under prescribed in those with concomitant COPD, due to concerns regarding respiratory side-effects. We investigated the effects of beta-blockers on outcomes in patients with COPD and explored within-class differences between different agents.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Medline for observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effects of beta-blocker exposure versus no exposure or placebo, in patients with COPD, with and without cardiovascular indications. A meta-analysis was performed to assess the association of beta-blocker therapy with acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD), and a network meta-analysis was conducted to investigate the effects of individual beta-blockers on FEV1. Mortality, all-cause hospitalization, and quality of life outcomes were narratively synthesized.

RESULTS

We included 23 observational studies and 14 RCTs. In pooled observational data, beta-blocker therapy was associated with an overall reduced risk of AECOPD versus no therapy (HR 0.77, 95%CI 0.70 to 0.85). Among individual beta-blockers, only propranolol was associated with a relative reduction in FEV1 versus placebo, among 199 patients evaluated in RCTs. Narrative syntheses on mortality, all-cause hospitalization and quality of life outcomes indicated a high degree of heterogeneity in study design and patient characteristics but suggested no detrimental effects of beta-blocker therapy on these outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The class effect of beta-blockers remains generally positive in patients with COPD. Reduced rates of AECOPD, mortality, and improved quality of life were identified in observational studies, while propranolol was the only agent associated with a deterioration of lung function in RCTs.

Beta Blockers and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD): Sum of Evidence

Approximately, half a century has passed since the discovery of beta blockers. Then, their prime therapeutic purpose was to treat angina and cardiac arrhythmias, nowadays, beta blockers' usage and effectiveness is extended to treat other cardiovascular diseases, such as hypertension, congestive heart failure, and coronary artery disease. Safety concerns were raised about beta blockers and their use for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients with concurrent cardiovascular disease. After a thorough research of the literature, this review summarizes the evidence proving that beta blockers not only might be well tolerated in COPD patients, but they might also have a beneficial effect in this group of patients.

Beta Adrenergic Blocker Use in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Concurrent Chronic Heart Failure With a Low Ejection Fraction

Chronic heart failure (CHF) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) often coexist and present clinicians with diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. Beta-blockers are a cornerstone of CHF treatment, in patients with a low ejection fraction, while beta-agonists are utilized for COPD. These 2 therapies exert opposing pharmacological effects. COPD patients are at an increased risk of mortality from cardiovascular events. In addition to CHF, beta-blockers are used in a number of cardiovascular conditions because of their cardioprotective properties as well as their mortality benefit. However, there is reluctance among physicians to use beta-blockers in patients with COPD because of fear of inducing bronchospasms, despite increasing evidence of their safety and mortality benefits. The majority of this evidence comes from observational studies showing that beta-blockers are safe and well tolerated, with minimal effect on respiratory function. Furthermore, beta-blockers have been shown to lower the mortality risk in patients with COPD alone, as well as in those with COPD and CHF. Large clinical trials are needed in order to dispel the mistrust of beta-blocker use in COPD patients. The current evidence supports the use of cardioselective beta-blockers in patients with COPD. As the population continues to live longer, comorbidities become ever more present, and cardioselective beta-blockers should not be withheld from patients with COPD and coexistent CHF, because the benefits outweigh the risks.

Beta-blockers in COPD: A systematic review based on recent research

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with cardiovascular complications is very common. Due to fear of exacerbating airway spasm, β-blockers are rarely used in such patients. Many observational studies suggest that β-blockers can reduce the disease progression and the risk of mortality in patients with COPD, but lack of confirmation from randomized controlled trials. This article reviews the application of β-blockers in patients with COPD based on the results of the latest published randomized controlled trials.

Choosing among β-blockers in heart failure patients according to β-receptors' location and functions in the cardiopulmonary system

Several large clinical trials showed a favorable effect of β-blocker treatment in patients with chronic heart failure (HF) as regards overall mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and hospitalizations. Indeed, the use of β-blockers is strongly recommended by current international guidelines, and it remains a cornerstone in the pharmacological treatment of HF. Although different types of β-blockers are currently approved for HF therapy, possible criteria to choose the best β-blocking agent according to HF patients' characteristics and to β-receptors' location and functions in the cardiopulmonary system are still lacking. In such a context, a growing body of literature shows remarkable differences between β-blocker types (β1-selective blockers versus β1-β2 blockers) with respect to alveolar-capillary gas diffusion and chemoreceptor response in HF patients, both factors able to impact on quality of life and, most likely, on prognosis. This review suggests an original algorithm for choosing among the currently available β-blocking agents based on the knowledge of cardiopulmonary pathophysiology. Particularly, starting from lung physiology and from some experimental models, it focuses on the mechanisms underlying lung mechanics, chemoreceptors, and alveolar-capillary unit impairment in HF. This paper also remarks the significant benefit deriving from the correct use of the different β-blockers in HF patients through a brief overview of the most important clinical trials.

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Heart Failure: A Breathless Conspiracy

Heart failure (HF) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are both common causes of breathlessness and often conspire to confound accurate diagnosis and optimal therapy. Risk factors (such as aging, smoking, and obesity) and clinical presentation (eg, cough and breathlessness on exertion) can be very similar, but the treatment and prognostic implications are very different. This review discusses the diagnostic challenges in individuals with exertional dyspnea. Also highlighted are the prevalence, clinical relevance, and therapeutic implications of a concurrent diagnosis of COPD and HF.

Adherence to ESC guideline-recommended medications over a 36-month follow-up period after hospitalization for heart failure: Results from the EPICAL2 cohort study

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study is to describe the trajectories of oral medication prescriptions in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) over 3 years after discharge from hospitalization for heart failure. We then evaluated the adherence of these prescriptions to the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guideline-recommended medications and identified patient characteristics associated with nonadherence.

METHODS

We used data from the EPICAL2 cohort study. HFrEF patients who had completed prescriptions at discharge and at 6-month follow-up were included and followed for 36 months. The following medication agents were considered adherent to guidelines: renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockers [angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) or an angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARB)] plus a β-blocker (BB) or RAS blocker plus BB plus mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs). The evolution of drug prescriptions and the adherence to ESC guidelines were assessed by using sequence analysis and clustering approaches. Patient characteristics associated with nonadherence were identified by logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

A typology of four therapeutic clusters was obtained, among which two clusters were adherent to recommendations and two were not. The adherent clusters consisted of bitherapy (RAS blockers-BB) and tritherapy (RAS blockers-BB-MRA) for about 64% of patients and remain stable over time. The nonadherent clusters consisted of nonprescription of BB for about 22% of patients or nonprescription of RAS blocker for about 14%. The main reason for nonprescription of BB was a concomitant obstructive airway disease (asthma or COPD) but was a concomitant chronic kidney disease for nonprescription of RAS blocker.

CONCLUSION

Adherence to guideline-recommended medications while being hospitalized is of great importance because prescriptions are quite stable over time after discharge. HFrEF patients are most often older, with various comorbidities, such as chronic kidney disease or asthma/COPD, which importantly limit physicians' ability to prescribe recommended drugs, leading to suboptimal adherence to guidelines.

Comparison of Long-Term Clinical Implications of Beta-Blockade in Patients With Obstructive Airway Diseases Exposed to Beta-Blockers With Different β1-Adrenoreceptor Selectivity: An Italian Population-Based Cohort Study

Rationale: Long-term clinical implications of beta-blockade in obstructive airway diseases remains controversial. We investigated if within the first 5 years of treatment patients with heart failure and obstructive airway diseases using non β1-adrenoreceptor selective beta-blockers have an increased risk of being hospitalized for all-causes, heart failure, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) when compared to patient using selective beta-blockers.

Methods: Carvedilol users were propensity matched 1:1 for co-treatments, age, gender, and year of inclusion in the cohort with metoprolol/bisoprolol/nebivolol users. Cox proportional hazard regression model was used to compare all causes, COPD, and heart failure hospitalization or the beta-blocker discontinuation between cohorts. For statistically significant associations, we computed the rate difference and the attributable risk.

Results: Overall, 11,844 patients out of the 51,214 (23.1%) were exposed to carvedilol and 39,370 (76.9%) to metoprolol/bisoprolol/nebivolol. Carvedilol users had a higher hazard for heart failure hospitalization (HR 1.29; 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.18–1.40) with 106 (95%CI 76–134; p-value < 0.001) additional cases of heart failure hospitalization per 10000 person-years if compared to metoprolol/bisoprolol/nebivolol users. In all, 26.8% (95%CI 22.5–30.9%; p-value < 0.001) of heart failure hospitalizations in the study population could be attributed to being exposed to carvedilol. Carvedilol users had a higher hazard (HR 1.06; 95%CI 1.02–1.10) of discontinuing the pharmacological treatment with 131 (95%CI 62–201; p-value < 0.001) additional cases of beta-blocker discontinuation per 10000 person-years metoprolol/bisoprolol/nebivolol users. In all, 6.5% (95%CI 3.9–9.0%; p-value < 0.001) of beta-blocker discontinuation could be attributed to being exposed to carvedilol.

Conclusion: On long-term follow-up period, carvedilol was associated with a higher risk of heart failure hospitalization and discontinuation if compared to metoprolol/bisoprolol/nebivolol users among patients with heart failure and obstructive airway diseases.

Therapeutic effects of the combination of inhaled beta2-agonists and beta-blockers in COPD patients with cardiovascular disease

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major health problem worldwide, with co-morbidities contributing to the overall severity and mortality of the disease. The incidence and prevalence of cardiovascular disease among COPD patients are high. Both disorders often co-exist, mainly due to smoking, but they also share common underlying risk factors, such as aging and low-grade systemic inflammation. The therapeutic approach is based on agents, whose pharmacological properties are completely opposed. Beta2-agonists remain the cornerstone of COPD treatment due to their limited cardiac adverse effects. On the other hand, beta-blockers are administered in COPD patients with cardiovascular disease, but despite their proven cardiac benefits, they remain underused. There is still a trend among physicians over underprescription of these drugs in patients with heart failure and COPD due to bronchoconstriction. Therefore, cardioselective beta-blockers are preferred, and recent meta-analyses have shown reduced rates in mortality and exacerbations in COPD patients treated with beta-blockers.

Relationship between heart failure, concurrent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and beta-blocker use: a Danish nationwide cohort study

AIMS

To compare the hazard of all-cause, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and heart failure (HF) hospitalization in carvedilol vs. metoprolol/bisoprolol/nebivolol users with COPD and concurrent HF from 2009 to 2012, and to evaluate the use and persistence in treatment of these β-blockers, their impact on the risk of COPD-related hospitalization, and the factors important for their selection.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Cox and logistic regression were used for both unadjusted and adjusted analyses. Carvedilol users had a higher hazard of being hospitalized for HF compared with metoprolol/bisoprolol/nebivolol users in both the unadjusted [hazard ratio (HR) 1.74; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.65-1.83] and adjusted (HR 1.61; 95% CI 1.52-1.70) analyses. No significant differences were found for all-cause and COPD hospitalization between the two groups. Carvedilol users had a significant lower restricted mean persistence time than metoprolol/bisoprolol/nebivolol users. Patients exposed to carvedilol had an odds ratio (OR) of 1.38 (95% CI 1.23-1.56) for being hospitalized due to COPD within 60 days after redeeming the first carvedilol prescription, which was similar to that observed in metoprolol/bisoprolol/nebivolol users (OR 1.37; 95% CI 1.27-1.48). Patients with concurrent chronic kidney disease had a higher probability of receiving carvedilol (OR 1.16; 95% CI 1.04-1.29).

CONCLUSION

Carvedilol prescription carried an increased hazard of HF hospitalization and lower restricted mean persistence time among patients with COPD and concurrent HF. Additionally, we found a widespread phenomenon of carvedilol prescription at variance with the European Society of Cardiology guidelines and potential for improving the proportion of patients treated with β-blockers.

Korean Guidelines for Diagnosis and Management of Chronic Heart Failure

The prevalence of heart failure (HF) is skyrocketing worldwide, and is closely associated with serious morbidity and mortality. In particular, HF is one of the main causes for the hospitalization and mortality in elderly individuals. Korea also has these epidemiological problems, and HF is responsible for huge socioeconomic burden. However, there has been no clinical guideline for HF management in Korea. 
The present guideline provides the first set of practical guidelines for the management of HF in Korea and was developed using the guideline adaptation process while including as many data from Korean studies as possible. The scope of the present guideline includes the definition, diagnosis, and treatment of chronic HF with reduced/preserved ejection fraction of various etiologies.

Effect of β-blockade on lung function, exercise performance and dynamic hyperinflation in people with arterial vascular disease with and without COPD

Introduction

β Blockers are important treatment for ischaemic heart disease and heart failure; however, there has long been concern about their use in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) due to fear of symptomatic worsening of breathlessness. Despite growing evidence of safety and efficacy, they remain underused. We examined the effect of β-blockade on lung function, exercise performance and dynamic hyperinflation in a group of vascular surgical patients, a high proportion of who were expected to have COPD.

Methods

People undergoing routine abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) surveillance were sequentially recruited from vascular surgery clinic. They completed plethysmographically measured lung function and incremental cardiopulmonary exercise testing with dynamic measurement of inspiratory capacity while taking and not taking β blocker.

Results

48 participants completed tests while taking and not taking β blockers with 38 completing all assessments successfully. 15 participants (39%) were found to have, predominantly mild and undiagnosed, COPD. People with COPD had airflow obstruction, increased airway resistance (Raw) and specific conductance (sGaw), static hyperinflation and dynamically hyperinflated during exercise. In the whole group, β-blockade led to a small fall in FEV1 (0.1 L/2.8% predicted) but did not affect Raw, sGaw, static or dynamic hyperinflation. No difference in response to β-blockade was seen in those with and without COPD.

Conclusions

In people with AAA, β-blockade has little effect on lung function and dynamic hyperinflation in those with and without COPD. In this population, the prevalence of COPD is high and consideration should be given to case finding with spirometry.

Trial registration number

NCT02106286.

Challenges of Treating Acute Heart Failure in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Heart failure (HF) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) comorbidity poses substantial diagnostic and therapeutic challenges in acute care settings. The specific role of pulmonary comorbidity in the treatment and outcomes of cardiovascular disease patients was not addressed in any short- or long-term prospective study. Both HF and COPD can be interpreted as systemic disorders associated with low-grade inflammation, endothelial dysfunction, vascular remodelling and skeletal muscle atrophy. HF is regularly treated as a broader cardiopulmonary syndrome utilising acute respiratory therapy. Based on observational data and clinical expertise, a management strategy of concurrent HF and COPD in acute settings is suggested. Concomitant use of beta2-agonists and beta-blockers in a comorbid cardiopulmonary condition seems to be safe and effective.

β-Blockers, heart disease and COPD: current controversies and uncertainties

Treating people with cardiovascular disease and COPD causes significant clinician anxiety. β-Blockers save lives in people with heart disease, specifically postinfarction and heart failure. COPD and heart disease frequently coexist and people with both disorders have particularly high cardiovascular mortality. There are concerns about giving β-blockers to people with concomitant COPD that include reduced basal lung function, diminished effectiveness of emergency β-agonist treatments, reduced benefit of long-acting β-agonist treatment and difficulty in discriminating between asthma and COPD. β-Blockers appear to reduce lung function in both the general population and those with COPD because they are poorly selective for cardiac β1-adrenoceptors over respiratory β2-adrenoceptors, and studies have shown that higher β-agonist doses are required to overcome the β-blockade. COPD and cardiovascular disease share similar environmental risks and both disease states have high adrenergic and inflammatory activation. β-Blockers may therefore be particularly helpful in reducing cardiovascular events in this high-risk group. They may reduce the background inflammatory state, and inhibit the tachycardia and hypertension associated with both the endogenous adrenaline and high-dose β-agonist treatment associated with acute exacerbations of COPD. Some studies have suggested no increased and, at times, reduced mortality in patients with COPD taking β-blockers for heart disease. However, these are all observational studies and there are no randomised controlled trials. Potential ways to improve this dilemma include the development of highly β1-selective β-blockers or the use of non-β-blocking heart rate reducing agents, such as ivabridine, if these are proven to be beneficial in randomised controlled trials.

Beta-blockers in COPD: time for reappraisal

The combined effects on the heart of smoking and hypoxaemia may contribute to an increased cardiovascular burden in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The use of beta-blockers in COPD has been proposed because of their known cardioprotective effects as well as reducing heart rate and improving systolic function. Despite the proven cardiac benefits of beta-blockers post-myocardial infarction and in heart failure they remain underused due to concerns regarding potential bronchoconstriction, even with cardioselective drugs. Initiating treatment with beta-blockers requires dose titration and monitoring over a period of weeks, and beta-blockers may be less well tolerated in older patients with COPD who have other comorbidities. Medium-term prospective placebo-controlled safety studies in COPD are warranted to reassure prescribers regarding the pulmonary and cardiac tolerability of beta-blockers as well as evaluating their potential interaction with concomitant inhaled long-acting bronchodilator therapy. Several retrospective observational studies have shown impressive reductions in mortality and exacerbations conferred by beta-blockers in COPD. However, this requires confirmation from long-term prospective placebo-controlled randomised controlled trials. The real challenge is to establish whether beta-blockers confer benefits on mortality and exacerbations in all patients with COPD, including those with silent cardiovascular disease where the situation is less clear.

Underuse of β-blockers in heart failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

OBJECTIVE

Although β-blockers are an established therapy in heart failure (HF) guidelines, including for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), there remain concerns regarding bronchoconstriction even with cardioselective β-blockers. We wished to assess the real-life use of β-blockers for patients with HF and comorbid COPD.

METHODS

We evaluated data from the Optimum Patient Care Research Database over a period of 1 year for co-prescribing of β-blockers with either an ACE inhibitor (ACEI) or angiotensin-2 receptor blocker (ARB) in patients with HF alone versus HF+COPD. Association with inhaler therapy was also evaluated.

RESULTS

We identified 89 861 patients with COPD, 24 237 with HF and 10 853 with both conditions. In patients with HF+COPD, the mean age was 79 years; 60% were male, and 27% had prior myocardial infarction. Of patients with HF+COPD, 22% were taking a β-blocker in conjunction with either ACEI/ARB (n=2416) compared with 41% of patients with HF only (n=10 002) (adjusted OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.58, p<0.001). Among HF+COPD patients taking inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) with long-acting β-agonist (LABA) and long-acting muscarinic antagonist, 27% of patients were taking an ACEI/ARB with β-blockers (n=778) versus 46% taking an ACEI/ARB without β-blockers (n=1316). Corresponding figures for those patients taking ICS/LABA were 20% (n=583) versus 48% (n=1367), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

These data indicate a substantial unmet need for patients with COPD who should be prescribed β-blockers more often for concomitant HF.

Management of Noncardiac Comorbidities in Chronic Heart Failure

Prevalence of heart failure is increasing, especially in the elderly population. Noncardiac comorbidities complicate heart failure care and are increasingly common in elderly patients with reduced or preserved ejection fraction heart failure, owing to prolongation of patient's lives by advances in chronic heart failure (CHF) management. Common comorbidities include respiratory disease, renal dysfunction, anemia, arthritis, obesity, diabetes mellitus, cognitive dysfunction, and depression. These conditions contribute to the progression of the disease and may alter the response to treatment, partly as polypharmacy is inevitable in these patients. Cardiologists and other physicians caring for patients with CHF need to be vigilant to comorbid conditions that complicate the care of these patients. There is now more guidance on management of noncardiac comorbidities in heart failure, and this article contains a comprehensive review of the most recent updates on management of noncardiac comorbidities in CHF.

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.

Carvedilol, Bisoprolol, and Metoprolol Use in Patients With Coexistent Heart Failure and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Beta (β)-blockers are under-prescribed in patients with heart failure (HF) and concurrent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) due to concerns about adverse pulmonary effects and a poor understanding of the effects of these drugs. We aimed to evaluate the survival effects of β-blockers in patients with coexistent HF and COPD. Using the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database, we conducted a nationwide population-based study. Patients with coexistent HF and COPD diagnosed between 2000 and 2009 were enrolled. Doses of the 3 β-blockers proven to be beneficial to HF (carvedilol, bisoprolol, and metoprolol) during the study period were extracted. The primary endpoint was cumulative survival. Patients were followed until December 31, 2009. The study included 11,558 subjects, with a mean follow-up period of 4.07 years. After adjustment for age, sex, comorbidities, and severity of HF and COPD, bisoprolol use showed a dose-response survival benefit [low dose: adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 0.76, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.59-0.97, P = 0.030; high dose: adjusted HR = 0.40, 95% CI = 0.26-0.63, P < 0.001] compared with nonusers, whereas no survival difference was observed for carvedilol or metoprolol. Compared with patients with HF alone, this special HF + COPD cohort received significantly fewer targeted β-blockers (108.8 vs 137.3 defined daily doses (DDDs)/person-year, P < 0.001) and bisoprolol (57.9 vs 70.8 DDDs/person-year, P < 0.001). In patients with coexisting HF and COPD, this study demonstrated a dose-response survival benefit of bisoprolol use, but not of carvedilol or metoprolol use.

A clinical in-hospital prognostic score for acute exacerbations of COPD

Background

The use of a severity score to help orientation decisions could improve the efficiency of care for acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD). We previously developed a score (‘2008 score’, based on age, dyspnea grade at steady state and number of clinical signs of severity) predicting in-hospital mortality in patients with AECOPD visiting emergency departments (EDs). External validity of this score remained to be assessed.

Objectives

To test the predictive properties of the ‘2008 score’ in a population of patients hospitalized in medical respiratory wards for AECOPD, and determine whether a new score specifically derived from this population would differ from the previous score in terms of components or predictive performance.

Methods

Data from a cohort study in 1824 patients hospitalized in a medical ward for an AECOPD were analyzed. Patients were categorized using the 2008 score and its predictive characteristics for in-hospital mortality rates were assessed. A new score was developed using multivariate logistic regression modeling in a randomly selected derivation population sample followed by testing in the remaining population (validation sample). Robustness of results was assessed by case-by-case validation.

Results

The 2008 score was characterized by a c-statistic at 0.77, a sensitivity of 69% and a specificity of 76% for prediction of in-hospital mortality. The new score comprised the same variables plus major cardiac comorbidities and was characterized by a c-statistic of 0.78, a sensitivity of 77% and specificity of 66%.

Conclusions

A score using simple clinical variables has robust properties for predicting the risk of in-hospital death in patients hospitalized for AECOPD. Adding cardiac comorbidities to the original score increased its sensitivity while decreasing its specificity.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12931-014-0099-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Polypharmacy in heart failure: drugs to use and avoid

Polypharmacy, the use of 4 or more medications, is universal in patients with heart failure (HF). Evidence-based combination therapy is prescribed in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Additionally, treatment of the high prevalence of comorbidities presents many therapeutic dilemmas. The use of nonprescription medications is common, adding further complexity to the medication therapy regimens of patients with HF. An approach for combining evidence-based therapies in patients with HFrEF is presented. Strategies for optimizing the management of common comorbidities in patients with HF are reviewed. Both prescription and nonprescription medications to avoid or use with caution are highlighted.

Lung Disease and Hypertension

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients are at a high risk of developing cardiovascular diseases. Airflow limitation is a predictor of future risks of hypertension and cardiovascular events. COPD is now understood as a systemic inflammatory disease, with the focus on inflammation of the lungs. An association between inflammation and sympathetic overactivity has also been reported. In this article, we review the association between chronic lung disease and the risks of hypertension, cardiovascular morbidity, the underlying mechanisms, and the therapeutic approach to hypertension and cardiovascular diseases in patients with lung diseases.

β-Blockers and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: inappropriate avoidance?

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the third leading cause of death in the United States and is often accompanied by one or more comorbid conditions. While there are established morbidity and mortality benefits of β-blocker (BB) use for certain cardiovascular conditions, data suggest that clinicians are often reluctant to prescribe them in the presence of COPD because of concerns for bronchoconstriction, despite evidence that they are typically well-tolerated among these patients. Treatment guidelines for COPD are consistent with those for cardiovascular disease management and support the role of BBs in management of particular cardiovascular conditions, even in the presence of severe COPD. Adherence to these guidelines could result in significant decreases in morbidity and mortality among patients with COPD. Additionally, current treatments for COPD are often linked to increased cardiovascular disease events. Further study is needed to clarify and guide therapeutic management in patients with COPD.