Predictors of Mortality and Hospitalization in Women with Heart Failure in the Digitalis Investigation Group Trial

Sex and gender differences in myocarditis and dilated cardiomyopathy: An update

In the past decade there has been a growing interest in understanding sex and gender differences in myocarditis and dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), and the purpose of this review is to provide an update on this topic including epidemiology, pathogenesis and clinical presentation, diagnosis and management. Recently, many clinical studies have been conducted examining sex differences in myocarditis. Studies consistently report that myocarditis occurs more often in men than women with a sex ratio ranging from 1:2-4 female to male. Studies reveal that DCM also has a sex ratio of around 1:3 women to men and this is also true for familial/genetic forms of DCM. Animal models have demonstrated that DCM develops after myocarditis in susceptible mouse strains and evidence exists for this progress clinically as well. A consistent finding is that myocarditis occurs primarily in men under 50 years of age, but in women after age 50 or post-menopause. In contrast, DCM typically occurs after age 50, although the age that post-myocarditis DCM occurs has not been investigated. In a small study, more men with myocarditis presented with symptoms of chest pain while women presented with dyspnea. Men with myocarditis have been found to have higher levels of heart failure biomarkers soluble ST2, creatine kinase, myoglobin and T helper 17-associated cytokines while women develop a better regulatory immune response. Studies of the pathogenesis of disease have found that Toll-like receptor (TLR)2 and TLR4 signaling pathways play a central role in increasing inflammation during myocarditis and in promoting remodeling and fibrosis that leads to DCM, and all of these pathways are elevated in males. Management of myocarditis follows heart failure guidelines and there are currently no disease-specific therapies. Research on standard heart failure medications reveal important sex differences. Overall, many advances in our understanding of the effect of biologic sex on myocarditis and DCM have occurred over the past decade, but many gaps in our understanding remain. A better understanding of sex and gender effects are needed to develop disease-targeted and individualized medicine approaches in the future.

Pharmacological interventions for heart failure in people with chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Approximately half of people with heart failure have chronic kidney disease (CKD). Pharmacological interventions for heart failure in people with CKD have the potential to reduce death (any cause) or hospitalisations for decompensated heart failure. However, these interventions are of uncertain benefit and may increase the risk of harm, such as hypotension and electrolyte abnormalities, in those with CKD.

OBJECTIVES

This review aims to look at the benefits and harms of pharmacological interventions for HF (i.e., antihypertensive agents, inotropes, and agents that may improve the heart performance indirectly) in people with HF and CKD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies through 12 September 2019 in consultation with an Information Specialist and using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of any pharmacological intervention for acute or chronic heart failure, among people of any age with chronic kidney disease of at least three months duration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened the records to identify eligible studies and extracted data on the following dichotomous outcomes: death, hospitalisations, worsening heart failure, worsening kidney function, hyperkalaemia, and hypotension. We used random effects meta-analysis to estimate treatment effects, which we expressed as a risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane tool. We applied the GRADE methodology to rate the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

One hundred and twelve studies met our selection criteria: 15 were studies of adults with CKD; 16 studies were conducted in the general population but provided subgroup data for people with CKD; and 81 studies included individuals with CKD, however, data for this subgroup were not provided. The risk of bias in all 112 studies was frequently high or unclear. Of the 31 studies (23,762 participants) with data on CKD patients, follow-up ranged from three months to five years, and study size ranged from 16 to 2916 participants. In total, 26 studies (19,612 participants) reported disaggregated and extractable data on at least one outcome of interest for our review and were included in our meta-analyses. In acute heart failure, the effects of adenosine A1-receptor antagonists, dopamine, nesiritide, or serelaxin on death, hospitalisations, worsening heart failure or kidney function, hyperkalaemia, hypotension or quality of life were uncertain due to sparse data or were not reported. In chronic heart failure, the effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) (4 studies, 5003 participants: RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.02; I2 = 78%; low certainty evidence), aldosterone antagonists (2 studies, 34 participants: RR 0.61 95% CI 0.06 to 6.59; very low certainty evidence), and vasopressin receptor antagonists (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.89; 2 studies, 1840 participants; low certainty evidence) on death (any cause) were uncertain. Treatment with beta-blockers may reduce the risk of death (any cause) (4 studies, 3136 participants: RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.79; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). Treatment with ACEi or ARB (2 studies, 1368 participants: RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.90; I2 = 97%; very low certainty evidence) had uncertain effects on hospitalisation for heart failure, as treatment estimates were consistent with either benefit or harm. Treatment with beta-blockers may decrease hospitalisation for heart failure (3 studies, 2287 participants: RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.05; I2 = 87%; low certainty evidence). Aldosterone antagonists may increase the risk of hyperkalaemia compared to placebo or no treatment (3 studies, 826 participants: RR 2.91, 95% CI 2.03 to 4.17; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence). Renin inhibitors had uncertain risks of hyperkalaemia (2 studies, 142 participants: RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.49; I2 = 0%; very low certainty). We were unable to estimate whether treatment with sinus node inhibitors affects the risk of hyperkalaemia, as there were few studies and meta-analysis was not possible. Hyperkalaemia was not reported for the CKD subgroup in studies investigating other therapies. The effects of ACEi or ARB, or aldosterone antagonists on worsening heart failure or kidney function, hypotension, or quality of life were uncertain due to sparse data or were not reported. Effects of anti-arrhythmic agents, digoxin, phosphodiesterase inhibitors, renin inhibitors, sinus node inhibitors, vasodilators, and vasopressin receptor antagonists were very uncertain due to the paucity of studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effects of pharmacological interventions for heart failure in people with CKD are uncertain and there is insufficient evidence to inform clinical practice. Study data for treatment outcomes in patients with heart failure and CKD are sparse despite the potential impact of kidney impairment on the benefits and harms of treatment. Future research aimed at analysing existing data in general population HF studies to explore the effect in subgroups of patients with CKD, considering stage of disease, may yield valuable insights for the management of people with HF and CKD.

Review Paper. Transplacental Digoxin Treatment In Prenatal Cardiac Problems In Singleton Pregnancies - Meta Analysis (Based On Literature: 1992–2015)

Based on fourteen case reports from various centres from 1992-2015 and three original studies in 2006-2011, 122 fetuses were subjected to analysis. In these reports, transplacental digoxin treatment was administered to different cardiac anomalies such as SVT , Ebstein’s anomaly, critical AS , absent pulmonary valve syndrome, complete heart block, in foetuses with aneurysm/diverticulum of LV, in tricuspid atresia or dysplasia, rhabdomyoma, pulmonary atresia, HLHS with fibroelastosis, in TTTS and in extracardiac anomalies such as atriovenous malformation or sacrococcygeal teratoma. There was no statistical difference to suggest (Chi-square test) that digoxin was more efficient to control fetal arrhythmias than fetal congestive heart failure in nonarrhythmic patients.

Conclusions: Foetal cardiac insufficiency may appear due to different reasons (in normal heart anatomy or in heart defects, in normal sinus rhythm or due to foetal arrhythmias: tachycardias or severe bradycardia) and may be a cause of intrauterine demise. So far, we do not have strong evidence that digoxin treatment may prevent foetal death or prematurity. More research is needed to ascertain if the prolonging of pregnancy resulted from digoxin treatment or if improvement in foetal circulatory insufficiency was influenced by spontaneous regression of foetal cardiac symptoms.

Use of Inotropic Agents in Treatment of Systolic Heart Failure

The most common use of inotropes is among hospitalized patients with acute decompensated heart failure, with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction and with signs of end-organ dysfunction in the setting of a low cardiac output. Inotropes can be used in patients with severe systolic heart failure awaiting heart transplant to maintain hemodynamic stability or as a bridge to decision. In cases where patients are unable to be weaned off inotropes, these agents can be used until a definite or escalated supportive therapy is planned, which can include coronary revascularization or mechanical circulatory support (intra-aortic balloon pump, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, impella, left ventricular assist device, etc.). Use of inotropic drugs is associated with risks and adverse events. This review will discuss the use of the inotropes digoxin, dopamine, dobutamine, norepinephrine, milrinone, levosimendan, and omecamtiv mecarbil. Long-term inotropic therapy should be offered in selected patients. A detailed conversation with the patient and family shall be held, including a discussion on the risks and benefits of use of inotropes. Chronic heart failure patients awaiting heart transplants are candidates for intravenous inotropic support until the donor heart becomes available. This helps to maintain hemodynamic stability and keep the fluid status and pulmonary pressures optimized prior to the surgery. On the other hand, in patients with severe heart failure who are not candidates for advanced heart failure therapies, such as transplant and mechanical circulatory support, inotropic agents can be used for palliative therapy. Inotropes can help reduce frequency of hospitalizations and improve symptoms in these patients.

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators for the treatment of arrhythmias and cardiac resynchronisation therapy for the treatment of heart failure: systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

This assessment updates and expands on two previous technology assessments that evaluated implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) for arrhythmias and cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) for heart failure (HF).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of ICDs in addition to optimal pharmacological therapy (OPT) for people at increased risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) as a result of ventricular arrhythmias despite receiving OPT; to assess CRT with or without a defibrillator (CRT-D or CRT-P) in addition to OPT for people with HF as a result of left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) and cardiac dyssynchrony despite receiving OPT; and to assess CRT-D in addition to OPT for people with both conditions.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic resources including MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library were searched from inception to November 2012. Additional studies were sought from reference lists, clinical experts and manufacturers' submissions to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.

REVIEW METHODS

Inclusion criteria were applied by two reviewers independently. Data extraction and quality assessment were undertaken by one reviewer and checked by a second. Data were synthesised through narrative review and meta-analyses. For the three populations above, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing (1) ICD with standard therapy, (2) CRT-P or CRT-D with each other or with OPT and (3) CRT-D with OPT, CRT-P or ICD were eligible. Outcomes included mortality, adverse events and quality of life. A previously developed Markov model was adapted to estimate the cost-effectiveness of OPT, ICDs, CRT-P and CRT-D in the three populations by simulating disease progression calculated at 4-weekly cycles over a lifetime horizon.

RESULTS

A total of 4556 references were identified, of which 26 RCTs were included in the review: 13 compared ICD with medical therapy, four compared CRT-P/CRT-D with OPT and nine compared CRT-D with ICD. ICDs reduced all-cause mortality in people at increased risk of SCD, defined in trials as those with previous ventricular arrhythmias/cardiac arrest, myocardial infarction (MI) > 3 weeks previously, non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (depending on data included) or ischaemic/non-ischaemic HF and left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 35%. There was no benefit in people scheduled for coronary artery bypass graft. A reduction in SCD but not all-cause mortality was found in people with recent MI. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) ranged from £14,231 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) to £29,756 per QALY for the scenarios modelled. CRT-P and CRT-D reduced mortality and HF hospitalisations, and improved other outcomes, in people with HF as a result of LVSD and cardiac dyssynchrony when compared with OPT. The rate of SCD was lower with CRT-D than with CRT-P but other outcomes were similar. CRT-P and CRT-D compared with OPT produced ICERs of £27,584 per QALY and £27,899 per QALY respectively. The ICER for CRT-D compared with CRT-P was £28,420 per QALY. In people with both conditions, CRT-D reduced the risk of all-cause mortality and HF hospitalisation, and improved other outcomes, compared with ICDs. Complications were more common with CRT-D. Initial management with OPT alone was most cost-effective (ICER £2824 per QALY compared with ICD) when health-related quality of life was kept constant over time. Costs and QALYs for CRT-D and CRT-P were similar. The ICER for CRT-D compared with ICD was £27,195 per QALY and that for CRT-D compared with OPT was £35,193 per QALY.

LIMITATIONS

Limitations of the model include the structural assumptions made about disease progression and treatment provision, the extrapolation of trial survival estimates over time and the assumptions made around parameter values when evidence was not available for specific patient groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In people at risk of SCD as a result of ventricular arrhythmias and in those with HF as a result of LVSD and cardiac dyssynchrony, the interventions modelled produced ICERs of < £30,000 per QALY gained. In people with both conditions, the ICER for CRT-D compared with ICD, but not CRT-D compared with OPT, was < £30,000 per QALY, and the costs and QALYs for CRT-D and CRT-P were similar. A RCT comparing CRT-D and CRT-P in people with HF as a result of LVSD and cardiac dyssynchrony is required, for both those with and those without an ICD indication. A RCT is also needed into the benefits of ICD in non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy in the absence of dyssynchrony.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO number CRD42012002062.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Diagnostic accuracy and discrimination of ischemia by fractional flow reserve CT using a clinical use rule: results from the Determination of Fractional Flow Reserve by Anatomic Computed Tomographic Angiography study

BACKGROUND

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is the gold standard for determining lesion-specific ischemia. Computed FFRCT derived from coronary CT angiography (coronary CTA) correlates well with invasive FFR and accurately differentiates between ischemia-producing and nonischemic lesions. The diagnostic performance of FFRCT when applied in a clinically relevant way to all vessels ≥ 2 mm in diameter stratified by sex and age has not been previously examined.

METHODS

Two hundred fifty-two patients and 407 vessels underwent coronary CTA, FFRCT, invasive coronary angiography, and invasive FFR. FFRCT and FFR ≤ 0.80 were considered ischemic, whereas CT stenosis ≥ 50% was considered obstructive. The diagnostic performance of FFRCT was assessed following a prespecified clinical use rule which included all vessels ≥ 2 mm in diameter, not just those assessed by invasive FFR measurements. Stenoses <30% were assigned an FFR of 0.90, and stenoses >90% were assigned an FFR of 0.50. Diagnostic performance of FFRCT was stratified by vessel diameter, sex, and age.

RESULTS

By FFR, ischemia was identified in 129 of 252 patients (51%) and in 151 of 407 vessels (31%). Mean age (± standard deviation) was 62.9 ± 9 years, and women were older (65.5 vs 61.9 years; P = .003). Per-patient diagnostic accuracy (83% vs 72%; P < .005) and specificity (54% vs 82%, P < .001) improved significantly after application of the clinical use tool. These were significantly improved over standard coronary CTA values before application of the clinical use rule. Discriminatory power of FFRCT also increased compared with baseline (area under the receiver operating characteristics curve [AUC]: 0.93 vs 0.81, P < .001). Diagnostic performance improved in both sexes with no significant differences between the sexes (AUC: 0.93 vs 0.90, P = .43). There were no differences in the discrimination of FFRCT after application of the clinical use rule when stratified by age ≥ 65 or <65 years (AUC: 0.95 vs 0.90, P = .10).

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnostic accuracy and discriminatory power of FFRCT improve significantly after the application of a clinical use rule which includes all clinically relevant vessels >2 mm in diameter. FFRCT has similar diagnostic accuracy and discriminatory power for ischemia detection in men and women irrespective of age using a cut point of 65 years.

Gender and age differences in medications dispensed from a national chain drugstore

OBJECTIVES

Our objective was to compare sex and age differences in the medications dispensed in pharmacies from a large national drugstore chain.

METHODS

Using a list for the 200 most commonly prescribed medicines, we assessed prescriptions dispensed by a large national chain drug store over 1 year (2002-2003). The analysis used U.S. census data adjusted for the population by sex and age and weighted by the number of pharmacies per state. Results are reported as an odds ratio (OR) of prescriptions dispensed to females and males.

RESULTS

Under age 18, 24 drug classes were dispensed more commonly to females (OR > 1) and 18 drug classes more commonly to males (OR < 1). In the 18-24 age group, 48 of 53 drug classes were dispensed more frequently to females. Across other adult groups, females were dispensed more medications than males for 156 of 180 medications. There was greater dispensing to females of antibiotics (OR = 1.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.74-1.74), analgesics (OR = 1.70, 95% CI 1.70-1.70), antihistamines and sympathomimetics (OR = 1.46, 95% CI 1.45-1.46), benzodiazapines (OR = 2.08, 95% CI 2.07-2.08), antidepressants (OR = 2.40, 95% CI 2.39-2.40), diuretics (OR = 1.9328, 95% CI 1.93-1.94), and thyroid drugs (OR = 4.80, 95% CI 4.78-4.82). However, males had higher dispensing of antianginal drugs (OR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.83-0.85), anticoagulants (OR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.88-0.90), glycosides (OR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.79-0.81), and antihypertensives (OR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.91-0.91). More females were dispensed propoxyphene with acetaminophen (OR = 2.23, 95% CI 2.23-2.24), which has been associated with adverse outcomes (hospitalizations, emergency department visits, and deaths).

CONCLUSIONS

Females, especially during the reproductive years, are dispensed more medications than males.

Treatment of heart failure with normal left ventricular ejection fraction

Underlying causes and precipitating causes of heart failure (HF) should be treated when possible. Persons with HF and normal left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) should have maintenance of sinus rhythm, treatment of hypertension, myocardial ischemia, dyslipidemia, and anemia, slowing of the ventricular rate below 90 bpm, and reduction of salt overload. First-line drug treatment in the management of these persons is the use of loop diuretics combined with beta blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors. If persons are unable to tolerate ACE inhibitors because of cough, angioneurotic edema, rash, or altered taste sensation, angiotensin II type I receptor antagonists (ARBs) should be given. If HF persists despite diuretics, beta blockers, and ACE inhibitors or ARBs, isosorbide dinitrate plus hydralazine should be administered. Beta blockers, verapamil, diltiazem, and digoxin may be used to slow a rapid ventricular rate in persons with supraventricular tachyarrhythmias. Digoxin should not be used in persons with HF in sinus rhythm with normal LVEF. Exercise training should be encouraged in persons with mild to moderate HF to improve functional status and to decrease symptoms.

Cardiovascular drug therapy in the elderly

Pharmacokinetic considerations in the elderly include absorption, bioavailablility, drug distribution, half-life, drug metabolism, and drug excretion. There are numerous physiologic changes with aging that affect pharmacodynamics with alterations in end-organ responsiveness. This article discusses use of cardiovascular drugs in the elderly including digoxin, diuretics, beta-adrenergic blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-II receptor blockers, nitrates, calcium channel blockers, alpha-adrenergic blockers, antiarrhythmic drugs, lipid-lowering drugs, and anticoagulants. This article also discusses the adverse effects of cardiovascular drugs in the elderly, medications best to avoid in the elderly, and the prudent use of medications in the elderly.

Treatment of Systolic and Diastolic Heart Failure in the Elderly

Underlying causes, risk factors, and precipitating causes of heart failure (HF) should be treated. Drugs known to precipitate or aggravate HF should be stopped. Patients with HF and an abnormal left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (systolic heart failure) or normal LVEF (diastolic HF) should be treated with diuretics if fluid retention is present; with an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or an angiotensin receptor blocker if the patient cannot tolerate an ACE inhibitor because of cough, angioneurotic edema, rash, or altered taste sensation; and with a beta blocker unless contraindicated. If severe systolic HF persists, an aldosterone antagonist should be added. If HF persists, isosorbide dinitrate plus hydralazine should be added. Calcium channel blockers should be avoided if systolic HF is present. Digoxin should be avoided in men and women with diastolic HF if sinus rhythm is present and in women with systolic HF. Digoxin should be given to men with systolic HF if symptoms persist, but the serum digoxin level should be maintained between 0.5 and 0.8 ng/mL. A multidisciplinary approach should be used with nurse monitoring of the condition. In a home-bound patient, a homemaker should be hired.