Discharge treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker after a heart failure hospitalisation is associated with a better prognosis irrespective of left ventricular ejection fraction

Coronary Artery Disease and Prognosis of Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction

Our aim was to determine the prognostic impact of coronary artery disease (CAD) on heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) mortality and readmissions. From a prospective multicenter registry that included 1831 patients hospitalized due to heart failure, 583 had a left ventricular ejection fraction of <40%. In total, 266 patients (45.6%) had coronary artery disease as main etiology and 137 (23.5%) had idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), and they are the focus of this study. Significant differences were found in Charlson index (CAD 4.4 ± 2.8, idiopathic DCM 2.9 ± 2.4, p < 0.001), and in the number of previous hospitalizations (1.1 ± 1, 0.8 ± 1.2, respectively, p = 0.015). One-year mortality was similar in the two groups: idiopathic DCM (hazard ratio [HR] = 1), CAD (HR 1.50; 95% CI 0.83-2.70, p = 0.182). Mortality/readmissions were also comparable: CAD (HR 0.96; 95% CI 0.64-1.41, p = 0.81). Patients with idiopathic DCM had a higher probability of receiving a heart transplant than those with CAD (HR 4.6; 95% CI 1.4-13.4, p = 0.012). The prognosis of HFrEF is similar in patients with CAD etiology and in those with idiopathic DCM. Patients with idiopathic DCM were more prone to receive heart transplant.

Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction in Children

Diastolic dysfunction (DD) refers to abnormalities in the mechanical function of the left ventricle (LV) during diastole. Severe LVDD can cause symptoms and the signs of heart failure (HF) in the setting of normal or near normal LV systolic function and is referred to as diastolic HF or HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Pediatric cardiologists have long speculated HFpEF in children with congenital heart disease and cardiomyopathy. However, understanding the risk factors, clinical course, and validated biomarkers predictive of the outcome of HFpEF in children is challenging due to heterogeneous etiologies and overlapping pathophysiological mechanisms. The natural history of HFpEF varies depending upon the patient's age, sex, race, geographic location, nutritional status, biochemical risk factors, underlying heart disease, and genetic-environmental interaction, among other factors. Pediatric onset HFpEF is often not the same disease as in adults. Advances in the noninvasive evaluation of the LV diastolic function by strain, and strain rate analysis with speckle-tracking echocardiography, tissue Doppler imaging, and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging have increased our understanding of the HFpEF in children. This review addresses HFpEF in children and identifies knowledge gaps in the underlying etiologies, pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management, especially compared to adults with HFpEF.

Individualizing the treatment of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: a journey from hospitalization to long-term outpatient care

INTRODUCTION

: Despite the relevant advances achieved thanks to the traditional step-by-step therapeutic approach, heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) remains associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. The pathogenesis of HFrEF is complex, with the implication of various neurohormonal systems, including activation of deleterious pathways (i.e. renin-angiotensin-aldosterone, sympathetic, and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 [SGLT2] systems) and the inhibition of protective pathways (i.e. natriuretic peptides and the guanylate cyclase system). Therefore, the burden of HF can only be reduced through a comprehensive approach that involves all evidence-based use of available HF drugs targeting the neurohormonal systems involved.

AREAS COVERED

: We performed a critical analysis of evidence from recent clinical trials and assessed the effects of HF therapies on hemodynamics and renal function.

EXPERT OPINION

: HF therapy must be adapted to the clinical profile (i.e. congestion, blood pressure, heart rate, renal function, and electrolytes). Consequently, blood pressure is reduced by beta blockers, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors, sacubitril/valsartan, and, minimally, by SGLT2 inhibitors and vericiguat; heart rate decreases with beta blockers and ivabradine; and renal function is impaired and potassium are levels increased with renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors and sacubitril/valsartan. Practical recommendations on how to individualize HF therapy according to patient profile are provided.

Characteristics and long-term prognosis of patients with reduced, mid-range, and preserved ejection fraction: A systemic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

Patients with heart failure (HF) have a poor prognosis and are categorized by ejection fraction. We performed a meta-analysis to compare baseline characteristics and long-term outcomes of patients with heart failure with reduced (HFrEF), mid-range (HFmrEF), and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 27 prospective studies were included. Patients with HFpEF were older and had a higher proportion of females, hypertension, diabetes, and insufficient neuroendocrine antagonist treatments, while patients with HFrEF and HFmrEF had a higher prevalence of coronary heart disease and chronic kidney disease. After more than 1-year of follow-up, all-cause mortality was significantly lower in patients with HFmrEF 9388/25 042 (37.49%) than those with HFrEF 39 333/90 023 (43.69%) and HFpEF 24 828/52 492 (47.30%) (p < .001). Cardiovascular mortality was lowest in patients with HFpEF 1130/9904 (11.41%), highest in patients with HFrEF 3419/16 277 (21.07%) mainly coming from HF death and sudden cardiac death, and middle in patients with HFmrEF 699/5171 (13.52%) and the non-cardiovascular mortality was on the contrary. Subgroup analysis showed that in high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation, the all-cause mortality of HFpEF was significantly higher than both HFrEF and HFmrEF (p < .001). HF hospitalization was lowest in patients with HFmrEF 1822/5285 (34.47%), highest in patients with HFrEF 12 607/28 590 (44.10%) and middle in patients with HFpEF 8686/22 763 (38.16%) and the composite of all-cause mortality and HF hospitalization was also observed similar results.

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, patients with HFmrEF had the lowest incidence of all-cause mortality and HF hospitalization, while the highest all-cause mortality and HF hospitalization rates were HFpEF and HFrEF patients, respectively.

Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers and outcomes in patients with acute decompensated heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) and angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARB) are cornerstones in the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection (HFrEF). However, there are limited data on their risk-benefit profile in patients with acute heart failure requiring hospitalizations.

METHODS

We did a meta-analysis pooling data from all studies examining the use of ACEi/ARB in patients hospitalized for heart failure compared to patients without ACEi/ARB use. We calculated pooled hazard ratios (HR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies were included in the meta-analysis. Continued use of ACEi/ARBs in hospitalized patients with HFrEF was associated with lower 1-year mortality risk (pooled HR 0.68 [0.60-0.77] p < 0.001) and with lower 1-6-year mortality risk in those with heart failure preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) (pooled HR 0.86 [0.78-0.94] p = 0.002). There were significant reductions in 1-year HF readmissions among hospitalized HFrEF patients (pooled HR 0.83 [0.73-0.95] p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Maintaining or initiating patients with HFrEF hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) on ACEi/ARB is associated with a reduce risk of mortality and 1-year admissions, but the effect size is lower among those with HFpEF with more heterogeneous outcomes.

Prognostic impact of hyponatraemia and hypernatraemia at admission and discharge in heart failure patients with preserved, mid-range and reduced ejection fraction

BACKGROUND

Hyponatraemia is common in patients with acute heart failure (HF).

AIMS

To determine the impact of sodium disturbances on mortality and readmissions in HF with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF), preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and mid-range ejection fraction (HFmrEF).

METHODS

This study was a prospective multicentre consecutive registry in 20 hospitals, including patients admitted due to acute HF in cardiology departments. Sodium <135 mmol/L was considered hyponatraemia, >145 mmol/L hypernatraemia and 135-145 mmol/L normal.

RESULTS

A total of 1309 patients was included. Mean age was 72.0 ± 11.9 years, and 810 (61.9%) were male. Mean serum sodium level was 138.6 ± 4.7 mmol/L at hospital admission and 138.1 ± 4.1 mmol/L at discharge. The evolution of sodium levels was: normal-at-admission/normal-at-discharge 941 (71.9%), abnormal-at-admission/normal-at-discharge 127 (9.7%), normal-at-admission/abnormal-at-discharge 155 (11.8%) and abnormal-at-admission/abnormal-at-discharge 86 (6.6%). Hyponatraemia at discharge was more common in HFrEF (109 (20.7%)) than in HFpEF (79 (13.9%)) and HFmrEF (27 (12%)), P = 0.003. The prevalence of hypernatraemia at discharge was similar in the three groups: HFrEF (10 (1.9%)), HFpEF (12 (2.1%)) and HFmrEF (4 (1.9%)), P = 0.96. In multivariate analysis, abnormal sodium concentrations at hospital admission (hazard ratio (HR) 1.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15-1.76, P = 0.001) and discharge (HR 1.33, 95% CI 1.08-1.64, P = 0.007) were both independently associated with increased mortality and readmissions at 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Hyponatraemia and hypernatraemia at admission and discharge predict a poor outcome in patients with acute HF regardless of left ventricular ejection fraction. Hyponatraemia at discharge is more frequent in HFrEF than in the other groups.

Ischemic Etiology and Prognosis in Men and Women with Acute Heart Failure

Coronary heart disease is common in heart failure (HF). Our aim was to determine the impact of ischemic etiology on prognosis among men and women with HF. This study is a prospective national multicenter registry. The primary endpoint was 12-month mortality. Patients with HF and ischemic heart disease were stratified according to sex. A total of 1830 patients were enrolled of which 756 (41.3%) were women. Ischemic etiology was more common in men (446 (41.6%)) than in women (167 (22.2%)). Among patients with ischemic HF, diabetes was more frequent in women than in men. Ischemic etiology was not associated with higher mortality risk, and this was true for women (Hazard Ratio [HR] 1.51, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0.98–2.32; p = 0.61) and men (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.81–1.61; p = 0.46), p-value for interaction: 0.067. Mortality/readmission risk in ischemic HF increased in men with previous readmissions (HR 1.15, 95% CI 1.02–1.29; p = 0.022), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR1.20, 95% CI 1.02–1.41; p = 0.026) and in women with diabetes (HR 2.23, 95% CI 1.05–4.47; p = 0.035). Ischemic etiology was not associated with mortality in HF patients. In ischemic HF, the variables associated with a poor prognosis were diabetes in women and previous readmissions and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in men.

The predictive value of global longitudinal strain in patients with heart failure mid-range ejection fraction

BACKGROUND

Heart failure (HF) with mid-range ejection fraction (HFmrEF) is defined as HF with a left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (LVEF) of 41-49%. However, the change in LV function and the subsequent prognosis in these patients remain unclear. We aimed to investigate whether LV global longitudinal strain (LV GLS) could differentiate the changes in LVEF and predict the clinical outcomes in patients with HFmrEF.

METHODS

According to the changes in LVEF on follow-up echocardiography, 273 outpatients with HFmrEF were divided into 3 groups: HFwEF (HF with worse EF: <40%), HFsEF (HF with similar EF: 40-49%), and HFrecEF (HF with recovered EF: >50%). Further, the LV GLS at diagnosis was evaluated.

RESULTS

The average follow-up duration was 31 months. Among patients with HFmrEF, the more impaired the LV GLS at baseline, the higher probability of HFwEF development. In comparison with patients with HFwEF and HFsEF, those with HFrecEF had a lower risk of hospitalization for HF. At a cut-off value of -11%, LV GLS differentiated the subsequent risk of cardiovascular death in patients with HFmrEF. In Cox regression, patients with LV GLS >-11% had a high risk of cardiovascular death.

CONCLUSION

In patients with HFmrEF, LV GLS is associated with LVEF changes and subsequent cardiovascular death. Patients with HFrecEF had a lower risk of hospitalization for HF.

ARNi: A Novel Approach to Counteract Cardiovascular Diseases

Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) still represent the greatest burden on healthcare systems worldwide. Despite the enormous efforts over the last twenty years to limit the spread of cardiovascular risk factors, their prevalence is growing and control is still suboptimal. Therefore, the availability of new therapeutic tools that may interfere with different pathophysiological pathways to slow the establishment of clinical CVDs is important. Previously, the inhibition of neurohormonal systems, namely the renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system (RAAS) and the sympathetic nervous system, has proven to be useful in the treatment of many CVDs. Attempts have recently been made to target an additional hormonal system, that of the natriuretic peptides (NPs), which, when dysregulated, can also play a role in the development CVDs. Indeed, a new class of drug, the angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitors (ARNi), has the ability to counteract the effects of angiotensin II as well as to increase the activity of NPs. ARNi have already been proven to be effective in the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. New evidence has suggested that, in the next years, the field of ARNi application will widen to include other CVDs, such as heart failure, with preserved ejection fraction and hypertension.