Bolus versus continuous low dose of enalaprilat in congestive heart failure with acute refractory decompensation

Vasodilators in acute heart failure - evidence based on new studies

Acute heart failure (AHF) contributes largely to the worldwide burden of heart failure (HF) and is associated with high mortality, poor prognosis and high rehospitalization rate. The pharmacologic therapy of AHF includes diuretics and vasodilators, which are a keystone when fluid overload and congestion are present. However, vasodilators are mainly focused on controlling symptoms, and drugs that also improve long-term mortality and morbidity seem to be in high demand. In this review, we summarize the existing evidence on mortality benefits of IV vasodilators in AHF. There is lack of evidence on the mortality benefits of IV vasodilators in AHF, as well as well-designed and large-scale trials for some of them. The existing trials on nitrates have conflicting results and are insufficient to establish definitive conclusions. Other vasodilators, such as enalaprilat, clevidipine, carperitide, and ularitide, have been evaluated only in a few trials assessing mortality. Levosimendan, nesititide and carperitide are approved by some regulatory agencies; however, data regarding mortality are also conflicting and large-scale post-marketing studies would be important. Serelaxin is a recent therapy with a novel mechanism of action and seemed to be promising; although serelaxin was safe and well tolerated in earlier trials, the results of a larger phase III trial failed to meet the primary endpoints of reduction in cardiovascular death at day 180 and reduction of worsening heart failure at day 5. The absence of definitive mortality benefits and high-quality and large-scale data not allow firm conclusions to be drawn about the role of IV vasodilators in AHF. Well-designed studies are needed to clarify the role of these drugs in the long-term outcome of AHF, as well as new therapies entering the clinical investigation.

Clinical and Research Considerations for Patients With Hypertensive Acute Heart Failure: A Consensus Statement from the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine and the Heart Failure Society of America Acute Heart Failure Working Group

Management approaches for patients in the emergency department (ED) who present with acute heart failure (AHF) have largely focused on intravenous diuretics. Yet, the primary pathophysiologic derangement underlying AHF in many patients is not solely volume overload. Patients with hypertensive AHF (H-AHF) represent a clinical phenotype with distinct pathophysiologic mechanisms that result in elevated ventricular filling pressures. To optimize treatment response and minimize adverse events in this subgroup, we propose that clinical management be tailored to a conceptual model of disease that is based on these mechanisms. This consensus statement reviews the relevant pathophysiology, clinical characteristics, approach to therapy, and considerations for clinical trials in ED patients with H-AHF.

Congestive Heart Failure

Patients with acute decompensated heart failure are usually critically ill and require immediate treatment. However, most are not volume overloaded. Emergency department (ED) management is based on rapid initiation of noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation and aggressive titration of nitrates. Afterload reduction with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor can be considered. A diuretic should not be administered before optimal preload and afterload reduction has been achieved. Short-term inotropic therapy can be considered in select patients with cardiogenic shock and acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) who fail to respond to standard therapy.

Beneficial hemodynamic and renal effects of intravenous enalaprilat following coronary artery bypass surgery complicated by left ventricular dysfunction

OBJECTIVE

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors are an effective therapy for all stages of heart failure due to reduced systolic left ventricular function. Because sufficient data on intravenous angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors following coronary artery bypass surgery complicated by postoperative left ventricular dysfunction are unavailable, the efficacy and safety of intravenously administered enalaprilat were evaluated.

DESIGN

A placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind protocol.

SETTING

Postoperative intensive care unit at the German Heart Institute Berlin.

PATIENTS

Forty patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction <35% following coronary artery bypass surgery on the second postoperative day or after weaning from intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation.

INTERVENTIONS

A loading dose of enalaprilat 0.625 mg infused over 1 hr was followed by 5 mg/24 hrs administered continuously for up to 72 hrs.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Systemic and pulmonary hemodynamic variables, blood gases, hormonal variables, renal function, and electrolytes were measured before and repeatedly during therapy. Acute effects were as follows: At 1 hr, enalaprilat increased the cardiac index (p <.001), stroke volume index (p <.001), and right ventricular stroke work index (p <.03) compared with placebo, whereas mean arterial pressure (p <.008) and both systemic (p <.001) and pulmonary (p <.02) vascular resistance decreased. Continuous effects were as follows: Over 72 hrs, enalaprilat decreased diastolic pulmonary artery pressure (p <.019), pulmonary artery occlusion pressure (p <.02), and central venous pressure (p <.02). The cardiac and stroke volume indexes were consistently higher in the enalaprilat group, whereas systemic and pulmonary vascular resistances were lower. The arterial blood-pressure lowering effect was blunted and heart rate remained unchanged. Mixed venous oxygenation (p <.02) was higher and arterial oxygenation was not modified. Finally, enalaprilat increased creatinine clearance (p <.002) and decreased creatinine (p <.02) and urea (p <.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous enalaprilat safely and effectively improves cardiac and renal function following coronary artery bypass surgery complicated by postoperative left ventricular dysfunction.

Prehospital therapy for acute congestive heart failure: state of the art

Acute congestive heart failure (CHF) is one of the most common syndromes encountered in emergency care settings. Correct diagnosis and treatment for pulmonary edema, the most common acute manifestation of CHF, are of primary importance as misdiagnosis can result in deleterious consequences to patients. The pathogenesis of acute pulmonary edema (APE) is currently believed to arise primarily from the redistribution of intravascular fluid to the lungs secondary to acutely elevated left ventricular (LV) filling pressures. This understanding has provided a basis for the management of acute APE, which entails reduction of LV preload, reduction of LV afterload, ventilatory support, inotropic support as needed, and identification and treatment of other underlying factors contributing to elevated LV filling pressures. The agent most applicable and effective for field treatment is nitroglycerin. Diuretics and morphine should be used with caution, as they carry higher risks, especially in misdiagnosed patients. The role of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors has yet to be demonstrated in a prehospital setting. Noninvasive positive pressure ventilation methods are effective adjuncts to current treatment, but their mode of delivery presents technical challenges. The development of novel rapid diagnostic tools, currently in progress, might prove valuable for emergency medical services (EMS) personnel in the future. But for now, EMS personnel must rely on their fundamental skills of history taking and physical examination for accurate diagnosis of CHF.

Evaluation and management of acutely decompensated chronic heart failure in the emergency department

A wide range of patients with symptomatic heart failure seek treatment in the emergency department. While there is no single approach to the diversity of patients with acutely decompensated heart failure, certain overarching principles apply. For patients with acute pulmonary edema or cardiogenic shock, the first priority must be rapid stabilization and treatment of reversible problems. For patients with less dramatic presentations, a more systematic search for precipitating factors may be required. Therapy, in general, is directed at reversing dyspnea and/or hypoxemia caused by pulmonary edema, improving systemic perfusion, and reducing myocardial oxygen demand. While morphine and diuretics still have their traditional roles, vasodilators and inotropic agents play an increasingly important part in the modern pharmacologic approach to decompensated heart failure in the emergency department. After evaluation and stabilization in the emergency department, most patients will require hospital admission, although a subset of low-risk patients may be appropriate for discharge to home following a period of observation. Strategies to optimize emergency department care are likely to have an impact upon patient outcomes and upon resource utilization. (c)2001 by CHF, Inc.