Can brain natriuretic peptide be used to guide the management of patients with heart failure and a preserved ejection fraction? The wrong way to identify new treatments for a nonexistent disease

Natriuretic Peptide-guided Therapy for Heart Failure

Heart failure (HF) is a complex syndrome with high mortality and hospitalization rates. Conventional care in patients with HF is usually based on clinical history and physical examination. Natriuretic peptides (NPs), B-type NP (BNP) and N-terminal proBNP, are the gold-standard biomarkers in HF. They are recommended for diagnosing HF, when the physician is uncertain of the diagnosis, and for estimating the prognosis. NPs also guide therapy in HF, as serial NP measurements inform medication adjustments to achieve targets independently of symptoms. In this regard, the data are conflicting. In patients with HF and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF) there is a suggestion that NP-guided therapy is helpful. The studies STARS-BNP and PROTECT demonstrated a reduction in cardiac events with NP-guided therapy. Additionally, mortality in patients aged <75 years reduced in the BATTLESCARRED and TIME-CHF studies, and in a meta-analysis. On the contrary, no differences were observed in the studies PRIMA and GUIDE-IT. In HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and in the acute setting, no differences were detected with NP-guided therapy compared with conventional care. In patients at risk of developing HF, NP can be useful to guide therapy and prevent HF. In summary, NP-guided therapy seems to be useful in patients with HFrEF, especially in those aged <75 years, but has no use in HFpEF or in acute HF.

Prognostic Implications of N-Terminal Pro-B-Type Natriuretic Peptide and High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin T in EMPEROR-Preserved

BACKGROUND

N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) are associated with disease severity and outcomes among patients with heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction.

OBJECTIVES

The authors evaluated associations between both biomarkers and clinical outcomes in the EMPEROR-Preserved (Empagliflozin Outcome Trial in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction) trial.

METHODS

Of 5,988 study participants, 5,986 (99.9%) and 5,825 (97.3%) had available baseline NT-proBNP and hs-cTnT; postbaseline NT-proBNP was also available. Baseline characteristics were expressed by biomarker quartiles. The effect of empagliflozin on cardiovascular death/ HF hospitalization, the individual components, total HF hospitalizations, slope of decline of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and a composite renal endpoint were examined across biomarker quartiles. Change in NT-proBNP across study visits as a function of treatment assignment was also assessed.

RESULTS

Higher baseline NT-proBNP and hs-cTnT concentrations were associated with more comorbidities and worse HF severity. Incidence rates for cardiac and renal outcomes were 2- to 5-fold higher among those in the highest vs lowest NT-proBNP or hs-cTnT quartiles. Empagliflozin consistently reduced the risk for cardiovascular events and reduced slope of eGFR decline across NT-proBNP or hs-cTnT quartiles. Empagliflozin treatment modestly lowered NT-proBNP; by 100 weeks, the adjusted mean difference in NT-proBNP from placebo was 7%. Increase in NT-proBNP from baseline to 12 weeks was strongly associated with risk of cardiovascular death/HF hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

The benefit of empagliflozin on cardiac outcomes and decline of eGFR is preserved across the wide range of baseline NT-proBNP and hs-cTnT evaluated. Empagliflozin modestly reduces NT-proBNP in HF with preserved ejection fraction. (EMPagliflozin outcomE tRial in Patients With chrOnic heaRt Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction [EMPEROR-Preserved]; NCT03057951).

Is heart failure misdiagnosed in hospitalized patients with preserved ejection fraction? From the European Society of Cardiology - Heart Failure Association EURObservational Research Programme Heart Failure Long-Term Registry

Aims

In hospitalized patients with a clinical diagnosis of acute heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), the aims of this study were (i) to assess the proportion meeting the 2016 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) HFpEF criteria and (ii) to compare patients with restrictive/pseudonormal mitral inflow pattern (MIP) vs. patients with MIP other than restrictive/pseudonormal.

Methods and results

We included hospitalized participants of the ESC‐Heart Failure Association (HFA) EURObservational Research Programme (EORP) HF Long‐Term Registry who had echocardiogram with ejection fraction (EF) ≥ 50% during index hospitalization. As no data on e', E/e' and left ventricular (LV) mass index were gathered in the registry, the 2016 ESC HFpEF definition was modified as follows: elevated B‐type natriuretic peptide (BNP) (≥100 pg/mL for acute HF) and/or N‐terminal pro‐BNP (≥300 pg/mL) and at least one of the echocardiographic criteria: (i) presence of LV hypertrophy (yes/no), (ii) left atrial volume index (LAVI) of >34 mL/m²), or (iii) restrictive/pseudonormal MIP. Next, all patients were divided into four groups: (i) patients with restrictive/pseudonormal MIP on echocardiography [i.e. with presumably elevated left atrial (LA) pressure], (ii) patients with MIP other than restrictive/pseudonormal (i.e. with presumably normal LA pressure), (iii) atrial fibrillation (AF) group, and (iv) ‘grey area’ (no consistent description of MIP despite no report of AF). Of 6365 hospitalized patients, 1848 (29%) had EF ≥ 50%. Natriuretic peptides were assessed in 28%, LV hypertrophy in 92%, LAVI in 13%, and MIP in 67%. The 2016 ESC HFpEF criteria could be assessed in 27% of the 1848 patients and, if assessed, were met in 52%. Of the 1848 patients, 19% had restrictive/pseudonormal MIP, 43% had MIP other than restrictive/pseudonormal, 18% had AF and 20% were grey area. There were no differences in long‐term all‐cause or cardiovascular mortality, or all‐cause hospitalizations or HF rehospitalizations between the four groups. Despite fewer non‐cardiac comorbidities reported at baseline, patients with MIP other than restrictive/pseudonormal (i.e. with presumably normal LA pressure) had more non‐cardiovascular (14.0 vs. 6.7 per 100 patient‐years, P < 0.001) and cardiovascular non‐HF (13.2 vs. 8.0 per 100 patient‐years, P = 0.016) hospitalizations in long‐term follow‐up than patients with restrictive/pseudonormal MIP.

Conclusions

Acute HFpEF diagnosis could be assessed (based on the 2016 ESC criteria) in only a quarter of patients and confirmed in half of these. When assessed, only one in three patients had restrictive/pseudonormal MIP suggestive of elevated LA pressure. Patients with MIP other than restrictive/pseudonormal (suggestive of normal LA pressure) could have been misdiagnosed with acute HFpEF or had echocardiography performed after normalization of LA pressure. They were more often hospitalized for non‐HF reasons during follow‐up. Symptoms suggestive of acute HFpEF may in some patients represent non‐HF comorbidities.

Therapy for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: current status, unique challenges, and future directions

Heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is the most common form of HF. Among elderly women, HFpEF comprises more than 80% of incident HF cases. Adverse outcomes-exercise intolerance, poor quality of life, frequent hospitalizations, and reduced survival-approach those of classic HF with reduced EF (HFrEF). However, despite its importance, our understanding of the pathophysiology of HFpEF is incomplete, and despite intensive efforts, optimal therapy remains uncertain, as most trials to date have been negative. This is in stark contrast to management of HFrEF, where dozens of positive trials have established a broad array of effective, guidelines-based therapies that definitively improve a range of clinically meaningful outcomes. In addition to providing an overview of current management status, we examine evolving data that may help explain this paradox, overcome past challenges, provide a roadmap for future success, and that underpin a wave of new trials that will test novel approaches based on these insights.

Phenotype-Specific Treatment of Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Multiorgan Roadmap

Heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (EF; HFpEF) accounts for 50% of HF cases, and its prevalence relative to HF with reduced EF continues to rise. In contrast to HF with reduced EF, large trials testing neurohumoral inhibition in HFpEF failed to reach a positive outcome. This failure was recently attributed to distinct systemic and myocardial signaling in HFpEF and to diversity of HFpEF phenotypes. In this review, an HFpEF treatment strategy is proposed that addresses HFpEF-specific signaling and phenotypic diversity. In HFpEF, extracardiac comorbidities such as metabolic risk, arterial hypertension, and renal insufficiency drive left ventricular remodeling and dysfunction through systemic inflammation and coronary microvascular endothelial dysfunction. The latter affects left ventricular diastolic dysfunction through macrophage infiltration, resulting in interstitial fibrosis, and through altered paracrine signaling to cardiomyocytes, which become hypertrophied and stiff because of low nitric oxide and cyclic guanosine monophosphate. Systemic inflammation also affects other organs such as lungs, skeletal muscle, and kidneys, leading, respectively, to pulmonary hypertension, muscle weakness, and sodium retention. Individual steps of these signaling cascades can be targeted by specific interventions: metabolic risk by caloric restriction, systemic inflammation by statins, pulmonary hypertension by phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors, muscle weakness by exercise training, sodium retention by diuretics and monitoring devices, myocardial nitric oxide bioavailability by inorganic nitrate-nitrite, myocardial cyclic guanosine monophosphate content by neprilysin or phosphodiesterase 9 inhibition, and myocardial fibrosis by spironolactone. Because of phenotypic diversity in HFpEF, personalized therapeutic strategies are proposed, which are configured in a matrix with HFpEF presentations in the abscissa and HFpEF predispositions in the ordinate.

Prognostic implications of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in patients with an exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Diagnosing heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is difficult due to overlapping pathophysiological pathways, risk factors and clinical presentations. We investigated the prevalence and prognostic implications of coexisting HFpEF in patients hospitalized for acute exacerbation of COPD. A total of 116 consecutive patients with an acute exacerbation of COPD were evaluated for HFpEF and followed for an average period of 22 ± 9 months for the occurrence of death from any cause. HFpEF was diagnosed in 22 (19 %) patients with COPD, who were older, and also had higher LV mass, left atrial size, and mitral E/Ea ratio than those without HFpEF (p < 0.05 for all comparisons). HFpEF was not independently associated with all-cause mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 1.07, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.44-2.62]. Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) stage (IV vs. I-III, HR 2.37, CI 1.23-4.59) and N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels (HR 2.79, CI 1.12-6.98) were independent predictors of long-term survival. HFpEF is present in one-fifth of patients with exacerbated COPD. Non-invasively diagnosed HFpEF may not be an independent predictor of all-cause mortality. Elevated NT-proBNP levels and very severe COPD were independently associated with unfavorable overall survival.

What to Expect From the Evolving Field of Geriatric Cardiology

The population of older adults is expanding rapidly, and aging predisposes to cardiovascular disease. The principle of patient-centered care must respond to the preponderance of cardiac disease that now occurs in combination with the complexities of old age. Geriatric cardiology melds cardiovascular perspectives with multimorbidity, polypharmacy, frailty, cognitive decline, and other clinical, social, financial, and psychological dimensions of aging. Although some assume that a cardiologist may instinctively cultivate some of these skills over the course of a career, we assert that the volume and complexity of older cardiovascular patients in contemporary practice warrants a more direct approach to achieve suitable training and a more reliable process of care. We present a rationale and vision for geriatric cardiology as a melding of primary cardiovascular and geriatrics skills, thereby infusing cardiology practice with expanded proficiencies in diagnosis, risks, care coordination, communications, end-of-life, and other competences required to best manage older cardiovascular patients.

The Hospitalization Burden and Post-Hospitalization Mortality Risk in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: Results From the I-PRESERVE Trial (Irbesartan in Heart Failure and Preserved Ejection Fraction)

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate prognosis in patients with heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction and the causes of hospitalization and post-hospitalization mortality.

BACKGROUND

Although hospitalizations in patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction are common, there are limited data from clinical trials on the causes of admission and the influence of hospitalizations on subsequent mortality risk.

METHODS

Patients (n = 4,128) with New York Heart Association functional class II to IV HF and left ventricular ejection fractions >45% were enrolled in I-PRESERVE (Irbesartan in Heart Failure and Preserved Ejection Fraction). A blinded events committee adjudicated cardiovascular hospitalizations and all deaths using predefined and standardized definitions. The risk for death after HF, any-cause, or non-HF hospitalization was assessed using time-dependent Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

A total of 2,278 patients had 5,863 hospitalizations during the 49 months of follow-up, of which 3,585 (61%) were recurrent hospitalizations. For any-cause hospitalizations, 26.5% of patients died during follow-up, with an incident mortality rate of 11.1 deaths per 100 patient-years (PYs) and an adjusted hazard ratio of 5.32 (95% confidence interval: 4.21 to 6.23). Overall, 53.6% of hospitalizations were classified as cardiovascular and 43.7% as noncardiovascular, with 2.7% not classifiable. HF was the largest single cause of initial (17.6%) and overall (21.1%) hospitalizations, although, after HF hospitalization, a substantially higher proportion of readmissions were due to primary HF causes (40%). HF hospitalization occurred in 685 patients, with 41% deaths during follow-up, an incident mortality rate of 19.3 deaths per 100 PYs. The adjusted hazard ratio was 2.93 (95% confidence interval: 2.40 to 3.57) relative to patients who were not hospitalized for HF and was greater in those with longer durations of hospitalization. There were 1,593 patients with only non-HF hospitalizations, 21% of whom died during follow-up, with an incident mortality rate of 8.7 deaths per 100 PYs and an adjusted hazard ratio of 4.25 (95% confidence interval: 3.27 to 5.32). The risk for death was highest in the first 30 days and declined over time for all hospitalization categories. Patients not hospitalized for HF or for any cause had observed incident mortality rates of 3.8 and 1.3 deaths per 100 PYs, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In I-PRESERVE, HFpEF patients hospitalized for any reason, and especially for HF, were at high risk for subsequent death, particularly early. The findings support the need for careful attention in the post-discharge time period including attention to comorbid conditions. Among those hospitalized for HF, the high mortality rate and increased proportion of readmissions due to HF (highest during the first 30 days), suggest that this group would be an appropriate target for investigation of new interventions.

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in the elderly: scope of the problem

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is the most common form of heart failure (HF) in older adults, particularly women, and is increasing in prevalence as the population ages. With morbidity and mortality on par with HF with reduced ejection fraction, it remains a most challenging clinical syndrome for the practicing clinician and basic research scientist. Originally considered to be predominantly caused by diastolic dysfunction, more recent insights indicate that HFpEF in older persons is typified by a broad range of cardiac and non-cardiac abnormalities and reduced reserve capacity in multiple organ systems. The globally reduced reserve capacity is driven by: 1) inherent age-related changes; 2) multiple, concomitant co-morbidities; 3) HFpEF itself, which is likely a systemic disorder. These insights help explain why: 1) co-morbidities are among the strongest predictors of outcomes; 2) approximately 50% of clinical events in HFpEF patients are non-cardiovascular; 3) clinical drug trials in HFpEF have been negative on their primary outcomes. Embracing HFpEF as a true geriatric syndrome, with complex, multi-factorial pathophysiology and clinical heterogeneity could provide new mechanistic insights and opportunities for progress in management. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled CV Aging.

Evolving role for mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The majority of randomized clinical trials in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) have failed to show meaningful improvements in clinical outcomes. Recent randomized trials have shown benefits from mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) in the management of HFpEF. This review will focus on new evidence for MRA therapy in patients with HFpEF.

RECENT FINDINGS

Three randomized trials were reviewed: the Effect of spironolactone on diastolic function and exercise capacity in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: the Aldo-DHF randomized controlled trial; the Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure with an Aldosterone Antagonist trial; and its echocardiography substudy. The Aldo-DHF trial showed improvements in echocardiographic measures of diastolic function. In the Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure With an Aldosterone Antagonist trial, hospitalization for heart failure was significantly reduced with MRA therapy with no difference in the primary outcome of cardiovascular death or hospitalization. In patients with high risk, however, there may be a reduction in cardiovascular mortality. We will also briefly discuss finerenone, a new generation MRA associated with a lower incidence of hyperkalemia.

SUMMARY

New evidence shows that MRA therapy decreases left ventricular mass and left atrial size, reduces hospitalization, and may reduce cardiovascular mortality in patients with high risk.

New strategies for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: the importance of targeted therapies for heart failure phenotypes

The management of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HF-REF) has improved significantly over the last two decades. In contrast, little or no progress has been made in identifying evidence-based, effective treatments for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HF-PEF). Despite the high prevalence, mortality, and cost of HF-PEF, large phase III international clinical trials investigating interventions to improve outcomes in HF-PEF have yielded disappointing results. Therefore, treatment of HF-PEF remains largely empiric, and almost no acknowledged standards exist. There is no single explanation for the negative results of past HF-PEF trials. Potential contributors include an incomplete understanding of HF-PEF pathophysiology, the heterogeneity of the patient population, inadequate diagnostic criteria, recruitment of patients without true heart failure or at early stages of the syndrome, poor matching of therapeutic mechanisms and primary pathophysiological processes, suboptimal study designs, or inadequate statistical power. Many novel agents are in various stages of research and development for potential use in patients with HF-PEF. To maximize the likelihood of identifying effective therapeutics for HF-PEF, lessons learned from the past decade of research should be applied to the design, conduct, and interpretation of future trials. This paper represents a synthesis of a workshop held in Bergamo, Italy, and it examines new and emerging therapies in the context of specific, targeted HF-PEF phenotypes where positive clinical benefit may be detected in clinical trials. Specific considerations related to patient and endpoint selection for future clinical trials design are also discussed.

The emerging epidemic of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), which currently represents approximately 50 % of heart failure (HF) cases, is common and associated with high morbidity and mortality. Understanding the epidemiology of HFpEF has been difficult due to the challenges in HFpEF diagnosis and the heterogeneous etiologies and pathophysiologies that underlie HFpEF. Nevertheless, several high-quality epidemiology and observational registry studies of HFpEF demonstrate that an increasing prevalence of HFpEF in both the outpatient and inpatient settings, coupled with a lack of evidence-based effective treatments for HFpEF, is resulting in an emerging epidemic of HFpEF. In this review, we discuss the emerging HFpEF epidemic, focusing on: (1) reasons for the rising prevalence of HFpEF; (2) the abnormalities in cardiac structure and function that dictate the transition from risk factors to HFpEF; (3) novel HFpEF mechanisms that may underlie the increase in HFpEF prevalence; (4) prognosis of HFpEF; and (5) risk prediction in HFpEF. We conclude with 10 unanswered questions onHFpEF epidemiology thatwill be important areas for future investigation.

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

As part of this series devoted to heart failure (HF), we review the epidemiology, diagnosis, pathophysiology, and treatment of HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Gaps in knowledge and needed future research are discussed.

Effects of renin-angiotensin system blockade on mortality and hospitalization in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HF-PEF) is a well-recognized complication of long-standing hypertension. However, beyond the control of the traditional cardiovascular risk factors, there are few other recommendations for its management. To examine the potential benefit of renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibition in HF-PEF, we performed a systematic review of the published medical literature. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and COCHRANE databases were searched from 1966 to 2011 for longitudinal studies examining HF-PEF patients receiving treatment with RAS inhibitors, either ACE inhibitors (ACE-I) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) in addition to their standard treatment compared to those receiving standard treatment alone. We examined the all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and hospitalizations for heart failure. A total of 12 studies with 11,259 participants were included in the analysis. Among the randomized clinical trials, with the use of RAS inhibitors over standard treatment, there was no improvement in all-cause mortality (RR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.88-1.12; p = 0.88), while there was a trend toward lowered rates of hospitalization (RR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.86-1.01; p = 0.08). There were no major differences in the outcomes between the ACE-I or ARB. However, among the observational studies with the use of RAS inhibitors, there was a significant benefit in all-cause mortality (RR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.62-0.93; p = 0.009), with no significant impact on the hospitalization rates. RAS inhibition in HF-PEF was not associated with significant reduction in all-cause or cardiovascular mortality, but randomized control trials appear to demonstrate a trend toward reduction in the risk for subsequent hospitalization. Further prospective randomized trials are warranted to confirm the effects of RAS inhibition on mortality and hospitalization.

Update on heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFPEF) is the most common form of heart failure (HF) in older adults, and is increasing in prevalence as the population ages. Morbidity and long-term mortality in HFPEF are substantial and can be similar to HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFREF), yet HFPEF therapy remains empirical and treatment guidelines are based primarily on expert consensus. Neurohormonal blockade has revolutionized the management of HFREF, but trials in HFPEF based on this strategy have been disappointing to date. However, many recent studies have increased knowledge about HFPEF. The concept of HFPEF has evolved from a 'cardio-centric' model to a syndrome that may involve multiple cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular mechanisms. Emerging data highlight the importance of non-pharmacological management strategies and assessment of non-cardiovascular comorbidities. Animal models, epidemiological cohorts, and small human studies suggest that oxidative stress and inflammation contribute to HFPEF, potentially leading to development of new therapeutic targets.

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Progressive aging of the population and prolongation of life expectancy have led to the rising prevalence of heart failure (HF). Despite the improvements in medical therapy, the mortality rate of this condition has remained unacceptably high, becoming the primary cause of death in the elderly population. Almost half of patients with signs and symptoms of HF are found to have a nearly normal ejection fraction, which delineates a distinct clinical syndrome, known as HF with preserved ejection fraction (HF-PEF). While early research focused on the importance of diastolic dysfunction, more recent studies reported the pathophysiological complexity of the disease with multiple cardiovascular abnormalities contributing to its development and progression. HF-PEF is a challenging major health problem with yet no solution as there is no evidence-based treatment which improves clinical outcomes. This review summarizes the state of current knowledge on diagnosis, prognosis and treatment of HF-PEF, with particular insights on the pathological characteristics in the elderly population.

Pathological ventricular remodeling: mechanisms: part 1 of 2

Despite declines in heart failure morbidity and mortality with current therapies, rehospitalization rates remain distressingly high, substantially affecting individuals, society, and the economy. As a result, the need for new therapeutic advances and novel medical devices is urgent. Disease-related left ventricular remodeling is a complex process involving cardiac myocyte growth and death, vascular rarefaction, fibrosis, inflammation, and electrophysiological remodeling. Because these events are highly interrelated, targeting a single molecule or process may not be sufficient. Here, we review molecular and cellular mechanisms governing pathological ventricular remodeling.

N-terminal pro brain natriuretic peptide-guided management in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction: findings from the Trial of Intensified versus standard medical therapy in elderly patients with congestive heart failure (TIME-CHF)

AIMS

To assess the effects of an NT-proBNP-guided medical management on 18-month outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF) and preserved LVEF ( HFpEF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients with HFpEF (LVEF >45%; n = 123) and HF with reduced LVEF (HFrEF; LVEF ≤45%; n = 499) with age ≥60 years, NYHA class ≥ II, and elevated NT-proBNP (>400 ng/L or >800 ng/L depending on age) were randomized to medical therapy titrated only to reduce symptoms to NYHA ≤II (symptom-guided) or also to reduce NT-proBNP below the inclusion threshold (NT-proBNP-guided) during a 6-month period. Patients were followed for an additional 12 months. Despite similar treatment escalation, NT-proBNP reduction and symptom relief were less in HFpEF than in HFrEF. Hospitalization-free survival at 18 months was worse in HFpEF than in HFrEF (P = 0.02), while survival and HF hospitalization-free survival did not differ. Among HFpEF patients, NT-proBNP reduction and symptom relief were similar in the symptom-guided (n = 59) and NT-proBNP-guided (n = 64) group despite more aggressive treatment in the NT-proBNP-guided group. In contrast to effects in HFrEF, NT-proBNP-guided management tended to worsen 18-month outcomes in HFpEF, with P-values for the interactions between LVEF stratum and management strategy of 0.2 for hospitalization-free survival, 0.03 for survival, and 0.01 for HF hospitalization-free survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Outcomes in HFpEF were not better than in HFrEF, and opposite effects of NT-proBNP-guided management were observed in HFpEF compared with HFrEF. These preliminary findings suggest that, in contrast to HFrEF, NT-proBNP-guided therapy may not be beneficial in HFpEF. Trial registration ISRCTN43596477.

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in African Americans: The ARIC (Atherosclerosis Risk In Communities) study

OBJECTIVES

In an entirely African-American cohort, we compared clinical characteristics, cardiac structure and function, and all-cause mortality in patients with heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) in relation to patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and those without HF.

BACKGROUND

African Americans are at increased risk for HF. Nevertheless, there are limited phenotypic and prognostic data in African Americans with HFpEF compared with those with HFrEF and those without HF.

METHODS

Middle-aged African Americans from the Jackson, Mississippi, cohort of the ARIC (Atherosclerosis Risk In Communities) study (n = 2,445) underwent echocardiography between 1993 and 1995. HF prevalence was available in 1,962 patients for whom left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) could be quantified. Participants with HF were categorized as having HFpEF (LVEF ≥50%), HFrEF (LVEF <50%), or no HF, with comparisons made between groups.

RESULTS

HF was identified in 116 (5.9%) participants (HFpEF n = 85 [73%]; HFrEF n = 31 [27%]). Compared with those without HF, those with HFpEF were older, were more likely to be female, and had more frequent comorbidities and concentric hypertrophy. In relation to HFrEF, those with HFpEF were more likely to be female but less likely to have coronary heart disease, diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease, left atrial enlargement, and eccentric hypertrophy. Over a median 13.7 years of follow-up, risk of death differed between groups, with age- and sex-adjusted hazard ratios of 1.51 (95% confidence interval: 1.01 to 2.25) for HFpEF versus those without HF and 2.50 (95% confidence interval: 1.37 to 4.58) for HFrEF versus HFpEF.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort of middle-aged African Americans, HFpEF was the most common form of HF and was associated with a substantially better prognosis than HFrEF but worse than those without HF.

Cardiac output response to exercise in relation to metabolic demand in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

AIMS

Exercise intolerance is a hallmark of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), yet its mechanisms remain unclear. The current study sought to determine whether increases in cardiac output (CO) during exercise are appropriately matched to metabolic demands in HFpEF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients with HFpEF (n = 109) and controls (n = 73) exercised to volitional fatigue with simultaneous invasive (n = 96) or non-invasive (n = 86) haemodynamic assessment and expired gas analysis to determine oxygen consumption (VO2) during upright or supine exercise. At rest, HFpEF patients had higher LV filling pressures but similar heart rate, stroke volume, EF, and CO. During supine and upright exercise, HFpEF patients displayed lower peak VO2 coupled with blunted increases in heart rate, stroke volume, EF, and CO compared with controls. LV filling pressures increased dramatically in HFpEF patients, with secondary elevation in pulmonary artery pressures. Reduced peak VO2 in HFpEF patients was predominantly attributable to CO limitation, as the slope of the increase in CO relative to VO2 was 20% lower in HFpEF patients (5.9 ± 2.5 vs. 7.4 ± 2.6 L blood/L O2, P = 0.0005). While absolute increases in arterial-venous O2 difference with exercise were similar in HFpEF patients and controls, augmentation in arterial-venous O2 difference relative to VO2 was greater in HFpEF patients (8.9 ± 3.4 vs. 5.5 ± 2.0 min/dL, P < 0.0001). These differences were observed in the total cohort and when upright and supine exercise modalities were examined individually.

CONCLUSION

While diastolic dysfunction promotes congestion and pulmonary hypertension with stress in HFpEF, reduction in exercise capacity is predominantly related to inadequate CO relative to metabolic needs.

What have we learned about patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction from DIG-PEF, CHARM-preserved, and I-PRESERVE?

Examination of patients with reduced and preserved ejection fraction in the DIG (Digitalis Investigation Group) trials and the CHARM (Candesartan in Heart Failure: Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and Morbidity) trials provides comparisons of outcomes in each of these types of heart failure. Comparison of the patients in these trials, along with the I-PRESERVE (Irbesartan in Heart Failure with Preserved Systolic Function Trial), with patients of similar age, sex distribution, and comorbidity in trials of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, angina pectoris, and atrial fibrillation provides even more interesting insights into the relation between phenotype and rates of death and heart failure hospitalization. The poor clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction do not seem easily explained on the basis of age, sex, comorbidity, blood pressure, or left ventricular structural remodeling but do seem to be explained by the presence of the syndrome of heart failure.

Comorbidity and ventricular and vascular structure and function in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a community-based study

BACKGROUND

Patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) display increased adiposity and multiple comorbidities, factors that in themselves may influence cardiovascular structure and function. This has sparked debate as to whether HFpEF represents a distinct disease or an amalgamation of comorbidities. We hypothesized that fundamental cardiovascular structural and functional alterations are characteristic of HFpEF, even after accounting for body size and comorbidities.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Comorbidity-adjusted cardiovascular structural and functional parameters scaled to independently generated and age-appropriate allometric powers were compared in community-based cohorts of HFpEF patients (n=386) and age/sex-matched healthy n=193 and hypertensive, n=386 controls. Within HFpEF patients, body size and concomitant comorbidity-adjusted cardiovascular structural and functional parameters and survival were compared in those with and without individual comorbidities. Among HFpEF patients, comorbidities (obesity, anemia, diabetes mellitus, and renal dysfunction) were each associated with unique clinical, structural, functional, and prognostic profiles. However, after accounting for age, sex, body size, and comorbidities, greater concentric hypertrophy, atrial enlargement and systolic, diastolic, and vascular dysfunction were consistently observed in HFpEF compared with age/sex-matched normotensive and hypertensive.

CONCLUSIONS

Comorbidities influence ventricular-vascular properties and outcomes in HFpEF, yet fundamental disease-specific changes in cardiovascular structure and function underlie this disorder. These data support the search for mechanistically targeted therapies in this disease.

Prevalence, clinical phenotype, and outcomes associated with normal B-type natriuretic peptide levels in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) is used widely to exclude heart failure (HF) in patients with dyspnea. However, most studies of BNP have focused on diagnosing HF with reduced ejection fraction (EF). The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that a normal BNP level (≤100 pg/ml) is relatively common in HF with preserved EF (HFpEF), a heterogenous disorder commonly associated with obesity. A total of 159 consecutive patients enrolled in the Northwestern University HFpEF Program were prospectively studied. All subjects had symptomatic HF with EF >50% and elevated pulmonary capillary wedge pressure. BNP was tested at baseline in all subjects. Clinical characteristics, echocardiographic parameters, invasive hemodynamics, and outcomes were compared among patients with HFpEF with normal (≤100 pg/ml) versus elevated (>100 pg/ml) BNP. Of the 159 patients with HFpEF, 46 (29%) had BNP ≤100 pg/ml. Subjects with normal BNP were younger, were more often women, had higher rates of obesity and higher body mass index, and less commonly had chronic kidney disease and atrial fibrillation. EFs and pulmonary capillary wedge pressures were similar in the normal and elevated BNP groups (62 ± 7% vs 61 ± 7%, p = 0.67, and 25 ± 8 vs 27 ± 9 mm Hg, p = 0.42, respectively). Elevated BNP was associated with enlarged left atrial volume, worse diastolic function, abnormal right ventricular structure and function, and worse outcomes (e.g., adjusted hazard ratio for HF hospitalization 4.0, 95% confidence interval 1.6 to 9.7, p = 0.003). In conclusion, normal BNP levels were present in 29% of symptomatic outpatients with HFpEF who had elevated pulmonary capillary wedge pressures, and although BNP is useful as a prognostic marker in HFpEF, normal BNP does not exclude the outpatient diagnosis of HFpEF.