Does natriuretic peptide monitoring improve outcomes in heart failure patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines do not support the use of serial natriuretic peptide (NP) monitoring for heart failure with preserved (HFpEF) or reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) treatment, despite some studies showing benefit. We conducted an updated meta-analysis to address whether medical therapy in HFpEF or HFrEF should be titrated according to NP levels.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Scopus and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing NP versus guideline directed titration in HF patients through December 2017. The key outcomes of interest were mortality, HF hospitalizations and all-cause hospitalizations. Risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals were pooled using random effects model. Sub-group analyses were performed for type of NP used, average age and acute or chronic HF.

RESULTS

Eighteen trials including 5116 patients were included. Meta-analysis showed no significant difference between the NP-guided arm versus guideline directed titration in all-cause mortality (RR = 0.91 [0.81, 1.03]; p = 0.13), HF hospitalizations (RR = 0.81 [0.65, 1.01]; p = 0.06), and all cause hospitalizations (RR = 0.93 [0.86, 1.01]; p = 0.09). The results were consistent upon subgroup analysis by biomarker type (NT-proBNP or BNP) and type of heart failure (acute or chronic and HFrEF or HFpEF). Sub-group analysis suggested that NP-guided treatment was associated with decreased all-cause hospitalizations in patients younger than 72 years of age.

CONCLUSION

The available evidence suggests that NP-guided therapy provides no additional benefit over guideline directed therapy in terms of all-cause mortality and HF-related hospitalizations in acute or chronic HF patients, regardless of their ejection fraction.

The Effects of Ivabradine on Left Ventricular Synchronization and Tei Index in Patients with Systolic Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

The aim of our study was to evaluate in stable outpatients with systolic heart failure (HF) the 3 months effect of ivabradine on LV synchronization and Tei index in stable outpatients with systolic HF.

METHODS

We evaluated prospectively 40 (30 males, 10 females) patients with HF. All patients were evaluated before and after treatment by transthoracic M mode, two dimensional (2D), pulsed-wave (PW), continuous wave (CW), color flow and tissue Doppler imaging (TDI) and tissue synchronization imaging (TSI). Standard deviation of Ts of the 12 LV segments (Ts-SD-12) is the most widely used parameter of intra-LV asynchrony.

RESULTS

Thirty men and 10 women with mean ± SD age of 64.7 ± 9.9 years were included in this study. Most of the patients benefitted from some degree of clinical improvement, 12/16 (75.0%) from NYHA III to II and 18/24 (75.0%) from II to I, respectively. Resting heart rate was significantly reduced after ivabradine treatment (84.3 ± 11.4 vs. 66.5 ± 11.5 bpm, p < 0.001). E/E' and Tei index were significantly changed after ivabradine treatment (17.3 ± 9.0 vs. 14.8 ± 7.1, p = 0.02 and 0.86 ± 0.74 vs. 0.81 ± 0.69, p = 0.02). Intra-LV synchrony parameters Ts-SD-12 and Ts-12 were significantly reduced after ivabradine (46.8 ± 13.6 vs. 42.7 ± 13.1, p = 0.01 and 142.5 ± 44.0 vs. 128.5 ± 45.2, p = 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study demonstrated that adding ivabradine to the standard therapy reduced HR and significantly improved LV ventricular asynchrony and Tei index in systolic HF patients.

Early NT-proBNP decrease with ivabradine in ambulatory patients with systolic heart failure

BACKGROUND

Heart rate (HR) reduction in patients with systolic heart failure (HF) is a cornerstone of current therapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term effect of the HR reduction with ivabradine on N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) in outpatients with systolic HF.

HYPOTHESIS

Ivabradine improves survival and promotes left ventricle remodelling by reducing resting heart rate. Nt-ProBNP absolute and trends predict prognosis. We hypothesized a possible association between heart rate decrease and Nt-ProBNP values.

METHODS

We included 25 outpatients with systolic HF on optimized medical therapy (80% on angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, 56% on spironolactone, and 88% on β-blocker therapy), left ventricle ejection fraction <40%, and sinus rhythm and HR >70/bpm. After a 1 month running-out period, to establish the clinical and NT-proBNP stability, patients were started on ivabradine for 3 months.

RESULTS

Ivabradine decreased NT-proBNP (P = 0.002) from a median of 2850 pg/mL to 1802 pg/mL, corresponding to a median absolute and percent decrease of 964 pg/mL and 44.5%, respectively. The baseline HR correlated significantly with the baseline NT-proBNP (rs = 0.411, P = 0.041). The absolute and percent HR decrease correlated with the absolute NT-proBNP decrease (rs = 0.442, P = 0.027; rs = 0.395, P = 0.05). The greater the NT-proBNP absolute decrease tertile, the greater the baseline HR (P = 0.023) and the absolute (P = 0.028) and percent (P = 0.064) HR variation.

CONCLUSIONS

In outpatients with systolic HF, the NT-proBNP reduction obtained by short-term ivabradine treatment correlates closely with the degree of HR reduction.

Safety and tolerability of intensified, N-terminal pro brain natriuretic peptide-guided compared with standard medical therapy in elderly patients with congestive heart failure: results from TIME-CHF

AIMS

NT-proBNP-guided therapy results in intensification of medical heart failure (HF) therapy and is suggested to improve outcome. However, it is feared that an intensified, NT-proBNP-guided therapy carries a risk of adverse effects. Therefore, the safety and tolerability of NT-proBNP-guided therapy in the Trial of Intensified vs standard Medical therapy in Elderly patients with Congestive Heart Failure (TIME-CHF) was assessed.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 495 chronic HF patients, aged ≥60, with an LVEF ≤45%, NYHA class ≥II, randomized to NT-proBNP-guided or symptom-guided therapy and ≥1 month follow-up were included in the present safety analysis. All adverse events (AEs) were recorded during the 18-month trial period. A total of 5212 AEs were noted, 433 of them serious. NT-proBNP-guided therapy led to a higher up-titration of HF medication and was well tolerated, with a dropout rate (12% vs. 11%, P = 1.0) and AE profile [number of AEs/patient-year 4.7 (2.8-9.4) vs. 5.4 (2.7-11.4), P = 0.69; number of severe AEs/patient-year 0.7 (0-2.7) vs. 1.3 (0-3.9), P = 0.21] similar to that of symptom-guided therapy, although most subjects in both treatment groups (96% vs. 95%, P = 0.55) experienced at least one AE. Age and number of co-morbidities were associated with AEs and interacted with the safety profile of NT-proBNP-guided therapy: positive effects were more frequent in younger and less co-morbid patients whereas potential negative effects-although small and related to non-severe AEs only-were only seen in the older and more co-morbid patients.

CONCLUSIONS

NT-proBNP-guided therapy is safe in elderly and highly co-morbid HF patients. Trial registration ISRCTN43596477.

Natriuretic peptide-guided therapy in chronic heart failure: a meta-analysis of 2,686 patients in 12 randomized trials

Background

The role of cardiac natriuretic peptides in the management of patients with chronic heart failure (HF) remains uncertain. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether natriuretic peptide-guided therapy, compared to clinically-guided therapy, improves mortality and hospitalization rate in patients with chronic HF.

Methodology/Principal Findings

MEDLINE, Cochrane, ISI Web of Science and SCOPUS databases were searched for articles reporting natriuretic peptide-guided therapy in HF until August 2012. All randomized trials reporting clinical end-points (all-cause mortality and/or HF-related hospitalization and/or all-cause hospitalization) were included. Meta-analysis was performed to assess the influence of treatment on outcomes. Sensitivity analysis was performed to test the influence of potential effect modifiers and of each trial included in meta-analysis on results. Twelve trials enrolling 2,686 participants were included. Natriuretic peptide-guided therapy (either B-type natriuretic peptide [BNP]- or N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide [NT-proBNP]-guided therapy) significantly reduced all-cause mortality (Odds Ratio [OR]:0.738; 95% Confidence Interval [CI]:0.596 to 0.913; p = 0.005) and HF-related hospitalization (OR:0.554; CI:0.399 to 0.769; p = 0.000), but not all-cause hospitalization (OR:0.803; CI:0.629 to 1.024; p = 0.077). When separately assessed, NT-proBNP-guided therapy significantly reduced all-cause mortality (OR:0.717; CI:0.563 to 0.914; p = 0.007) and HF-related hospitalization (OR:0.531; CI:0.347 to 0.811; p = 0.003), but not all-cause hospitalization (OR:0.779; CI:0.414 to 1.465; p = 0.438), whereas BNP-guided therapy did not significantly reduce all-cause mortality (OR:0.814; CI:0.518 to 1.279; p = 0.371), HF-related hospitalization (OR:0.599; CI:0.303 to 1.187; p = 0.142) or all-cause hospitalization (OR:0.726; CI:0.609 to 0.964; p = 0.077).

Conclusions/Significance

Use of cardiac peptides to guide pharmacologic therapy significantly reduces mortality and HF related hospitalization in patients with chronic HF. In particular, NT-proBNP-guided therapy reduced all-cause mortality and HF-related hospitalization but not all-cause hospitalization, whereas BNP-guided therapy did not significantly reduce both mortality and morbidity.

Effects of Candesartan on Left Ventricular Function, Aldosterone and BNP in Chronic Heart Failure

PURPOSE: Heart failure (HF) is characterized by activation of neurohormonal systems such as aldosterone and natriuretic peptides. In the absence of published data, CandHeart trial was designed to assess the effects on left ventricular (LV) function, aldosterone and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) of candesartan in patients with HF and preserved (LVEF ≥ 40%) or depressed (LVEF <40%) LV systolic function. METHODS: A total of 514 patients with stable symptomatic NYHA II-IV HF and any left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)were randomized to candesartan (target dose 32 mg once daily) as add-on therapy or standard medical therapy alone. Standardized echocardiographic exams were performed locally under central quality control, whereas biomarkers were assayed in a core laboratory. RESULTS: The majority of patients (73.3%) were NYHA II and on ACE inhibitors (91.8%) and beta-blockers (85.4%). Mean age was 66 ± 11 years. Mean LVEF was 36.2 ± 9.7% and 24.9% of patients had LVEF ≥ 40%. LVEF increased significantly more in the candesartan group (p = 0.09 at 12 weeks and p = 0.01 at 48 weeks) and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter decreased in candesartan group (p = 0.05 at 12 weeks). Candesartan significantly reduced aldosterone at 48 weeks (p = 0.009). BNP was reduced similarly over time in both study groups (p = 0.35 and p = 0.98 at 12 and 48 weeks, respectively). There were 6.6% of discontinuations of candesartan for adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In CandHeart, the addition of candesartan to standard medical treatment did not reduce circulating BNP more than standard therapy (primary endpoint), but it significantly improved LV function and produced a marked decrease in aldosterone levels at study end.

The role of natriuretic peptide testing in guiding chronic heart failure management: review of available data and recommendations for use

The care of patients with heart failure can be challenging, with few objective tools available to assist in therapy decision-making. Natriuretic peptides are powerfully prognostic biomarkers in patients with heart failure and may represent an objective target for therapy. Accordingly, the use of biomarker-guided care with either B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) or amino-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) has been recently explored. Over the past few years, a number of studies with heterogeneous inclusion criteria, methods and results have been performed. We have reviewed the available literature, summarizing the results of biomarker-guided heart failure trials and deriving recommendations for optimal application of biomarker-guided heart failure care based on the experience gained. In general, positive studies had low BNP or NT-proBNP target concentrations (∼100 pg/mL and ∼1000 pg/mL, respectively) and achieved lower natriuretic peptide concentrations compared with standard care. Patients in the biomarker-guided arms of the studies typically received more aggressive heart failure care and had no excess adverse outcomes. In the recent ProBNP Outpatient Tailored Chronic Heart Failure Therapy (PROTECT) study, patients treated with biomarker-guided care also had improved quality of life and significantly better reverse remodeling on echocardiography compared with patients who received standard care. In conclusion, heart failure therapy guided by a goal to reduce natriuretic peptide concentrations below prognostically-meaningful levels results in more aggressive heart failure care, is well tolerated and is associated with superior outcomes.

Use of amino-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide to guide outpatient therapy of patients with chronic left ventricular systolic dysfunction

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether chronic heart failure (HF) therapy guided by concentrations of amino-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) is superior to standard of care (SOC) management.

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether standard HF treatment plus a goal of reducing NT-proBNP concentrations improves outcomes compared with standard management alone.

METHODS

In a prospective single-center trial, 151 subjects with HF due to left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction were randomized to receive either standard HF care plus a goal to reduce NT-proBNP concentrations ≤1,000 pg/ml or SOC management. The primary endpoint was total cardiovascular events between groups compared using generalized estimating equations. Secondary endpoints included effects of NT-proBNP-guided care on patient quality of life as well as cardiac structure and function, assessed with echocardiography.

RESULTS

Through a mean follow-up period of 10 ± 3 months, a significant reduction in the primary endpoint of total cardiovascular events was seen in the NT-proBNP arm compared with SOC (58 events vs. 100 events, p = 0.009; logistic odds for events 0.44, p = 0.02); Kaplan-Meier curves demonstrated significant differences in time to first event, favoring NT-proBNP-guided care (p = 0.03). No age interaction was found, with elderly patients benefitting similarly from NT-proBNP-guided care as younger subjects. Compared with SOC, NT-proBNP-guided patients had greater improvements in quality of life, demonstrated greater relative improvements in LV ejection fraction, and had more significant improvements in both LV end-systolic and -diastolic volume indexes.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with HF due to LV systolic dysfunction, NT-proBNP-guided therapy was superior to SOC, with reduced event rates, improved quality of life, and favorable effects on cardiac remodeling. (Use of NT-proBNP Testing to Guide Heart Failure Therapy in the Outpatient Setting; NCT00351390).

Design and methods of the Pro-B Type Natriuretic Peptide Outpatient Tailored Chronic Heart Failure Therapy (PROTECT) Study

BACKGROUND

Serial measurements of N-terminal pro-B type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) provide prognostic information in patients with chronic heart failure (HF). Changes in NT-proBNP concentrations parallel prognosis; however, it remains unclear whether HF care with a goal to maximize medical therapy and also lower NT-proBNP concentrations is superior to standard HF care alone.

AIMS

The aim of the study was to evaluate the hypothesis that an HF strategy guided by NT-proBNP reduces cardiovascular events compared to standard of care HF management.

METHODS

In a prospective randomized single-center trial, subjects with New York Heart Association class II to IV systolic HF (left ventricular ejection fraction < or =40%) will be enrolled. Both groups will receive standard HF management (with a goal for minimizing HF symptoms and achieving maximal dosages of therapies with proven mortality benefit in HF), whereas one group ("NT-proBNP") will also have treatment adjustments to reduce NT-proBNP concentrations < or =1,000 pg/mL. The primary end point of the trial is total cardiovascular events for a 1-year period; secondary end points will include effects of NT-proBNP-guided care on cardiac structure and function, quality of life, and total costs of care.

RESULTS

Enrollment began in 2006; of the original 300 planned, thus far, 151 subjects have been randomized. Interim analysis in November 2009 indicated significant reduction of events in the NT-proBNP arm. Full results are expected in 2010.

CONCLUSIONS

The Pro-B Type Natriuretic Peptide Outpatient Tailored Chronic Heart Failure Therapy (PROTECT) Study will test the hypothesis that therapy guided by NT-proBNP concentrations will be superior to standard of care HF management (www.clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT00351390).

Chronic central versus systemic blockade of AT(1) receptors and cardiac dysfunction in rats post-myocardial infarction

In rats, both central and systemic ANG II type 1 (AT(1)) receptor blockade attenuate sympathetic hyperactivity, but central blockade more effectively attenuates left ventricular (LV) dysfunction post-myocardial infarction (MI). In protocol I, we examined whether functional effects on cardiac load may play a role and different cardiac effects disappear after withdrawal of the blockade. Wistar rats were infused for 4 wk post-MI intracerebroventricularly (1 mg.kg(-1).day(-1)) or injected subcutaneously daily (100 mg x kg(-1) x day(-1)) with losartan. LV dimensions and function were assessed at 4 wk and at 6 wk post-MI, i.e., 2 wk after discontinuing treatments. At 4 and 6 wk post-MI, LV dimensions were increased and ejection fraction was decreased. Intracerebroventricular but not subcutaneous losartan significantly improved these parameters. At 6 wk, LV peak systolic pressure (LVPSP) and maximal or minimal first derivative of change in pressure over time (dP/dt(max/min)) were decreased and LV end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP) was increased. All four indexes were improved by previous intracerebroventricular losartan, whereas subcutaneous losartan improved LVEDP only. In protocol II, we evaluated effects of oral instead of subcutaneous administration of losartan for 4 wk post-MI. Losartan ( approximately 200 mg x kg(-1) x day(-1)) either via drinking water or by gavage similarly decreased AT(1) receptor binding densities in brain nuclei and improved LVEDP but further decreased LVPSP and dP/dt(max). These results indicate that effects on cardiac load by peripheral AT(1) receptor blockade or the pharmacokinetic profile of subcutaneous versus oral dosing do not contribute to the different cardiac effects of central versus systemic AT(1) receptor blockade post-MI.