Congestion and Use of Diuretics in Heart Failure and Cardiomyopathies: a Practical Guide

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Heart failure is a highly prevalent condition caused by many different aetiologies and characterised by cardiac dysfunction and congestion. Once developed, congestion leads to signs (peripheral oedema) and symptoms (breathlessness on exertion), adverse cardiac remodelling, and an increased risk of hospitalisation and premature death. This review summarises strategies that could enable early identification and a more objective management of congestion in patients with heart failure.

RECENT FINDINGS

For patients with suspected or diagnosed heart failure, combining an echocardiogram with assessment of great veins, lungs, and kidneys by ultrasound might facilitate recognition and quantification of congestion, the management of which is still difficult and highly subjective. Congestion is a one of the key drivers of morbidity and mortality in patients with heart failure and is often under-recognised. The use of ultrasound allows for a timely, simultaneous identification of cardiac dysfunction and multiorgan congestion; ongoing and future studies will clarify how to tailor diuretic treatments in those with or at risk of heart failure.

Clinical practice update on heart failure 2019: pharmacotherapy, procedures, devices and patient management. An expert consensus meeting report of the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology

The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) has published a series of guidelines on heart failure (HF) over the last 25 years, most recently in 2016. Given the amount of new information that has become available since then, the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC recognized the need to review and summarise recent developments in a consensus document. Here we report from the HFA workshop that was held in January 2019 in Frankfurt, Germany. This expert consensus report is neither a guideline update nor a position statement, but rather a summary and consensus view in the form of consensus recommendations. The report describes how these guidance statements are supported by evidence, it makes some practical comments, and it highlights new research areas and how progress might change the clinical management of HF. We have avoided re-interpretation of information already considered in the 2016 ESC/HFA guidelines. Specific new recommendations have been made based on the evidence from major trials published since 2016, including sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors in type 2 diabetes mellitus, MitraClip for functional mitral regurgitation, atrial fibrillation ablation in HF, tafamidis in cardiac transthyretin amyloidosis, rivaroxaban in HF, implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in non-ischaemic HF, and telemedicine for HF. In addition, new trial evidence from smaller trials and updated meta-analyses have given us the chance to provide refined recommendations in selected other areas. Further, new trial evidence is due in many of these areas and others over the next 2 years, in time for the planned 2021 ESC guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure.

Mode of presentation and mortality amongst patients hospitalized with heart failure? A report from the First Euro Heart Failure Survey

BACKGROUND

Heart failure is heterogeneous in aetiology, pathophysiology, and presentation. Despite this diversity, clinical trials of patients hospitalized for HF deal with this problem as a single entity, which may be one reason for repeated failures.

METHODS

The first EuroHeart Failure Survey screened consecutive deaths and discharges of patients with suspected heart failure during 2000-2001. Patients were sorted into seven mutually exclusive hierarchical presentations: (1) with cardiac arrest/ventricular arrhythmia; (2) with acute coronary syndrome; (3) with rapid atrial fibrillation; (4) with acute breathlessness; (5) with other symptoms/signs such as peripheral oedema; (6) with stable symptoms; and (7) others in whom the contribution of HF to admission was not clear.

RESULTS

The 10,701 patients enrolled were classified into the above seven presentations as follows: 260 (2%), 560 (5%), 799 (8%), 2479 (24%), 1040 (10%), 703 (7%), and 4691 (45%) for which index-admission mortality was 26%, 20%, 10%, 8%, 6%, 6%, and 4%, respectively. Compared to those in group 7, the hazard ratios for death during the index admission were 4.9 (p ≤ 0.001), 4.0 (p < 0.001), 2.2 (p < 0.001), 2.1 (p < 0.001), 1.4 (p < 0.04) and 1.4 (p = 0.04), respectively. These differences were no longer statistically significant by 12 weeks.

CONCLUSION

There is great diversity in the presentation of heart failure that is associated with very different short-term outcomes. Only a minority of hospitalizations associated with suspected heart failure are associated with acute breathlessness. This should be taken into account in the design of future clinical trials.