Sequencing and titrating approach of therapy in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction following the 2021 European Society of Cardiology guidelines: an international cardiology survey

AIMS

In symptomatic patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), recent international guidelines recommend initiating four major therapeutic classes rather than sequential initiation. It remains unclear how this change in guidelines is perceived by practicing cardiologists versus heart failure (HF) specialists.

METHODS AND RESULTS

An independent academic web-based survey was designed by a group of HF specialists and posted by email and through various social networks to a broad community of cardiologists worldwide 1 year after the publication of the latest European HF guidelines. Overall, 615 cardiologists (38 [32-47] years old, 63% male) completed the survey, of which 58% were working in a university hospital and 26% were HF specialists. The threshold to define HFrEF was ≤40% for 61% of the physicians. Preferred drug prescription for the sequential approach was angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors first (74%), beta-blockers second (55%), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists third (52%), and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (53%) fourth. Eighty-four percent of participants felt that starting all four classes was feasible within the initial hospitalization, and 58% felt that titration is less important than introducing a new class. Age, status in training, and specialization in HF field were the principal characteristics that significantly impacted the answers.

CONCLUSION

In a broad international cardiology community, the 'historical approach' to HFrEF therapies remains the preferred sequencing approach. However, accelerated introduction and uptitration are also major treatment goals. Strategy trials in treatment guidance are needed to further change practices.

Coronary artery disease and revascularization associated with immune checkpoint blocker myocarditis – report from an international registry

Purpose

Immune-checkpoint-blocker (ICB) associated myocarditis (ICB-myocarditis) may present similarly and/or overlap with other cardiac pathology including acute coronary syndrome presenting a challenge for prompt clinical diagnosis.

Methods

An international registry was used to retrospectively identify cases of ICB-myocarditis. Presence of coronary artery disease (CAD) was defined as coronary artery stenosis >70% in patients undergoing coronary angiogram.

Results

Among 261 patients with clinically suspected ICB-myocarditis who underwent a coronary angiography, CAD was present in 59/261 (22.6%) (Table 1). Coronary revascularization was performed during the index hospitalization in 19/59 (32.2%) patients. Patients undergoing coronary revascularization less frequently received steroids administration within 24h of admission compared to the other groups (p=0.029). Myocarditis related 90-day mortality was 9/17 (52.7%) in the revascularized cohort, compared to 5/31 (16.1%) in those not revascularized and 25/156 (16.0%) in those without CAD (p=0.001). irAE-related 90-day mortality was 9/17 (52.7%) in the revascularized cohort, compared to 6/31 (19.4%) in those not revascularized and 31/156 (19.9%) in no CAD groups (p=0.007) (Figure 1). All-cause 90-day mortality was 11/17 (64.7%) in the revascularized cohort, compared to 13/31 (41.9%) in no revascularization and 60/158 (38.0%) in no CAD groups (p=0.10). After adjustment on age and sex, coronary revascularization remained associated with ICB-myocarditis-related death at 90 days (Hazard ratio [HR]=4.03, 95%confidence interval [CI] 1.84–8.84, p<0.001) and was marginally associated with all-cause death (HR=1.88, 95% CI 0.98–3.61, p=0.057).

Conclusion

CAD may exist concomitantly with ICB-myocarditis and portend a poorer outcome when revascularization is performed. This is potentially mediated thru delayed diagnosis and treatment or more severe presentation of ICB-myocarditis.

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding sources: None.

P907Respective pronostic value of the valvular aortic calcifications and the thoracic aorta calcifications in patients with and without low gradient aortic stenosis after TAVI

Background

Both the valvular aortic calcifications (VAC) and the thoracic aorta calcifications (TAC) have a prognostic impact in patients with aortic stenosis. Their respective prognostic values in patients with and without low gradient aortic stenosis (LGAS) remain unknown after TAVI.

Objectives

To assess the prognostic significance of VAC and TAC in patients with and without LGAS regarding cardiovascular mortality after 3 years follow-up.

Methods

The CAPRI-LGAS is an ancillary study of the C4CAPRI trial (NCT02935491) including 1282 consecutive TAVI patients. Calcifications were measured on pre-TAVI CT. The primary outcome was defined as cardiovascular mortality 3 years after TAVI.

Results

Among the 1282 patients, 397 (31%) had a LGAS. Compared to the other patients, LGAS patients were more prone to be men, younger, with atrial fibrillation, and lower left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), p<0.05 for all. No statistically significant difference was noticed for pulmonary systolic pressures, history of diabetes, chronic respiratory disease, renal insufficiency or peripheral vascular disease. VAC was lower in LGAS compared to non-LGAS patients (1.05 cm3±0.7 vs 0.75 cm3±0.5), p<0.001, the contrary was noticed for TAC, (3.1 cm3±3 vs 3.7 cm3±3.7), p=0.011. After 3 years follow-up, 227 (17.7%) patients died from cardiovascular causes; respectively 85 (21.4%) and 142 (16.1%) patients with and without LGAS, p=0.02. In univariate analysis, in LGAS patients each increase of 1cm3 TAC was associated with cardiovascular mortality while VAC was not, respectively Hazard Ratio (HR) 1.07 and confidence interval (CI) (1.023–1.119) p=0.003, and HR 0.822 CI (0.523–1.292), p=0.39. In patients without LGAS both TAC and VAC were associated with mortality, respectively HR 1.054 CI (1.006–1.104), p=0.028 and HR 1.363 CI (1.092–1.701), p=0.006. Multivariate analysis was adjusted for TAC, VAC, age, gender, atrial fibrillation, and LVEF. In LGAS patients TAC but not VAC was still a predictor of cardiovascular mortality, respectively HR 1.092 CI (1.031–1.158), p=0.003, and HR 0.743 CI (0.464–1.191), p=0.21. In patients without LGAS TAC was no more associated with cardiovascular mortality while VAC was, respectively HR 1.306 CI (1.024–1.666), p=0.031, and HR 1.038 CI (0.985–1.094), p=0.161. When further adjusting on pulmonary systolic pressures, history of diabetes, chronic respiratory disease, renal insufficiency and peripheral vascular disease, the results remained similar ie in LGAS patients, TAC HR 1.090 CI (1.022–1.162), p=0.009 while in patients without LGAS VAC HR 1.377 CI (1.049–1.809), p=0.021.

Conclusions

The present study shows that VAC and TAC involve different prognostic information in patients with and without LGAS after TAVI. While VAC may be a marker of early and periprocedural mortality and aortic regurgitation in non-LGAS patients, TAC may continue to be harmful and increase afterload in patients with LGAS whom LVEF is often impaired.

Reproducibility in echocardiographic assessment of diastolic function in a population based study (the STANISLAS Cohort study)

INTRODUCTION

There is limited evidence regarding intra-observer and inter-observer variations in echocardiographic measurements of diastolic function. This study aimed to assess this reproducibly within a population-based cohort study.

METHODS

Sixty subjects in sinus rhythm were randomly selected among 4th visit participants of the STANISLAS Cohort (Lorraine region, France). This 4th examination systematically included M-mode, 2-dimensional, DTI and pulsed-wave Doppler echocardiograms. Reproducibility of variables was studied by intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) and Bland Altman plots.

RESULTS

Our population was on average middle-aged (50 ± 14 y), overweight (BMI = 26 ± 6 kg/m2) and non-smoking (87%) with a quarter of the participants having self-declared hypertension or treated with anti-hypertensive medication(s). Intra-observer ICC were > 0.90 for all analyzed parameters except for left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) which was 0.89 (0.81-0.93). The mean relative intra-observer differences were small and limits of agreement of relative differences were narrow for all considered parameters (<5% and <15% respectively). Inter-observer ICC were > 0.90 for all analyzed parameters except for LVEF (ICC = 0.87) and both mitral and pulmonary A wave duration (0.83 and 0.73 respectively). The mean relative inter-observer differences were <5% for all parameters except for pulmonary A wave duration (mean difference = 6.5%). Limits of agreement of relative differences were narrow (<15%), except for mitral A wave duration and velocity (both <20%) as well as left ventricular mass and pulmonary A wave duration (both <30%). Intra-observer agreements with regard to the presence and severity of diastolic dysfunction were excellent (Kappa = 0.93 (0.83-1.00) and 0.88 (0.75-0.99), respectively).

CONCLUSION

In this validation study within the STANISLAS cohort, diastolic function echocardiographic parameters were found to be highly reproducible. Diastolic dysfunction consequently appears as a highly effective clinical and research tool.