Effects of Cardiac Contractility Modulation Electrodes on Tricuspid Regurgitation in Patients with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac contractility modulation (CCM) is an innovative therapy for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction delivered by a cardiac implantable device (Optimizer Smart®). One of the most prominent periprocedural complications common to all cardiac implantable devices (CIDs) is tricuspid regurgitation (TR) due to the placement of the right ventricular endocardial leads. To date, no published studies have assessed the changes in the TR degree in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) who received an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) after the implantation of cardiac contractility modulation therapy devices. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of the implantation of the trans-tricuspid leads required to deliver CCM therapy on the severity of TR in patients with HFrEF who previously underwent ICD implantation. METHODS: We enrolled 30 HFrEF patients who underwent CCM therapy between November 2020 and October 2021. For all the patients, echocardiographic evaluations of TR were performed according to current guidelines 24 h before and six months after the Optimizer Smart® implant was applied. RESULTS: At the 6-month follow-up, the grade of TR remained unchanged compared to the preimplant grade. The value of the vena contracta (VC) of TR was 0.40 ± 0.19 cm in the preimplant period and 0.45 ± 0.21 cm at the 6-month follow-up (p = 0.33). Similarly, the TR proximal isovelocity surface area (PISA) radius value was unchanged at follow-up (0.54 ± 0.22 cm vs. 0.62 ± 0.20 cm; p = 0.18). No statistically significant difference existed between the preimplant VC and PISA radius values, irrespective of the device type. CONCLUSIONS: The implantation of right ventricular electrodes for the delivery of CCM therapy did not worsen tricuspid regurgitation in patients with HFrEF and ICD.

The Effects of Device-Based Cardiac Contractility Modulation Therapy on Left Ventricle Global Longitudinal Strain and Myocardial Mechano-Energetic Efficiency in Patients with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: Virtually all patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction have a reduction of myocardial mechano-energetic efficiency (MEE). Cardiac contractility modulation (CCM) is a novel therapy for the treatment of patients with HFrEF, in whom it improves the quality of life and functional capacity, reduces hospitalizations, and induces biventricular reverse remodeling. However, the effects of CCM on MEE and global longitudinal strain (GLS) are still unknown; therefore, this study aims to evaluate whether CCM therapy can improve the MEE of patients with HFrEF. METHODS: We enrolled 25 patients with HFrEF who received an Optimizer Smart implant (the device that develops CCM therapy) between January 2018 and January 2021. Clinical and echocardiographic evaluations were performed in all patients 24 h before and six months after CCM therapy. RESULTS: At six months, follow-up patients who underwent CCM therapy showed an increase of left ventricular ejection fraction (30.8 ± 7.1 vs. 36.1 ± 6.9%; p = 0.032) as well a rise of GLS 10.3 ± 2.7 vs. -12.9 ± 4.2; p = 0.018), of MEE (32.2 ± 10.1 vs. 38.6 ± 7.6 mL/s; p = 0.013) and of MEE index (18.4 ± 6.3 vs. 24.3 ± 6.7 mL/s/g; p = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: CCM therapy increased left ventricular performance, improving left ventricular ejection fraction, GLS, as well as MEE and MEEi.

Hemodynamic Effects of Levosimendan in Outpatients With Advanced Heart Failure: An Echocardiographic Pilot Study.

ABSTRACT: Infusions of levosimendan delivered in ambulatory/outpatient settings have been shown to improve quality of life and reduce hospitalizations in patients with advanced heart failure (HF). The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate the effects of ambulatory infusion of levosimendan on echocardiographic markers of perfusion, congestion, and cardiovascular efficiency. Thirty patients with diagnosed advanced HF underwent ambulatorial infusion of levosimendan at a total dose of 6.25 mg as a part of a repetitive biweekly treatment strategy with the inotrope. Standardized transthoracic echocardiography and Doppler examinations, were performed 1 hour before and 48 hours after completion of ambulatory infusion. At 48 hours after ambulatory infusion of levosimendan, a significant increase in the stroke volume (37.47 ± 12.38 mL/beat vs. 45.47 ± 14.48 mL/beat; P < 0.05) and cardiac output (2.64 ± 0.66 L/min vs. 3.26 ± 0.57 L/min; P < 0.05) occurred. Significant postreductions versus prereductions were also recorded in left atrial pressure (27.37 ± 6.62 mm Hg vs. 22.82 ± 4.17 mm Hg; P < 0.01), mean pulmonary artery pressure (27.69 ± 4.64 mm Hg vs. 23.24 ± 5.32; P < 0.01), and inferior vena cava diameter (23.81 ± 7.63 mm vs. 18.53 ± 4.82 mm; P < 0.01). Significant improvements were noted in the resting cardiac power output (0.46 ± 0.15 watt vs. 0.53 ± 0.22 watt; P < 0.01) and the resting cardiac power index (0.24 ± 0.08 watt/m2 vs. 0.28 ± 0.11 watt/m2; P < 0.01). In outpatients with advanced HF, infusion of levosimendan was associated with hemodynamic responses that may contribute to the clinical benefit previously reported in such patients.

Inotropes in Patients with Advanced Heart Failure: Not Only Palliative Care.

Patients with advanced heart failure suffer from severe and persistent symptoms, often not responding disease-modifying drugs, a marked limitation of functional capacity and poor quality of life that can ameliorate with inotropic drugs therapy. In small studies, pulsed infusions of classical inotropes (ie, dobutamine and milrinone) are associated with improvement in hemodynamic parameters and quality of life in patients with advanced heart failure. However, because of the adverse effects of these drugs, serious safety issues have been raised. Levosimendan is a calcium-sensitizing inodilators with a triple mechanism of action, whose infusion results in hemodynamic, neurohormonal, and inflammatory cytokine improvements in patients with chronic advanced HF. In addition, levosimendan has important pleiotropic effects, including protection of myocardial, renal, and liver cells from ischemia-reperfusion injury, and anti-inflammatory and antioxidant effects; these properties possibly make levosimendan an "organ protective" inodilator. In clinical trials and real-world evidence, infusion of levosimendan at fixed intervals is safe and effective in patients with advanced HF, alleviating clinical symptoms, reducing hospitalizations, and improving the quality of life. Therefore, the use of repeated doses of levosimendan could represent the therapy of choice as a bridge to transplant/left ventricular assist device implantation or as palliative therapy in patients with advanced heart failure.

The Use of ß-Blockers in Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction.

Treatment with ß-blockers is the main strategy for managing patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction because of their ability to reverse the neurohumoral effects of the sympathetic nervous system, with consequent prognostic and symptomatic benefits. However, to date, they are underused, mainly because of the misconception that hypotension and bradycardia may worsen the haemodynamic status of patients with HFrEF and because of the presence of comorbidities falsely believed to be absolute contraindications to their use. To promote proper use of ß-blockers in this article, we review the clinical pharmacology of ß-blockers, the evidence of the beneficial effects of these drugs in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, and the current guidelines for their use in clinical practice and in the presence of comorbidities (e.g., pulmonary disease, diabetes, atrial fibrillation, peripheral arterial disease, etc.). It is hoped that the practical approach discussed in this review will allow for a proper diffusion of knowledge about the correct use of ß-blockers and the drug-disease interactions to achieve their increased use and titration, as well as for the selection of a specific agent with a view to a properly tailored approach for HFrEF patients.

Clinical relevance of transient worsening renal function after initiation of sacubitril/valsartan.

BACKGROUND: The worsening of renal function after the start of valsartan therapy is relatively common in clinical practice. However, few data are available on the incidence of worsening renal function after the beginning of therapy with sacubitril/valsartan. METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled 202 outpatients with HFrEF that started therapy with sacubitril/valsartan to evaluate the prevalence of worsening renal function and its clinical significance. RESULTS: At 1 month, a worsening renal function (defined as a > 20% decrease in eGFR occurring after 1 month of ARNi therapy) was found in 68 patients (33%), however after a mean follow-up of 650 ± 80 days, Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no significant in terms of HF-related deaths, HF-related hospitalizations, and the need for renal replacement therapy (25.2 vs. 23.6%; p = .812). In addition, the renal function recovered in patients with early WRF at 3 months (62 + 9.3 ml/min/1.73 m2 vs. 63 ± 13.8 ml/min/1.73 m2; p < .05), with an improvement in estimated glomerular filtration rate at 1 year compared with baseline value (62 ± 9.3 ml/min/1.73 m2 vs. 69 ± 8.6 ml/min/1.73 m2; p < .01). CONCLUSIONS: WRF occurs in nearly 30% of HFrEF patients without impacting clinical outcomes; HF specialists should be aware of these changes to avoid unnecessary discontinuation of sacubitril/valsartan therapy.

Effects of Sacubitril/Valsartan on the Right Ventricular Arterial Coupling in Patients with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: right ventricle-pulmonary artery (RV-PA) coupling assessed by measuring the tricuspid anular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE)/pulmonary artery systolic pressure (PASP) ratio has been recently proposed as an early marker of right ventricular dysfunction in patients with heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). METHODS: As the effects of sacubitril/valsartan therapy on RV-PA coupling remain unknown, this study aimed to analyse the effect of this drug on TAPSE/PASP in patients with HFrEF. We retrospectively analysed all outpatients with HFrEF referred to our unit between October 2016 and July 2018. RESULTS: At the 1-year follow-up, sacubitril/valsartan therapy was associated with a significant improvement in TAPSE (18.26 ± 3.7 vs. 19.6 ± 4.2 mm, p < 0.01), PASP (38.3 ± 15.7 vs. 33.7 ± 13.6, p < 0.05), and RV-PA coupling (0.57 ± 0.25 vs. 0.68 ± 0.30 p < 0.01). These improvements persisted at the 2-year follow-up. In the multivariable analysis, the improvement in the RV-PA coupling was independent of the left ventricular remodelling. CONCLUSIONS: in patients with HFrEF, sacubitril/valsartan improved the RV-PA coupling; however, further trials are necessary to evaluate the role of sacubitril/valsartan in the treatment of right ventricle (RV) dysfunction either associated or not associated with left ventricular dysfunction.