Prevalence and clinical profile of kidney disease in patients with chronic heart failure. Insights from the Spanish cardiorenal registry.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Patients with combined heart failure (HF) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) have been underrepresented in clinical trials. The prevalence of CKD in these patients and their clinical profile require constant evaluation. This study aimed to analyze the prevalence of CKD, its clinical profile, and patterns of use of evidence-based medical therapies in HF across CKD stages in a contemporary cohort of ambulatory patients with HF. METHODS: From October 2021 to February 2022, the CARDIOREN registry included 1107 ambulatory HF patients from 13 HF clinics in Spain. RESULTS: The median age was 75 years, 63% were male, and 48% had heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF). A total of 654 (59.1%) had an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <60 mL/min/1.73 m2, and 122 (11%) patients with eGFR ≥ 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 had a urine albumin-creatinin ratio ≥ 30 mg/g. The most important variables associated with lower eGFR were age (R2=61%) and furosemide dose (R2=21%). The proportion of patients receiving an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI)/ angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB), an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNi), a sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor (SGLT2i), or a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) progressively decreased with lower eGFR categories. Notably, 32% of the patients with HFrEF and an eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2 received the combination of ACEI/ARB/ARNi+beta-blockers+MRA+SGLT2i. CONCLUSIONS: In this contemporary HF registry, 70% of patients had kidney disease. Although this population is less likely to receive evidence-based therapies, structured and specialized follow-up approaches within HF clinics may facilitate the adoption of these life-saving drugs.

Influence of the medical treatment schedule in new diagnoses patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction.

AIMS: Heart failure (HF) guidelines recommend treating all patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) with quadruple therapy, although they do not establish how to start it. This study aimed to evaluate the implementation of these recommendations, analyzing the efficacy and safety of the different therapeutic schedules. METHODS AND RESULTS: Prospective, observational, and multicenter registry that evaluated the treatment initiated in patients with newly diagnosed HFrEF and its evolution at 3 months. Clinical and analytical data were collected, as well as adverse reactions and events during follow-up. Five hundred and thirty-three patients were included, selecting four hundred and ninety-seven, aged 65.5 ± 12.9 years (72% male). The most frequent etiologies were ischemic (25.5%) and idiopathic (21.1%), with a left ventricular ejection fraction of 28.7 ± 7.4%. Quadruple therapy was started in 314 (63.2%) patients, triple in 120 (24.1%), and double in 63 (12.7%). Follow-up was 112 days [IQI 91; 154], with 10 (2%) patients dying. At 3 months, 78.5% had quadruple therapy (p < 0.001). There were no differences in achieving maximum doses or reducing or withdrawing drugs (< 6%) depending on the starting scheme. Twenty-seven (5.7%) patients had any emergency room visits or admission for HF, less frequent in those with quadruple therapy (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: It is possible to achieve quadruple therapy in patients with newly diagnosed HFrEF early. This strategy makes it possible to reduce admissions and visits to the emergency room for HF without associating a more significant reduction or withdrawal of drugs or significant difficulty in achieving the target doses.

A Simple Score to Identify Super-Responders to Sacubitril/Valsartan in Ambulatory Patients With Heart Failure.

INTRODUCTION: Sacubitril/valsartan (SV) promotes cardiac remodeling and improves prognosis in patients with heart failure (HF). However, the response to the drug may vary between patients and its implementation in daily clinical practice has been slower than expected. Our objective was to develop a score predicting the super-response to SV in HF outpatients. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of 185 consecutive patients prescribed SV from two tertiary hospitals between September 2016 and February 2018. Super-responder was defined as a patient taking the drug and (i) without HF admissions, death, or heart transplant, and (ii) with a ≥50% reduction in NT-proBNP levels and/or an increase of ≥10 points in LVEF in a 12-month follow-up period after starting SV. Clinical, echocardiographic, ECG, and biochemical variables were used in a logistic regression analysis to construct a score for super-response to SV which was internally validated using bootstrap method. RESULTS: Out of 185 patients, 65 (35%) fulfilled the super-responder criteria. Predictors for super-response to SV were absence of both previous aldosterone antagonist and diuretic treatment, NYHA I-II class, female gender, previous 1-year HF admission, and sinus rhythm. An integrating score distinguished a low- (<25%), intermediate- (∼46%), and high-probability (>80%) for 1-year super-response to SV. The AUC for the model was 0.72 (95%CI: 0.64-0.80), remaining consistent after internal validation. CONCLUSION: One-third of our patients presented a super-response to SV. We propose an easy-to-calculate score to predict super-response to SV after 1-year initiation based on variables that are currently assessed in clinical practice.

Sacubitril/Valsartan in Real-Life Practice: Experience in Patients with Advanced Heart Failure and Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: Sacubitril/valsartan reduced heart failure (HF) admissions and cardiovascular mortality in the PARADIGM-HF trial. However, real-life studies are scarce comparing daily practice patients with those of the trial. The aim of our study was to analyze the efficacy and safety of the drug in an advanced heart failure cohort and to review systematically the previous real-life studies published to date. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients prescribed sacubitril/valsartan in a single tertiary HF clinic between September 2016 and February 2018. HF admissions before and after the initiation of the drug were assessed in a paired fashion. A systematic review of real-life studies published to date was also conducted. RESULTS: Sacubitril/valsartan was started in 108 patients who were in a more advanced NYHA class and more frequently treated with mineral receptor antagonists, internal cardiac defibrillator, and cardiac resynchronization therapy than in the PARADIGM-HF trial. After a 6-month follow-up, we observed a significant reduction in the HF hospitalizations, median levels of NT-proBNP, and need for levosimendan ambulatory perfusion. Likewise, we found a significant improvement in mean LVEF and end diastolic left ventricle diameter. Regarding safety, sacubitril/valsartan was well-tolerated without any severe adverse effect. CONCLUSION: Sacubitril/valsartan in real-life is prescribed to a more advanced HF population, which could be responsible for the difficulties in reaching high doses of the drug. However, after a 6-month follow-up, sacubitril/valsartan significantly reduces HF hospitalization and induces cardiac reverse remodeling, without remarkable adverse events.