The blunted loop diuretic response in acute heart failure is driven by reduced tubular responsiveness rather than insufficient tubular delivery. The role of furosemide urine excretion on diuretic and natriuretic response in acute heart failure.

AIMS: Diuretic response in heart failure is blunted when compared to healthy individuals, but the pathophysiology underlying this phenomenon is unclear. We aimed to investigate whether the diuretic resistance mechanism is related to insufficient furosemide tubular delivery or low tubular responsiveness. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a prospective, observational study of 50 patients with acute heart failure patients divided into two groups based on previous furosemide use (furosemide naïve: n = 28 [56%] and chronic furosemide users: n = 22 [44%]). Each patient received a protocol-derived, standardized furosemide dose based on body weight. We measured diuretic response and urine furosemide concentrations. The furosemide naïve group had significantly higher urine volumes and natriuresis when compared to chronic users at all timepoints (all p < 0.05). Urine furosemide delivery was similar in furosemide naïve versus chronic users after accounting for differences in estimated glomerular filtration rate (28.02 [21.03-35.89] vs. 29.70 [18.19-34.71] mg, p = 0.87). However, the tubular response to delivered diuretic was dramatically higher in naïve versus chronic users, that is the urine volume per 1 µg/ml of urine furosemide at 2 h was 148.6 ± 136.1 versus 50.6 ± 56.1 ml (p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Patients naïve to furosemide have significantly better diuresis and natriuresis when compared to chronic furosemide users. The blunted diuretic response in patients with chronic loop diuretic exposure is driven by decreased tubular responsiveness rather than insufficient furosemide tubular delivery.

Relationship of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor C, a Lymphangiogenesis Modulator, With Edema Formation, Congestion and Outcomes in Acute Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Although vascular endothelial growth factor C (VEGF-C) is a known lymphangiogenesis modulator, its relationship with congestion formation and outcomes in acute heart failure (AHF) is unknown. METHODS: Serum VEGF-C levels were measured in 237 patients hospitalized for AHF. The population was stratified by VEGF-C levels and linked with clinical signs of congestion and outcomes. RESULTS: The study's population was divided in VEGF-C tertiles: low (median [Q25-Q75]: 33 [15-175]), medium (606 [468-741]) and high (1141 [968-1442] pg/mL). The group with low VEGF-C on admission presented with the highest prevalence of severe lower-extremity edema (low VEGF-C vs medium VEGF-C vs high VEGF-C): 30% vs 13% vs 20%; P = 0.02); the highest percentage of patients with ascites: 22% vs 9% vs 6%; P = 0.006; and the lowest proportion of patients with pulmonary congestion: 22% vs 30% vs 46%; P = 0.004. The 1-year mortality rate was the highest in the low VEGF-C tertile: 35% vs 28% vs 18%, respectively; P = 0.049. The same pattern was observed for the composite endpoint (death and AHF rehospitalization): 45% vs 43% vs 26%; P = 0.029. The risks of death at 1-year follow-up and composite endpoint were significantly lower in the high VEGF-C group. CONCLUSIONS: Low VEGF-C was associated with more severe signs of congestion (signs of fluid accumulation) and adverse clinical outcomes.

Machine Learning Approach to Understand Worsening Renal Function in Acute Heart Failure.

Acute heart failure (AHF) is a common and severe condition with a poor prognosis. Its course is often complicated by worsening renal function (WRF), exacerbating the outcome. The population of AHF patients experiencing WRF is heterogenous, and some novel possibilities for its analysis have recently emerged. Clustering is a machine learning (ML) technique that divides the population into distinct subgroups based on the similarity of cases (patients). Given that, we decided to use clustering to find subgroups inside the AHF population that differ in terms of WRF occurrence. We evaluated data from the three hundred and twelve AHF patients hospitalized in our institution who had creatinine assessed four times during hospitalization. Eighty-six variables evaluated at admission were included in the analysis. The k-medoids algorithm was used for clustering, and the quality of the procedure was judged by the Davies-Bouldin index. Three clinically and prognostically different clusters were distinguished. The groups had significantly (p = 0.004) different incidences of WRF. Inside the AHF population, we successfully discovered that three groups varied in renal prognosis. Our results provide novel insight into the AHF and WRF interplay and can be valuable for future trial construction and more tailored treatment.

Novel Biomarkers of Renal Dysfunction and Congestion in Heart Failure.

Heart failure is a major public health problem and, despite the constantly emerging, new, effective treatments, it remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Reliable tools for early diagnosis and risk stratification are crucial in the management of HF. This explains a growing interest in the development of new biomarkers related to various pathophysiological mechanisms of HF. In the course of this review, we focused on the markers of congestion and renal dysfunction in terms of their interference with cardiovascular homeostasis. Congestion is a hallmark feature of heart failure, contributing to symptoms, morbidity, and hospitalizations of patients with HF and has, therefore, become a therapeutic target in AHF. On the other hand, impaired renal function by altering the volume status contributes to the development and progression of HF and serves as a marker of an adverse clinical outcome. Early detection of congestion and an adequate assessment of renal status are essential for the prompt administration of patient-tailored therapy. This review provides an insight into recent advances in the field of HF biomarkers that could be potentially implemented in diagnosis and risk stratification of patients with HF.

Biomarkers of Myocardial Injury and Remodeling in Heart Failure.

With its complicated pathophysiology, high incidence and prevalence, heart failure remains a major public concern. In hopes of improving diagnosis, treatment and prognosis, the utility of many different biomarkers is researched vigorously around the world. In this review, biomarkers of myocardial remodeling and fibrosis (galectin-3, soluble isoform of suppression of tumorigenicity 2, matrix metalloproteinases, osteopontin, interleukin-6, syndecan-4, myostatin, procollagen type I C-terminal propeptide, procollagen type III N-terminal propeptide, vascular endothelial growth factor, nitric oxidase synthetase and asymmetric dimethylarginine), myocyte injury (heart-type fatty acid-binding protein, glutathione S-transferase P1 and heat shock protein 60), as well as iron metabolism (ferritin, transferrin saturation, soluble transferrin receptor and hepcidin), are considered in terms of possible clinical applicability and significance. Our short review consists of a summary of the aforementioned cardiovascular biomarkers' clinical relevance and perspectives.

Distinct renin/aldosterone activity profiles correlate with renal function, natriuretic response, decongestive ability and prognosis in acute heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Although renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) activation is believed to be the major driver of acute heart failure (AHF) episodes our understanding of its prevalence and clinical relevance in contemporary settings is incomplete. METHODS: Serum renin and aldosterone were measured at day-1 and at discharge in patients (n = 211) that were hospitalized between 2016 and 2017 for AHF in a single cardiology center. The population was profiled based on upper limits of normal (ULN) of both biomarkers assessed at day-1 and linked with the clinical course and outcomes. RESULTS: The study population constituted of three profiles: RAAS-/- (n = 121 [57%]); RAAS+/- (n = 60 [28%]); and RAAS+/+ (n = 30 [14%]). The RAAS+/+ profile had the lowest blood pressure and serum sodium at admission, day-2 and discharge compared to the other profiles (p < 0.001). The RAAS+/+ patients had significantly lower urine Na+ at admission (57.8 ± 36.7 vs 97.3 ± 31.3 and 86.4 ± 35.0), day-1 (52.7 ± 32.7 vs 85.3 ± 36.3 and 75.5 ± 33.9) mmol/l, vs RAAS-/- and RAAS+/- profiles, respectively, all p < 0.001. There was also a gradual decrease of renal function across increasing RAAS profiles. The RAAS+/+ profile received higher dose of furosemide at discharge 120 [80-160] vs the other profiles 80 [40-120] mg, p < 0.01. The risks of one year mortality or HF rehospitalization increased across the RAAS profiles (p < 0.001). The trajectory of renin or aldosterone change during hospitalization was not related to outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The RAAS overactivity is not essential for development of AHF. However, elevated RAAS is a marker of more advanced stages of heart failure, is related to low natriuresis and adverse clinical outcomes.

Pathophysiology of Advanced Heart Failure: What Knowledge Is Needed for Clinical Management?

Understanding of heart failure (HF) has evolved from a simple hemodynamic problem through a neurohormonally and proinflammatory-driven syndrome to a complex multiorgan dysfunction accompanied by inadequate energy handling. This article discusses the most important clinical aspects of advanced HF pathophysiology. It presents the concept of neurohormonal activation and its deleterious effect on cardiovascular system and reflex control. The current theories regarding the role of inflammation, cytokine activation, and myocardial remodeling in HF progression are presented. Advanced HF is a multiorgan syndrome with interplay between cardiovascular system and other organs. The role of iron deficiency is also discussed.

Spot urine sodium in acute heart failure: differences in prognostic value on admission and discharge.

AIMS: Most studies examined spot urine sodium's (sUNa+ ) prognostic utility during the early phase of acute heart failure (AHF) hospitalization. In AHF, sodium excretion is related to clinical status; therefore, we investigated the differences in the prognostic information of spot UNa+ throughout the course of hospitalization for AHF (admission vs. discharge). METHODS AND RESULTS: The study population were AHF patients (n = 172), who survived the index hospitalization. We compared the relationship between early (on admission, at 24 and 48 h) and discharge sUNa+ measurements with post-discharge study endpoints: composite of 1 year all-cause mortality and AHF rehospitalization (with time to first event analysis) as well as with each event in separation. There were 49 (28.5%) deaths, 40 (23.3%) AHF rehospitalizations, while the composite endpoint occurred in 69 (40.1%) during 1 year follow-up. The sUNa+ had prognostic significance for the composite endpoint when assessed on admission, at 24 and at 48 h: hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) (per 10 mmol/L) were 0.88 (0.82-0.94); 0.87 (0.81-0.91); 0.90 (0.84-0.96), all P < 0.005. In contrast to early, active decongestion phase, discharge sUNa+ had no prognostic significance HR (95% CI) (per 10 mmol/L): 0.99 (0.93-1.06) P = 0.79 for the composite endpoint, which was independent from the dose of oral furosemide prescribed at that timepoint (average causal mediation effects: -0.38; P = 0.71). Similarly, discharge sUNa+ was neither associated with 1 year mortality HR (95% CI) (per 10 mmol/L): 0.97 (0.89-1.05) P = 0.48 nor with AHF rehospitalizations HR (95% CI) (per 10 mmol/l): 1.03 (0.94-1.12), P = 0.56. The comparison of longitudinal profiles of sUNa+ during hospitalization showed significantly higher values within the early, active decongestive phase in those who did not experience composite endpoint when compared with those who did: admission: 94 ± 34 vs. 76 ± 35; Day 1: 85 ± 36 vs. 65 ± 37; Day 2: 84 ± 37 vs. 67 ± 35, all P < 0.005 (mmol/L), respectively. There was no difference between those groups in discharge sUNa+ : 73 ± 35 vs. 70 ± 35 P = 0.82 (mmol/L). CONCLUSIONS: Spot UNa+ assessed at early phase of hospitalization and at discharge have different prognostic significance, which confirms that it should be always interpreted along with clinical context.