Malonate given at reperfusion prevents post-myocardial infarction heart failure by decreasing ischemia/reperfusion injury.

The mitochondrial metabolite succinate is a key driver of ischemia/reperfusion injury (IRI). Targeting succinate metabolism by inhibiting succinate dehydrogenase (SDH) upon reperfusion using malonate is an effective therapeutic strategy to achieve cardioprotection in the short term (< 24 h reperfusion) in mouse and pig in vivo myocardial infarction (MI) models. We aimed to assess whether inhibiting IRI with malonate given upon reperfusion could prevent post-MI heart failure (HF) assessed after 28 days. Male C57BL/6 J mice were subjected to 30 min left anterior coronary artery (LAD) occlusion, before reperfusion for 28 days. Malonate or without-malonate control was infused as a single dose upon reperfusion. Cardiac function was assessed by echocardiography and fibrosis by Masson's trichrome staining. Reperfusion without malonate significantly reduced ejection fraction (~ 47%), fractional shortening (~ 23%) and elevated collagen deposition 28 days post-MI. Malonate, administered as a single infusion (16 mg/kg/min for 10 min) upon reperfusion, gave a significant cardioprotective effect, with ejection fraction (~ 60%) and fractional shortening (~ 30%) preserved and less collagen deposition. Using an acidified malonate formulation, to enhance its uptake into cardiomyocytes via the monocarboxylate transporter 1, both 1.6 and 16 mg/kg/min 10 min infusion led to robust long-term cardioprotection with preserved ejection fraction (> 60%) and fractional shortening (~ 30%), as well as significantly less collagen deposition than control hearts. Malonate administration upon reperfusion prevents post-MI HF. Acidification of malonate enables lower doses of malonate to also achieve long-term cardioprotection post-MI. Therefore, the administration of acidified malonate upon reperfusion is a promising therapeutic strategy to prevent IRI and post-MI HF.

Correlation of ventricular pacing burden and left ventricular function in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

BACKGROUND: Pacemaker-induced cardiomyopathy is a well described phenomenon in patients with preserved ejection fraction at the time of permanent pacemaker implant. One of the identified risk factors for pacemaker-induced cardiomyopathy is the degree of ventricular pacing burden. However, it is unclear how a high right ventricular pacing burden affects patients with depressed left ventricular function at the time of pacemaker implantation. We sought to assess the relationship between right ventricular pacing and change in left ventricular function over time. METHODS: We conducted an analysis of all patients who had received either a single or dual lead cardiac implantable electronic devices, excluding biventricular devices, and had a prior transthoracic echocardiogram demonstrating an ejection fraction of less than 50%. The primary end-point was the correlation between the percentage of ventricular pacing and the change in LV ejection fraction. RESULTS: Fifty eight patients with preceding heart failure had pacemakers implanted and had follow up echocardiograms. There was no correlation between the degree of ventricular pacing and the absolute change in LV function (r = .04, p = .979). None of the previously identified risk factors for pacemaker induced cardiomyopathy were predictive of a significant fall in ejection fraction. CONCLUSION: The degree of RV pacing and other established risk factors for pacemaker-induced cardiomyopathy in patients with normal left ventricular function at the time of implantation do not appear to carry the same risk in patients with pre-existing heart failure who receive either single or dual lead pacemakers.

Early Initiation of Sacubitril/Valsartan in Patients With Acute Heart Failure and Renal Dysfunction: An Analysis of the TRANSITION Study.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and renal dysfunction (RD) is challenging owing to the risk of further deterioration in renal function, especially after acute decompensated HF (ADHF). METHODS AND RESULTS: We assessed the effect of RD (estimated glomerular filtration rate of ≥30 to <60 mL/min/1.73 m2) on initiation, up-titration, and tolerability of sacubitril/valsartan in hemodynamically stabilized patients with HFrEF admitted for ADHF (RD, n = 476; non-RD, n = 483). At week 10, the target dose of sacubitril/valsartan (97/103 mg twice daily) was achieved by 42% patients in RD subgroup vs 54% in non-RD patients (P < .001). Sacubitril/valsartan was associated with greater estimated glomerular filtration rate improvements in RD subgroup than non-RD (change from baseline least squares mean 4.1 mL/min/1.73 m2, 95% confidence interval 2.2-6.1, P < .001). Cardiac biomarkers improved significantly in both subgroups; however, compared with the RD subgroup, the improvement was greater in those without RD (N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide, -28.6% vs -44.8%, high-sensitivity troponin T -20.3% vs -33.9%) (P < .001). Patients in the RD subgroup compared with those without RD experienced higher rates of hyperkalemia (16.3% vs 6.5%, P < .001), investigator-reported cardiac failure (9.7% vs 5.6%, P = .029), and renal impairment (6.4% vs 2.1%, P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with HFrEF and concomitant RD hospitalized for ADHF tolerated early initiation of sacubitril/valsartan and showed significant improvements in estimated glomerular filtration rate and cardiac biomarkers. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02661217.

Beyond quadruple therapy: the potential roles for ivabradine, vericiguat, and omecamtiv mecarbil in the therapeutic armamentarium.

Quadruple therapy is effective for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, providing significant clinical benefits, including reduced mortality. Clinicians are now in an era focused on how to initiate and titrate quadrable therapy in the early phase of the disease trajectory, including during heart failure hospitalization. However, patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction still face a significant "residual risk" of mortality and heart failure hospitalization. Despite the effective implementation of quadruple therapy, high mortality and rehospitalization rates persist in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, and many patients cannot maximize therapy due to side effects such as hypotension and renal dysfunction. In this context, ivabradine, vericiguat, and omecamtiv mecarbil may have adjunct roles in addition to quadruple therapy (note that omecamtiv mecarbil is not currently approved for clinical use). However, the contemporary use of ivabradine and vericiguat is relatively low globally, likely due in part to the under-recognition of the role of these therapies as well as costs. This review offers clinicians a straightforward guide for bedside evaluation of potential candidates for these medications. Quadruple therapy, with strong evidence to reduce mortality, should always be prioritized for implementation. As second-line therapies, ivabradine could be considered for patients who cannot achieve optimal heart rate control (≥ 70 bpm at rest) despite maximally tolerated beta-blocker dosing. Vericiguat could be considered for high-risk patients who have recently experienced worsening heart failure events despite being on quadrable therapy, but they should not have N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels exceeding 8000 pg/mL. In the future, omecamtiv mecarbil may be considered for severe heart failure (New York Heart Association class III to IV, ejection fraction ≤ 30%, and heart failure hospitalization within 6 months) when current quadrable therapy is limited, although this is still hypothesis-generating and requires further investigation before its approval.

Latest pharmaceutical approaches across the spectrum of heart failure.

Despite major advances in prevention and medical therapy, heart failure (HF) remains associated with high morbidity and mortality, especially in older and frailer patients. Therefore, a complete, guideline-based treatment is essential, even in HF patients with conditions traditionally associated with a problematic initiation and escalation of the medical HF therapy, such as chronic kidney disease and arterial hypotension, as the potential adverse effects are overcome by the overall decrease of the absolute risk. Furthermore, since the latest data suggest that the benefit of a combined medical therapy (MRA, ARNI, SGLT2i, beta-blocker) may extend up to a LVEF of 65%, further trials on these subgroups of patients (HFmrEF, HFpEF) are needed to re-evaluate the guideline-directed medical therapy across the HF spectrum. In particular, the use of SGLT2i was recently extended to HFpEF patients, as evidenced by the DELIVER and EMPEROR-preserved trials. Moreover, the indication for other conservative treatments in HF patients, such as the intravenous iron supplementation, was accordingly strengthened in the latest guidelines. Finally, the possible implementation of newer substances, such as finerenone, in guideline-directed medical practice for HF is anticipated with great interest.

Reduced thoracic skeletal muscle size is associated with adverse outcomes in diabetes patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: quantitative analysis of sarcopenia by using cardiac MRI.

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia is frequently found in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and is associated with reduced exercise capacity, poor quality of life and adverse outcomes. Recent evidence suggests that axial thoracic skeletal muscle size could be used as a surrogate to assess sarcopenia in HFrEF. Since diabetes mellitus (DM) is one of the most common comorbidities with HFrEF, we aimed to explore the potential association of axial thoracic skeletal muscle size with left ventricular (LV) remodeling and determine its prognostic significance in this condition. METHODS: A total of 243 diabetes patients with HFrEF were included in this study. Bilateral axial thoracic skeletal muscle size was obtained using cardiac MRI. Patients were stratified by the tertiles of axial thoracic skeletal muscle index (SMI). LV structural and functional indices, as well as amino-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), were measured. The determinants of elevated NT-proBNP were assessed using linear regression analysis. The associations between thoracic SMI and clinical outcomes were assessed using a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Patients in the lowest tertile of thoracic SMI displayed a deterioration in LV systolic strain in three components, together with an increase in LV mass and a heavier burden of myocardial fibrosis (all P < 0.05). Moreover, thoracic SMI (ß = -0.25; P < 0.001), rather than body mass index (ß = -0.04; P = 0.55), was independently associated with the level of NT-proBNP. The median follow-up duration was 33.6 months (IQR, 20.4-52.8 months). Patients with adverse outcomes showed a lower thoracic SMI (40.1 [34.3, 47.9] cm2/m2 vs. 45.3 [37.3, 55.0] cm2/m2; P < 0.05) but a similar BMI (P = 0.76) compared with those without adverse outcomes. A higher thoracic SMI indicated a lower risk of adverse outcomes (hazard ratio: 0.96; 95% confidence interval: 0.92-0.99; P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: With respect to diabetes patients with HFrEF, thoracic SMI is a novel alternative for evaluating muscle wasting in sarcopenia that can be obtained by a readily available routine cardiac MRI protocol. A reduction in thoracic skeletal muscle size predicts poor outcomes in the context of DM with HFrEF.

Glycemic control and clinical outcomes in diabetic patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: insight from ventricular remodeling using cardiac MRI.

BACKGROUND: Glycemic control, as measured by glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), is an important biomarker to evaluate diabetes severity and is believed to be associated with heart failure development. Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) commonly coexist, and the combination of these two diseases indicates a considerably poorer outcome than either disease alone. Therefore, glycemic control should be carefully managed. The present study aimed to explore the association between glycemic control and clinical outcomes, and to determine the optimal glycemic target in this specific population. METHODS: A total of 262 patients who underwent cardiac MRI were included and were split by HbA1c levels [HbA1c < 6.5% (intensive control), HbA1c 6.5-7.5% (modest control), and HbA1c > 7.5% (poor control)]. The biventricular volume and function, as well as left ventricular (LV) systolic strains in patients in different HbA1c categories, were measured and compared. The primary and secondary outcomes were recorded. The association of different HbA1c levels with adverse outcomes was assessed. RESULTS: Despite similar biventricular ejection fractions, both patients with intensive and poor glycemic control exhibited prominent deterioration of LV systolic strain in the longitudinal component (P = 0.004). After a median follow-up of 35.0 months, 55 patients (21.0%) experienced at least one confirmed endpoint event. Cox multivariable analysis indicated that both patients in the lowest and highest HbA1c categories exhibited a more than 2-fold increase in the risk for primary outcomes [HbA1c < 6.5%: hazard ratio (HR) = 2.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.07-5.45; P = 0.033; HbA1c > 7.5%: HR = 2.24, 95% CI = 1.01-4.99; P = 0.038] and secondary outcomes (HbA1c < 6.5%: HR = 2.84, 95% CI = 1.16-6.96; P = 0.022; HbA1c > 7.5%: HR = 2.65, 95% CI = 1.08-6.50; P = 0.038) compared with those in the middle HbA1c category. CONCLUSIONS: We showed a U-shaped association of glycemic control with clinical outcomes in patients with T2DM and HFrEF, with the lowest risk of adverse outcomes among patients with modest glycemic control. HbA1c between 6.5% and 7.5% may be served as the optimal hypoglycemic target in this specific population.

Dapagliflozin pharmacokinetics is similar between patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Dapagliflozin was recently approved for use in adults with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) with/without type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The objectives of this analysis were to characterize dapagliflozin pharmacokinetics in patients with HFrEF and to compare dapagliflozin systemic exposure between adults with HFrEF with/without T2DM and adults with T2DM. A nonlinear mixed-effects modelling approach was applied; the population-pharmacokinetic model was developed using 9735 dapagliflozin plasma concentrations from 2744 patients. The final two-compartmental model adequately described the observed dapagliflozin concentrations, with a similar estimated apparent clearance compared with a previous estimate in patients with T2DM without HF and in healthy subjects (23.0 [95% CI: 22.6-23.9] L/h vs. 22.9 [95% CI: 22.1-23.7] L/h). The model-predicted median area under the dapagliflozin concentration-time profile was ≤1.2-fold higher in patients with HFrEF vs. those with T2DM without HFrEF, which is not considered clinically relevant. Dapagliflozin exposure was similar between patients with HFrEF with/without T2DM and T2DM patients without HFrEF.

Clinical Outcomes Associated With Diltiazem Use in Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction After Implementation of a Clinical Support System.

BACKGROUND: Despite atrial fibrillation guideline recommendations, many patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (EF) continue to receive IV diltiazem for acute rate control. OBJECTIVE: Our institution recently implemented a clinical decision support system (CDSS)-based tool that recommends against the use of diltiazem in patients with an EF ≤ 40%. The objective of this study was to evaluate outcomes of adherence to the aforementioned CDSS-based tool. METHODS: This multi-hospital, retrospective study assessed patients who triggered the CDSS alert and compared those who did and did not discontinue diltiazem. The primary outcome was the occurrence of clinical deterioration. The primary endpoint was compared utilizing a Fisher's Exact Test, and a multivariate logistic regression model was developed to confirm the results of the primary analysis. RESULTS: A total of 246 patients were included in this study with 146 patients in the nonadherent group (received diltiazem) and 100 patients in the adherent group (did not receive diltiazem). There was a higher proportion of patients experiencing clinical deterioration in the alert nonadherence group (33% vs 21%, P = 0.044), including increased utilization of inotropes and vasopressors, and higher rate of transfer to ICU. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: In patients with heart failure with reduced EF, diltiazem use after nonadherence to a CDSS alert resulted in an increased risk of clinical deterioration. This study highlights the need for improved provider adherence to diltiazem clinical decision support systems.

Differences in provider approach to initiating and titrating guideline directed medical therapy in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

BACKGROUND: Despite the strong evidence supporting guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), prescription rates in clinical practice are still lacking. METHODS: A survey containing 20 clinical vignettes of patients with HFrEF was answered by a national sample of 127 cardiologists and 68 internal/family medicine physicians. Each vignette had 4-5 options for adjusting GDMT and the option to make no medication changes. Survey respondents could only select one option. For analysis, responses were dichotomized to the answer of interest. RESULTS: Cardiologists were more likely to make GDMT changes than general medicine physicians (91.8% vs. 82.0%; OR 1.84 [1.07-3.19]; p = 0.020). Cardiologists were more likely to initiate beta-blockers (46.3% vs. 32.0%; OR 2.38 [1.18-4.81], p = 0.016), angiotensin receptor blocker/neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) (63.8% vs. 48.1%; OR 1.76 [1.01-3.09], p = 0.047), and hydralazine and isosorbide dinitrate (HYD/ISDN) (38.2% vs. 23.7%; OR 2.47 [1.48-4.12], p < 0.001) compared to general medicine physicians. No differences were found in initiating angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker (ACEi/ARBs), initiating mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA), sodium-glucose transporter protein 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, digoxin, or ivabradine. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate cardiologists were more likely to adjust GDMT than general medicine physicians. Future focus on improving GDMT prescribing should target providers other than cardiologists to improve care in patients with HFrEF.

Prescribing trends of SGLT2 inhibitors among HFrEF and HFpEF patients with and without T2DM, 2013-2021.

BACKGROUND: Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) are recommended for treatment of heart failure (HF), regardless of type 2 diabetes (T2DM) status. However, limited data exist on SGLT2i prescribing in HF patients without T2DM or across HF subtypes. METHODS: This was a serial, cross-sectional study of US MarketScan commercial and Medicare claims (2013-2021). Prevalence of SGLT2i was calculated by calendar year among HFrEF and HFpEF patients and stratified by T2DM status. RESULTS: Among 218,066 HFrEF patients [mean (SD): 54.9 (8.92) years; 66.4% male], the prevalence of SGLT2i use increased from 0.3 to 18.6%, while among 150,437 HFpEF patients [56.5 (7.77) years; 47.6% male], it rose from 0.5 to 9.9%. These increases were driven by the subgroup with comorbid T2DM. SGLT2i prevalence use ratios among patients with T2DM compared to those without decreased from > 100 in 2018 to 3.8 in 2021 among HFrEF patients, and from 83.1 in 2018 to 17.5 in 2021, coinciding with the publication of landmark trials and corresponding changes in clinical guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: SGLT2i use rose rapidly following changes in guidelines but remained low among those without T2DM. By the end of the study, approximately 1 in 3 HFrEF and 1 in 5 HFpEF patients with T2DM were using an SGLT2i, compared to only 1 in 11 HFrEF and 1 in 85 HFpEF patients without T2DM. Future work identifying barriers with the uptake of GDMT, including SGLT2i, among HF patients is needed.

Implications of pulse wave velocity and central pulse pressure in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

BACKGROUND: Carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV) and central pulse pressure (PP) are recognised as significant indicators of vascular health and predictors of cardiovascular outcomes. In this study, associations between central hemodynamics and left ventricular (LV) echocardiographic parameters were investigated in subjects with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), comparing the results to healthy individuals. METHODS AND RESULTS: This cross-sectional prospective controlled study included 50 subjects with HFrEF [mean LV ejection fraction (EF) 26 ± 6.5%] and 30 healthy controls (mean LVEF 65.9 ± 5.3%). Pulse wave analysis (PWA) and carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV) were used to measure central hemodynamics and arterial stiffness. The HFrEF group displayed higher cfPWV (8.2 vs. 7.2 m/s, p = 0.007) and lower central (111.3 vs. 121.7 mmHg, p = 0.001) and peripheral (120.1 vs. 131.5 mmHg, p = 0.002) systolic blood pressure. Central pulse pressure (PP) was comparable between the two groups (37.6 vs. 40.4 mmHg, p = 0.169). In the HFrEF group, cfPWV significantly correlated with left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) index (mL/m2) and LVEF, with LVEDV index being a significant independent predictor of cfPWV (R2 = 0.42, p = 0.003). Central PP was significantly associated with heart rate, LVEF and LVEDV index, with the latter being a significant independent predictor of central PP (R2 = 0.41, p < 0.001). These correlations were not observed in healthy controls. CONCLUSIONS: Significant associations between central hemodynamic measures and LV echocardiographic parameters were identified, suggesting the potential to use PWA and cfPWV as possible tools for managing HFrEF.

What is the context?Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) affects millions of people worldwide.Vascular health plays a significant role in the development and progression of HFrEF.This study investigates two indicators of arterial stiffness­pulse wave velocity (PWV) and central pulse pressure (PP)­and their impact on the functioning of the heart in HFrEF patients compared to healthy individuals.What is new?The study found that higher carotid-femoral PWV and central PP, which typically indicate worse vascular health, were associated with better heart function in HFrEF patients. This paradoxical finding suggests that in the context of HFrEF, traditional markers of vascular health may have different implications.The study included non-invasive methods to evaluate these indicators, offering a potential new additional approach for monitoring and managing HFrEF.What is the impact?We could possibly use non-invasively evaluated PWV and central PP (measures of vascular function) as markers of left ventricular function assessment in HFrEF.

Early improvement of global longitudinal strain after iron deficiency correction in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

BACKGROUND: Iron deficiency correction with ferric carboxymaltose improves symptoms and reduces rehospitalization in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. The mechanisms underlying these improvements are poorly understood. This study aimed to determine changes in left ventricular contractility after iron treatment as reflected in global longitudinal strain. METHODS: Prospective single-center study including 43 adults with reduced ejection fraction, non-anemic iron deficiency, and functional class II-III heart failure despite optimal medical treatment. Global longitudinal strain through speckle-tracking echocardiography was measured at baseline and 4 weeks after ferric carboxymaltose. RESULTS: A significant improvement in global longitudinal strain was detected (from -12.3% ± 4.0% at baseline to -15.6% ± 4.1%, p < .001); ferritin and transferrin saturation index had increased, but ejection fraction presented no significant changes (baseline 35.7% ± 4.6%, follow-up 37.2% ± 6.6%, p = .073). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction, the correction of iron deficiency with ferric carboxymaltose is associated with an early improvement in global longitudinal strain, possibly suggesting a direct effect of iron correction on myocardial contractility.

Use of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with heart failure in primary care in Germany: the AURORA-HF noninterventional study.

BACKGROUND: Sacubitril/valsartan (Sac/Val) is the first angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor indicated for symptomatic chronic heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Given most patients with HF in Germany are managed by general practitioners, AURORA-HF investigated the baseline characteristics and 1­year follow-up of patients starting Sac/Val in primary care in Germany. METHODS: This was a prospective, multicenter, observational study, with all treatment decisions independent of participation. The only inclusion criteria were adults (age ≥ 18 years) with symptomatic HFrEF. The study comprised four groups, depending on therapy on entry: initiation of (1) Sac/Val or (2) other HF therapy; and no change in HF regimen that (3) included or (4) did not include Sac/Val. Baseline data were captured for all groups; 1­year follow-up was recorded in groups 1 and 2. RESULTS: Of 1278 patients in the baseline analyses, 513 (40.1%) had newly started Sac/Val (449 [87.5%] completing the 1­year follow-up), 265 (20.7%) had newly started other HF regimens (245, 92.5%) with 1­year follow-up, while 249 with Sac/Val (19.5%) and 251 without Sac/Val (19.6%) patients had unchanged therapies. Patients treated with Sac/Val had a higher New York Heart Association (NYHA) class at baseline and more often a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 35%. The only baseline parameter significantly correlating with Sac/Val discontinuation during the 1­year follow-up was diabetes mellitus (odds ratio: 2.44; 95% confidence interval: 1.14-5.24). In the Sac/Val group, 30.7% of patients were in NYHA class I/II on study entry, improving to 51.0% at 1­year follow-up. In the no Sac/Val group, the corresponding rates of NYHA I and II classes were 49.8% and 58.2%, respectively. The overall adverse event profile of Sac/Val was good, with only 6.0% patients experiencing serious adverse events leading to permanent discontinuation. CONCLUSION: In patients with symptomatic HFrEF treated in primary care, the group in whom Sac/Val was initiated was characterized by a higher NYHA class and lower LVEF compared to patients in whom Sac/Val was not initiated. Sac/Val was well tolerated, with a high proportion completing 1 year of therapy.

Electrocardiographic predictors of response to sacubitril/valsartan therapy in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

BACKGROUND: Sacubitril/valsartan (SV) is currently recommended as a first-line therapy in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) due to its significant clinical and prognostic benefit; however, not all patients respond to therapy and predictors of clinical response to SV remain under-studied. AIMS: To identify electrocardiographic (ECG) predictors of response to SV therapy in HFrEF patients. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of a hospital heart failure registry was undertaken. Consecutive HFrEF patients (New York Heart Association class II-III) on maximal-dose SV were studied. Response to SV was defined as ≥10% relative improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) at 3-months post-maximal-dose therapy. Pre-therapy ECGs were retrospectively analyzed for axes and standard wave and interval durations. Logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for associations between predictors and therapeutic response. Backward stepwise regression was employed to develop a parsimonious model. RESULTS: P-wave duration (PWD) 100-120 ms, PWD >120 ms, and QTc >460 ms were associated with response to SV on univariate analysis: OR 18.00 (4.45-122.90), 5.00 (1.47-20.42), and 3.10 (1.18-9.22), respectively. The preferred model that included the former two predictors in combination with pre-therapy creatinine, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist use, and LVEF was highly selective (area under the ROC curve = 0.868). CONCLUSIONS: Prolongation of both PWD and QTc interval on baseline ECG in HFrEF patients is predictive of therapeutic response to maximal-dose SV therapy and may indicate early cardiac remodeling that is highly amenable to reversal.

Heart failure, peripheral artery disease, and dapagliflozin: a patient-level meta-analysis of DAPA-HF and DELIVER.

AIMS: Because an increased risk of amputation with canagliflozin was reported in the CANVAS trials, there has been a concern about the safety of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) who are at higher risk of amputation. METHODS AND RESULTS: A patient-level pooled analysis of the DAPA-HF and DELIVER trials, which evaluated the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced, mildly reduced/preserved ejection fraction, respectively, was conducted. In both trials, the primary outcome was the composite of worsening HF or cardiovascular death, and amputation was a prespecified safety outcome. Peripheral artery disease history was available for 11 005 of the total 11 007 patients. Peripheral artery disease was reported in 809 of the 11 005 patients (7.4%). Median follow-up was 22 months (interquartile range 17-30). The rate of the primary outcome (per 100 person-years) was higher in PAD patients than that in non-PAD patients: 15.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) 13.1-17.3) vs. 10.6 (10.2-11.1]; adjusted hazard ratio 1.23 (95% CI 1.06-1.43). The benefit of dapagliflozin on the primary outcome was consistent in patients with [hazard ratio 0.71 (95% CI 0.54-0.94)] and without PAD [0.80 (95% CI 0.73-0.88)] (Pinteraction = 0.39). Amputations, while more frequent in PAD patients, were not more common with dapagliflozin, compared with placebo, irrespective of PAD status (PAD, placebo 4.2% vs. dapagliflozin 3.7%; no PAD, placebo 0.4% vs. dapagliflozin 0.4%) (Pinteraction = 1.00). Infection rather than ischaemia was the main trigger for amputation, even in patients with PAD. CONCLUSION: The risk of worsening HF or cardiovascular death was higher in patients with PAD, as was the risk of amputation. The benefits of dapagliflozin were consistent in patients with and without PAD, and dapagliflozin did not increase the risk of amputation.

Anthropometric measures and adverse outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: revisiting the obesity paradox.

AIMS: Although body mass index (BMI) is the most commonly used anthropometric measure, newer indices such as the waist-to-height ratio, better reflect the location and amount of ectopic fat, as well as the weight of the skeleton, and may be more useful. METHODS AND RESULTS: The prognostic value of several newer anthropometric indices was compared with that of BMI in patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) enrolled in prospective comparison of ARNI with ACEI to determine impact on global mortality and morbidity in heart failure. The primary outcome was HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death. The association between anthropometric indices and outcomes were comprehensively adjusted for other prognostic variables, including natriuretic peptides. An 'obesity-survival paradox' related to lower mortality risk in those with BMI ≥25 kg/m2 (compared with normal weight) was identified but this was eliminated by adjustment for other prognostic variables. This paradox was less evident for waist-to-height ratio (as an exemplar of indices not incorporating weight) and eliminated by adjustment: the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) for all-cause mortality, for quintile 5 vs. quintile 1, was 1.10 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87-1.39]. However, both BMI and waist-to-height ratio showed that greater adiposity was associated with a higher risk of the primary outcome and HF hospitalization; this was more evident for waist-to-height ratio and persisted after adjustment e.g. the aHR for HF hospitalization for quintile 5 vs. quintile 1 of waist-to-height ratio was 1.39 (95% CI 1.06-1.81). CONCLUSION: In patients with HFrEF, alternative anthropometric measurements showed no evidence for an 'obesity-survival paradox'. Newer indices that do not incorporate weight showed that greater adiposity was clearly associated with a higher risk of HF hospitalization.

Beyond Quadruple Therapy and Current Therapeutic Strategies in Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction: Medical Therapies with Potential to Become Part of the Therapeutic Armamentarium.

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is a complex clinical syndrome with significant morbidity and mortality and seems to be responsible for approximately 50% of heart failure cases and hospitalizations worldwide. First-line treatments of patients with HFrEF, according to the ESC and AHA guidelines, include ß-blockers, angiotensin receptor/neprilysin inhibitors, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. This quadruple therapy should be initiated during hospital stay and uptitrated to maximum doses within 6 weeks after discharge according to large multicenter controlled trials. Quadruple therapy improves survival by approximately 8 years for a 55-year-old heart failure patient. Additional therapeutic strategies targeting other signaling pathways such as ivabradine, digoxin, and isosorbide dinitrate and hydralazine combination for African Americans, as well as adjunctive symptomatic therapies, seem to be necessary in the management of HFrEF. Although second-line medications have not achieved improvements in mortality, they seem to decrease heart failure hospitalizations. There are novel medical therapies including vericiguat, omecamtiv mecarbil, genetic and cellular therapies, and mitochondria-targeted therapies. Moreover, mitraclip for significant mitral valve regurgitation, ablation in specific atrial fibrillation cases, omecamtiv mecarbil are options under evaluation in clinical trials. Finally, the HeartMate 3 magnetically levitated centrifugal left ventricular assist device (LVAD) has extended 5-year survival for stage D HF patients who are candidates for an LVAD.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials Assessing Clinical and Haemodynamic Outcomes of Ivabradine in Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction Patients.

BACKGROUND: Ivabradine, a pure bradycardic agent, can be given to heart failure reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) patients with a sinus rhythm of ≥70 bpm on a maximum beta blocker dose, or when beta blockers are contraindicated. This study aimed to see how ivabradine affects the clinical and haemodynamic outcomes of HFrEF patients. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis searched ClinicalTrials.gov, OpenMD, ProQuest, PubMed, and ScienceDirect for potential articles. All relevant data were extracted. For all pooled effects, the random effect model was applied. RESULTS: A total of 18,972 heart failure (HF) patients from nine randomised clinical trials (RCTs) were involved in this study. Ivabradine decreased the risk of HF mortality (RR 0.79; 95% CI 0.64-0.98; p=0.03) and HF hospitalisation (RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.65-0.97; p=0.03). Ivabradine was related to a greater reduction in heart rate (MD -12.21; 95% CI -15.47 - -8.96; p<0.01) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) improvement (MD 3.24; 95% CI 2.17-4.31; p <0.01) compared with placebo. Asymptomatic bradycardia (RR 4.25; 95% CI 3.36-5.39; p<0.01) and symptomatic bradycardia (RR 3.99; 95% CI 3.17-5.03; p<0.01) were higher in the ivabradine group. CONCLUSION: Ivabradine can reduce the risk of HF mortality and HF hospitalisation in HFrEF patients. Ivabradine also effectively reduces resting heart rate and improves LVEF. However, ivabradine is associated with a greater risk of symptomatic and asymptomatic bradycardia.

Higher C-Reactive Protein to Albumin Ratio Portends Long-Term Mortality in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction.

Background and Objectives: In this study, we aimed to investigate the prognostic value of the C-reactive protein to albumin ratio (CAR) for all-cause mortality in patients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Materials and Methods: In total, 404 chronic HFrEF patients were included in this observational and retrospective study. The CAR value of each patient included in this analysis was calculated. We stratified the study population into tertiles (T1, T2, and T3) according to CAR values. The primary outcome of the analysis was to determine all-cause mortality. Results: The median follow-up period in our study was 30 months. In the follow-up, 162 (40%) patients died. The median value of CAR was higher in patients who did not survive during the follow-up [6.7 (IQR = 1.6-20.4) vs. 0.6 (IQR = 0.1-2.6), p < 0.001]. In addition, patients in the T3 tertile (patients with the highest CAR) had a higher rate of all-cause mortality [n = 90 cases (66.2%), p < 0.001]. Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that CAR was an independent predictor of mortality in patients with HFrEF (hazard ratio: 1.852, 95% confidence interval: 1.124-2.581, p = 0.005). In a receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, the optimal cut-off value of CAR was >2.78, with a sensitivity of 66.7% and specificity of 76%. Furthermore, older age, elevated N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide levels, and absence of a cardiac device were also independently associated with all-cause death in HFrEF patients after 2.5 years of follow-up. Conclusions: The present study revealed that CAR independently predicts long-term mortality in chronic HFrEF patients. CAR may be used to predict mortality among these patients as a simple and easily obtainable inflammatory marker.