Is His-optimized superior to conventional cardiac resynchronization therapy in improving heart failure? Results from a propensity-matched study.

BACKGROUND: His bundle pacing (HBP), alone or optimized in association with coronary sinus pacing (HBP+LV) has recently been proposed as an alternative to conventional cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). However, there is lack of controlled studies that assessed clinical outcome. METHODS: We did a single-center, propensity-score matched, case-control study of comparison of HBP and HBP+LV versus conventional CRT in patients with heart failure (HF) and standard indications for CRT. The study group patients were consecutively enrolled in the year 2019. The control group patients were selected, by propensity score matching, among those CRT implantations performed in the years 2015-2018. RESULTS: There were 27 patients in each group. In the active group, 12 (44%) patients received HBP alone and 12 (44%) patients HBP+LV pacing. HBP failed in three (11%) patients. In the control group, conventional CRT was achieved in 26 (96%) patients and failed in one. Paced QRS width was shorter in the active than in the control group (128 ± 18 vs. 148 ± 27 ms, p = .004). During a mean of 9.6 months of follow-up, a composite clinical outcome of death, hospitalization for HF or worsening HF occurred in three (11%) in the active group and in four (15%) in the control group, p = .58. No difference was also observed with softer endpoints: NYHA class (1.9 ± 0.7 vs. 2.1 ± 0.7), subjective improvement (74% vs. 74%) and LV ejection fraction (40.7% vs. 40.7%). CONCLUSION: Compared with conventional CRT, a shorter QRS width can be obtained with HBP alone or in association with coronary sinus pacing but we were unable to show a better clinical outcome. There is urgent need for large, randomized trials.

Effects of Candesartan on Left Ventricular Function, Aldosterone and BNP in Chronic Heart Failure.

PURPOSE: Heart failure (HF) is characterized by activation of neurohormonal systems such as aldosterone and natriuretic peptides. In the absence of published data, CandHeart trial was designed to assess the effects on left ventricular (LV) function, aldosterone and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) of candesartan in patients with HF and preserved (LVEF ≥ 40%) or depressed (LVEF <40%) LV systolic function. METHODS: A total of 514 patients with stable symptomatic NYHA II-IV HF and any left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)were randomized to candesartan (target dose 32 mg once daily) as add-on therapy or standard medical therapy alone. Standardized echocardiographic exams were performed locally under central quality control, whereas biomarkers were assayed in a core laboratory. RESULTS: The majority of patients (73.3%) were NYHA II and on ACE inhibitors (91.8%) and beta-blockers (85.4%). Mean age was 66 ± 11 years. Mean LVEF was 36.2 ± 9.7% and 24.9% of patients had LVEF ≥ 40%. LVEF increased significantly more in the candesartan group (p = 0.09 at 12 weeks and p = 0.01 at 48 weeks) and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter decreased in candesartan group (p = 0.05 at 12 weeks). Candesartan significantly reduced aldosterone at 48 weeks (p = 0.009). BNP was reduced similarly over time in both study groups (p = 0.35 and p = 0.98 at 12 and 48 weeks, respectively). There were 6.6% of discontinuations of candesartan for adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In CandHeart, the addition of candesartan to standard medical treatment did not reduce circulating BNP more than standard therapy (primary endpoint), but it significantly improved LV function and produced a marked decrease in aldosterone levels at study end.

Prevalence and prognostic value of elevated urinary albumin excretion in patients with chronic heart failure: data from the GISSI-Heart Failure trial.

BACKGROUND: Increased urinary excretion of albumin is an early sign of kidney damage and a risk factor for progressive cardiovascular and renal diseases and heart failure. There is, however, only limited information on the prevalence and prognostic role of urinary albumin excretion in patients with established chronic heart failure. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 2131 patients enrolled in 76 sites participating in the GISSI-Heart Failure trial provided a first morning spot sample of urine at any of the clinical visits scheduled in the trial to calculate the urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio. The relation between log-transformed urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio and all-cause mortality (428 deaths, time from urine collection to event or censoring) was evaluated with Cox multivariable models adjusted for all significant risk factors at the time of urine collection, in the study population, and in patients without diabetes or hypertension. Almost 75% of the patients had normal urinary albumin excretion, but 19.9% had microalbuminuria (30 to 299 mg/g creatinine) and 5.4% had overt albuminuria (>or=300 mg/g). There was a progressive, significant increase in the adjusted rate of mortality in the study population (hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.18 per 1-U increase of log(urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio), P=0.0002) and in the subgroup of patients without diabetes or hypertension. Randomized treatments (n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids or rosuvastatin) had no major impact on albumin excretion. CONCLUSIONS: Independently of diabetes, hypertension, or renal function, elevated albumin excretion is a powerful prognostic marker in patients with chronic heart failure.

Stress echo in chest pain unit: the SPEED trial.

BACKGROUND: Emergency room (ER) evaluation of patients with acute chest pain and non-diagnostic electrocardiography (ECG) remains a frequent and difficult problem. AIM: To assess safety and prognostic implications of pharmacological stress echocardiography in the ER chest pain unit (CPU). METHODS: A total of 552 patients (321 males, age 58+/-12.6 years) with acute chest pain, negative serial enzymes and/or troponin, and ECG recordings, and normal/unchanged resting left ventricular function were prospectively enrolled and underwent pharmacological (dipyridamole or dobutamine) stress echo. Six echo labs that had passed the preliminary quality control for stress echo reading entered the study. Follow-up was obtained in all patients after a median period of 13 months. RESULTS: No significant adverse events were observed during the test. Stress echocardiography was negative in 502 patients (91%) and positive in 50 (9%). The 502 patients with negative stress echocardiography were discharged with no or unchanged anti-ischemic medications. While the 50 patients with positive stress echo were admitted to the coronary care unit, 44 of these underwent coronary angiography with the result that 42 out of 44 showed significant coronary artery disease. There were 45 events in the follow-up: six in the 502 patients with negative and 39 in the 50 patients with positive stress echo (1.2% vs. 78%, p<0.001). The negative predictive value of stress echocardiography was 98.8% for all events and 99.6% for hard events. CONCLUSIONS: Stress echocardiography is a feasible, safe, and effective tool for early stratification of patients admitted to the ER with acute chest pain and non-ischemic ECG and resting echo.