Inter-relationships between cardiovascular, renal and metabolic diseases: Underlying evidence and implications for integrated interdisciplinary care and management.

Cardiovascular, renal and metabolic (CaReMe) diseases are individually among the leading global causes of death, and each is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. However, as these conditions commonly coexist in the same patient, the individual risk of mortality and morbidity is further compounded, leading to a considerable healthcare burden. A number of pathophysiological pathways are common to diseases of the CaReMe spectrum, including neurohormonal dysfunction, visceral adiposity and insulin resistance, oxidative stress and systemic inflammation. Because of the shared pathology and common co-occurrence of the CaReMe diseases, the value of managing these conditions holistically is increasingly being realized. A number of pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches have been shown to offer simultaneous metabolic, cardioprotective and renoprotective benefits, leading to improved patient outcomes across the CaReMe spectrum. In addition, increasing value is being placed on interdisciplinary team-based and coordinated care models built on greater integration between specialties to increase the rate of early diagnosis and adherence to practice guidelines, and improve clinical outcomes. This interdisciplinary approach also facilitates integration between primary and specialty care, improving the patient experience, optimizing resources, and leading to efficiencies and cost savings. As the burden of CaReMe diseases continues to increase, implementation of innovative and integrated care delivery models will be essential to achieve effective and efficient chronic disease management and to ensure that patients benefit from the best care available across all three disciplines.

Cardiovascular-Kidney-Metabolic Health: A Presidential Advisory From the American Heart Association.

Cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic health reflects the interplay among metabolic risk factors, chronic kidney disease, and the cardiovascular system and has profound impacts on morbidity and mortality. There are multisystem consequences of poor cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic health, with the most significant clinical impact being the high associated incidence of cardiovascular disease events and cardiovascular mortality. There is a high prevalence of poor cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic health in the population, with a disproportionate burden seen among those with adverse social determinants of health. However, there is also a growing number of therapeutic options that favorably affect metabolic risk factors, kidney function, or both that also have cardioprotective effects. To improve cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic health and related outcomes in the population, there is a critical need for (1) more clarity on the definition of cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic syndrome; (2) an approach to cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic staging that promotes prevention across the life course; (3) prediction algorithms that include the exposures and outcomes most relevant to cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic health; and (4) strategies for the prevention and management of cardiovascular disease in relation to cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic health that reflect harmonization across major subspecialty guidelines and emerging scientific evidence. It is also critical to incorporate considerations of social determinants of health into care models for cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic syndrome and to reduce care fragmentation by facilitating approaches for patient-centered interdisciplinary care. This presidential advisory provides guidance on the definition, staging, prediction paradigms, and holistic approaches to care for patients with cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic syndrome and details a multicomponent vision for effectively and equitably enhancing cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic health in the population.

Dapagliflozin in Heart Failure With Mildly Reduced or Preserved Ejection Fraction According to Polypharmacy Status.

BACKGROUND: Patients with heart failure (HF) have a high burden of multimorbidity, often necessitating numerous medications. There may be clinical concern about introducing another medication, especially among individuals with polypharmacy. OBJECTIVES: This study examined the efficacy and safety of addition of dapagliflozin according to the number of concomitant medications in HF with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction. METHODS: In this post hoc analysis of the DELIVER (Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the Lives of Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure) trial, 6,263 participants with symptomatic HF with left ventricular ejection fraction >40% were randomized to dapagliflozin or placebo. Baseline medication use (including vitamins and supplements) was collected. Efficacy and safety outcomes were assessed by medication use categories ("nonpolypharmacy": <5 medications; "polypharmacy": 5 to 9 medications; and "hyperpolypharmacy": ≥10 medications) and continuously. The primary outcome was worsening HF or cardiovascular death. RESULTS: Overall, 3,795 (60.6%) patients met polypharmacy and 1,886 (30.1%) met hyperpolypharmacy criteria. Higher numbers of medications were strongly associated with higher comorbidity burden and increased rates of the primary outcome. Compared with placebo, dapagliflozin similarly reduced the risk of the primary outcome irrespective of polypharmacy status (nonpolypharmacy HR: 0.88 [95% CI: 0.58-1.34]; polypharmacy HR: 0.88 [95% CI: 0.75-1.03]; hyperpolypharmacy HR: 0.73 [95% CI: 0.60-0.88]; Pinteraction = 0.30). Similarly, benefits with dapagliflozin were consistent across the spectrum of total medication use (Pinteraction = 0.06). Although adverse events increased with higher number of medications, they were not more frequent with dapagliflozin, regardless of polypharmacy status. CONCLUSIONS: In the DELIVER trial, dapagliflozin safely reduced worsening HF or cardiovascular death across a broad range of baseline medication use, including among individuals with polypharmacy (Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the Lives of Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure [DELIVER]; NCT03619213).

American Association of Clinical Endocrinology Clinical Practice Guideline: Developing a Diabetes Mellitus Comprehensive Care Plan-2022 Update.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this clinical practice guideline is to provide updated and new evidence-based recommendations for the comprehensive care of persons with diabetes mellitus to clinicians, diabetes-care teams, other health care professionals and stakeholders, and individuals with diabetes and their caregivers. METHODS: The American Association of Clinical Endocrinology selected a task force of medical experts and staff who updated and assessed clinical questions and recommendations from the prior 2015 version of this guideline and conducted literature searches for relevant scientific papers published from January 1, 2015, through May 15, 2022. Selected studies from results of literature searches composed the evidence base to update 2015 recommendations as well as to develop new recommendations based on review of clinical evidence, current practice, expertise, and consensus, according to established American Association of Clinical Endocrinology protocol for guideline development. RESULTS: This guideline includes 170 updated and new evidence-based clinical practice recommendations for the comprehensive care of persons with diabetes. Recommendations are divided into four sections: (1) screening, diagnosis, glycemic targets, and glycemic monitoring; (2) comorbidities and complications, including obesity and management with lifestyle, nutrition, and bariatric surgery, hypertension, dyslipidemia, retinopathy, neuropathy, diabetic kidney disease, and cardiovascular disease; (3) management of prediabetes, type 2 diabetes with antihyperglycemic pharmacotherapy and glycemic targets, type 1 diabetes with insulin therapy, hypoglycemia, hospitalized persons, and women with diabetes in pregnancy; (4) education and new topics regarding diabetes and infertility, nutritional supplements, secondary diabetes, social determinants of health, and virtual care, as well as updated recommendations on cancer risk, nonpharmacologic components of pediatric care plans, depression, education and team approach, occupational risk, role of sleep medicine, and vaccinations in persons with diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: This updated clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations to assist with person-centered, team-based clinical decision-making to improve the care of persons with diabetes mellitus.

Patiromer for the management of hyperkalemia in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: the DIAMOND trial.

AIMS: To investigate the impact of patiromer on the serum potassium level and its ability to enable specified target doses of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor (RAASi) use in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 1642 patients with HFrEF and current or a history of RAASi-related hyperkalemia were screened and 1195 were enrolled in the run-in phase with patiromer and optimization of the RAASi therapy [≥50% recommended dose of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, and 50 mg of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) spironolactone or eplerenone]. Specified target doses of the RAASi therapy were achieved in 878 (84.6%) patients; 439 were randomized to patiromer and 439 to placebo. All patients, physicians, and outcome assessors were blinded to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was between-group difference in the adjusted mean change in serum potassium. Five hierarchical secondary endpoints were assessed. At the end of treatment, the median (interquartile range) duration of follow-up was 27 (13-43) weeks, the adjusted mean change in potassium was +0.03 mmol/l in the patiromer group and +0.13 mmol/l in the placebo group [difference in the adjusted mean change between patiromer and placebo: -0.10 mmol/l (95% confidence interval, CI -0.13, 0.07); P < 0.001]. Risk of hyperkalemia >5.5 mmol/l [hazard ratio (HR) 0.63; 95% CI 0.45, 0.87; P = 0.006), reduction of MRA dose (HR 0.62; 95% CI 0.45, 0.87; P = 0.006), and total adjusted hyperkalemia events/100 person-years (77.7 vs. 118.2; HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.53, 0.81; P < 0.001) were lower with patiromer. Hyperkalemia-related morbidity-adjusted events (win ratio 1.53, P < 0.001) and total RAASi use score (win ratio 1.25, P = 0.048) favored the patiromer arm. Adverse events were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Concurrent use of patiromer and high-dose MRAs reduces the risk of recurrent hyperkalemia (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03888066).

Quality of life in people with type 2 diabetes in the 3 years following initiation of second-line therapy: The DISCOVER study.

AIMS: To assess changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in DISCOVER, a 3-year, longitudinal, observational study of patients with type 2 diabetes initiating a second-line glucose-lowering therapy. METHODS: HRQoL was assessed using the physical and mental component summary (PCS and MCS) scores of the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey version 2 (score ranges: 0-100; higher denotes better HRQoL) and the Hypoglycaemia Fear Survey II (HFS-II; score range: 0-132 scale; higher indicates greater fear of hypoglycaemia). Latent class growth modelling (LCGM) was used to identify patients with similar score trajectories. RESULTS: Mean baseline PCS (n = 7428), MCS (n = 7453), and HFS-II (n = 5005) scores were 48.0, 45.4, and 15.4, respectively, and remained stable during follow-up. LCGM revealed subgroups with low or decreasing HRQoL. Patients in these subgroups tended to be older, had more comorbidities, and a lower socioeconomic status than in other subgroups. Use of insulin and sulfonylureas was highest in the subgroup with the highest fear of hypoglycaemia. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, HRQoL remained stable in DISCOVER patients during follow-up. However, LCGM suggests that some patient characteristics and use of sulfonylureas or insulin are associated with low or decreasing HRQoL, potentially warranting the use of alternative therapies.

A Review of Cardiovascular Outcomes Trials of Glucose-Lowering Therapies and Their Effects on Heart Failure Outcomes.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus has long been recognized as a major risk factor for adverse atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events; however, recent data indicate that heart failure is now emerging as the most common and morbid cardiovascular complication of type 2 diabetes mellitus. When heart failure develops in patients with type 2 diabetes, prognosis is ominous, highlighting the need for glucose-lowering therapies that can prevent heart failure, improve outcomes, or both. Prior to 2008, there was a paucity of randomized controlled trials evaluating long-term cardiovascular outcomes with glucose-lowering therapies. This changed after guidance on the assessment of novel glucose-lowering agents was issued by both the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency. Since then, significant progress has been made as a result of large cardiovascular outcomes trials. Though randomized controlled trials on insulin, sulfonylureas, and metformin are still limited, cardiovascular outcomes trials on newer glucose-lowering agents have included hundreds of thousands of patients with multiple years of follow-up. The increased risk of thiazolidinediones on heart failure had been well theorized and is now established; however, the increase in heart failure hospitalization with certain dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors was unexpected. The reasons for discrepancies with regard to heart failure risk with different dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors remain unclear, and further mechanistic studies are ongoing. The role of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists among patients with heart failure also remains unclear, and their effects may differ in patients with and without established heart failure, particularly those with decompensated heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

The Association Between Complementary and Alternative Medicine and Health Status Following Acute Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: Complementary and alternative medicines (CAM) are commonly used in patients with cardiovascular disease. Although there is lack of evidence regarding the benefit of CAM on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, health-status benefits could justify CAM use. HYPOTHESIS: Adoption of mind-body CAM after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is associated with improved health status, though other forms of CAM are not associated with health-status improvement. METHODS: Patients with AMI from 24 US sites were assessed for CAM use (categorized as mind-body, biological, and manipulative therapies) prior to and 1 year after AMI. Among patients who reported not using CAM prior to their AMI, association of initiating CAM on patients' health status at 1 year after AMI was assessed using Angina Frequency and Quality of Life domains from the Seattle Angina Questionnaire and the Short Form-12 Physical and Mental Component scales. Multivariable regression helped examine association between use of different CAM therapies and health status. RESULTS: Among 1884 patients not using CAM at the time of their AMI, 33% reported initiating ≥1 forms of CAM therapy 1 year following AMI: 62% adopted mind-body therapies, 42% adopted biological therapies, and 15% began using manipulative therapies. In both unadjusted and adjusted analyses, we found no association between different types of CAM use and health-status improvement after AMI. CONCLUSIONS: There was no association between CAM use and health-status recovery after AMI. Until randomized trials suggest otherwise, these findings underscore the importance of focusing on therapies with proven effectiveness after AMI.

Acute and chronic cardiovascular effects of hyperkalemia: new insights into prevention and clinical management.

The plasma pool of potassium is a partial reflection of the overall body, transient cellular shifts, and potassium elimination regulated by the kidneys. Potassium concentrations elevating above the upper limit of normal (> 5.0 mEq/L) have become more common in cardiovascular practice due to the growing population of patients with chronic kidney disease and the broad applications of drugs that modulate potassium excretion by either reducing production of angiotensin II (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, direct renin inhibitors, beta-adrenergic receptor antagonists), blocking angiotensin II receptors (angiotensin receptor blockers), or antagonizing the action of aldosterone on mineralocorticoid receptors (mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists). In addition, acute kidney injury, critical illness, crush injuries, and massive red blood cell transfusions can result in hyperkalemia. Progressively more severe elevations in potassium are responsible for abnormalities in cardiac depolarization and repolarization and contractility. Untreated severe hyperkalemia results in sudden cardiac death. Traditional management steps have included reducing dietary potassium and discontinuing potassium supplements; withdrawal of exacerbating drugs; acute treatment with intravenous calcium gluconate, insulin, and glucose; nebulized albuterol; correction of acidosis with sodium bicarbonate for short-term shifts out of the plasma pool; and, finally, gastrointestinal ion exchange with oral sodium polystyrene sulfonate in sorbitol, which is mainly used in the hospital and is poorly tolerated due to gastrointestinal adverse effects. This review explores hyperkalemia as a complication in cardiovascular patients and highlights new acute, chronic, and preventative oral therapies (patiromer calcium, cross-linked polyelectrolyte, ZS-9) that could potentially create a greater margin of safety for vulnerable patients with combined heart and kidney disease.

Self-reported use of complementary and alternative medicine in patients with previous acute coronary syndrome.

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use is common in patients with cardiovascular disease. Although numerous efforts have sought to understand CAM types and the prevalence of CAM, whether patients preferentially use CAM instead of evidence-based therapies is unknown. Self-reported use of CAM and evidence-based therapies in a prospective registry of hospitalized patients with acute coronary syndrome from March 1, 2001 to October 31, 2002 were examined. Poisson regression models were used to assess whether CAM use was independently associated with lower rates of aspirin, beta-blocker, and statin use in 596 patients with established coronary artery disease (CAD). Overall, CAM use was 19% in patients with CAD. Higher proportions of patients who used CAM were non-Caucasian (31% vs 12%), uninsured (12% vs 7%), economically burdened (58% vs 29%), and had depression (13% vs 6%, p<0.05 for all). Patients who used CAM were more likely to use beta blockers (64% vs 46%, p=0.008) and as likely to use aspirin (73% vs 74%, p=0.90) and statins (71% vs 68%, p=0.76) as non-CAM users. Adjusting for demographic and clinical factors did not change results (CAM users: RR 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01 to 1.60 for using beta blockers, RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.11 for using aspirin, and RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.28 for using statins). In conclusion, although CAM users with established CAD have worse socioeconomic status than nonusers, we found no evidence that they were less compliant with evidence-based therapies.