Spironolactone in Acute Heart Failure Patients With Renal Dysfunction and Risk Factors for Diuretic Resistance: From the ATHENA-HF Trial.

BACKGROUND: Acute heart failure (HF) patients with renal insufficiency and risk factors for diuretic resistance may be most likely to derive incremental improvement in congestion with the addition of spironolactone. METHODS: The Aldosterone Targeted Neurohormonal Combined with Natriuresis Therapy in Heart Failure (ATHENA-HF) trial randomized 360 acute HF patients with reduced or preserved ejection fraction to spironolactone 100 mg daily or usual care for 96 hours. The current analysis assessed the effects of study therapy within tertiles of baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and subgroups at heightened risk for diuretic resistance. RESULTS: Across eGFR tertiles, there was no incremental benefit of high-dose spironolactone on any efficacy endpoint, including changes in log N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide and signs and symptoms of congestion (all P for interaction ≥ 0.06). High-dose spironolactone had no significant effect on N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide reduction regardless of blood pressure, diabetes mellitus status, and loop diuretic dose (all P for interaction ≥ 0.38). In-hospital changes in serum potassium and creatinine were similar between treatment groups for all GFR tertiles (all P for interaction ≥ 0.18). Rates of inpatient worsening HF, 30-day worsening HF, and 60-day all-cause mortality were numerically higher among patients with lower baseline eGFR, but relative effects of study treatment did not differ with renal function (all P for interaction ≥ 0.27). CONCLUSIONS: High-dose spironolactone did not improve congestion over usual care among patients with acute HF, irrespective of renal function and risk factors for diuretic resistance. In-hospital initiation or continuation of spironolactone was safe during the inpatient stay, even when administered at high doses to patients with moderate renal dysfunction.

Worsening Renal Function in Patients With Acute Heart Failure Undergoing Aggressive Diuresis Is Not Associated With Tubular Injury.

BACKGROUND: Worsening renal function (WRF) in the setting of aggressive diuresis for acute heart failure treatment may reflect renal tubular injury or simply indicate a hemodynamic or functional change in glomerular filtration. Well-validated tubular injury biomarkers, N-acetyl-ß-d-glucosaminidase, neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin, and kidney injury molecule 1, are now available that can quantify the degree of renal tubular injury. The ROSE-AHF trial (Renal Optimization Strategies Evaluation-Acute Heart Failure) provides an experimental platform for the study of mechanisms of WRF during aggressive diuresis for acute heart failure because the ROSE-AHF protocol dictated high-dose loop diuretic therapy in all patients. We sought to determine whether tubular injury biomarkers are associated with WRF in the setting of aggressive diuresis and its association with prognosis. METHODS: Patients in the multicenter ROSE-AHF trial with baseline and 72-hour urine tubular injury biomarkers were analyzed (n=283). WRF was defined as a ≥20% decrease in glomerular filtration rate estimated with cystatin C. RESULTS: Consistent with protocol-driven aggressive dosing of loop diuretics, participants received a median 560 mg IV furosemide equivalents (interquartile range, 300-815 mg), which induced a urine output of 8425 mL (interquartile range, 6341-10 528 mL) over the 72-hour intervention period. Levels of N-acetyl-ß-d-glucosaminidase and kidney injury molecule 1 did not change with aggressive diuresis (both P>0.59), whereas levels of neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin decreased slightly (-8.7 ng/mg; interquartile range, -169 to 35 ng/mg; P<0.001). WRF occurred in 21.2% of the population and was not associated with an increase in any marker of renal tubular injury: neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (P=0.21), N-acetyl-ß-d-glucosaminidase (P=0.46), or kidney injury molecule 1 (P=0.22). Increases in neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin, N-acetyl-ß-d-glucosaminidase, and kidney injury molecule 1 were paradoxically associated with improved survival (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.80 per 10 percentile increase; 95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.91; P=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Kidney tubular injury does not appear to have an association with WRF in the context of aggressive diuresis of patients with acute heart failure. These findings reinforce the notion that the small to moderate deteriorations in renal function commonly encountered with aggressive diuresis are dissimilar from traditional causes of acute kidney injury.

Efficacy and Safety of Spironolactone in Acute Heart Failure: The ATHENA-HF Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Persistent congestion is associated with worse outcomes in acute heart failure (AHF). Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists administered at high doses may relieve congestion, overcome diuretic resistance, and mitigate the effects of adverse neurohormonal activation in AHF. Objective: To assess the effect of high-dose spironolactone and usual care on N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels compared with usual care alone. Design, Setting, and Participants: This double-blind and placebo (or low-dose)-controlled randomized clinical trial was conducted in 22 US acute care hospitals among patients with AHF who were previously receiving no or low-dose (12.5 mg or 25 mg daily) spironolactone and had NT-proBNP levels of 1000 pg/mL or more or B-type natriuretic peptide levels of 250 pg/mL or more, regardless of ejection fraction. Interventions: High-dose spironolactone (100 mg) vs placebo or 25 mg spironolactone (usual care) daily for 96 hours. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the change in NT-proBNP levels from baseline to 96 hours. Secondary end points included the clinical congestion score, dyspnea assessment, net urine output, and net weight change. Safety end points included hyperkalemia and changes in renal function. Results: A total of 360 patients were randomized, of whom the median age was 65 years, 129 (36%) were women, 200 (55.5%) were white, 151 (42%) were black, 8 (2%) were Hispanic or Latino, 9 (2.5%) were of other race/ethnicity, and the median left ventricular ejection fraction was 34%. Baseline median (interquartile range) NT-proBNP levels were 4601 (2697-9596) pg/mL among the group treated with high-dose spironolactone and 3753 (1968-7633) pg/mL among the group who received usual care. There was no significant difference in the log NT-proBNP reduction between the 2 groups (-0.55 [95% CI, -0.92 to -0.18] with high-dose spironolactone and -0.49 [95% CI, -0.98 to -0.14] with usual care, P = .57). None of the secondary end point or day-30 all-cause mortality or heart failure hospitalization rate differed between the 2 groups. The changes in serum potassium and estimated glomerular filtration rate at 24, 48, 72, and 96 hours. were similar between the 2 groups. Conclusions and Relevance: Adding treatment with high-dose spironolactone to usual care for patients with AHF for 96 hours was well tolerated but did not improve the primary or secondary efficacy end points. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02235077.

Effect of Oral Iron Repletion on Exercise Capacity in Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction and Iron Deficiency: The IRONOUT HF Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Iron deficiency is present in approximately 50% of patients with heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF) and is an independent predictor of reduced functional capacity and mortality. However, the efficacy of inexpensive readily available oral iron supplementation in heart failure is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To test whether therapy with oral iron improves peak exercise capacity in patients with HFrEF and iron deficiency. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Phase 2, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial of patients with HFrEF (<40%) and iron deficiency, defined as a serum ferritin level of 15 to 100 ng/mL or a serum ferritin level of 101 to 299 ng/mL with transferrin saturation of less than 20%. Participants were enrolled between September 2014 and November 2015 at 23 US sites. INTERVENTIONS: Oral iron polysaccharide (n = 111) or placebo (n = 114), 150 mg twice daily for 16 weeks. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was a change in peak oxygen uptake (V̇o2) from baseline to 16 weeks. Secondary end points were change in 6-minute walk distance, plasma N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels, and health status as assessed by Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ, range 0-100, higher scores reflect better quality of life). RESULTS: Among 225 randomized participants (median age, 63 years; 36% women) 203 completed the study. The median baseline peak V̇o2 was 1196 mL/min (interquartile range [IQR], 887-1448 mL/min) in the oral iron group and 1167 mL/min (IQR, 887-1449 mL/min) in the placebo group. The primary end point, change in peak V̇o2 at 16 weeks, did not significantly differ between the oral iron and placebo groups (+23 mL/min vs -2 mL/min; difference, 21 mL/min [95% CI, -34 to +76 mL/min]; P = .46). Similarly, at 16 weeks, there were no significant differences between treatment groups in changes in 6-minute walk distance (-13 m; 95% CI, -32 to 6 m), NT-proBNP levels (159; 95% CI, -280 to 599 pg/mL), or KCCQ score (1; 95% CI, -2.4 to 4.4), all P > .05. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among participants with HFrEF with iron deficiency, high-dose oral iron did not improve exercise capacity over 16 weeks. These results do not support use of oral iron supplementation in patients with HFrEF. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02188784.

Rationale and Design of the ATHENA-HF Trial: Aldosterone Targeted Neurohormonal Combined With Natriuresis Therapy in Heart Failure.

Although therapy with mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) is recommended for patients with chronic heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction and in post-infarction HF, it has not been studied well in acute HF (AHF) despite being commonly used in this setting. At high doses, MRA therapy in AHF may relieve congestion through its natriuretic properties and mitigate the effects of adverse neurohormonal activation associated with intravenous loop diuretics. The ATHENA-HF (Aldosterone Targeted Neurohormonal Combined with Natriuresis Therapy in Heart Failure) trial is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the safety and efficacy of 100 mg/day spironolactone versus placebo (or continued low-dose spironolactone use in participants who are already receiving spironolactone at baseline) in 360 patients hospitalized for AHF. Patients are randomized within 24 h of receiving the first dose of intravenous diuretics. The primary objective is to determine if high-dose spironolactone, compared with standard care, will lead to greater reductions in N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels from randomization to 96 h. The secondary endpoints include changes in the clinical congestion score, dyspnea relief, urine output, weight change, loop diuretic dose, and in-hospital worsening HF. Index hospital length of stay and 30-day clinical outcomes will be assessed. Safety endpoints include risk of hyperkalemia and renal function. Differences among patients with reduced versus preserved ejection fraction will be determined. (Study of High-dose Spironolactone vs. Placebo Therapy in Acute Heart Failure [ATHENA-HF]; NCT02235077).

Coenzyme Q10 and Heart Failure: A State-of-the-Art Review.

Heart failure (HF) with either preserved or reduced ejection fraction is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Evidence-based therapies are often limited by tolerability, hypotension, electrolyte disturbances, and renal dysfunction. Coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10) may represent a safe therapeutic option for patients with HF. CoQ10 is a highly lipophilic molecule with a chemical structure similar to vitamin K. Although being a common component of cellular membranes, CoQ10's most prominent role is to facilitate the production of adenosine triphosphate in the mitochondria by participating in redox reactions within the electron transport chain. Numerous trials during the past 30 years examining CoQ10 in patients with HF have been limited by small numbers and lack of contemporary HF therapies. The recent publication of the Q-SYMBIO randomized controlled trial demonstrated a reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events with CoQ10 supplementation in a contemporary HF population. Although having limitations, this study has renewed interest in evaluating CoQ10 supplementation in patients with HF. Current literature suggests that CoQ10 is relatively safe with few drug interactions and side effects. Furthermore, it is already widely available as an over-the-counter supplement. These findings warrant future adequately powered randomized controlled trials of CoQ10 supplementation in patients with HF. This state-of-the-art review summarizes the literature about the mechanisms, clinical data, and safety profile of CoQ10 supplementation in patients with HF.

Decongestion in acute heart failure.

Congestion is a major reason for hospitalization in acute heart failure (HF). Therapeutic strategies to manage congestion include diuretics, vasodilators, ultrafiltration, vasopressin antagonists, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and potentially also novel therapies such as gut sequesterants and serelaxin. Uncertainty exists with respect to the appropriate decongestion strategy for an individual patient. In this review, we summarize the benefit and risk profiles for these decongestion strategies and provide guidance on selecting an appropriate approach for different patients. An evidence-based initial approach to congestion management involves high-dose i.v. diuretics with addition of vasodilators for dyspnoea relief if blood pressure allows. To enhance diuresis or overcome diuretic resistance, options include dual nephron blockade with thiazide diuretics or natriuretic doses of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. Vasopressin antagonists may improve aquaresis and relieve dyspnoea. If diuretic strategies are unsuccessful, then ultrafiltration may be considered. Ultrafiltration should be used with caution in the setting of worsening renal function. This review is based on discussions among scientists, clinical trialists, and regulatory representatives at the 9th Global Cardio Vascular Clinical Trialists Forum in Paris, France, from 30 November to 1 December 2012.

Approaches to decongestion in patients with acute decompensated heart failure.

Loop diuretics remain a mainstay in the pharmacologic treatment of acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). Recent randomized trial results have challenged existing clinical dogma about the optimal manner of intravenous diuretic administration in hospitalized patients. The Diuretic Optimization Strategies Evaluation (DOSE) trial, while technically a neutral study, suggested some advantages of a high-dose diuretic strategy as compared with low dose administration without evidence of long term safety concerns. The DOSE study additionally showed no difference in efficacy or safety between continuous infusion or bolus diuretic therapy. Venovenous ultrafiltration (UF) holds promise as an alternative approach to volume removal in ADHF, but significant work remains in characterizing the relative risks and benefits of this technique, as well as the degree to which it can be broadly utilized. This review highlights current approaches and future directions in mitigating congestion and volume overload in the ADHF population, with a particular focus on novel diuretic dosing strategies and on the emerging role of UF.

Diuretics and ultrafiltration in acute decompensated heart failure.

Congestion and volume overload are the hallmarks of acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF), and loop diuretics have historically been the cornerstone of treatment. The demonstrated efficacy of loop diuretics in managing congestion is balanced by the recognized limitations of diuretic resistance, neurohormonal activation, and worsening renal function. However, the recently published DOSE (Diuretic Optimization Strategies Evaluation) trial suggests that previous concerns about the safety of high-dose diuretics may not be valid. There has been a growing interest in alternative strategies to manage volume retention in ADHF with improved efficacy and safety profiles. Peripheral venovenous ultrafiltration (UF) represents a potentially promising approach to volume management in ADHF. Small studies suggest that UF may allow for more effective fluid removal compared with diuretics, with improved quality of life and reduced rehospitalization rates. However, further investigation is needed to completely define the role of UF in patients with ADHF. This review summarizes available data on the use of both diuretics and UF in ADHF patients and identifies challenges and unresolved questions for each approach.

Diuretic strategies in patients with acute decompensated heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Loop diuretics are an essential component of therapy for patients with acute decompensated heart failure, but there are few prospective data to guide their use. METHODS: In a prospective, double-blind, randomized trial, we assigned 308 patients with acute decompensated heart failure to receive furosemide administered intravenously by means of either a bolus every 12 hours or continuous infusion and at either a low dose (equivalent to the patient's previous oral dose) or a high dose (2.5 times the previous oral dose). The protocol allowed specified dose adjustments after 48 hours. The coprimary end points were patients' global assessment of symptoms, quantified as the area under the curve (AUC) of the score on a visual-analogue scale over the course of 72 hours, and the change in the serum creatinine level from baseline to 72 hours. RESULTS: In the comparison of bolus with continuous infusion, there was no significant difference in patients' global assessment of symptoms (mean AUC, 4236±1440 and 4373±1404, respectively; P=0.47) or in the mean change in the creatinine level (0.05±0.3 mg per deciliter [4.4±26.5 µmol per liter] and 0.07±0.3 mg per deciliter [6.2±26.5 µmol per liter], respectively; P=0.45). In the comparison of the high-dose strategy with the low-dose strategy, there was a nonsignificant trend toward greater improvement in patients' global assessment of symptoms in the high-dose group (mean AUC, 4430±1401 vs. 4171±1436; P=0.06). There was no significant difference between these groups in the mean change in the creatinine level (0.08±0.3 mg per deciliter [7.1±26.5 µmol per liter] with the high-dose strategy and 0.04±0.3 mg per deciliter [3.5±26.5 µmol per liter] with the low-dose strategy, P=0.21). The high-dose strategy was associated with greater diuresis and more favorable outcomes in some secondary measures but also with transient worsening of renal function. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with acute decompensated heart failure, there were no significant differences in patients' global assessment of symptoms or in the change in renal function when diuretic therapy was administered by bolus as compared with continuous infusion or at a high dose as compared with a low dose. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00577135.).

Vasodilators in the treatment of acute heart failure: what we know, what we don't.

Although we have recently witnessed substantial progress in management and outcome of patients with chronic heart failure, acute heart failure (AHF) management and outcome have not changed over almost a generation. Vasodilators are one of the cornerstones of AHF management; however, to a large extent, none of those currently used has been examined by large, placebo-controlled, non-hemodynamic monitored, prospective randomized studies powered to assess the effects on outcomes, in addition to symptoms. In this article, we will discuss the role of vasodilators in AHF trying to point out which are the potentially best indications to their administration and which are the pitfalls which may be associated with their use. Unfortunately, most of this discussion is only partially evidence based due to lack of appropriate clinical trials. In general, we believe that vasodilators should be administered early to AHF patients with normal or high blood pressure (BP) at presentation. They should not be administered to patients with low BP since they may cause hypotension and hypoperfusion of vital organs, leading to renal and/or myocardial damage which may further worsen patients' outcome. It is not clear whether vasodilators have a role in either patients with borderline BP at presentation (i.e., low-normal) or beyond the first 1-2 days from presentation. Given the limitations of the currently available clinical trial data, we cannot recommend any specific agent as first line therapy, although nitrates in different formulations are still the most widely used in clinical practice.