Randomized comparison of the effects of tailored text messaging versus pillbox organizers on medication adherence of heart failure patients.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) is a major public health issue worldwide, affecting approximately 64.3 million people in 2017. Non-adherence to medication is a common and serious issue in the management of HF. However, new reminder systems utilizing mobile technology, such as text messaging, have shown promise in improving medication adherence. The purpose of this study was to compare the impact of tailored text messaging (TTM) and pillbox organizers on medication adherence in individuals with HF. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was conducted, involving 189 eligible patients with HF who were randomly assigned to either the TTM, pillbox organizer, or control group. Medication adherence was evaluated using pill counting and the Medication Adherence Rating Scale (MARS) over a period of three months and compared across the groups. The data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), and Repeated Measures ANOVA tests. RESULTS: The results indicate that both the TTM and pillbox organizers groups had significantly higher medication adherence compared to the control group, as measured by pill counting (MD = 0.05, 95%CI = 0.03-0.06; p < 0.001 for TTM group, MD = 0.04, 95%CI = 0.03-0.06; p < 0.001 for pillbox organizers group) and the MARS (MD = 1.32, 95%CI = 0.93 to 1.72; p < 0.001 for TTM group, MD = 1.33, 95%CI = 0.95 to 1.72; p < 0.001 for pillbox organizers group). However, there was no statistically significant difference in medication adherence between the two intervention groups using either measurement method. The TTM group exhibited a lower hospitalization rate than the other groups in the first follow up (p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: Both the TTM and pillbox organizers were shown to be effective in enhancing medication adherence among patients with HF. Therefore, healthcare providers should take into account the patient's condition and preferences when selecting one of these methods to promote medication adherence. Future research should aim to address the limitations of this study, such as controlling for confounding variables, considering long-term effects, and comparing the effectiveness of different interventions.

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.

Sex Differences in Cardiovascular Management: A Call for Better Acknowledgment-Part 1 Pharmacological Differences in Women and Men; How Relevant Are They?

BACKGROUND: Sex differences (SDs) in pharmacology of cardiovascular (CV) drugs have been described previously; however, paradoxically, there are scarce recommendations in therapy based on these differences. It is of utmost importance to identify whether these SDs determine a modified clinical response and the potential practical implications for this, to provide a base for personalized medicine. AREA OF UNCERTAINTY: The aim of this article was to outline the most important pharmacological drivers of cardiovascular drugs that differ between women and men, along with their implications and challenges in clinical practice. DATA SOURCES: A detailed assessment of English-written resources reflecting SDs impact in CV drug pharmacology was performed using PubMed and Embase databases. RESULTS: Despite large variations in CV drug pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in individuals, correcting for height, weight, surface area, and body composition compensate for most "sex-dependent" differences. In addition, individual, cultural, and social factors significantly impact disease management in women versus men. Gender-biased prescribing patterns and gender-dependent adherence to therapy also influence outcomes. The development of sex-specific guidelines requires that they should reflect the SDs implications for the management of a disease and that the evidence should be carefully evaluated as to whether there is an adequate representation of both sexes and whether sex-disaggregated data are reported. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacological drivers are under the influence of an impressive number of differences between women and men. However, to establish their significance in clinical practice, an adequate representation of women in studies and the reporting of distinct results is mandatory.

Treatment Patterns, Outcomes, and Persistence to Newly Started Heart Failure Medications in Patients with Worsening Heart Failure: A Cohort Study from the United States and Germany.

BACKGROUND: Data are limited regarding guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) treatment patterns in patients with worsening heart failure (HF). METHODS: We used administrative claims databases in Germany and the USA to conduct a retrospective cohort study of patients with worsening HF. Two cohorts of patients with prevalent HF and a HF hospitalization (HFH) from 2016 to 2019, alive at discharge (N = 75,140 USA; N = 47,003 Germany) were identified. Index date was the first HFH during the study period. One-year HF rehospitalization and mortality rates were calculated and a composite endpoint of both outcomes assessed using Kaplan-Meier estimation. We evaluated HF medication patterns in the 6 months before and after the index date. New users of a HF medication (at discharge/after index HFH) were followed for 1 year to evaluate persistence (no treatment gaps > 2 months) RESULTS: One-year HF rehospitalization rates were 36.2% (USA) and 47.7% (Germany). One year mortality rates were 30.0% (USA) and 23.0% (Germany), and the composite endpoint (mortality/HF rehospitalization) was reached in 55.1 % (USA) and 56.6% (Germany). Kaplan-Meier plots showed the risk for the composite endpoint was high in the early post discharge period. Comparison of patterns pre- and postindex HFH showed some increase in use of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), and triple therapy; use of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor/ angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) plus beta-blockers remained constant/slightly declined; < 20% patients received triple therapy (ACE inhibitor/ARB plus beta-blocker plus MRA). A third of patients were new users; 1 year persistence rates were often low. CONCLUSIONS: Morbidity, mortality, and rehospitalization risk is high among patients with worsening HF; uptake and continuation of GDMT is suboptimal.

Image testing based on biomedical drug loading in cardiovascular drug care simulation for coronary heart disease.

Coronary heart disease is a common cardiovascular disease, and its therapeutic effect is affected by the distribution and absorption of drugs in the body. Biomedical drug-carrying image testing technology can provide a quantitative assessment of drug distribution and absorption in the body. This study aims to explore the application of biomedical drug-carrying image testing technology in the simulation of cardiovascular drug care in coronary heart disease, so as to provide reference for the optimization of drug treatment plan and individualized treatment. The study collected clinical data and medication regiments of patients with coronary heart disease. Then, the imaging examination of patients was carried out by selecting appropriate drug loading markers using the biomedical drug loading image examination technology. Then quantitative analysis was used to process the image data to quantitatively evaluate the distribution and absorption of drugs in the cardiovascular system. The quantitative data of drug distribution and absorption in patients with coronary heart disease have been obtained successfully by means of biomedical imaging. These data reveal the dynamic changes of drugs in the cardiovascular system, and help doctors optimize drug therapy, improve treatment effectiveness, and achieve personalized treatment.

Effects on physical activity, physical fitness and well-being in a 36-months randomized controlled study, comparing a multimodal hospital-based intervention programme for primary cardiovascular prevention with usual care.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease is a major cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide, and primary prevention efforts are poorly developed in people at high cardiovascular risk. On this background, we performed the Hjerteløftet Study and demonstrated that participation over 36 months in a multimodal primary prevention programme, significantly reduced validated cardiovascular risk scores. In the current substudy we aimed to further explore several elements and effects following the intervention programme. METHODS: A random sample from the original Hjerteløftet Study was included for further examinations (n = 255, 40% women), and these patients were already randomized to an intervention group (IG) (n = 127), or a control group (CG) (n = 128). We compared changes from baseline to 36-months follow-up in physical activity, cardiorespiratory fitness, psychological well-being (WHO-5), cardiovascular medication use, smoking habits, and cardiometabolic risk factors (blood pressure, lipids, blood glucose, HbA1c, Apolipoprotein A-I, Apolipoprotein B and high-sensitive C-reactive protein). RESULTS: Self-reported physical activity increased significantly with absolute difference in mean delta Physical Activity Index score in the IG compared to the CG: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.10 to 1.70, p = 0.028 (ANCOVA). There were no corresponding differences in cardiorespiratory fitness. The participation resulted in psychological well-being improvement in both groups with a larger increase in the IG compared to the CG. The mean difference in delta WHO-5 score was 5.06, 95% CI: 0.68 to 9.45, p = 0.024, and 3.28, 95% CI: -0.69 to 5.25, p = 0.104 when controlled for baseline values (ANCOVA). The use of antihypertensive medication increased significantly more in the CG (p = 0.044). Only minor, nonsignificant changes were observed for traditional risk factors and cardiometabolic variables. CONCLUSIONS: Participation in the Hjerteløftet Study intervention programme resulted in an improved physical activity level, but without changing cardiorespiratory fitness. Participation in the programme also tended to improve psychological well-being, possibly related to increased physical activity, less smoking and less use of cardiovascular medication. Concerning the metabolic status, no major differences were observed, but minor changes may have been concealed by a larger increase in cardiovascular medication use in the control group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01741428), 04/12/2012.

Mortality in a Nationwide Practice-Based Cohort Receiving Paclitaxel-Coated Devices for Lower Limb Peripheral Artery Disease.

BACKGROUND: According to a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials, paclitaxel-coated devices (PCDs) for lower limb endovascular revascularization may be associated with increased risk of late mortality. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine whether PCDs are associated with all-cause mortality in a real-world setting. METHODS: DETECT is a nationwide, exhaustive retrospective cohort study using medico-administrative data from the French National Healthcare System representing >99% of the population. The main selection criterion was the first procedure of interest: endovascular revascularization for lower limb peripheral artery disease involving ≥1 balloon and/or stent performed between October 1, 2011, and December 31, 2019. Patients with or without PCDs were compared for all-cause mortality until December 31, 2021. RESULTS: A total of 259,137 patients were analyzed, with 20,083 (7.7%) treated with ≥1 PCD. After a median follow-up of 4.1 years (Q1-Q3: 2.3-6.4 years), a total of 5,385 deaths/73,923 person-years (PY) (7.3/100 PY) and 109,844 deaths/1,060,513 PY (10.4/100 PY) were observed in the PCD and control groups, respectively. After adjustment for confounding factors, PCD treatment was associated with a lower risk of mortality in multivariable Cox analyses (HR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.84-0.89; P < 0.001). Similar results were observed using propensity score matching approaches based on either nearest-neighbor or exact matching. CONCLUSIONS: In a nationwide analysis based on large-scale real-world data, exposure to PCDs was not associated with a higher risk of mortality in patients undergoing endovascular revascularization for lower limb peripheral artery disease. (The DETECT Project; NCT05254106).

The Use and Impact of Cilostazol on Patients Undergoing Endovascular Peripheral Interventions.

BACKGROUND: Cilostazol is used for the treatment of intermittent claudication. The impact of cilostazol on the outcomes of peripheral vascular interventions (PVIs) remains controversial. This study assesses the use and impact of cilostazol on patients undergoing PVI for peripheral arterial disease (PAD). METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) database files for PVI were reviewed. Patients with PAD who underwent PVI for chronic limb threatening-ischemia or claudication were included and divided based on the use of cilostazol preoperatively. After propensity matching for patient demographics and comorbidities, the short-term and long-term outcomes of the 2 groups (preoperative cilostazol use versus no preoperative cilostazol use) were compared. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to determine outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 245,309 patients underwent PVI procedures and 6.6% (N = 16,366) were on cilostazol prior to intervention. Patients that received cilostazol were more likely to be male (62% vs 60%; P < 0.001), White (77% vs. 75%; P < 0.001), and smokers (83% vs. 77%; P < 0.001). They were less likely to have diabetes mellitus (50% vs. 56%; P < 0.001) and congestive heart failure (14% vs. 23%; P < 0.001). Patient on cilostazol were more likely to be treated for claudication (63% vs. 40%, P < 0.001), undergo prior lower extremity revascularization (55% vs. 51%, P < 0.001) and less likely to have undergone prior minor and major amputation (10% vs. 19%; P < 0.001) compared with patients who did not receive cilostazol. After 3:1 propensity matching, there were 50,265 patients included in the analysis with no differences in baseline characteristics. Patients on cilostazol were less likely to develop renal complications and more likely to be discharged home. Patients on cilostazol had significantly lower rates of long-term mortality (11.5% vs. 13.4%, P < 0.001 and major amputation (4.0% vs. 4.7%, P = 0.022). However, there were no significant differences in rates of reintervention, major adverse limb events, or patency after PVI. Amputation-free survival rates were significantly higher for patients on cilostazol, after 4 years of follow up (89% vs. 87%, P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Cilostazol is underutilized in the VQI database and seems to be associated with improved amputation-free survival. Cilostazol therapy should be considered in all patients with PAD who can tolerate it prior to PVI.

Oral Cardiac Drug-Gut Microbiota Interaction in Chronic Heart Failure Patients: An Emerging Association.

Regardless of the currently proposed best medical treatment for heart failure patients, the morbidity and mortality rates remain high. This is due to several reasons, including the interaction between oral cardiac drug administration and gut microbiota. The relation between drugs (especially antibiotics) and gut microbiota is well established, but it is also known that more than 24% of non-antibiotic drugs affect gut microbiota, altering the microbe's environment and its metabolic products. Heart failure treatment lies mainly in the blockage of neuro-humoral hyper-activation. There is debate as to whether the administration of heart-failure-specific drugs can totally block this hyper-activation, or whether the so-called intestinal dysbiosis that is commonly observed in this group of patients can affect their action. Although there are several reports indicating a strong relation between drug-gut microbiota interplay, little is known about this relation to oral cardiac drugs in chronic heart failure. In this review, we review the contemporary data on a topic that is in its infancy. We aim to produce scientific thoughts and questions and provide reasoning for further clinical investigation.

The efficacy and safety of ivabradine hydrochloride in hemodialysis patients with chronic heart failure.

INTRODUCTION: There is little evidence for ivabradine hydrochloride in patients undergoing hemodialysis. METHODS: In this open-label prospective interventional trial of hemodialysis patients with chronic heart failure, during 12 weeks of treatment, changes in Heart rate (HR), frequency of dialysis-related hypotension were examined, and we investigated health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) and adverse effects. RESULTS: 18 patients from 6 facilities were enrolled in the study. HR significantly decreased over time, from 87 ± 12.61/min at baseline to 75.85 ± 8.91/min (p = 0.0003), and systolic blood pressure also increased significantly (p < 0.0001). The frequency of dialysis-related hypotension was markedly reduced (p = 0.0001). The HR-QOL survey showed significant improvements in Social Functioning among others (p = 0.0178). No specific adverse events occurred. CONCLUSION: Ivabradine hydrochloride improved dialysis-related hypotension. Furthermore, the HR-QOL improvement effect were suggested. These results demonstrated the safety and effectiveness of ivabradine hydrochloride.

Percutaneous coronary intervention versus medical therapy in stable angina: a matched cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: It is uncertain whether percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in addition to optimal medical therapy (OMT) can reduce adverse clinical events in the long term as compared with OMT alone in patients with pure stable angina. METHODS: We enrolled patients from 2006 to 2010 using the Korean national insurance data. 58 742 patients with pure stable angina with no history of myocardial infarction (MI) nor PCI were candidate, and finally, 5673 patients in the PCI plus OMT group and 5673 in the OMT alone group were selected with 1:1 propensity matching. They were followed up for 9.3 years. RESULTS: Primary endpoint, a composite of MI, stroke and cardiac death rate was significantly higher in the PCI group than in the OMT group, 13.5/1000 vs 11.5/1000 person-year with HR of 1.18 (95% CI 1.06 to 1.32, p=0.003). Individual event rate of MI and cardiac death rate was higher in the PCI group than in the OMT group at 9.3 years, 2.9 vs 2.1 (HR 1.38, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.7, p=0.009) and 4.8 vs 3.4/1000 person-year (HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.69, p=0.001), respectively. Revascularisation and total death occurred more in the PCI group as compared with the OMT group, 30.3 vs 8.2 (HR 3.64, 95% CI 3.27 to 4.05, p<0.001) and 13.5 vs 10.6/1000 person-year (HR 1.23, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.40, p<0.001), respectively. In subgroup analysis, the same trend of more event in the PCI group was detected. CONCLUSIONS: PCI plus OMT was associated with higher rate of primary endpoint of MI, stroke, cardiac death as compared with OMT alone in patients with pure stable angina at 9.3-year follow-up in large population.