Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 115
Filtrar
1.
JACC Heart Fail ; 2020 Nov 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33189635

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to better understand the discrepant results of 2 trials of serelaxin on acute heart failure (AHF) and short-term mortality after AHF by analyzing causes of death of patients in the RELAX-AHF-2 (Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability of Serelaxin When Added to Standard Therapy in AHF-2) trial. BACKGROUND: Patients with AHF continue to suffer significant short-term mortality, but limited systematic analyses of causes of death in this patient population are available. METHODS: Adjudicated cause of death of patients in RELAX-AHF-2, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of serelaxin in patients with AHF across the spectrum of ejection fraction (EF), was analyzed. RESULTS: By 180 days of follow-up, 11.5% of patients in RELAX-AHF-2 died, primarily due to heart failure (HF) (38% of all deaths). Unlike RELAX-AHF, there was no apparent effect of treatment with serelaxin on any category of cause of death. Older patients (≥75 years) had higher rates of mortality (14.2% vs. 8.8%) and non-cardiovascular (CV) death (27% vs. 19%) compared to younger patients. Patients with preserved EF (≥50%) had lower rates of HF-related mortality (30% vs. 40%) but higher non-CV mortality (36% vs. 20%) compared to patients with reduced EF. CONCLUSIONS: Despite previous data suggesting benefit of serelaxin in AHF, treatment with serelaxin was not found to improve overall mortality or have an effect on any category of cause of death in RELAX-AHF-2. Careful adjudication of events in the serelaxin trials showed that older patients and those with preserved EF had fewer deaths from HF or sudden death and more deaths from other CV causes and from noncardiac causes. (Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability of Serelaxin When Added to Standard Therapy in AHF [RELAX-AHF-2]; NCT01870778).

2.
ESC Heart Fail ; 2020 Nov 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33191637

RESUMO

AIMS: Discontinuation or non-publication of trials may hinder scientific progress and violates the commitment made to research participants. We sought to identify the prevalence of discontinuation and non-publication of heart failure (HF) clinical trials. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a cross-sectional search of ClinicalTrials.gov to identify all completed and discontinued HF clinical trials. We limited our search to only include trials that were completed by 31 December 2017. Trials were investigated to identify reasons for discontinuation. Informative termination was defined as trial termination due to safety or efficacy concerns. Data pertaining to the trial phase, funding, intervention, enrolment, and trial completion date were extracted for each trial. A total of 572 trials were included. Of these, 21% (n = 118) were discontinued before completion. Patient accrual was the most frequently cited reason (n = 42; 36%) for trial discontinuation, followed by informative termination (n = 16; 14%) and funding (n = 14; 12%). Overall, 24 780 patients were enrolled in trials that were terminated. Of trials that were completed and not terminated, nearly one-third (n = 131/454; 29%) were not published. Seventy-nine (24%) trials were published within 12 months, 192 (59%) within 24 months, and 252 (78%) trials within 36 months. CONCLUSIONS: Discontinuation and non-publication of HF trials is common. This raises ethical concerns towards participants who volunteer for research and are exposed to potential risks, inconvenience, and discomfort without furthering scientific progress.

3.
Circulation ; 2020 Oct 21.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33081531

RESUMO

Background: Empagliflozin reduces the risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure in patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction, with or without diabetes, but additional data are needed about the effect of the drug on inpatient and outpatient events that reflect worsening heart failure. Methods: We randomly assigned 3730 patients with class II-IV heart failure with an ejection fraction of ≤40% to double-blind treatment with placebo or empagliflozin (10 mg once daily), in addition to recommended treatments for heart failure, for a median of 16 months. We prospectively collected information on inpatient and outpatient events reflecting worsening heart failure and prespecified their analysis in individual and composite endpoints. Results: Empagliflozin reduced the combined risk of death, hospitalization for heart failure or an emergent/urgent heart failure visit requiring intravenous treatment (415 vs 519 patients; empagliflozin vs placebo, respectively; hazard ratio 0.76, 95% CI: 0.67-0.87), P <0.0001. This benefit reached statistical significance at 12 days after randomization. Empagliflozin reduced the total number of heart failure hospitalizations that required intensive care (hazard ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.50-0.90, P=0.008) and that required a vasopressor or positive inotropic drug or mechanical or surgical intervention (hazard ratio 0.64, 95% CI: 0.47-0.87, P=0.005). As compared with placebo, fewer patients in the empagliflozin group reported intensification of diuretics (297 vs 414), hazard ratio 0.67, 95% CI: 0.56-0.78, P<0.0001. Additionally, patients assigned to empagliflozin were 20-40% more likely to experience an improvement in NYHA functional class and were 20-40% less likely to experience worsening of NYHA functional class, with statistically significant effects that were apparent 28 days after randomization and maintained during long-term follow-up. The risk of any inpatient or outpatient worsening heart failure event in the placebo group was high (48.1 per 100 patient-years of follow-up), and it was reduced by empagliflozin (hazard ratio 0.70, 95% CI: 0.63-0.78), P<0.0001. Conclusions: In patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction, empagliflozin reduced the risk and total number of inpatient and outpatient worsening heart failure events, with benefits seen early after initiation of treatment and sustained for the duration of double-blind therapy. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov Unique Identifier: NCT03057977.

4.
Eur J Heart Fail ; 2020 Oct 17.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33068051

RESUMO

The Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) has recently issued a position paper on the role of sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors in heart failure (HF). The present document provides an update of the position paper, based of new clinical trial evidence. Accordingly, the following recommendations are given: • Canagliflozin, dapagliflozin empagliflozin, or ertugliflozin have consistently demonstrated to be effective for the prevention of HF hospitalization in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and established cardiovascular disease or at high cardiovascular risk. The specifically listed agents are recommended. • Dapagliflozin or empagliflozin are recommended to reduce the combined risk of HF hospitalization and cardiovascular death in symptomatic patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction, already receiving guideline-directed medical therapy, regardless of the presence of type 2 diabetes mellitus.

5.
ESC Heart Fail ; 2020 Oct 23.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33094909

RESUMO

AIMS: This study aims to explore long-term clinical outcomes of cardiopoiesis-guided stem cell therapy for ischaemic heart failure assessed in the Congestive Heart Failure Cardiopoietic Regenerative Therapy (CHART-1) trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: CHART-1 is a multinational, randomized, and double-blind trial conducted in 39 centres in heart failure patients (n = 315) on standard-of-care therapy. The 'active' group received cardiopoietic stem cells delivered intramyocardially using a retention-enhanced catheter. The 'control' group underwent patient-level sham procedure. Patients were followed up to 104 weeks. In the entire study population, results of the primary hierarchical composite outcome were maintained neutral at Week 52 [Mann-Whitney estimator 0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45-0.59, P = 0.51]. Landmark analyses suggested late clinical benefit in patients with significant left ventricular enlargement receiving adequate dosing. Specifically, beyond 100 days of follow-up, patients with left ventricular end-diastolic volume of 200-370 mL treated with ≤19 injections of cardiopoietic stem cells showed reduced risk of death or cardiovascular hospitalization (hazard ratio 0.38, 95% CI 0.16-0.91, P = 0.031) and cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization (hazard ratio 0.28, 95% CI 0.09-0.94, P = 0.040). Cardiopoietic stem cell therapy was well tolerated long term with no difference in safety readouts compared with sham at 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: Longitudinal follow-up documents that cardiopoietic stem cell therapy is overall safe, and post hoc analyses suggest benefit in an ischaemic heart failure subpopulation defined by advanced left ventricular enlargement on tolerable stem cell dosing. The long-term clinical follow-up thus offers guidance for future targeted trials.

6.
Heart Fail Rev ; 2020 Sep 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32939666

RESUMO

Heart failure (HF) and cancer are of the most common diseases globally, both associated with significant adverse outcomes and greatly impaired quality of life. Despite those similarities, over the last 15 years, the United States (USA) and European authorities have approved only 5 and 3 new drugs for HF respectively, none using an accelerated process and none for patients with either acute HF (AHF) or with HF and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). During the same period, more than 100 new drugs were approved for treatment of various cancers, several receiving accelerated approval. HF drugs in the last 15 years were mostly approved for reduction in mortality, whereas most approved cancer drugs addressed disease progression and surrogate markers. Consequently, the size of the trials in HF were far greater than those in oncology which was associated with lower probability of success. Given the larger study size and smaller probability of approval, pharma progressively reduces the necessary investments in new HF drugs. We suggest for HF drugs be developed, especially those used to treat patients with HFpEF and AHF, consideration of approval based beyond morbidity and mortality on improvements in symptoms and functional capacity and, like oncology, based on measures of disease progression and end organ damage. At the same time, HF drug development should adopt some approaches used in other diseases (such as oncology) focusing on better defining specific phenotypes and defining specific disease-related targets for new drugs.

7.
Eur J Heart Fail ; 22(9): 1495-1503, 2020 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32618086

RESUMO

Heart failure (HF) is common and associated with a poor prognosis, despite advances in treatment. Over the last decade cardiovascular outcome trials with sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus have demonstrated beneficial effects for three SGLT2 inhibitors (empagliflozin, canagliflozin and dapagliflozin) in reducing hospitalisations for HF. More recently, dapagliflozin reduced the risk of worsening HF or death from cardiovascular causes in patients with chronic HF with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, with or without type 2 diabetes mellitus. A number of additional trials in HF patients with reduced and/or preserved left ventricular ejection fraction are ongoing and/or about to be reported. The present position paper summarises recent clinical trial evidence and discusses the role of SGLT2 inhibitors in the treatment of HF, pending the results of ongoing trials in different populations of patients with HF.

8.
Eur J Heart Fail ; 22(6): 999-1005, 2020 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32239794

RESUMO

AIMS: While the associations of health-related quality of life scores in heart failure (HF) [e.g. the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ)] with clinical outcomes are well established, their interpretation in the context of what magnitudes of change are clinically important to patients is less clear. The main objective of this study was to correlate the changes in the KCCQ and Patient Global Assessment (PGA) in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) to determine minimal clinically important difference (MCID). METHODS AND RESULTS: We analysed data from 459 patients of the FAIR-HF trial. Both KCCQ and PGA were assessed at 4 and 24 weeks after enrolment. An anchor-based approach was used to calculate MCID at week 4 and 24. PGA was chosen as the clinical anchor against which changes in the KCCQ scores were calibrated. For each category of change in PGA, the corresponding differences were calculated by the mean scores of various domains of KCCQ along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). There was fair correlation between PGA and changes in overall summary scores (OSS) (r = 0.31; P < 0.001), clinical summary scores (CSS) (r = 0.36; P < 0.001) and physical limitation scores (PLS) (r = 0.31; P < 0.001) from baseline to week 4. KCCQ OSS, CSS and PLS MCID for 'little improvement' at week 4 were 3.6 (1.0-6.2), 4.5 (1.8-7.2) and 4.7 (1.4-8.0) points, respectively. OSS, CSS and PLS MCID for 'little improvement' at week 24 were 4.3 (0.2-8.4), 4.5 (0.5-8.5) and 4.0 (-0.9-9.0) points, respectively. CONCLUSION: The MCID threshold for KCCQ score was generally consistent and numerically lower than the threshold of 5-point change considered for clinical outcome prognosis and were stable between 4 and 24 weeks. This suggests that even changes smaller than the traditional 5-point improvements in KCCQ may be clinically meaningful. Also, these results can aid in the clinical interpretation of patient-reported outcomes, and better endpoint selection in future studies.

9.
JACC Heart Fail ; 8(3): 212-222, 2020 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31838032

RESUMO

Whereas multiple national, international, and trial registries for heart failure have been created, international standards for clinical assessment and outcome measurement do not currently exist. The working group's objective was to facilitate international comparison in heart failure care, using standardized parameters and meaningful patient-centered outcomes for research and quality of care assessments. The International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement recruited an international working group of clinical heart failure experts, researchers, and patient representatives to define a standard set of outcomes and risk-adjustment variables. This was designed to document, compare, and ultimately improve patient care outcomes in the heart failure population, with a focus on global feasibility and relevance. The working group employed a Delphi process, patient focus groups, online patient surveys, and multiple systematic publications searches. The process occurred over 10 months, employing 7 international teleconferences. A 17-item set has been established, addressing selected functional, psychosocial, burden of care, and survival outcome domains. These measures were designed to include all patients with heart failure, whether entered at first presentation or subsequent decompensation, excluding cardiogenic shock. Sources include clinician report, administrative data, and validated patient-reported outcome measurement tools: the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire; the Patient Health Questionnaire-2; and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System. Recommended data included those to support risk adjustment and benchmarking across providers and regions. The International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement developed a dataset designed to capture, compare, and improve care for heart failure, with feasibility and relevance for patients and clinicians worldwide.

10.
Eur J Heart Fail ; 2019 Nov 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31713324

RESUMO

AIMS: Heart failure is traditionally classified by left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), rather than by left ventricular (LV) geometry, with guideline-recommended therapies in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) but not heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Most patients with HFrEF have eccentric LV hypertrophy, but some have concentric LV hypertrophy. We aimed to compare clinical characteristics, biomarker patterns, and response to treatment of patients with HFrEF and eccentric vs. concentric LV hypertrophy. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a retrospective post-hoc analysis including 1015 patients with HFrEF (LVEF <40%) from the multinational observational BIOSTAT-CHF study. LV geometry was classified using two-dimensional echocardiography. Network analysis of 92 biomarkers was used to investigate pathophysiologic pathways. Concentric LV hypertrophy was present in 142 (14%) patients, who were on average older and more likely hypertensive compared to those with eccentric LV hypertrophy. Network analysis revealed that N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide was an important hub in eccentric hypertrophy, whereas in concentric hypertrophy, tumour necrosis factor receptor 1, urokinase plasminogen activator surface receptor, paraoxonase and P-selectin were central hubs. Up-titration of beta-blockers was associated with a mortality benefit in HFrEF with eccentric but not concentric LV hypertrophy (P-value for interaction ≤0.001). For angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, the hazard ratio for mortality was higher in concentric hypertrophy, but the interaction was not significant. CONCLUSION: Patients with HFrEF with concentric hypertrophy have a clinical and biomarker phenotype that is distinctly different from those with eccentric hypertrophy. Patients with concentric hypertrophy may not experience similar benefit from up.-titration of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers and beta-blockers compared to patients with eccentric hypertrophy.

11.
Eur J Heart Fail ; 21(10): 1270-1278, 2019 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31584231

RESUMO

Drugs that inhibit the sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) have been shown to reduce the risk of hospitalizations for heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes. In populations that largely did not have heart failure at the time of enrolment, empagliflozin, canagliflozin and dapagliflozin decreased the risk of serious new-onset heart failure events by ≈30%. In addition, in the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial, empagliflozin reduced the risk of both pump failure and sudden deaths, the two most common modes of death among patients with heart failure. In none of the three trials could the benefits of SGLT2 inhibitors on heart failure be explained by the actions of these drugs as diuretics or anti-hyperglycaemic agents. These observations raise the possibility that SGLT2 inhibitors could reduce morbidity and mortality in patients with established heart failure, including those without diabetes. The EMPEROR-Reduced trial is enrolling ≈3600 patients with heart failure and a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (≤ 40%), half of whom are expected not to have diabetes. Patients are being randomized to placebo or empagliflozin 10 mg daily, which is added to all appropriate treatment with inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin system and neprilysin, beta-blockers and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. The primary endpoint is the time-to-first event analysis of the combined risk of cardiovascular death and hospitalization for heart failure, but the trial will also evaluate the effects of empagliflozin on renal function, cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, and recurrent hospitalization events. By adjusting eligibility based on natriuretic peptide levels to the baseline ejection fraction, the trial will preferentially enrol high-risk patients. A large proportion of the participants is expected to have an ejection fraction < 30%, and the estimated annual event rate is expected to be at least 15%. The EMPEROR-Reduced trial is well-positioned to determine if the addition of empagliflozin can add meaningfully to current approaches that have established benefits in the treatment of chronic heart failure with left ventricular systolic dysfunction.

12.
Eur J Heart Fail ; 21(10): 1279-1287, 2019 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31523904

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The principal biological processes that characterize heart failure with a preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) are systemic inflammation, epicardial adipose tissue accumulation, coronary microcirculatory rarefaction, myocardial fibrosis and vascular stiffness; the resulting impairment of left ventricular and aortic distensibility (especially when accompanied by impaired glomerular function and sodium retention) causes increases in cardiac filling pressures and exertional dyspnoea despite the relative preservation of left ventricular ejection fraction. Independently of their actions on blood glucose, sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors exert a broad range of biological effects (including actions to inhibit cardiac inflammation and fibrosis, antagonize sodium retention and improve glomerular function) that can ameliorate the pathophysiological derangements in HFpEF. Such SGLT2 inhibitors exert favourable effects in experimental models of HFpEF and have been found in large-scale trials to reduce the risk for serious heart failure events in patients with type 2 diabetes, many of whom were retrospectively identified as having HFpEF. STUDY DESIGN: The EMPEROR-Preserved Trial is enrolling ≈5750 patients with HFpEF (ejection fraction >40%), with and without type 2 diabetes, who are randomized to receive placebo or empagliflozin 10 mg/day, which is added to all appropriate treatments for HFpEF and co-morbidities. STUDY AIMS: The primary endpoint is the time-to-first-event analysis of the combined risk for cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure. The trial will also evaluate the effects of empagliflozin on renal function, cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality and recurrent hospitalization events, and will assess a wide range of biomarkers that reflect important pathophysiological mechanisms that may drive the evolution of HFpEF. The EMPEROR-Preserved Trial is well positioned to determine if empagliflozin can have a meaningful impact on the course of HFpEF, a disorder for which there are currently few therapeutic options.

13.
Eur J Heart Fail ; 21(8): 965-973, 2019 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31087601

RESUMO

AIMS: Inflammation is a central process in the pathophysiology of heart failure (HF), but trials targeting tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α were largely unsuccessful. Interleukin (IL)-6 is an important inflammatory mediator and might constitute a potential pharmacologic target in HF. However, little is known regarding the association between IL-6 and clinical characteristics, outcomes and other inflammatory biomarkers in HF. We thus aimed to identify and characterize these associations. METHODS AND RESULTS: Interleukin-6 was measured in 2329 patients [89.4% with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 40%] of the BIOSTAT-CHF cohort. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality and HF hospitalization during 2 years, with all-cause, cardiovascular (CV), and non-CV death as secondary outcomes. Approximately half (56%) of all included patients had plasma IL-6 values greater than the previously determined 95th percentile of normal values at baseline. Elevated N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide, procalcitonin and hepcidin, younger age, TNF-α/IL-1-related biomarkers, or having iron deficiency, atrial fibrillation and LVEF > 40% independently predicted elevated IL-6 levels. IL-6 independently predicted the primary outcome [HR (95% confidence interval) per doubling: 1.16 (1.11-1.21), P < 0.001], all-cause mortality [1.22 (1.16-1.29), P < 0.001] and CV as well as non-CV mortality [1.16 (1.09-1.24), P < 0.001; 1.31 (1.18-1.45), P < 0.001], but did not improve discrimination in previously published risk models. CONCLUSIONS: In a large, heterogeneous cohort of HF patients, elevated IL-6 levels were found in more than 50% of patients and were associated with iron deficiency, reduced LVEF, atrial fibrillation and poorer clinical outcomes. These findings warrant further investigation of IL-6 as a potential therapeutic target in specific HF subpopulations.

14.
Eur J Heart Fail ; 21(5): 553-576, 2019 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30989768

RESUMO

Cardiomyopathies are a heterogeneous group of heart muscle diseases and an important cause of heart failure (HF). Current knowledge on incidence, pathophysiology and natural history of HF in cardiomyopathies is limited, and distinct features of their therapeutic responses have not been systematically addressed. Therefore, this position paper focuses on epidemiology, pathophysiology, natural history and latest developments in treatment of HF in patients with dilated (DCM), hypertrophic (HCM) and restrictive (RCM) cardiomyopathies. In DCM, HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has high incidence and prevalence and represents the most frequent cause of death, despite improvements in treatment. In addition, advanced HF in DCM is one of the leading indications for heart transplantation. In HCM, HF with preserved ejection (HFpEF) affects most patients with obstructive, and ∼10% of patients with non-obstructive HCM. A timely treatment is important, since development of advanced HF, although rare in HCM, portends a poor prognosis. In RCM, HFpEF is common, while HFrEF occurs later and more frequently in amyloidosis or iron overload/haemochromatosis. Irrespective of RCM aetiology, HF is a harbinger of a poor outcome. Recent advances in our understanding of the mechanisms underlying the development of HF in cardiomyopathies have significant implications for therapeutic decision-making. In addition, new aetiology-specific treatment options (e.g. enzyme replacement therapy, transthyretin stabilizers, immunoadsorption, immunotherapy, etc.) have shown a potential to improve outcomes. Still, causative therapies of many cardiomyopathies are lacking, highlighting the need for the development of effective strategies to prevent and treat HF in cardiomyopathies.

15.
Eur J Heart Fail ; 21(7): 921-929, 2019 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30933403

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Physicians' adherence to guideline-recommended therapy is associated with short-term clinical outcomes in heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, its impact on longer-term outcomes is poorly documented. Here, we present results from the 18-month follow-up of the QUALIFY registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data at 18 months were available for 6118 ambulatory HFrEF patients from this international prospective observational survey. Adherence was measured as a continuous variable, ranging from 0 to 1, and was assessed for five classes of recommended HF medications and dosages. Most deaths were cardiovascular (CV) (228/394) and HF-related (191/394) and the same was true for unplanned hospitalizations (1175 CV and 861 HF-related hospitalizations, out of a total of 1541). According to univariable analysis, CV and HF deaths were significantly associated with physician adherence to guidelines. In multivariable analysis, HF death was associated with adherence level [subdistribution hazard ratio (SHR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87-0.99 per 0.1 unit adherence level increase; P = 0.034] as was composite of HF hospitalization or CV death (SHR 0.97, 95% CI 0.94-0.99 per 0.1 unit adherence level increase; P = 0.043), whereas unplanned all-cause, CV or HF hospitalizations were not (all-cause: SHR 0.99, 95% CI 0.9-1.02; CV: SHR 0.98, 95% CI 0.96-1.01; and HF: SHR 0.99, 95% CI 0.96-1.02 per 0.1 unit change in adherence score; P = 0.52, P = 0.2, and P = 0.4, respectively). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that physicians' adherence to guideline-recommended HF therapies is associated with improved outcomes in HFrEF. Practical strategies should be established to improve physicians' adherence to guidelines.

16.
Eur J Heart Fail ; 20(7): 1081-1099, 2018 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29710416

RESUMO

This paper provides a practical clinical application of guideline recommendations relating to the inpatient monitoring of patients with acute heart failure, through the evaluation of various clinical, biomarker, imaging, invasive and non-invasive approaches. Comprehensive inpatient monitoring is crucial to the optimal management of acute heart failure patients. The European Society of Cardiology heart failure guidelines provide recommendations for the inpatient monitoring of acute heart failure, but the level of evidence underpinning most recommendations is limited. Many tools are available for the in-hospital monitoring of patients with acute heart failure, and each plays a role at various points throughout the patient's treatment course, including the emergency department, intensive care or coronary care unit, and the general ward. Clinical judgment is the preeminent factor guiding application of inpatient monitoring tools, as the various techniques have different patient population targets. When applied appropriately, these techniques enable decision making. However, there is limited evidence demonstrating that implementation of these tools improves patient outcome. Research priorities are identified to address these gaps in evidence. Future research initiatives should aim to identify the optimal in-hospital monitoring strategies that decrease morbidity and prolong survival in patients with acute heart failure.


Assuntos
Pesquisa Biomédica/normas , Cardiologia , Insuficiência Cardíaca/terapia , Pacientes Internados , Monitorização Fisiológica/normas , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Sociedades Médicas , Doença Aguda , Europa (Continente) , Humanos
17.
Eur J Heart Fail ; 20(5): 853-872, 2018 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29520964

RESUMO

The coexistence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and heart failure (HF), either with reduced (HFrEF) or preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), is frequent (30-40% of patients) and associated with a higher risk of HF hospitalization, all-cause and cardiovascular (CV) mortality. The most important causes of HF in T2DM are coronary artery disease, arterial hypertension and a direct detrimental effect of T2DM on the myocardium. T2DM is often unrecognized in HF patients, and vice versa, which emphasizes the importance of an active search for both disorders in the clinical practice. There are no specific limitations to HF treatment in T2DM. Subanalyses of trials addressing HF treatment in the general population have shown that all HF therapies are similarly effective regardless of T2DM. Concerning T2DM treatment in HF patients, most guidelines currently recommend metformin as the first-line choice. Sulphonylureas and insulin have been the traditional second- and third-line therapies although their safety in HF is equivocal. Neither glucagon-like preptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, nor dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibitors reduce the risk for HF hospitalization. Indeed, a DPP4 inhibitor, saxagliptin, has been associated with a higher risk of HF hospitalization. Thiazolidinediones (pioglitazone and rosiglitazone) are contraindicated in patients with (or at risk of) HF. In recent trials, sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, empagliflozin and canagliflozin, have both shown a significant reduction in HF hospitalization in patients with established CV disease or at risk of CV disease. Several ongoing trials should provide an insight into the effectiveness of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with HFrEF and HFpEF in the absence of T2DM.


Assuntos
Cardiologia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiologia , Insuficiência Cardíaca/epidemiologia , Sociedades Médicas , Comorbidade/tendências , Europa (Continente) , Saúde Global , Humanos , Prevalência , Taxa de Sobrevida/tendências
18.
Eur J Heart Fail ; 20(2): 359-369, 2018 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28980368

RESUMO

AIMS: To examine associations of below-target and target dose of enalapril, an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor, with outcomes in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in the Studies of Left Ventricular Dysfunction (SOLVD) Treatment trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: Two thousand five hundred and sixty-nine patients with HFrEF (ejection fraction ≤35%) were randomized to below-target (5-10 mg/day) dose placebo (n = 1284) or enalapril (n = 1285). One month post-randomization, blind up-titration to target (20 mg/day) dose was attempted for both study drugs in 2458 patients. Among the 1444 patients who achieved dose up-titration (placebo, n = 748; enalapril, n = 696; mean dose for both groups, 20.0 mg/day), target dose enalapril (vs. target dose placebo) was associated with a 9% absolute lower risk of the combined endpoint of heart failure hospitalization or all-cause mortality [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.70; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60-0.81; P < 0.001] during 4 years of follow-up. Among the 1014 patients who could not achieve target dose (placebo, n = 486; enalapril, n = 528; mean dose for both groups, 8.8 mg/day), below-target dose enalapril (vs. below-target dose placebo) was associated with a 12% absolute lower risk of the combined endpoint of heart failure hospitalization or all-cause mortality (adjusted HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.57-0.81; P < 0.001). Among the 1224 patients receiving enalapril, target (vs. below-target) dose had no association with the combined endpoint of heart failure hospitalization or all-cause mortality (adjusted HR 1.04; 95% CI 0.87-1.23; P = 0.695). CONCLUSION: In patients with HFrEF, the clinical benefits of ACE inhibitors appear to be similar at both below-target and target doses.


Assuntos
Enalapril/administração & dosagem , Insuficiência Cardíaca/tratamento farmacológico , Volume Sistólico/efeitos dos fármacos , Inibidores da Enzima Conversora de Angiotensina/administração & dosagem , Canadá/epidemiologia , Causas de Morte/tendências , Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Método Duplo-Cego , Europa (Continente)/epidemiologia , Seguimentos , Insuficiência Cardíaca/mortalidade , Insuficiência Cardíaca/fisiopatologia , Humanos , Volume Sistólico/fisiologia , Taxa de Sobrevida/tendências , Resultado do Tratamento , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
19.
Eur J Heart Fail ; 19(11): 1361-1378, 2017 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28949064

RESUMO

Despite improvements in medical therapy and device-based treatment, heart failure (HF) continues to impose enormous burdens on patients and health care systems worldwide. Alterations in autonomic nervous system (ANS) activity contribute to cardiac disease progression, and the recent development of invasive techniques and electrical stimulation devices has opened new avenues for specific targeting of the sympathetic and parasympathetic branches of the ANS. The Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology recently organized an expert workshop which brought together clinicians, trialists and basic scientists to discuss the ANS as a therapeutic target in HF. The questions addressed were: (i) What are the abnormalities of ANS in HF patients? (ii) What methods are available to measure autonomic dysfunction? (iii) What therapeutic interventions are available to target the ANS in patients with HF, and what are their specific strengths and weaknesses? (iv) What have we learned from previous ANS trials? (v) How should we proceed in the future?


Assuntos
Sistema Nervoso Autônomo/fisiopatologia , Cardiologia , Consenso , Insuficiência Cardíaca/fisiopatologia , Insuficiência Cardíaca/terapia , Sociedades Médicas , Pesquisa Médica Translacional/métodos , Europa (Continente) , Humanos
20.
Eur J Heart Fail ; 19(7): 821-836, 2017 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28560717

RESUMO

Organ injury and impairment are commonly observed in patients with acute heart failure (AHF), and congestion is an essential pathophysiological mechanism of impaired organ function. Congestion is the predominant clinical profile in most patients with AHF; a smaller proportion presents with peripheral hypoperfusion or cardiogenic shock. Hypoperfusion further deteriorates organ function. The injury and dysfunction of target organs (i.e. heart, lungs, kidneys, liver, intestine, brain) in the setting of AHF are associated with increased risk for mortality. Improvement in organ function after decongestive therapies has been associated with a lower risk for post-discharge mortality. Thus, the prevention and correction of organ dysfunction represent a therapeutic target of interest in AHF and should be evaluated in clinical trials. Treatment strategies that specifically prevent, reduce or reverse organ dysfunction remain to be identified and evaluated to determine if such interventions impact mortality, morbidity and patient-centred outcomes. This paper reflects current understanding among experts of the presentation and management of organ impairment in AHF and suggests priorities for future research to advance the field.


Assuntos
Cardiologia , Diagnóstico por Imagem , Gerenciamento Clínico , Insuficiência Cardíaca , Insuficiência de Múltiplos Órgãos , Sociedades Médicas , Doença Aguda , Europa (Continente) , Insuficiência Cardíaca/complicações , Insuficiência Cardíaca/diagnóstico , Insuficiência Cardíaca/terapia , Humanos , Insuficiência de Múltiplos Órgãos/diagnóstico , Insuficiência de Múltiplos Órgãos/etiologia , Insuficiência de Múltiplos Órgãos/terapia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA