Single-dose intravenous iron in Southeast Asian heart failure patients: A pilot randomized placebo-controlled study (PRACTICE-ASIA-HF)

Ferric carboxymaltose for iron deficiency in patients with heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Aim: Iron deficiency (ID) is associated with heart failure (HF) in a considerable proportion of patients. To improve the quality of life, lower the frequency of hospitalizations, and lower mortality rates of chronic HF patients (HF), this meta-analysis will look into the role of iron supplementation using ferric carboxymaltose (FCM). Methods & results: From inception until 1 October 2023, we conducted a thorough literature search of electronic databases for peer-reviewed publications. Around 5229 HF patients were included, of which 2691 received FCM while 2538 received placebo. Conclusion: FCM reduces HF-related hospitalizations but doesn't improve overall or cardiovascular mortality in those with HF and ID. The overall results support FCM's role in managing iron deficiency in heart failure.

Intravenous iron therapy for heart failure and iron deficiency: An updated meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Heart failure (HF) patients frequently exhibit iron deficiency, which is associated with a poor prognosis. Although various trials have been conducted, it is uncertain if intravenous (IV) iron replenishment improves clinical outcomes in HF patients with iron deficiency. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from inception till 15 September 2023 to retrieve randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared IV iron therapy with placebo or standard of care in patients with HF and iron deficiency. Clinical outcomes were assessed by generating forest plots using the random-effects model and pooling odds ratios (ORs) or weighted mean differences (WMDs). Fourteen RCTs with 6651 patients were included. IV iron therapy showed a significantly reduced incidence of the composite of first heart failure hospitalization (HHF) or cardiovascular (CV) mortality as compared with the control group (OR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.58 to 0.92). The IV iron therapy resulted in a trend towards lower CV mortality (OR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.76 to 1.01), 1-year all-cause mortality (OR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.71 to 1.02), and first HHF (OR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.51 to 1.05), and an improved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (MD = 4.54, 95% CI: -0.13 to 9.21). Meta-regression showed a significant inverse moderating effect of baseline LVEF on the first HHF or CV death. In patients with HF and iron deficiency, IV iron therapy reduced the incidence of composite of first HHF or CV mortality. There was a trend of lower overall CV and 1-year all-cause mortality, first HHF, and improved LVEF with IV iron therapy.

Iron Deficiency and Incident Heart Failure in Older Community-Dwelling Individuals

AIMS

Among persons with prevalent heart failure (HF), iron deficiency has been linked to HF admissions, and intravenous iron replacement improves HF outcomes. Recent studies in persons with chronic kidney disease (CKD) demonstrate that iron deficiency is associated with incident HF. This study aimed to determine the relationship of iron status with incident HF in community-dwelling older adults irrespective of their kidney function.

METHODS

In this case-cohort study, 1,006 Cardiovascular Health Study participants (785 from the random sub-cohort [including 193 HF cases] and 221 additional HF cases [N = 414 total HF cases]) aged ≥ 65 years without HF (41% with CKD), we used weighted Cox models to evaluate associations of iron status with incident HF. Participants were categorized based on quartiles of transferrin saturation and ferritin as "iron replete" (27.3%), "functional iron deficiency" (7.7%), "iron deficiency" (11.8%), "mixed iron deficiency" (5.6%), "high iron" (9.3%) and "non-classified" (38.1%), consistent with prior studies.

RESULTS

Compared to older persons who were iron replete, those with iron deficiency were at higher risk of incident HF (HR 1.47; 1.02-2.11) in models adjusting for demographics, HF risk factors, and estimated glomerular filtration rate. Other iron categories did not associate with incident HF. The relationship of iron deficiency with incident HF did not differ by CKD status (interaction P value 0.2).

CONCLUSIONS

Among community-dwelling elders, iron deficiency is independently associated with incident HF, an association that was similar irrespective of CKD status. Our findings support conduct of clinical trials of iron replacement for prevention of HF in older adults with iron deficiency.

Expert recommendations for the management of iron deficiency in patients with heart failure in Asia

BACKGROUND

Iron deficiency is a common comorbidity in heart failure (HF) and is independently associated with a worse quality-of-life and exercise capacity, as well as increased risk of hospitalization, regardless of anemia status. Although international guidelines have provided recommendations for the management of iron deficiency in patients with HF, guidelines in Asia are less established, and practical use of guidelines for management of iron deficiency is limited in the region.

METHODS

A panel comprising cardiologists from China, Hong Kong, India, Japan, Malaysia, Pakistan, Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, and Thailand convened to share insights and provide guidance for the optimal management of iron deficiency in patients with HF, tailored for the Asian community.

RESULTS

Expert opinions were provided for the screening, diagnosis, treatment and monitoring of iron deficiency in patients with HF. It was recommended that all patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction should be screened for iron deficiency, and iron-deficient patients should be treated with intravenous iron. Monitoring of iron levels in patients with HF should be carried out once or twice yearly. Barriers to the management of iron deficiency in patients with HF in the region include low awareness of iron deficiency amongst general physicians, lack of reimbursement for screening and treatment, and lack of proper facilities for administration of intravenous iron.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations provide a structured approach to the management of iron deficiency in patients with HF in Asia.

Intravenous iron for acute and chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) patients with iron deficiency: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Patients with heart failure (HF) and iron deficiency are at increased risk of adverse clinical outcomes. We searched databases for randomised controlled trials that compared IV iron to placebo, in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). A total of 7,813 participants, all having HFrEF with 3,998 receiving IV iron therapy, and 3,815 control recipients were included. There was a significant improvement in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire favouring IV iron with MD 7.39, 95% CI [3.55, 11.22], p = 0.0002. Subgroup analysis, based on acute and chronic HF, has displayed a sustained statistical significance. Additionally, a significant increase in the left ventricular ejection fraction % was observed, with MD 3.76, 95% CI [2.32, 5.21], p < 0.00001. A significant improvement in 6-min walk test was noted, with MD 34.87, 95% CI [20.02, 49.72], p < 0.00001. Furthermore, IV iron showed significant improvement in NYHA class, peak VO2, serum ferritin, and haemoglobin levels. Finally, despite the lack of difference in terms of all-cause hospitalisation and HF-related death, IV iron was associated with a significant reduction in HF-related, any cardiovascular reason hospitalisations, and all-cause death; which supports the need for implementation of IV iron as a standard of care in patients with HF and iron deficiency.

Intravenous iron therapy for patients with iron deficiency and heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Introduction

Heart failure (HF) presents a significant health challenge, with intravenous (IV) iron therapy considered a potential treatment avenue.

Method

We assessed IV iron therapy's efficacy in HF patients with concurrent iron deficiency versus standard of care. Primary outcomes included the composite of HF hospitalizations or cardiovascular-related mortality, HF hospitalizations, and all-cause, HF, and cardiovascular mortality rates. Secondary measures encompassed improvements in New York Heart Association functional classification, quality of life, 6-minute walk test, left ventricular ejection fraction, and adverse events. We used a random-effects model to compute relative risk (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

Based on an analysis of 14 randomized controlled trials involving 6614 patients, IV iron therapy significantly reduced composite outcome (RR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.73, 0.96; P = 0.01) and HF hospitalizations (RR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.61, 0.89; P = 0.002) compared to standard of care. Mortality rates showed no significant difference. IV iron therapy improved New York Heart Association functional classification, quality of life, and 6-minute walk test, with no major impact on left ventricular ejection fraction. Adverse events remained stable.

Conclusions

IV iron therapy holds promise for diminishing HF hospitalizations and enhancing quality of life and 6-minute walk test in HF patients. Yet, its effect on all-cause or cardiovascular mortalities appears limited.

Clinical outcomes of intravenous iron therapy in patients with heart failure and iron deficiency: Meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Iron deficiency in patients with heart failure (HF) is underdiagnosed and undertreated. The role of intravenous (IV) iron is well-established to improve quality of life measures. Emerging evidence also supports its role in preventing cardiovascular events in patients with HF.

METHODOLOGY

We conducted a literature search of multiple electronic databases. Randomized controlled trials that compared IV iron to usual care among patients with HF and reported cardiovascular (CV) outcomes were included. Primary outcome was the composite of first heart failure hospitalization (HFH) or CV death. Secondary outcomes included HFH (first or recurrent), CV death, all-cause mortality, hospitalization for any cause, gastrointestinal (GI) side effects, or any infection. We performed trial sequential and cumulative meta-analyses to evaluate the effect of IV iron on the primary endpoint, and on HFH.

RESULTS

Nine trials enrolling 3337 patients were included. Adding IV iron to usual care significantly reduced the risk of first HFH or CV death [risk ratio (RR) 0.84; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.75-0.93; I2 = 0 %; number needed to treat (NNT) 18], which was primarily driven by a reduction in the risk of HFH of 25 %. IV iron also reduced the risk of the composite of hospitalization for any cause or death (RR 0.92; 95 % CI 0.85-0.99; I2 = 0 %; NNT 19). There was no significant difference in the risk of CV death, all-cause mortality, adverse GI events, or any infection among patients receiving IV iron compared to usual care. The observed benefits of IV iron were directionally consistent across trials and crossed both the statistical and trial sequential boundaries of benefit.

CONCLUSION

In patients with HF and iron deficiency, the addition of IV iron to usual care reduces the risk of HFH without affecting the risk of CV or all-cause mortality.

Intravenous Iron for Heart Failure: Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

While the administration of intravenous (IV) iron to those with heart failure has been implicated to be associated with a possible reduction in hospitalizations and improvement in symptoms, a recent large multicenter trial only showed modest benefits in reducing hospitalization, necessitating the updated systematic review. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, searching the MEDLINE and EMBASE database until January 9, 2023. Outcomes included total heart failure hospitalizations, first heart failure hospitalization, six-minute walk test (6MWT) distance, and incidence of infection. There were 13 studies with 3410 participants (1,790 with IV iron). Pooled analysis that reported the incidence of cardiovascular death showed that patients with IV iron did not have significantly lower odds of cardiovascular death or first heart failure hospitalization. In contrast, those who received IV iron had significantly lower total heart failure hospitalization (pooled odds ratio (OR) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44-0.90, I2 59.0%, P = .017) and a composite of cardiovascular death and first heart failure hospitalization (pooled OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.47-0.64, I2 0%, P = .656). While the efficacy is modest, IV iron therapy could be associated with reduced hospitalization for heart failure without significant adverse events.

Iron Deficiency in Heart Failure: A Korea-Oriented Review

Iron deficiency (ID) occurs at high frequency across the spectrum of heart failure (HF), with HF severity and race being potentially important predictors for its development. ID, irrespective of anaemia status, leads to poor outcomes in patients with HF, including exacerbated reduction in exercise capacity, poor quality of life (QoL) and increased risk of HF hospitalisation. As ID has a large public health and economic burden in Asia, and patients hospitalised with acute HF in the Asia Pacific vs. other regions commonly present with more severe clinical symptoms, there is a clear need to identify and treat ID promptly in Asian patients with HF. The biomarkers serum ferritin and transferrin saturation are used for ID diagnosis, and periodic screening is recommended in all patients with HF. The intravenous iron treatments, ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) and ferric derisomaltose, have demonstrated efficacy and tolerability in patients with acute or chronic HF and ID, with FCM shown to be cost-effective (and in some cases cost-saving). Meta-analyses support the likely benefits of intravenous FCM for improving QoL and reducing HF hospitalisation, without reducing mortality risk in patients with HF and ID. Accordingly, European Society of Cardiology guidelines recommend considering intravenous FCM for patients with symptomatic HF with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤50% who were recently hospitalised for HF and have ID. Although analyses of Asian patients with HF and ID are limited, the effects of intravenous iron would be expected to be similar to that in White populations; further clarifying studies may be of interest.

Meta-Analysis of Efficacy and Safety of Intravenous Iron in Patients With Iron Deficiency and Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

Iron deficiency is an independent risk factor for heart failure (HF) exacerbation. We aim to study the safety and efficacy of intravenous (IV) iron therapy in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). A literature search was conducted on MEDLINE (Embase and PubMed) using a systematic search strategy by PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) until October 2022. CRAN-R software (The R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) was used for statistical analysis. The quality assessment was performed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We included 12 studies with a total of 4,376 patients (IV iron n = 1,985 [45.3%]; standard of care [SOC] n = 2,391 [54.6%]). The mean age was 70.37 ± 8.14 years and 71.75 ± 7.01 years in the IV iron and SOC groups, respectively. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74 to 1.04, p <0.15). However, HF readmissions were significantly lower in the IV iron group (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.96, p = 0.026). Non-HF cardiac readmissions were not significantly different between the IV iron and SOC groups (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.02, p = 0.12). In terms of safety, there was a similar rate of infection-related adverse events in both arms (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.74 to 1, p = 0.05). IV iron therapy in patients with HFrEF is safe and shows a significant reduction in HF hospitalizations compared with SOC. There was no difference in the rate of infection-related adverse events. The changing landscape of HFrEF pharmacotherapy in the last decade may warrant a re-demonstration of the benefit of IV iron with current SOC. The cost-effectiveness of IV iron use also needs further study.

Treating Iron Deficiency (ID) Anemia in Heart Failure (HF) Patients with IV Iron: A Meta-Analysis

Findings on the effects of iron on heart failure (HF) hospitalizations and mortality among patients with iron deficiency (ID) and HF remain conflicting across different studies. We performed a meta-analysis of clinical trials assessing the clinical, hematic and cardiovascular benefits of treating ID in HF patients. We completed a systematic search for studies comparing IV iron to placebo in HF patients with ID. The primary outcomes were rates of HF hospitalization and all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included change in hematic values, New York Heart Association (NYHA) class and ejection fraction. We applied a random-effects model with planned sensitivity analyses of studies with skewed effect sizes. Nine studies were included with a total of 2,261 patients. Analysis revealed that treatment of HF patients with IV iron replacement significantly reduced the odds of HF hospitalization (odds ratio (OR): 0.44; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.24 to 0.78; p=0.005, I2=67%),) but did not significantly impact all-cause mortality compared to placebo (OR: 0.89; 95%, CI: 0.67 to 1.19; p=0.44, I2: 0%). Analysis showed that IV iron treatment group had significantly higher serum ferritin, transferrin saturation and hemoglobin (Hb) levels. They also had lower NYHA class -1.90 (95% CI (-2.91 to -0.89); p<0.001, I2:89%) with higher ejection fraction 0.50 (95% CI (0.09 to 0.90) p=0.016, I2:86%). Treatment with IV iron in HF patients with ID is associated with a significant reduction of HF hospitalization but no effects on all-cause mortality. There were also significant increases in hematic values and ejection fraction with a reduction in NYHA class.

Intravenous iron therapy among patients with heart failure and iron deficiency: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating the role of intravenous (IV) iron administration in patients with heart failure (HF) and iron deficiency (ID) have yielded inconsistent results.

Methods

Electronic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and OVID databases was performed until November 2022 for RCTs that evaluated the role of IV iron administration in patients with HF and ID. The main study outcomes were the composite of HF hospitalization or cardiovascular mortality, and individual outcome of HF hospitalization. Summary estimates were evaluated using random effects model.

Results

The final analysis included 12 RCTs with 3,492 patients (1,831 patients in the IV iron group and 1,661 patients in the control group). The mean follow-up was 8.3 months. IV iron was associated with a lower incidence in the composite of HF hospitalization or cardiovascular mortality (31.9% vs. 45.3%; relative risk [RR] 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59-0.88) and individual outcome of HF hospitalization (28.4% vs. 42.2; RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.57-0.85). There was no significant difference between both groups in cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.75-1.04) and all-cause mortality (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.83-1.09). IV iron was associated with lower New York Heart Association class and higher left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Meta-regression analyses showed no effect modification for the main outcomes based on age, hemoglobin level, ferritin level or LVEF.

Conclusion

Among patients with HF and ID, IV iron administration was associated with reduction in the composite of HF hospitalization or cardiovascular mortality and driven by a reduction in HF hospitalization.

Intravenous iron in patients with heart failure and iron deficiency: an updated meta-analysis

AIMS

For patients with heart failure (HF) and iron deficiency (ID), randomized trials suggest that intravenous (IV) iron reduces hospitalizations for heart failure (HHF), but uncertainty exists about the effects in subgroups and the impact on mortality. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized trials investigating the effect of IV iron on clinical outcomes in patients with HF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We identified randomized trials published between 1 January 2000 and 5 November 2022 investigating the effect of IV iron versus standard care/placebo in patients with HF and ID in any clinical setting, regardless of HF phenotype. Trials of oral iron or not in English were not included. The main outcomes of interest were a composite of HHF and cardiovascular death (CVD), on HHF alone and on cardiovascular and all-cause mortality. Ten trials were identified with 3373 participants, of whom 1759 were assigned to IV iron. IV iron reduced the composite of recurrent HHF and CVD (rate ratio 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-0.93; p < 0.01) and first HHF or CVD (odds ratio [OR] 0.72, 95% CI 0.53-0.99; p = 0.04). Effects on cardiovascular (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.70-1.05; p = 0.14) and all-cause mortality (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.78-1.12; p = 0.47) were inconclusive. Results were similar in analyses confined to the first year of follow-up, which was less disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Subgroup analyses found little evidence of heterogeneity for the effect on the primary endpoint, although patients with transferrin saturation <20% (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.49-0.92) may have benefited more than those with values ≥20% (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.74-1.30) (heterogeneity p = 0.07).

CONCLUSION

In patients with HF and ID, this meta-analysis suggests that IV iron reduces the risk of HHF but whether this is associated with a reduction in cardiovascular or all-cause mortality remains inconclusive.

Effects of Intravenous Iron Replacement Therapy on Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients with Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

(1) Background: Iron deficiency (ID) is an important adverse prognostic marker in patients with heart failure (HF); however, it is unclear whether intravenous iron replacement reduces cardiovascular mortality in this patient group. Here, we estimate the effect of intravenous iron replacement therapy on hard clinical outcomes following the publication of IRONMAN, the largest trial in this field. (2) Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, prospectively registered with PROSPERO and reported according to PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed and Embase for randomized controlled trials investigating intravenous iron replacement in patients with HF and co-existing ID. The primary outcome was cardiovascular mortality and secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, hospitalizations for HF and a combination of the primary outcome and hospitalizations for HF. (3) Results: A total of 1671 items were identified and after removal of duplicates we screened titles and abstracts of 1202 records. Some 31 studies were identified for full-text review and 12 studies were included in the final review. The odds ratio (OR) for cardiovascular death using a random effects model was 0.85 (95% CI 0.69 to 1.04) and for all-cause mortality it was 0.83 (95% CI 0.59 to 1.15). There was a significant reduction in hospitalizations for HF (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.69) and the combination of hospitalizations for HF and cardiovascular death (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.5 to 0.85). (4) Conclusions: This review supports the use of IV iron replacement reducing hospitalization rates for HF, however more research is required to determine the effect on cardiovascular mortality and to identify the patient population most likely to benefit.

Intravenous iron infusion in patients with heart failure: a systematic review and study-level meta-analysis

AIMS

There is considerable variability in the effect of intravenous iron on hard cardiovascular (CV)-related outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We use a meta-analytic approach to analyse data from existing RCTs to derive a more robust estimate of the effect size of intravenous iron infusion on CV-related outcomes in patients with HF.

METHOD AND RESULTS

PubMed/Medline was searched using the following terms: ('intravenous' and 'iron' and 'heart failure') from inception till 6 November 2022 for RCTs comparing intravenous iron infusion with placebo or standard of care in patients with HF and iron deficiency. Outcomes were the composite of CV mortality and first hospitalization for HF; all-cause mortality; CV mortality; first hospitalization for HF; and total hospitalizations for HF. Random effects risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Ten RCTs with a total of 3438 patients were included. Intravenous iron resulted in a significant reduction in the composite of CV mortality and first hospitalization for HF [RR 0.0.85; 95% CI (0.77, 0.95)], first hospitalization for HF [RR 0.82; 95% CI (0.67, 0.99)], and total hospitalizations for HF [RR 0.74; 95% CI (0.60, 0.91)] but no statistically significant difference in all-cause mortality [RR 0.95; 95% CI. (0.83, 1.09)] or CV mortality [OR 0.89; 95% CI (0.75, 1.05)].

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous iron infusion in patients with HF reduces the composite risk of first hospitalization for HF and CV mortality as well as the risks of first and recurrent hospitalizations for HF, with no effect on all-cause mortality or CV mortality alone.

Management of Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is a complex and progressive clinical condition characterized by dyspnea and functional impairment. HFrEF has a high burden of mortality and readmission rate making it one of the most significant public health challenges. Basic treatment strategies include diuretics for symptom relief and use of quadruple therapy (Angiotensin receptor blocker/neprilysin inhibitors, evidence-based beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors) for reduction in hospitalizations, all-cause mortality, and cardiovascular mortality. Despite compelling evidence of clinical benefit, guideline directed medical therapy is vastly underutilized in the real-world clinical practice. Other medications such as intravenous iron, ivabradine, hydralazine/nitrates and vericiguat may also have a role in certain subgroup of HFrEF patients. Specific groups of patients with HFrEF may also be candidates for various device therapies such as implanted cardioverter defibrillators, cardiac resynchronization therapy and trans catheter mitral valve repair. This review provides a comprehensive overview of drug and device management approaches for patients with HFrEF, recommendations for initiation and titrations of therapies, and challenges associated with guideline directed medical therapy in the management of patients with HFrEF (Graphical abstract).

Iron deficiency and cardiovascular disease

Iron deficiency (ID) is common in patients with cardiovascular disease. Up to 60% of patients with coronary artery disease, and an even higher proportion of those with heart failure (HF) or pulmonary hypertension have ID; the evidence for cerebrovascular disease, aortic stenosis and atrial fibrillation is less robust. The prevalence of ID increases with the severity of cardiac and renal dysfunction and is probably more common amongst women. Insufficient dietary iron, reduced iron absorption due to increases in hepcidin secondary to the low-grade inflammation associated with atherosclerosis and congestion or reduced gastric acidity, and increased blood loss due to anti-thrombotic therapy or gastro-intestinal or renal disease may all cause ID. For older people in the general population and patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), both anaemia and ID are associated with a poor prognosis; each may confer independent risk. There is growing evidence that ID is an important therapeutic target for patients with HFrEF, even if they do not have anaemia. Whether this is also true for other HF phenotypes or patients with cardiovascular disease in general is currently unknown. Randomized trials showed that intravenous ferric carboxymaltose improved symptoms, health-related quality of life and exercise capacity and reduced hospitalizations for worsening HF in patients with HFrEF and mildly reduced ejection fraction (<50%). Since ID is easy to treat and is effective for patients with HFrEF, such patients should be investigated for possible ID. This recommendation may extend to other populations in the light of evidence from future trials.

Management of Iron Deficiency in Heart Failure: A Review of Evidence

ABSTRACT

Iron deficiency is common in patients with heart failure and has been associated with worse outcomes, including increases in mortality, disease progression, and hospitalizations. As such, several studies have evaluated the role of iron supplementation in mitigating these risks. Evidence for the role of intravenous iron in improving exercise capacity, quality of life, and hospitalizations is promising, although the benefits of oral iron remain less clear. This review will evaluate the literature surrounding iron supplementation in heart failure and provide practical recommendations for its management.

Why Iron Deficiency in Acute Heart Failure Should Be Treated: A Real-World Clinical Practice Study

Background. This study aims to determine whether the administration of ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) in patients with acute heart failure (AHF) and iron deficiency (ID) improves morbidity and mortality. Methods. We studied 890 consecutive patients admitted for AHF. Patients were divided into six groups according to reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF) or preserved (HFpEF), presence of ID, and administration of FCM. Emergency visits, re-admissions, and all-cause mortality were assessed at 6 months. Results. The overall prevalence of ID was 91.2%. In the HFrEF group, no differences were found in isolated events when patients with untreated vs. treated ID were compared, while differences were found in the combined event rate (p = 0.049). The risk calculation showed an absolute risk reduction (ARR) of 10% and relative risk reduction (RRR) of 18%. In HFpEF there was a positive trend with regard to the combined event (p = 0.107), with an ARR of 9% and an RRR of 15%. The number of patients we needed to treat to prevent a combined event was 10.5 in HFrEF and 10.8 in HFpEF. Conclusions. FCM in AHF reduced the combined event rate of emergency visits, re-admission, and all-cause death at 6 months in HF with left ventricular ejection fraction <50%, and showed a positive trend in HFpEF.

Cost-effective heart failure management: Meta-analysis of IV iron therapy in iron-deficient heart failure patients

Background

Iron deficiency is an important co-morbidity in heart failure patients. IV iron may improve quality of life and reduce heart failure hospitalizations, but the results of the clinical trials are varied.

Objective

The purpose of this meta-analysis is to assess not only the effect of IV iron in iron-deficient heart failure patients but also the quality of evidence.

Methods

PubMed and Cochrane databases were searched from inception to Oct 2021. Randomized clinical trials in iron-deficient, heart failure patients assessing the effect of IV iron versus placebo and with at least 12 weeks of follow-up were included. The outcomes were pooled and analyzed using a random-effect model. The quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.

Results

Seven studies were included in our meta-analysis. IV iron was associated with a 13.8 % decreased risk of HF hospitalizations (OR 0.59; 0.35-0.98, p = 0.040, GRADE = Low). All-cause mortality and CV mortality were not different between IV iron and placebo. But a composite outcome of HF hospitalizations or CV mortality was 17.5 % lower with IV iron (OR 0.51;0.31-0.84, p = 0.008, GRADE = Moderate).

Conclusions

Among heart failure patients with iron deficiency, IV iron is associated with lower HF hospitalizations. It is a relatively inexpensive regimen that can potentially improve quality of life and decrease healthcare expenditure.

Intravenous Iron-Carbohydrate Nanoparticles and Their Similars. What Do We Choose?

Anemia is highly prevalent worldwide and iron deficiency is the first cause. Iron deficiency has not only hematologic effects but also non-hematologic effects - immune, metabolic, cognitive dysfunctions and poor cardiovascular and renal outcomes - which generally precede anemia. Iron therapy not only significantly improves the hematological parameters but also has non-hematologic benefits. Given that its efficacy and safety has been revealed over the years, intravenous (IV) iron therapy is frequently used. Intravenous iron products are nanoparticles largely consisting in an iron core surrounded by a carbohydrate shell. They are classified as non-biological complex molecules, being different from small commonly used molecules, with properties and biological behavior impossible to be completely characterized only by physicochemical analysis. To date, there is no appropriate regulatory evaluation system for these medicines and several follow-on versions of the IV iron originators (e.g., iron sucrose) were approved using the same regulatory pathway as for generics. Because of this vulnerability in an adequate pathway for approval, both non-clinical and clinical studies suggested no therapeutic equivalence (thus no interchangeability) between iron sucrose originator (Venofer®), and iron sucrose similars. In this review we aimed to underline the importance of intravenous iron therapy as well as raise awareness regarding the differences between nanomedicines and their intended similar but not identical copies. The potential implications of these differences impact patients (safety, efficacy) but also the medical system (higher costs).

Chronic Heart Failure: Clinical Implications of Iron Homeostasis Disturbances Revisited

Iron deficiency is prevalent in chronic heart failure (CHF) patients. Nonetheless, the diagnosis is often overlooked and, often, the treatment is commenced just when overt anemia has ensued. Therefore, a better appreciation of this disease is needed, and all seasoned cardiologists should know how to approach CHF patients with iron deficiency correctly, as mandated by clinical practice guidelines. In this comprehensive review, we describe iron homeostasis, the pathophysiologic changes of iron homeostasis, and the clinical implications of iron deficiency on CHF patients. In addition, we delineate the evolution of clinical trials, ranging from the inception to the ongoing clinical trials of iron deficiency treatment in CHF patients. Iron deficiency contributes to the worse clinical outcome of the patients. Numerous studies have reported the clinical benefit of iron supplementation, particularly in intravenous preparation, in heart failure patients regarding symptoms, functional capacity, and quality of life (QoL) improvement. Therefore, the current guidelines recommend routine screening of iron status in all newly diagnosed heart failure patients. Eventually, intravenous iron replacement is recommended for symptomatic heart failure patients with iron deficiency, irrespective of anemia.

Iron Deficiency in Heart Failure Patients and Benefits of Iron Replacement on Clinical Outcomes Including Comorbid Depression

BACKGROUND

Iron deficiency and depression are prevalent comorbidities in the setting of heart failure. Both conditions are associated with poorer patient outcomes including mortality, hospitalisation and quality of life. Iron replacement has come to the fore as a means to improve patient outcomes. This review aims to assess the current literature regarding the benefits of iron supplementation for iron deficient heart failure patients including potential improvements in depression.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The databases of Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane library of systematic reviews, Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for studies with relevant patient outcomes. A total of 18 studies were identified and included in the review. In essence, intravenous iron was found to be beneficial for New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification, quality of life measures, heart failure (HF) hospitalisation and aerobic capacity. Oral iron however was not beneficial. Research surrounding intravenous iron improving cardiovascular mortality, time to first hospitalisation and changes in depression status is lacking.

CONCLUSIONS

Further research is required to elucidate the advantages of intravenous iron for iron deficient heart failure patients on their depression, mortality and first admission to hospital. Consensus is required regarding which form of iron and the treatment regime that should be adopted for future clinical guidelines.

Risk of Infection Associated With Administration of Intravenous Iron: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Intravenous iron is recommended by many clinical guidelines based largely on its effectiveness in reducing anemia. However, the association with important safety outcomes, such as infection, remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the risk of infection associated with intravenous iron compared with oral iron or no iron.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) from 1966 to January 31, 2021. Ongoing trials were sought from ClinicalTrials.gov, CENTRAL, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Search Registry Platform.

STUDY SELECTION

Pairs of reviewers identified RCTs that compared intravenous iron with oral iron or no iron across all patient populations, excluding healthy volunteers. Nonrandomized studies published since January 1, 2007, were also included. A total of 312 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data extraction and risk of bias assessments were performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) and Cochrane recommendations, and the quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. Two reviewers extracted data independently. A random-effects model was used to synthesize data from RCTs. A narrative synthesis was performed to characterize the reporting of infection.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was risk of infection. Secondary outcomes included mortality, hospital length of stay, and changes in hemoglobin and red blood cell transfusion requirements. Measures of association were reported as risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences.

RESULTS

A total of 154 RCTs (32 920 participants) were included in the main analysis. Intravenous iron was associated with an increased risk of infection when compared with oral iron or no iron (RR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.04-1.31; I2 = 37%; moderate certainty of evidence). Intravenous iron also was associated with an increase in hemoglobin (mean difference, 0.57 g/dL; 95% CI, 0.50-0.64 g/dL; I2 = 94%) and a reduction in the risk of requiring a red blood cell transfusion (RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.76-0.89; I2 = 15%) when compared with oral iron or no iron. There was no evidence of an effect on mortality or hospital length of stay.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this large systematic review and meta-analysis, intravenous iron was associated with an increased risk of infection. Well-designed studies, using standardized definitions of infection, are required to understand the balance between this risk and the potential benefits.

Iron replacement therapy in heart failure: a literature review

Background

Heart failure (HF) is a major global challenge, emphasised by its designation as the leading cause of hospitalisation in those aged 65 and above. Approximately half of all patients with HF have concurrent iron deficiency (ID) regardless of anaemia status. In HF, iron deficiency is independently associated with higher rates of hospitalisation and death, lower exercise capacity, and poorer quality-of-life than in patients without iron deficiency. With such consequences, several studies have investigated whether correcting ID can improve HF outcomes.

Main body.

As of 1st June 2021, seven randomised controlled trials have explored the use of intravenous (IV) iron in patients with HF and ID, along with various meta-analyses including an individual patient data meta-analysis, all of which are discussed in this review. IV iron was well tolerated, with a comparable frequency of adverse events to placebo. In the context of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), IV iron reduces the risk of hospitalisation for HF, and improves New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class, quality-of-life, and exercise capacity (as measured by 6-min walk test (6MWT)) distance and peak oxygen consumption. However, the effect of IV iron on mortality is uncertain. Finally, the evidence for IV iron in patients with acute decompensated heart failure, or heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is limited.

Conclusions

IV iron improves some outcomes in patients with HFrEF and ID. Patients with HFrEF should be screened for ID, defined as ferritin < 100 µg/L, or ferritin 100–299 µg/L if transferrin saturation < 20%. If ID is found, IV iron should be considered, although causes of ID other than HF must not be overlooked.

Intravenous iron for heart failure with evidence of iron deficiency: a meta-analysis of randomised trials

BACKGROUND

The recent AFFIRM-AHF trial assessing the effect of intravenous (IV) iron on outcomes in patients hospitalised with worsening heart failure who had iron deficiency (ID) narrowly missed its primary efficacy endpoint of recurrent hospitalisations for heart failure (HHF) or cardiovascular (CV) death. We conducted a meta-analysis to determine whether these results were consistent with previous trials.

METHODS

We searched for randomised trials of patients with heart failure investigating the effect of IV iron vs placebo/control groups that reported HHF and CV mortality from 1st January 2000 to 5th December 2020. Seven trials were identified and included in this analysis. A fixed effect model was applied to assess the effects of IV iron on the composite of first HHF or CV mortality and individual components of these.

RESULTS

Altogether, 2,166 patients were included (n = 1168 assigned to IV iron; n = 998 assigned to control). IV iron reduced the composite of HHF or CV mortality substantially [OR 0.73; (95% confidence interval 0.59-0.90); p = 0.003]. Outcomes were consistent for the pooled trials prior to AFFIRM-AHF. Whereas first HHF were reduced substantially [OR 0.67; (0.54-0.85); p = 0.0007], the effect on CV mortality was uncertain but appeared smaller [OR 0.89; (0.66-1.21); p = 0.47].

CONCLUSION

Administration of IV iron to patients with heart failure and ID reduces the risk of the composite outcome of first heart failure hospitalisation or cardiovascular mortality, but this outcome may be driven predominantly by an effect on HHF. At least three more substantial trials of intravenous iron are underway.

Intravenous iron for heart failure with evidence of iron deficiency: a meta-analysis of randomised trials

Background

The recent AFFIRM-AHF trial assessing the effect of intravenous (IV) iron on outcomes in patients hospitalised with worsening heart failure who had iron deficiency (ID) narrowly missed its primary efficacy endpoint of recurrent hospitalisations for heart failure (HHF) or cardiovascular (CV) death. We conducted a meta-analysis to determine whether these results were consistent with previous trials.

Methods

We searched for randomised trials of patients with heart failure investigating the effect of IV iron vs placebo/control groups that reported HHF and CV mortality from 1st January 2000 to 5th December 2020. Seven trials were identified and included in this analysis. A fixed effect model was applied to assess the effects of IV iron on the composite of first HHF or CV mortality and individual components of these.

Results

Altogether, 2,166 patients were included (n = 1168 assigned to IV iron; n = 998 assigned to control). IV iron reduced the composite of HHF or CV mortality substantially [OR 0.73; (95% confidence interval 0.59–0.90); p = 0.003]. Outcomes were consistent for the pooled trials prior to AFFIRM-AHF. Whereas first HHF were reduced substantially [OR 0.67; (0.54–0.85); p = 0.0007], the effect on CV mortality was uncertain but appeared smaller [OR 0.89; (0.66–1.21); p = 0.47].

Conclusion

Administration of IV iron to patients with heart failure and ID reduces the risk of the composite outcome of first heart failure hospitalisation or cardiovascular mortality, but this outcome may be driven predominantly by an effect on HHF. At least three more substantial trials of intravenous iron are underway.

Graphic abstract

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00392-021-01837-8.

Pharmacotherapy for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and health-related quality of life: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

The aim of this study was to synthesize the evidence on the effect of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) pharmacotherapy on health-related quality of life (HRQoL).

METHODS AND RESULTS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform in June 2020. Randomized placebo-controlled trials evaluating contemporary HFrEF pharmacotherapy and reporting HRQoL as an outcome were included. Two reviewers independently assessed studies for eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and GRADE certainty of evidence. The primary outcome was HRQoL at last available follow-up analysed using a random-effects model. We included 37 studies from 5770 identified articles. Risk of bias was low in 10 trials and high/unclear in 27 trials. High certainty evidence from meta-analyses demonstrated improved HRQoL over placebo with sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors [standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08-0.23] and intravenous iron (SMD 0.52, 95% CI 0.04-1.00). Furthermore, high certainty evidence from ≥1 landmark trial further supported improved HRQoL with angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) (SMD 0.09, 95% CI 0.02-0.17), ivabradine (SMD 0.14, 95% CI 0.04-0.23), hydralazine-nitrate (SMD 0.24, 95% CI 0.04-0.44) vs. placebo, and for angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) compared with an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor (SMD 0.09, 95% CI 0.02-0.17). Findings were inconclusive for ACE inhibitors, beta-blockers, digoxin, and oral iron based on low-to-moderate certainty evidence.

CONCLUSION

ARBs, ARNIs, SGLT2 inhibitors, ivabradine, hydralazine-nitrate, and intravenous iron improved HRQoL in patients with HFrEF. These findings can be incorporated into discussions with patients to enable shared decision-making.

Efficacy and safety of iron therapy in patients with chronic heart failure and iron deficiency: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on 15 randomised controlled trials

Trials studying iron administration in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) and iron deficiency (ID) have sprung up these years but the results remain inconsistent. The aim of this meta-analysis was to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy and safety of iron therapy in patients with CHF and ID. A literature search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, OVID and Web of Science up to 31 July 2019 to search for randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing iron therapy with placebo in CHF with ID, regardless of presence of anaemia. Published studies reporting data of any of the following outcomes were included: all-cause death, cardiovascular hospitalisation, adverse events, New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), N-terminal pro b-type natriuretic peptide, peak oxygen consumption, 6 min walking test (6MWT) distance and quality of life (QoL) parameters. 15 RCTs with a total of 1627 patients (911 in iron therapy and 716 in control) were included. Iron therapy was demonstrated to reduce the risk of cardiovascular hospitalisation (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.99, p=0.049), but was ineffective in reducing all-cause death (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.06, p=0.078) or cardiovascular death (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.63, p=0.540). Iron therapy resulted in a reduction in NYHA class (mean difference (MD) -0.73, 95% CI -0.99 to -0.47, p<0.001), an increase in LVEF (MD +4.35, 95% CI 0.69 to 8.00, p=0.020), 6MWT distance (MD +35.44, 95% CI 11.55 to 59.33, p=0.004) and an improvement in QoL: EQ-5D score (MD +4.07, 95% CI 0.84 to 7.31, p=0.014); Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire score (MD -19.47, 95% CI -23.36 to -15.59, p<0.001) and Patients Global Assessment (PGA) scale (MD 0.71, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.10, p<0.001). There was no significant difference in adverse events or serious adverse events between iron treatment group and control group. Iron therapy reduces cardiovascular hospitalisation in patients with CHF with ID, and additionally improves cardiac function, exercise capacity and QoL in patients with CHF with ID and anaemia, without an increase of adverse events.

Intravenous iron therapy for non-anaemic, iron-deficient adults

BACKGROUND

Iron deficiency is one of the most common nutritional deficiencies, and has a number of physiological manifestations. Early, or non-anaemic iron deficiency can result in fatigue and diminished exercise capacity. Oral iron preparations have a high incidence of intolerable side effects, and are ineffective in certain forms of iron deficiency. Consequently, intravenous iron preparations are increasingly used in the treatment of non-anaemic iron deficiency. The newer, more stable iron preparations in particular purport to have a lower incidence of side effects, and are now used across a range of different patient populations.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of intravenous iron therapy in the treatment of adults with non-anaemic iron deficiency.

SEARCH METHODS

On 18 October 2019 we electronically searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two further databases and two trials registries 2019. We handsearched the references of full-text extracted studies, and contacted relevant study authors for additional data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials that compared any intravenous iron preparation to placebo in adults. We excluded other forms of comparison such as oral iron versus placebo, intramuscular iron versus placebo, or intravenous iron studies where other iron preparations were used as the comparator. We also excluded studies involving erythropoietin therapy or obstetric populations.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors screened references for eligibility, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We resolved differences in opinion through discussion and consensus, and where necessary, involved a third review author to adjudicate disputes. We contacted study authors to request additional data where appropriate. The primary outcome measures were haemoglobin concentration at the end of follow-up, and quality-of-life scores at end of follow-up. Secondary outcome measures were serum ferritin, peak oxygen consumption (as measured by cardiopulmonary exercise testing), adverse effects (graded as mild to moderate and severe) and bacterial infection. We pooled data for continuous outcomes, which we then reported as mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We reported quality-of-life metrics as standardised mean difference (SMD), and then converted them back into a more familiar measure, the Piper Fatigue Scale. We analysed dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RRs). Given an expected degree of heterogeneity, we used a random-effects model for all outcomes. We performed the analysis with the software package Review Manager 5.

MAIN RESULTS

This review includes 11 studies with 1074 participants. Outcome metrics for which data were available (haemoglobin concentration, quality-of-life scores, serum ferritin, peak oxygen consumption and mild to moderate adverse effects) were similar across the included studies. The incidence of severe adverse events across all studies was zero. None of the studies measured bacterial infection as a specific outcome metric. Substantial heterogeneity influenced the results of the meta-analysis, arising from differing patient populations, definitions of iron deficiency, iron preparations and dosing regimens, and time to end of follow-up. Consequently, many outcomes are reported with small group sizes and wide confidence intervals, with a subsequent downgrading in the quality of evidence. The level of bias in many included studies was high, further reducing confidence in the robustness of the results. We found that intravenous iron therapy may lead to a small increase in haemoglobin concentration of limited clinical significance compared to placebo (MD 3.04 g/L, 95% CI 0.65 to 5.42; I2 = 42%; 8 studies, 548 participants; low-quality evidence). Quality-of-life scores (Piper Fatigue Scale MD 0.73, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.18; I2 = 0%; studies = 3) and peak oxygen consumption (MD 2.77 mL/kg/min, 95% CI -0.89 to 6.43; I2 = 36%; 2 studies, 32 participants) were associated with very low-quality evidence, and we remain uncertain about the role of intravenous iron for these metrics. We were unable to present pooled estimates for the outcomes of serum ferritin at the end of follow-up or mild to moderate adverse effects due to extreme statistical heterogeneity. Ultimately, despite the results of the meta-analysis, the low- or very low-quality evidence for all outcomes precludes any meaningful interpretation of results beyond suggesting that further research is needed. We performed a Trial Sequential Analysis for all major outcomes, none of which could be said to have reached a necessary effect size.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence is insufficient to show benefit of intravenous iron preparations for the treatment of non-anaemic iron deficiency across a variety of patient populations, beyond stating that it may result in a small, clinically insignificant increase in haemoglobin concentration. However, the certainty for even this outcome remains limited. Robust data for the effectiveness of intravenous iron for non-anaemic iron deficiency is still lacking, and larger studies are required to assess the effect of this therapy on laboratory, patient-centric, and adverse-effect outcomes.

Therapeutic Advances in the Management of Acute Decompensated Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

Acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) is the most common presenting phenotype of acute heart failure (AHF). The main goal of this article was to review the contemporary management strategies in these patients and to describe how future clinical trials may address unmet clinical needs.

AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY

The current pathophysiologic understanding of AHF is incomplete. The guideline recommendations for the management of ADHF are based only on algorithms provided by expert consensus guided by blood pressure and/or clinical signs of congestion or hypoperfusion. The lack of adequately conducted trials to address the unmet need for evidence therapy in AHF has not yet been surpassed, and at this time, there is no evidence-based strategy for targeted decongestive therapy to improve outcomes. The precise time point for initiation of guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMTs), as respect to moment of decompensation, is also unknown.

DATA SOURCES

The available data informing current management of patients with ADHF are based on randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and administrative databases.

THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES

A major step-forward in the management of ADHF patients is recognizing congestion, either clinical or hemodynamic, as a major trigger for heart failure (HF) hospitalization and most important target for therapy. However, a strategy based exclusively on congestion is not sufficient, and at present, comprehensive assessment during hospitalization of cardiac and noncardiovascular substrate with identification of potential therapeutic targets represents "the corner-stone" of ADHF management. In the last years, substantial data have emerged to support the continuation of GDMTs during hospitalization for HF decompensation. Recently, several clinical trials raised hypothesis of "moving to the left" concept that argues for very early implementation of GDMTs as potential strategy to improve outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The management of ADHF is still based on expert consensus documents. Further research is required to identify novel therapeutic targets, to establish the precise time point to initiate GDMTs, and to identify patients at risk of recurrent hospitalization.

Iron deficiency in chronic and acute heart failure: A contemporary review on intertwined conditions

Iron Deficiency (ID) is increasingly recognized as a prevalent comorbid condition in Heart Failure (HF). Despite this, the pathophysiological mechanisms for progressive ID in either chronic or acute HF are still poorly understood. Beyond the traditional factors for iron deficit in the general population, we ought to review the specificities of such paucity in the HF patient, particularly focusing on the interplay between heightened inflammation, overactivity of the sympathetic nervous system and the so-called cardio-renal-anaemia-ID syndrome. Currently, ID constitutes not only an independent prognostic marker but also a novel safe therapeutic target. Particularly, in selected stable HF patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, intravenous (IV) iron improves symptomatic burden and reduces hospitalizations due to worsening HF. On this topic, the main trials of IV iron with either iron sucrose (Toblli et al., FERRIC-HF and IRON-HF) or ferric carboxymaltose (FAIR-HF, CONFIRM-HF and EFFECT-HF) will be summarized and discussed. Finally, we debate the gaps in knowledge of ID in special populations, namely the unreliability of routine plasmatic surrogate markers to assess iron status in acute and advanced HF, the challenging patient with both HF and Chronic Kidney Disease, as well as efficacy and safety concerns in these settings and the potential role of iron correction in cardiac resynchronization therapy candidates.

Single-dose intravenous iron in Southeast Asian heart failure patients: A pilot randomized placebo-controlled study (PRACTICE-ASIA-HF)

AIMS

Iron deficiency is highly prevalent in Southeast Asians with heart failure (HF) and associated with worse outcomes. This trial aimed to assess the effect of intravenous iron in Southeast Asians hospitalized with decompensated HF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Fifty patients hospitalized for acute decompensated HF, regardless of ejection fraction, with iron deficiency (defined as serum ferritin <300 ng/mL if transferrin saturation is <20%) were randomized to receive either one dose of intravenous ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) 1000 mg or placebo (0.9% saline) following HF stabilization and before discharge in two Singapore tertiary centres. The primary endpoint was difference in 6-min walk test (6MWT) distance over 12 weeks, while secondary endpoints were quality of life assessed using validated Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Improvement in 6MWT distance at Week 12 was observed in both FCM and placebo groups (from 252 ± 123 to 334 ± 128 m and from 243 ± 67 to 301 ± 83 m, respectively). Unadjusted analysis showed 6MWT distance for FCM exceeded that for placebo, but adjustment for baseline covariates and time attenuated this effect {adjusted mean difference between groups: 0.88 m [95% confidence interval (CI) -30.2 to 32.0, P = 0.956]}. KCCQ overall summary and VAS were similar in both groups [adjusted mean difference: KCCQ -1.48 (95% CI -8.27 to 5.31, P = 0.670) and VAS 0.26 (95% CI -0.33 to 0.86, P = 0.386)]. FCM was well tolerated with no serious treatment-related adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous FCM administered pre-discharge in Southeast Asians hospitalized with decompensated HF is clinically feasible. Changes in 6MWT distance should be measured beyond Week 12 to account for background therapy effects.