Usefulness of Rivaroxaban for Secondary Prevention of Acute Coronary Syndrome in Patients With History of Congestive Heart Failure (from the ATLAS-ACS-2 TIMI-51 Trial)

Prognoses and risk stratification of thrombus-associated events in heart failure patients without atrial fibrillation

AIMS

We aim to assess the risk of thrombus-associated events (TAE) in patients with heart failure (HF) without atrial fibrillation (AF) and develop an effective scoring system for a risk stratification model.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This retrospective study included 450 patients (median age 64.0 years, interquartile range [55.0, 75.0]; 31.6% women) hospitalized for HF without AF and atrial flutter, but with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 55% and New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class of III-IV. A median follow-up of 47 months was conducted. In the present study, TAE during follow-up was independently associated with both all-cause death [hazard ratio (HR) 1.756, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.324-2.328, P < 0.001] and readmission for HF (HR 1.574, 95% CI 1.122-2.208, P = 0.009) after adjustment for covariates. Hypertension (HR 1.573, 95% CI 1.018-2.429, P = 0.041), atrial arrhythmia excluding AF (AAexAF) (HR 2.041, 95% CI 1.066-3.908, P = 0.031), previous ischaemic stroke (HR 2.469, 95% CI 1.576-3.869, P < 0.001), and vascular disease (HR 1.658, 95% CI 1.074-2.562, P = 0.023) were independently associated with TAE. Age (HR 1.021, 95% CI 1.008-1.033, P = 0.001), previous ischaemic stroke (HR 1.685, 95% CI 1.248-2.274, P = 0.001), LVEF ([10, 25] vs. [40, 55]) HR 1.925, 95% CI 1.311-2.826, P = 0.001; (25, 40] vs. (40, 55] HR 1.084, 95% CI 0.825-1.424, P = 0.563), and creatinine clearance rate (Ccr) (HR 0.991, 95% CI 0.986-0.996, P = 0.001) were independently associated with composite events of TAE and death (TAE-D). CHA2DS2VASc modestly predicted 5-year TAE [area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) 0.660, P < 0.001 compared with 0.5] and TAE-D (AUC 0.639, P < 0.001 compared with 0.5). (C)ACE, formed by incorporating AAexAF, LVEF, and Ccr into CHA2DS2VASc, had higher AUC for predicting 5-year TAE (0.694 vs. 0.660, P = 0.018) and TAE-D (0.708 vs. 0.639, P < 0.001) compared with CHA2DS2VASc. In patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), (C)ACE and (C)ACEN [formed by incorporating NYHA into (C)ACE] had higher AUC compared with CHA2DS2VASc in predicting 5-year TAE (0.700 and 0.707 vs. 0.649, P = 0.013 and 0.030, respectively) and TAE-D (0.712 and 0.713 vs. 0.622, P < 0.001 and <0.001, respectively). The AUC did not improve statistically from (C)ACE to (C)ACEN (0.700 vs. 0.707, P = 0.600 for TAE; 0.712 vs. 0.713, P = 0.917 for TAE-D).

CONCLUSIONS

In HF without AF, TAE during follow-up was associated with adverse prognoses. The independent risk factors of TAE or TAE-D improved CHA2DS2-VASc predictive ability, especially in patients with HFrEF. Our findings provide new evidence for TAE risk stratification in HF without AF, potentially guiding prophylactic anticoagulation.

Non-vitamin-K-antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) after acute myocardial infarction: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Balancing the risk of bleeding and thrombosis after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is challenging, and the optimal antithrombotic therapy remains uncertain. The potential of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) to prevent ischaemic cardiovascular events is promising, but the evidence remains limited.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of non-vitamin-K-antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in addition to background antiplatelet therapy, compared with placebo, antiplatelet therapy, or both, after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in people without an indication for anticoagulation (i.e. atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, the Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science, and two clinical trial registers in September 2022 with no language restrictions. We checked the reference lists of included studies for any additional trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated NOACs plus antiplatelet therapy versus placebo, antiplatelet therapy, or both, in people without an indication for anticoagulation after an AMI.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently checked the results of searches to identify relevant studies, assessed each included study, and extracted study data. We conducted random-effects pairwise analyses using Review Manager Web, and network meta-analysis using the R package 'netmeta'. We ranked competing treatments by P scores, which are derived from the P values of all pairwise comparisons and allow ranking of treatments on a continuous 0-to-1 scale.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified seven eligible RCTs, including an ongoing trial that we could not include in the analysis. Of the six RCTs involving 33,039 participants, three RCTs compared rivaroxaban with placebo, two RCTs compared apixaban with placebo, and one RCT compared dabigatran with placebo. All participants in the six RCTs received concomitant antiplatelet therapy. The available evidence suggests that rivaroxaban compared with placebo reduces the rate of all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 0.98; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 250; 3 studies, 21,870 participants; high certainty) and probably reduces cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.01; NNTB 250; 3 studies, 21,870 participants; moderate certainty). There is probably little or no difference between apixaban and placebo in all-cause mortality (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.35; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 334; 2 studies, 8638 participants; moderate certainty) and cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.27; number needed to treat not applicable; 2 studies, 8638 participants; moderate certainty). Dabigatran may reduce the rate of all-cause mortality compared with placebo (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.06; NNTB 63; 1 study, 1861 participants; low certainty). Dabigatran compared with placebo may have little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality, although the point estimate suggests benefit (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.52; NNTB 143; 1 study, 1861 participants; low certainty). Two of the investigated NOACs were associated with an increased risk of major bleeding compared to placebo: apixaban (RR 2.41, 95% CI 1.44 to 4.06; NNTH 143; 2 studies, 8544 participants; high certainty) and rivaroxaban (RR 3.31, 95% CI 1.12 to 9.77; NNTH 125; 3 studies, 21,870 participants; high certainty). There may be little or no difference between dabigatran and placebo in the risk of major bleeding (RR 1.74, 95% CI 0.22 to 14.12; NNTH 500; 1 study, 1861 participants; low certainty). The results of the network meta-analysis were inconclusive between the different NOACs at all individual doses for all primary outcomes. However, low-certainty evidence suggests that apixaban (combined dose) may be less effective than rivaroxaban and dabigatran for preventing all-cause mortality after AMI in people without an indication for anticoagulation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared with placebo, rivaroxaban reduces all-cause mortality and probably reduces cardiovascular mortality after AMI in people without an indication for anticoagulation. Dabigatran may reduce the rate of all-cause mortality and may have little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality. There is probably no meaningful difference in the rate of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality between apixaban and placebo. Moreover, we found no meaningful benefit in efficacy outcomes for specific therapy doses of any investigated NOACs following AMI in people without an indication for anticoagulation. Evidence from the included studies suggests that rivaroxaban and apixaban increase the risk of major bleeding compared with placebo. There may be little or no difference between dabigatran and placebo in the risk of major bleeding. Network meta-analysis did not show any superiority of one NOAC over another for our prespecified primary outcomes. Although the evidence suggests that NOACs reduce mortality, the effect size or impact is small; moreover, NOACs may increase major bleeding. Head-to-head trials, comparing NOACs against each other, are required to provide more solid evidence.

Rivaroxaban in heart failure patients with left ventricular thrombus: A retrospective study

Background: The role of rivaroxaban in patients with heart failure (HF) combined with left ventricular (LV) thrombus remains unknown in current guideline-directed anticoagulant therapy. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact on clinical outcomes of rivaroxaban compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients with HF combined with LV thrombus.

Methods: We retrospectively extracted clinical, echocardiographic and follow-up data of HF patients (all classifications) admitted at China-Japan Union Hospital of Jilin University from January 2017 to June 2021. A total of 198 patients with HF were identified with LV thrombus by echocardiography, 78 of them were managed with VKAs, 109 with rivaroxaban.

Results: The median follow-up was 17.0 months (interquartile range: 6.0–24.0 months). High rates of major cardiovascular adverse events (MACEs) were observed in both the rivaroxaban and VKAs groups (49.5% vs. 57.7%). However, rivaroxaban versus VKAs observed a decrease in MACEs (adjusted HR:0.636; 95%CI:0.418–0.970; p = 0.035) and systemic embolism (4.6% vs. 12.8%; adjusted HR:0.318; 95%CI:0.108–0.933; p = 0.037; Gray’s test p = 0.041) but was not found to have a benefit with regard to LV thrombus resolution (59.6% vs. 70.6%; adjusted HR: 1.303; 95% CI:0.898–1.890; p = 0.163; Gray’s test p = 0.073). Additionally, there was no significant between-group difference in the rate of International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis (ISTH) bleeding events.

Conclusion: Our data found that in populations with HF combined with LV thrombus, the overall prognosis in both the rivaroxaban and VKAs groups was catastrophic. Although rivaroxaban improved the prognosis to some extent, a considerable need remains for new treatments to improve their clinical course.

Comparison of Aspirin and Rivaroxaban Plus Aspirin in the Management of Stable Coronary Artery Disease or Peripheral Artery Disease: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Introduction

Low-dose aspirin or clopidogrel, statins, renin–angiotensin system inhibitors, and beta blockers are the cornerstone therapy for cardiovascular prevention in patients with coronary heart disease. Using only single-antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention in patients with stable coronary artery disease (SCAD) and/or peripheral artery disease (PAD) has a significant risk of recurrent thrombotic complications.

Objective

This systematic review aimed to compare aspirin alone and its combination with rivaroxaban for secondary cardiovascular prevention in patients with SCAD and/or PAD.

Methods

The literature search was conducted on PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar for articles published from November 2011 to September 2021. An advanced search strategy was used to retrieve relevant studies related to aspirin and/or rivaroxaban use for secondary cardiovascular prevention in patients with SCAD and/or PAD. Records identified from the databases were extracted using a data-abstraction format prepared in Microsoft Excel. Studies’ methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. This systematic review is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022306598) and was prepared based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines.

Results

A total of five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 33,959 participants were included for final analysis. These studies showed that rivaroxaban with aspirin was more effective than the standard therapy of aspirin alone in the prevention of secondary cardiovascular events (major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and/or major adverse limb events (MALEs), but the combination increased major bleeding.

Conclusion

The combination of rivaroxaban with aspirin is more effective than aspirin alone in the prevention of both MACEs and MALEs in patients with stable CAD and/or PAD. However, the combination treatment is associated with increased of major bleeding. Therefore, the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin is superior to monotherapy in the management of patients with a high risk of developing MACEs and MALEs.

The efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban in coronary artery disease patients with heart failure and sinus rhythm: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To explore the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD), heart failure (HF) and sinus rhythm (SR).

METHODS

Comprehensive literature searches were conducted using the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI and Wanfang databases from inception to February 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) focusing on the efficacy and safety of new oral anticoagulant (NOAC) therapy in CAD and HF patients in SR were eligible. Statistical analyses were performed using R Programming Language.

RESULTS

Three RCTs included 10,658 adult patients treated with antiplatelet drugs with or without rivaroxaban were ultimately analysed. The average follow-up period was 20.4-24 months. Rivaroxaban had a favourable point estimate in myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke (MI rivaroxaban group (3.83%, 203/5306) vs. APT group (4.52%, 214/4731), RR = 0.78, 95% CI 0.65-0.94, P < 0.01, I² = 0%), (stroke: rivaroxaban group (1.60%, 85/5306) vs. APT group (2.52%, 119/4731), RR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.49-0.85, P < 0.01, I² = 12%) compared with the placebo. Rivaroxaban was comparable to the placebo for all-cause death and major bleeding (all-cause death: rivaroxaban group (12.27%, 688/5606) vs. APT group (14.59%, 737/5052), RR = 0.73, 95% CI 0.49-1.06, P > 0.05, I² = 87%), (major bleeding: rivaroxaban group (1.52%, 85/5586) vs. APT group (1.37%, 69/5043), RR = 1.18, 95% CI 0.86-1.62, P > 0.05, I² = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

In SR patients with CAD and HF, the rates of MI and stroke associated with rivaroxaban combined with APT were lower than those associated with APT alone, and the two treatments had similar rates of all-cause death and major bleeding.

Prevalence, Mechanisms, and Management of Ischemic Stroke in Heart Failure Patients

Heart failure (HF) and stroke, two of the major causes of death worldwide, are closely associated. Although atrial fibrillation (AF), which occurs in more than half of patients with HF, is a major risk factor for stroke, there is a great deal of evidence that HF itself increases the risk of stroke independent of AF. The main mechanism of stroke appears to be thromboembolism. However, previous studies have failed to demonstrate the benefit of warfarin in patients with HF without AF, as the benefit of stroke prevention was counteracted by the increased incidence of major bleeding. Recently, researchers have identified patients with HF at a particularly high risk for stroke who may benefit from anticoagulation therapy. Based on stroke-risk prediction models, it may be possible to make better stroke prevention decisions for patients with HF. Moreover, non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants have emerged as anticoagulants with a more favorable risk-benefit profile than warfarin. Future studies on selecting high-risk patients and using more appropriate antithrombotics will lead to improved management of patients with HF.

Thromboembolism in Heart Failure Patients in Sinus Rhythm: Epidemiology, Pathophysiology, Clinical Trials, and Future Direction

Despite advances in medical and device therapy, patients with heart failure remain at high risk for morbidity and mortality. Experimental and clinical studies have shown an association between heart failure and a hypercoagulable state, and that patients with heart failure experience an increased incidence of stroke and other thromboembolic events, regardless of whether they are in atrial fibrillation. Although oral anticoagulation is recommended when atrial fibrillation is present, the benefits of this therapy in patients with heart failure in sinus rhythm are uncertain. Older randomized controlled trials comparing warfarin with antiplatelet therapy were, for the most part, underpowered and failed to show convincing benefits of warfarin therapy in this population. Several recent studies that assessed the effects of low-dose direct-acting oral anticoagulant therapy in patients with coronary artery disease in sinus rhythm either included or specifically targeted patients with heart failure. Post hoc analysis of their results showed that this treatment strategy was associated with improved outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome or stable coronary artery disease and also a significant reduction in thromboembolic events, including ischemic stroke. This review presents the rationale for anticoagulant therapy in patients with heart failure in sinus rhythm, discusses gaps in our knowledge base, offers suggestions for when anticoagulation might be considered, and identifies potential directions for future research.

Protease-activated receptor 2 deficiency mediates cardiac fibrosis and diastolic dysfunction

AIMS

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and pathological cardiac aging share a complex pathophysiology, including extracellular matrix remodelling (EMR). Protease-activated receptor 2 (PAR2) deficiency is associated with EMR. The roles of PAR1 and PAR2 have not been studied in HFpEF, age-dependent cardiac fibrosis, or diastolic dysfunction (DD).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Evaluation of endomyocardial biopsies from patients with HFpEF (n = 14) revealed that a reduced cardiac PAR2 expression was associated with aggravated DD and increased myocardial fibrosis (r = -0.7336, P = 0.0028). In line, 1-year-old PAR2-knockout (PAR2ko) mice suffered from DD with preserved systolic function, associated with an increased age-dependent α-smooth muscle actin expression, collagen deposition (1.7-fold increase, P = 0.0003), lysyl oxidase activity, collagen cross-linking (2.2-fold increase, P = 0.0008), endothelial activation, and inflammation. In the absence of PAR2, the receptor-regulating protein caveolin-1 was down-regulated, contributing to an augmented profibrotic PAR1 and transforming growth factor beta (TGF-β)-dependent signalling. This enhanced TGF-β/PAR1 signalling caused N-proteinase (ADAMTS3) and C-proteinase (BMP1)-related increased collagen I production from cardiac fibroblasts (CFs). PAR2 overexpression in PAR2ko CFs reversed these effects. The treatment with the PAR1 antagonist, vorapaxar, reduced cardiac fibrosis by 44% (P = 0.03) and reduced inflammation in a metabolic disease model (apolipoprotein E-ko mice). Patients with HFpEF with upstream PAR inhibition via FXa inhibitors (n = 40) also exhibited reduced circulating markers of fibrosis and DD compared with patients treated with vitamin K antagonists (n = 20).

CONCLUSIONS

Protease-activated receptor 2 is an important regulator of profibrotic PAR1 and TGF-β signalling in the heart. Modulation of the FXa/FIIa-PAR1/PAR2/TGF-β-axis might be a promising therapeutic approach to reduce HFpEF.

Association of Rivaroxaban With Thromboembolic Events in Patients With Heart Failure, Coronary Disease, and Sinus Rhythm: A Post Hoc Analysis of the COMMANDER HF Trial

Importance

Whether anticoagulation benefits patients with heart failure (HF) in sinus rhythm is uncertain. The COMMANDER HF randomized clinical trial evaluated the effects of adding low-dose rivaroxaban to antiplatelet therapy in patients with recent worsening of chronic HF with reduced ejection fraction, coronary artery disease (CAD), and sinus rhythm. Although the primary end point of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke did not differ between rivaroxaban and placebo, there were numerical advantages favoring rivaroxaban for myocardial infarction and stroke.

Objective

To examine whether low-dose rivaroxaban was associated with reduced thromboembolic events in patients enrolled in the COMMANDER HF trial.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Post hoc analysis of the COMMANDER HF multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients with CAD and worsening HF. The trial randomized 5022 patients postdischarge from a hospital or outpatient clinic after treatment for worsening HF between September 2013 and October 2017. Patients were required to be receiving standard care for HF and CAD and were excluded for a medical condition requiring anticoagulation or a bleeding history. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio. Analysis was conducted from June 2018 and January 2019.

Intervention

Patients were randomly assigned to receive 2.5 mg of rivaroxaban given orally twice daily or placebo in addition to their standard therapy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

For this post hoc analysis, a thromboembolic composite was defined as either (1) myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, sudden/unwitnessed death, symptomatic pulmonary embolism, or symptomatic deep venous thrombosis or (2) all of the previous components except sudden/unwitnessed deaths because not all of these are caused by thromboembolic events.

Results

Of 5022 patients, 3872 (77.1%) were men, and the overall mean (SD) age was 66.4 (10.2) years. Over a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 19.6 (11.7-30.8) months, fewer patients assigned to rivaroxaban compared with placebo had a thromboembolic event including sudden/unwitnessed deaths: 328 (13.1%) vs 390 (15.5%) (hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.72-0.96; P = .01). When sudden/unwitnessed deaths were excluded, the results analyzing thromboembolic events were similar: 153 (6.1%) vs 190 patients (7.6%) with an event (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.64-0.98; P = .04).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, thromboembolic events occurred frequently in patients with HF, CAD, and sinus rhythm. Rivaroxaban may reduce the risk of thromboembolic events in this population, but these events are not the major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with recent worsening of HF for which rivaroxaban had no effect. While consistent with other studies, these results require confirmation in prospective randomized clinical trials.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01877915.

The Role of Antithrombotic Therapy in Heart Failure

Heart failure is a major contributor to global morbidity and mortality burden affecting approximately 1-2% of adults in developed countries, mounting to over 10% in individuals aged >70 years old. Heart failure is characterized by a prothrombotic state and increased rates of stroke and thromboembolism have been reported in heart failure patients compared with the general population. However, the impact of antithrombotic therapy on heart failure remains controversial. Administration of antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy is the obvious (and well-established) choice in heart failure patients with cardiovascular comorbidity that necessitates their use, such as coronary artery disease or atrial fibrillation. In contrast, antithrombotic therapy has not demonstrated any clear benefit when administered for heart failure per se, i.e. with heart failure being the sole indication. Randomized studies have reported decreased stroke rates with warfarin use in patients with heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, but at the expense of excessive bleeding. Non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants have shown a better safety profile in heart failure patients with atrial fibrillation compared with warfarin, however, current evidence about their role in heart failure with sinus rhythm is inconclusive and further research is needed. In the present review, we discuss the role of antithrombotic therapy in heart failure (beyond coronary artery disease), aiming to summarize evidence regarding the thrombotic risk and the role of antiplatelet and anticoagulant agents in patients with heart failure.

Rivaroxaban With or Without Aspirin in Patients With Heart Failure and Chronic Coronary or Peripheral Artery Disease

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease and history of heart failure (HF) are at high risk for major adverse cardiovascular events. We explored the effects of rivaroxaban with or without aspirin in these patients.

METHODS

The COMPASS trial (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) randomized 27 395 participants with chronic coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease to rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus aspirin 100 mg daily, rivaroxaban 5 mg twice daily alone, or aspirin 100 mg alone. Patients with New York Heart Association functional class III or IV HF or left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) <30% were excluded. The primary major adverse cardiovascular events outcome comprised cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction, and the primary safety outcome was major bleeding using modified International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis criteria. Investigators recorded a history of HF and EF at baseline, if available. We examined the effects of rivaroxaban on major adverse cardiovascular events and major bleeding in patients with or without a history of HF and an EF <40% or ≥40% at baseline.

RESULTS

Of the 5902 participants (22%) with a history of HF, 4971 (84%) had EF recorded at baseline, and 12% had EF <40%. Rivaroxaban and aspirin had similar relative reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events compared with aspirin in participants with HF (5.5% versus 7.9%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.53-0.86) and those without HF (3.8% versus 4.7%; HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.68-0.93; P for interaction 0.28) but larger absolute risk reduction in those with HF (HF absolute risk reduction 2.4%, number needed to treat=42; no HF absolute risk reduction 1.0%, number needed to treat=103). The primary major adverse cardiovascular events outcome was not statistically different between those with EF <40% (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.55-1.42) and ≥40% (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.67-0.98; P for interaction 0.36). The excess hazard for major bleeding was not different in participants with HF (2.5% versus 1.8%; HR, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.88-2.09) than in those without HF (3.3% versus 1.9%; HR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.45-2.21; P for interaction 0.26). There were no significant differences in the primary outcomes with rivaroxaban alone.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with chronic coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease and a history of mild or moderate HF, combination rivaroxaban and aspirin compared with aspirin alone produces similar relative but larger absolute benefits than in those without HF.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01776424.

Medical Therapy for Heart Failure Caused by Ischemic Heart Disease

Patients with heart failure (HF) syndromes have been categorized as those with reduced ejection fraction (EF) or preserved EF (HFpEF), and ischemia plays a key role in both types. HF remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, and with the aging of our population this burden continues to rise, predominantly as a result of hospitalizations for HFpEF. Patients with obstructive coronary artery disease more likely have HF with reduced EF, rather than HFpEF, secondary to acute ischemic injury resulting in myocardial infarction, and large outcomes trials of treatments with neurohumoral inhibition have documented reduced adverse outcomes. In contrast, similar treatments in patients with HFpEF have not proven beneficial. This therapeutic dilemma may be attributed, in part, to heterogeneity in the underlying pathophysiology with different systemic and myocardial signaling pathways, despite similar clinical presentations and findings, in patients with HFpEF. Also, emerging evidence indicates that impaired myocardial perfusion and inflammation secondary to multiple comorbidities are key mechanisms in HFpEF. We will thoroughly review the role of ischemic heart disease in the pathogenesis of HF with reduced EF and HFpEF, and discuss the medical management strategies available for these conditions.

Nine contemporary therapeutic directions in heart failure

The global burden of heart failure has continued to increase dramatically with 26 million people affected and an estimated health expenditure of $31 billion worldwide. Several practice-influencing studies were reported recently, bringing advances along many frontiers in heart failure, particularly heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. In this article, we discuss nine distinct therapeutic areas that were significantly influenced by this scientific progress. These distinct areas include the emergence of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors, broadening the application of angiotensin-neprilysin inhibition, clinical considerations in therapy withdrawal in those patients with heart failure that 'recover' myocardial function, benefits of low-dose direct oral anticoagulants in sinus rhythm, targeted therapy for treating cardiac amyloidosis, usefulness of mitral valve repair in heart failure, the advent of newer left ventricular assist devices for advanced heart failure, the role of ablation in atrial fibrillation in heart failure, and finally the use of wearable defibrillators to address sudden death.