Titration of Medical Therapy for Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

Therapy duration and improvement of ventricular function in de novo heart failure: the Heart Failure Optimization study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In patients with de novo heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), improvement of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is expected to occur when started on guideline-recommended medical therapy. However, improvement may not be completed within 90 days.

METHODS

Patients with HFrEF and LVEF ≤ 35% prescribed a wearable cardioverter-defibrillator between 2017 and 2022 from 68 sites were enrolled, starting with a registry phase for 3 months and followed by a study phase up to 1 year. The primary endpoints were LVEF improvement > 35% between Days 90 and 180 following guideline-recommended medical therapy initiation and the percentage of target dose reached at Days 90 and 180.

RESULTS

A total of 598 patients with de novo HFrEF [59 years (interquartile range 51-68), 27% female] entered the study phase. During the first 180 days, a significant increase in dosage of beta-blockers, renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists was observed (P < .001). At Day 90, 46% [95% confidence interval (CI) 41%-50%] of study phase patients had LVEF improvement > 35%; 46% (95% CI 40%-52%) of those with persistently low LVEF at Day 90 had LVEF improvement > 35% by Day 180, increasing the total rate of improvement > 35% to 68% (95% CI 63%-72%). In 392 patients followed for 360 days, improvement > 35% was observed in 77% (95% CI 72%-81%) of the patients. Until Day 90, sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias were observed in 24 wearable cardioverter-defibrillator carriers (1.8%). After 90 days, no sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmia occurred in wearable cardioverter-defibrillator carriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Continuous optimization of guideline-recommended medical therapy for at least 180 days in HFrEF is associated with additional LVEF improvement > 35%, allowing for better decision-making regarding preventive implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy.

The Heart Failure Patient Foundation Position Statement on Research and Patient Involvement

BACKGROUND

Heart Failure (HF) is a growing global public health problem affecting approximately 64 million people worldwide.

OBJECTIVES

The Heart Failure Patient Foundation developed a position statement to advocate for adult patients with HF to be an active participant in research and for HF leaders to integrate patients throughout the research process.

METHODS

A review of the literature and best practices was conducted. Based on the evidence, the HF Patient Foundation made recommendations regarding the inclusion of adult patients with HF throughout the research process.

RESULTS

Healthcare clinicians, researchers and funding agencies have a role to ensure rigorous quality research is performed and implemented into practice. Inclusion of adult patients with HF throughout the research process can improve the lives of patients and families while advancing HF science.

CONCLUSIONS

The HF Patient Foundation strongly advocates that patients with HF be involved in research from inception of the project through dissemination of findings to improve patient outcomes.

Ischemic Stroke and Reduced Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction: A Multidisciplinary Approach to Optimize Brain and Cardiac Health

Reduced left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40%, a known risk factor for adverse cardiac outcomes and recurrent acute ischemic stroke, may be detected during an acute ischemic stroke hospitalization. A multidisciplinary care paradigm informed by neurology and cardiology expertise may facilitate the timely implementation of an array of proven heart failure-specific therapies and procedures in a nuanced manner to optimize brain and cardiac health.

The Evolving Concept of Secondary Mitral Regurgitation Phenotypes: Lessons From the M-TEER Trials

Conflicting results from 2 randomized clinical trials of transcatheter mitral valve edge-to-edge repair in secondary mitral regurgitation (SMR) have led to the recognition that SMR is a heterogeneous disease entity presenting with different functional and morphological phenotypes. This review summarizes the current knowledge on SMR caused primarily by atrial secondary mitral regurgitation (aSMR) and ventricular SMR pathology. Although aSMR is generally characterized by severe left atrial enlargement in the setting of preserved left ventricular anatomy and function, different patterns of mitral annular distortion cause different phenotypes of aSMR. In ventricular SMR, the relation of SMR severity to left ventricular dilation as well as the degree of pulmonary hypertension and right ventricular dysfunction are important phenotypic characteristics, which are key for a better understanding of prognosis and treatment response.

Prescribing trends of SGLT2 inhibitors among HFrEF and HFpEF patients with and without T2DM, 2013-2021

BACKGROUND

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) are recommended for treatment of heart failure (HF), regardless of type 2 diabetes (T2DM) status. However, limited data exist on SGLT2i prescribing in HF patients without T2DM or across HF subtypes.

METHODS

This was a serial, cross-sectional study of US MarketScan commercial and Medicare claims (2013-2021). Prevalence of SGLT2i was calculated by calendar year among HFrEF and HFpEF patients and stratified by T2DM status.

RESULTS

Among 218,066 HFrEF patients [mean (SD): 54.9 (8.92) years; 66.4% male], the prevalence of SGLT2i use increased from 0.3 to 18.6%, while among 150,437 HFpEF patients [56.5 (7.77) years; 47.6% male], it rose from 0.5 to 9.9%. These increases were driven by the subgroup with comorbid T2DM. SGLT2i prevalence use ratios among patients with T2DM compared to those without decreased from > 100 in 2018 to 3.8 in 2021 among HFrEF patients, and from 83.1 in 2018 to 17.5 in 2021, coinciding with the publication of landmark trials and corresponding changes in clinical guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

SGLT2i use rose rapidly following changes in guidelines but remained low among those without T2DM. By the end of the study, approximately 1 in 3 HFrEF and 1 in 5 HFpEF patients with T2DM were using an SGLT2i, compared to only 1 in 11 HFrEF and 1 in 85 HFpEF patients without T2DM. Future work identifying barriers with the uptake of GDMT, including SGLT2i, among HF patients is needed.

How to tackle therapeutic inertia in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. A scientific statement of the Heart Failure Association of the ESC

Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) reduces morbidity and mortality, but its implementation is often poor in daily clinical practice. Barriers to implementation include clinical and organizational factors that might contribute to clinical inertia, i.e. avoidance/delay of recommended treatment initiation/optimization. The spectrum of strategies that might be applied to foster GDMT implementation is wide, and involves the organizational set-up of heart failure care pathways, tailored drug initiation/optimization strategies increasing the chance of successful implementation, digital tools/telehealth interventions, educational activities and strategies targeting patient/physician awareness, and use of quality registries. This scientific statement by the Heart Failure Association of the ESC provides an overview of the current state of GDMT implementation in HFrEF, clinical and organizational barriers to implementation, and aims at suggesting a comprehensive framework on how to overcome clinical inertia and ultimately improve implementation of GDMT in HFrEF based on up-to-date evidence.

Titration of Medications After Acute Heart Failure Is Safe, Tolerated, and Effective Regardless of Risk

BACKGROUND

Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) decisions may be less affected by single patient variables such as blood pressure or kidney function and more by overall risk profile. In STRONG-HF (Safety, tolerability and efficacy of up-titration of guideline-directed medical therapies for acute heart failure), high-intensity care (HIC) in the form of rapid uptitration of heart failure (HF) GDMT was effective overall, but the safety, tolerability and efficacy of HIC across the spectrum of HF severity is unknown. Evaluating this with a simple risk-based framework offers an alternative and more clinically translatable approach than traditional subgroup analyses.

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to assess safety, tolerability, and efficacy of HIC according to the simple, powerful, and clinically translatable MAGGIC (Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic) HF risk score.

METHODS

In STRONG-HF, 1,078 patients with acute HF were randomized to HIC (uptitration of treatments to 100% of recommended doses within 2 weeks of discharge and 4 scheduled outpatient visits over the 2 months after discharge) vs usual care (UC). The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause death or first HF rehospitalization at day 180. Baseline HF risk profile was determined by the previously validated MAGGIC risk score. Treatment effect was stratified according to MAGGIC risk score both as a categorical and continuous variable.

RESULTS

Among 1,062 patients (98.5%) with complete data for whom a MAGGIC score could be calculated at baseline, GDMT use at baseline was similar across MAGGIC tertiles. Overall GDMT prescriptions achieved for individual medication classes were higher in the HIC vs UC group and did not differ by MAGGIC risk score tertiles (interaction nonsignificant). The incidence of all-cause death or HF readmission at day 180 was, respectively, 16.3%, 18.9%, and 23.2% for MAGGIC risk score tertiles 1, 2, and 3. The HIC arm was at lower risk of all-cause death or HF readmission at day 180 (HR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.50-0.86) and this finding was robust across MAGGIC risk score modeled as a categorical (HR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.62-0.68 in tertiles 1, 2, and 3; interaction nonsignificant) for all comparisons and continuous (interaction nonsignificant) variable. The rate of adverse events was higher in the HIC group, but this observation did not differ based on MAGGIC risk score tertile (interaction nonsignificant).

CONCLUSIONS

HIC led to better use of GDMT and lower HF-related morbidity and mortality compared with UC, regardless of the underlying HF risk profile. (Safety, Tolerability and Efficacy of Rapid Optimization, Helped by NT-proBNP testinG, of Heart Failure Therapies [STRONG-HF]; NCT03412201).

Advancing Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy in Heart Failure: Overcoming Challenges and Maximizing Benefits

The delayed titration of guideline-directed drug therapy (GDMT) is a complex event influenced by multiple factors that often result in poor prognosis for patients with heart failure (HF). Individualized adjustments in GDMT titration may be necessary based on patient characteristics, and every clinician is responsible for promptly initiating GDMT and titrating it appropriately within the patient's tolerance range. This review examines the current challenges in GDMT implementation and scrutinizes titration considerations within distinct subsets of HF patients, with the overarching goal of enhancing the adoption and effectiveness of GDMT. The authors also underscore the significance of establishing a novel management strategy that integrates cardiologists, nurse practitioners, pharmacists, and patients as a unified team that can contribute to the improved promotion and implementation of GDMT.

Latest pharmaceutical approaches across the spectrum of heart failure

Despite major advances in prevention and medical therapy, heart failure (HF) remains associated with high morbidity and mortality, especially in older and frailer patients. Therefore, a complete, guideline-based treatment is essential, even in HF patients with conditions traditionally associated with a problematic initiation and escalation of the medical HF therapy, such as chronic kidney disease and arterial hypotension, as the potential adverse effects are overcome by the overall decrease of the absolute risk. Furthermore, since the latest data suggest that the benefit of a combined medical therapy (MRA, ARNI, SGLT2i, beta-blocker) may extend up to a LVEF of 65%, further trials on these subgroups of patients (HFmrEF, HFpEF) are needed to re-evaluate the guideline-directed medical therapy across the HF spectrum. In particular, the use of SGLT2i was recently extended to HFpEF patients, as evidenced by the DELIVER and EMPEROR-preserved trials. Moreover, the indication for other conservative treatments in HF patients, such as the intravenous iron supplementation, was accordingly strengthened in the latest guidelines. Finally, the possible implementation of newer substances, such as finerenone, in guideline-directed medical practice for HF is anticipated with great interest.

Heart Failure Management through Telehealth: Expanding Care and Connecting Hearts

Heart failure (HF) is a leading cause of morbidity worldwide, imposing a significant burden on deaths, hospitalizations, and health costs. Anticipating patients' deterioration is a cornerstone of HF treatment: preventing congestion and end organ damage while titrating HF therapies is the aim of the majority of clinical trials. Anyway, real-life medicine struggles with resource optimization, often reducing the chances of providing a patient-tailored follow-up. Telehealth holds the potential to drive substantial qualitative improvement in clinical practice through the development of patient-centered care, facilitating resource optimization, leading to decreased outpatient visits, hospitalizations, and lengths of hospital stays. Different technologies are rising to offer the best possible care to many subsets of patients, facing any stage of HF, and challenging extreme scenarios such as heart transplantation and ventricular assist devices. This article aims to thoroughly examine the potential advantages and obstacles presented by both existing and emerging telehealth technologies, including artificial intelligence.

Treatment patterns of patients with worsening heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

AIMS

Patients with HFrEF and worsening HF events (WHFE) are at particularly high risk and urgently need disease-modifying therapy. CHART-HF assessed treatment patterns and reasons for medication decisions among HFrEF patients with and without WHFE.

METHODS AND RESULTS

CHART-HF collected retrospective electronic medical records of outpatients with HF and EF < 45% between 2017-2019 from a nationwide panel of 238 cardiologists (458 patients) and the Geisinger Health System (GHS) medical record (1000 patients). The index visit in the WHFE cohort was the first outpatient cardiologist visit ≤6 months following the WHFE, and in the reference cohort was the last visit in a calendar year without WHFE. Demographic characteristics were similar between patients with and without WHFE in both the nationwide panel and GHS. In the nationwide panel, the proportion of patients with versus without WHFE receiving ≥50% of guideline-recommended dose on index visit was 35% versus 40% for beta blocker, 74% versus 83% for ACEI/ARB/ARNI, and 48% versus 49% for MRA. The proportion of patients receiving ≥50% of guideline-recommended dose was lower in the GHS: 29% versus 34% for beta-blocker, 16% versus 31% for ACEI/ARB/ARNI, and 18% versus 22% for MRA. For patients with and without WHFE, triple therapy on index date was 42% and 44% of patients from the nationwide panel, and 14% and 17% in the GHS. Comparing end of index clinic visit with 12-month follow-up in the GHS, the proportion of patients on no GDMT increased from 14% to 28% in the WHFE cohort and from 14 to 21% in the non-WHFE group.

CONCLUSIONS

Major gaps in use of GDMT, particularly combination therapy, remain among US HFrEF patients. These gaps persist during longitudinal follow-up and are particularly large among patients with recent WHFE.

Safety Indicators in Patients Receiving High-intensity Care After Hospital Admission for Acute Heart Failure: The STRONG-HF Trial

BACKGROUND

Safety, Tolerability and Efficacy of Rapid Optimization, Helped by NT-proBNP Testing, of Heart Failure Therapies (STRONG-HF) demonstrated the safety and efficacy of rapid up-titration of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) with high-intensity care (HIC) compared with usual care in patients hospitalized for acute heart failure (HF). In the HIC group, the following safety indicators were used to guide up-titration: estimated glomerular filtration rate of <30 mL/min/1.73 m2, serum potassium of >5.0 mmol/L, systolic blood pressure (SBP) of <95 mmHg, heart rate of <55 bpm, and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide concentration of >10% higher than predischarge values.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We examined the impact of protocol-specified safety indicators on achieved dose of GDMT and clinical outcomes. Three hundred thirteen of the 542 patients in the HIC arm (57.7%) met ≥1 safety indicator at any follow-up visit 1-6 weeks after discharge. As compared with those without, patients meeting ≥1 safety indicator had more severe HF symptoms, lower SBP, and higher heart rate at baseline and achieved a lower average percentage of GDMT optimal doses (mean difference vs the HIC arm patients not reaching any safety indicator, -11.0% [95% confidence interval [CI] -13.6 to -8.4%], P < .001). The primary end point of 180-day all-cause death or HF readmission occurred in 15.0% of patients with any safety indicator vs 14.2% of those without (adjusted hazard ratio 0.84, 95% CI 0.48-1.46, P = .540). None of each of the safety indicators, considered alone, was significantly associated with the primary end point, but an SBP of <95 mm Hg was associated with a trend toward increased 180-day all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 2.68, 95% CI 0.94-7.64, P = .065) and estimated glomerular filtration rate decreased to <30 mL/min/1.73 m2 with more HF readmissions (adjusted hazard ratio 3.60, 95% CI 1.22-10.60, P = .0203). The occurrence of a safety indicator was associated with a smaller 90-day improvement in the EURO-QoL 5-Dimension visual analog scale (adjusted mean difference -3.32 points, 95% CI -5.97 to -0.66, P = .015).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with acute HF enrolled in STRONG-HF in the HIC arm, the occurrence of any safety indicator was associated with the administration of slightly lower GDMT doses and less improvement in quality of life, but with no significant increase in the primary outcome of 180-day HF readmission or death when appropriately addressed according to the study protocol.

Drug development for major chronic health conditions-aligning with growing public health needs: Proceedings from a multistakeholder think tank

The global pharmaceutical industry portfolio is skewed towards cancer and rare diseases due to more predictable development pathways and financial incentives. In contrast, drug development for major chronic health conditions that are responsible for a large part of mortality and disability worldwide is stalled. To examine the processes of novel drug development for common chronic health conditions, a multistakeholder Think Tank meeting, including thought leaders from academia, clinical practice, non-profit healthcare organizations, the pharmaceutical industry, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), payors as well as investors, was convened in July 2022. Herein, we summarize the proceedings of this meeting, including an overview of the current state of drug development for chronic health conditions and key barriers that were identified. Six major action items were formulated to accelerate drug development for chronic diseases, with a focus on improving the efficiency of clinical trials and rapid implementation of evidence into clinical practice.

Contemporary Use and Implications of Beta-Blockers in Patients With HFmrEF or HFpEF: The DELIVER Trial

BACKGROUND

Although beta-blockers are not recommended for the treatment of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) according to the latest European Society of Cardiology and American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology/Heart Failure Society of America guidelines, these therapies remain commonly used for comorbidity management. There has been concern that beta-blockers may adversely influence clinical outcomes by limiting chronotropic response in HFpEF.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to examine the contemporary use and implications of beta-blockers in patients with heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) or HFpEF.

METHODS

In the DELIVER (Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the Lives of Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure) trial, a total of 6,263 patients with symptomatic heart failure (HF) with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) >40% were randomized to dapagliflozin or placebo across 20 countries. In this prespecified analysis, efficacy and safety outcomes were examined according to beta-blocker use at randomization. The primary outcome was cardiovascular death or worsening HF.

RESULTS

Overall, beta-blockers were used in 5,177 patients (83%), with wide variation by geographic region. Beta-blocker use was associated with a lower risk of the primary outcome in covariate-adjusted models (HR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.60-0.83). Dapagliflozin consistently reduced the risk of the primary outcome in patients taking beta-blockers (HR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.72-0.94) and in patients not taking beta-blockers (HR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.61-1.03; Pinteraction = 0.85), with similar findings for key secondary endpoints. Adverse events were balanced between patients randomized to dapagliflozin and placebo, regardless of background beta-blocker use.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with HFmrEF or HFpEF who were enrolled in DELIVER, 4 out of 5 participants were treated with a beta-blocker. Beta-blocker use was not associated with a higher risk of worsening HF or cardiovascular death. Dapagliflozin consistently and safely reduced clinical events, irrespective of background beta-blocker use. (Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the Lives of Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure [DELIVER]; NCT03619213).

Eligibility and Projected Benefits of Rapid Initiation of Quadruple Medical Therapy for Newly Diagnosed Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

U.S. nationwide estimates of the proportion of patients newly diagnosed with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) eligible for quadruple medical therapy, and the associated benefits of rapid implementation, are not well characterized.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to characterize the degree to which patients newly diagnosed with HFrEF are eligible for quadruple medical therapy, and the projected benefits of in-hospital initiation.

METHODS

Among patients hospitalized for newly diagnosed HFrEF in the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry from 2016 to 2023, eligibility criteria based on regulatory labeling, guidelines, and expert consensus documents were applied for angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, beta-blocker, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor therapies. Of those eligible, the projected effect of quadruple therapy on 12-month mortality was modeled using treatment effects from pivotal clinical trials utilized by the AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure, and compared with observed outcomes among patients treated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker and beta-blockers.

RESULTS

Of 33,036 patients newly diagnosed with HFrEF, 27,158 (82%) were eligible for quadruple therapy, and 30,613 (93%) were eligible for ≥3 components. From 2021 to 2023, of patients eligible for quadruple therapy, 15.3% were prescribed quadruple therapy and 41.5% were prescribed triple therapy. Among Medicare beneficiaries eligible for quadruple therapy, 12-month incidence of mortality was 24.7% and HF hospitalization was 22.2%. Applying the relative risk reductions in clinical trials, complete implementation of quadruple therapy by time of discharge was projected to yield absolute risk reductions in 12-month mortality of 10.4% (number needed to treat = 10) compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker and beta-blocker, and 24.8% (number needed to treat = 4) compared with no GDMT.

CONCLUSIONS

In this nationwide U.S. cohort of patients hospitalized for newly diagnosed HFrEF, >4 of 5 patients were projected as eligible for quadruple therapy at discharge; yet, <1 in 6 were prescribed it. If clinical trial benefits can be fully realized, in-hospital initiation of quadruple medical therapy for newly diagnosed HFrEF would yield large absolute reductions in mortality.

Blood pressure and intensive treatment up-titration after acute heart failure hospitalization: Insights from the STRONG-HF trial

AIMS

A high-intensity care (HIC) strategy with rapid guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) up-titration and close follow-up visits improved outcomes, compared to usual care (UC), in patients recently hospitalized for acute heart failure (AHF). Hypotension is a major limitation to GDMT implementation. We aimed to assess the impact of baseline systolic blood pressure (SBP) on the effects of HIC versus UC and the role of early SBP changes in STRONG-HF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 1075 patients hospitalized for AHF with SBP ≥100 mmHg were included in STRONG-HF. For the purpose of this post-hoc analysis, patients were stratified by tertiles of baseline SBP (<118, 118-128, and ≥129 mmHg) and, in the HIC arm, by tertiles of changes in SBP from the values measured before discharge to those measured at 1 week after discharge (≥2 mmHg increase, ≤7 mmHg decrease to <2 mmHg increase, and ≥8 mmHg decrease). The primary endpoint was 180-day heart failure rehospitalization or death. The effect of HIC versus UC on the primary endpoint was independent of baseline SBP evaluated as tertiles (pinteraction  = 0.77) or as a continuous variable (pinteraction  = 0.91). In the HIC arm, patients with increased, stable and decreased SBP at 1 week reached 83.5%, 76.2% and 75.3% of target doses of GDMT at day 90. The risk of the primary endpoint was not significantly different between patients with different SBP changes at 1 week (adjusted p = 0.46).

CONCLUSIONS

In STRONG-HF, the benefits of HIC versus UC were independent of baseline SBP. Rapid GDMT up-titration was performed also in patients with an early SBP drop, resulting in similar 180-day outcome as compared to patients with stable or increased SBP.

Recommendations for the management of hyperkalemia in patients receiving renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors

Hyperkalemia is common in clinical practice and can be caused by medications used to treat cardiovascular diseases, particularly renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASis). This narrative review discusses the epidemiology, etiology, and consequences of hyperkalemia, and recommends strategies for the prevention and management of hyperkalemia, mainly focusing on guideline recommendations, while recognizing the gaps or differences between the guidelines. Available evidence emphasizes the importance of healthcare professionals (HCPs) taking a proactive approach to hyperkalemia management by prioritizing patient identification and acknowledging that hyperkalemia is often a long-term condition requiring ongoing treatment. Given the risk of hyperkalemia during RAASi treatment, it is advisable to monitor serum potassium levels prior to initiating these treatments, and then regularly throughout treatment. If RAASi therapy is indicated in patients with cardiorenal disease, HCPs should first treat chronic hyperkalemia before reducing the dose or discontinuing RAASis, as reduction or interruption of RAASi treatment can increase the risk of adverse cardiovascular and renal outcomes or death. Moreover, management of hyperkalemia should involve the use of newer potassium binders, such as sodium zirconium cyclosilicate or patiromer, as these agents can effectively enable optimal RAASi treatment. Finally, patients should receive education regarding hyperkalemia, the risks of discontinuing their current treatments, and need to avoid excessive dietary potassium intake.

Early Initiation of Sacubitril/Valsartan in Patients With Acute Heart Failure and Renal Dysfunction: An Analysis of the TRANSITION Study

BACKGROUND

Treatment of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and renal dysfunction (RD) is challenging owing to the risk of further deterioration in renal function, especially after acute decompensated HF (ADHF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

We assessed the effect of RD (estimated glomerular filtration rate of ≥30 to <60 mL/min/1.73 m2) on initiation, up-titration, and tolerability of sacubitril/valsartan in hemodynamically stabilized patients with HFrEF admitted for ADHF (RD, n = 476; non-RD, n = 483). At week 10, the target dose of sacubitril/valsartan (97/103 mg twice daily) was achieved by 42% patients in RD subgroup vs 54% in non-RD patients (P < .001). Sacubitril/valsartan was associated with greater estimated glomerular filtration rate improvements in RD subgroup than non-RD (change from baseline least squares mean 4.1 mL/min/1.73 m2, 95% confidence interval 2.2-6.1, P < .001). Cardiac biomarkers improved significantly in both subgroups; however, compared with the RD subgroup, the improvement was greater in those without RD (N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide, -28.6% vs -44.8%, high-sensitivity troponin T -20.3% vs -33.9%) (P < .001). Patients in the RD subgroup compared with those without RD experienced higher rates of hyperkalemia (16.3% vs 6.5%, P < .001), investigator-reported cardiac failure (9.7% vs 5.6%, P = .029), and renal impairment (6.4% vs 2.1%, P = .002).

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients with HFrEF and concomitant RD hospitalized for ADHF tolerated early initiation of sacubitril/valsartan and showed significant improvements in estimated glomerular filtration rate and cardiac biomarkers.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02661217.

[Physicians' Adherence to Clinical Guidelines on the Chronic Heart Failure Diagnosis and Treatment: Changes Over 2 Years of the Document's Existence]

AIM

To study how physicians' commitment to the basic provisions of clinical guidelines (CGs) for the diagnosis and treatment of chronic heart failure (CHF) has changed over the two years of the document existence.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An anonymous survey was performed for 263 physicians (204 cardiologists, 46 internists and 13 other specialists) who were trained in advanced training programs in 2022. The questionnaire included questions regarding self-assessment of the respondents' professional knowledge, their attitude to the role of CGs in everyday practice and ideas about methods for treatment of CHF.

RESULTS

Respondents gave 60.6 % correct answers to questions related to the treatment of CHF. More than 70% correct answers were given by 42.7% of cardiologists and 17.4% of internists. Compared to 2020, the proportion of cardiologists who gave more than 70 % correct answers increased significantly (p<0.05). CGs were considered mandatory by 26.2% and important or sometimes useful by 71.5% of respondents. Cardiologists considered CGs mandatory more frequently than internists (29.9 and 15.2 %, respectively; p=0.04). The mean number of correct answers was greater in the subgroup of respondents who considered CGs mandatory (p<0.001). More than 70% correct answers were given by only 43.8% of cardiologists, who considered themselves fully informed and able to advise colleagues on complex issues of diagnosis and treatment of CHF, and 40.6% of physicians who considered their knowledge acceptable for managing patients with CHF.

CONCLUSION

The majority of physician consider CGs an important methodological document but only a little more than 25 % are aware that CGs are mandatory. Cardiologists are better informed than internists about the principal provisions of National Clinical Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of CHF, but the average level of physician knowledge remains low.

Prognostic Impact of Reduced Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction After Endovascular Therapy for Lower Extremities

BACKGROUND

The mechanism underlying a poor prognosis in patients with lower-extremity artery disease (LEAD) with heart failure is unknown. We examined the prognostic impact of the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in patients with LEAD who underwent endovascular therapy (EVT).Methods and Results: From August 2014 to August 2016, 2,180 patients with LEAD (mean age, 73.2 years; male, 71.9%) underwent EVT and were stratified into low-LVEF (LVEF <40%; n=234, 10.7%) and not-low LVEF groups. In the low- vs. not-low LVEF groups, there was a higher prevalence of heart failure (i.e., history of heart failure hospitalization or New York Heart Association functional class III or IV symptoms) (44.0% vs. 8.3%, respectively), diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease, below-the-knee lesion, critical limb ischemia, and incidence of major cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) and major adverse limb events (MALEs) (P<0.001, all). Low LVEF independently predicted MACCEs (hazard ratio: 2.23, 95% confidence interval: 1.63-3.03; P<0.001) and MALEs (hazard ratio: 1.85, 95% confidence interval: 1.15-2.96; P=0.011), regardless of heart failure (P value for interaction: MACCEs: 0.27; MALEs: 0.52).

CONCLUSIONS

Low LVEF, but not symptomatic heart failure, increased the incidence of MACCEs and MALEs. Intensive cardiac dysfunction management may improve LEAD prognosis after EVT.

Rationale and protocol of the LAQUA-HF trial: a factorial randomised controlled trial evaluating the effects of neurohormonal and diuretic agents on health-status reported outcomes in heart failure patients

INTRODUCTION

The current guidelines strongly recommend early initiation of multiple classes of cardioprotective drugs for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction to improve prognosis and health status. However, evidence on the optimal sequencing of approved drugs is scarce, highlighting the importance of individualised treatment plans. Registry data indicate that only a portion of these patients can tolerate all four recommended classes, underscoring the need to establish the favoured sequence when using these drugs. Additionally, the choice between long-acting and short-acting loop diuretics in the present era remains uncertain. This is particularly relevant given the frequent use of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor, both of which potentiate natriuretic effects.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint method, LAQUA-HF (Long-acting vs short-acting diuretics and neurohormonal Agents on patients' QUAlity-of-life in Heart Failure patients) will be a 2×2 factorial design, with a total of 240 patients randomised to sacubitril/valsartan versus dapagliflozin and torsemide versus furosemide in a 1:1 ratio. Most enrolment sites have participated in an ongoing observational registry for consecutive patients hospitalised for heart failure involved dedicated study coordinators, and used the same framework to enrol patients. The primary endpoint is the change in patients' health status over 6 months, defined by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire. Additionally, clinical benefit at 6 months defined as a hierarchical composite endpoint will be assessed by the win ratio as the secondary endpoint.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The medical ethics committee Keio University in Japan has approved this trial. All participants provide written informed consent prior to study entry. The results of this trial will be disseminated in one main paper and additional papers on secondary endpoints and subgroup analyses.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

UMIN000045229.

Clinical Implications of Ivabradine in the Contemporary Era

Ivabradine is a recently introduced inhibitor of the If ion channel, which exhibits the capacity to reduce heart rate while preserving hemodynamic stability. At present, ivabradine finds its clinical indication in patients suffering from heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and maintaining a relative sinus rhythm refractory to beta-blockers. To optimize heart rate control, it is recommended to pursue an aggressive up-titration of ivabradine. This approach may ameliorate tachycardia-induced hypotension by incrementally enhancing cardiac output and allow further up-titration of agents aimed at ameliorating heart failure, such as beta-blockers. Both the modulation of heart rate itself and the up-titration of agents targeting heart failure lead to cardiac reverse remodeling, consequently culminating in a subsequent reduction in mortality and morbidity. A novel overlap theory that our team proposed recently has emerged in recent times. Under trans-mitral Doppler echocardiography, the E-wave and A-wave closely juxtapose one another without any overlapping at the optimal heart rate. Employing echocardiography-guided ivabradine for heart-rate modulation to minimize the overlap between the E-wave and A-wave appears to confer substantial benefits to patients with heart failure. This approach facilitates superior cardiac reverse remodeling and yields more favorable clinical outcomes when compared to those patients who do not receive echocardiography-guided care. The next pertinent issue revolves around the potential expansion of ivabradine's clinical indications to encompass a broader spectrum of diseases. It is imperative to acknowledge that ivabradine may not yield clinically significant benefits in patients afflicted by heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, acute heart failure, sepsis, or stable angina. An important fact yet to be explored is the clinical applicability of ivabradine in patients with atrial fibrillation, a concern that beckons future investigation. In this review, the concept of overlap theory it introduced, along with its application to expand the indication of ivabradine and the overlap theory-guided optimal ivabradine therapy.

Implementation of evidence-based heart failure management: Regional variations between Japan and the USA

The implementation of optimal medical therapy is a crucial step in the management of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Over the prior three decades, there have been substantial advancements in this field. Early and accurate detection and diagnosis of the disease allow for the appropriate initiation of optimal therapies. The initiation and uptitration of optimal medical therapy including renin-angiotensin system inhibitor, beta-blocker, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor in the early stage would prevent the progression and morbidity of HF. Concurrently, individualized surveillance to recognize and treat signs of disease progression is critical given the progressive nature of HF, even among stable patients on optimal therapy. However, there remains a wide variation in regional practice regarding the initiation, titration, and long-term monitoring of this therapy. To cover the differences in approaches toward HFrEF management and the implementation of guideline-based medical therapy, we discuss the current evidence in this arena, differences in present guideline recommendations, and compare practice patterns in Japan and the USA using a case of new-onset HF as an example. We will discuss pros and cons of the way HF is managed in each region, and highlight potential areas for improvement in care.

Medical Therapy Before, During and After Hospitalization in Medicare Beneficiaries With Heart Failure and Diabetes: Get With The Guidelines - Heart Failure Registry

BACKGROUND

Patients hospitalized with heart failure (HF) and diabetes mellitus (DM) are at risk for worsening clinical status. Little is known about the frequency of therapeutic changes during hospitalization. We characterized the use of medical therapies before, during and after hospitalization in patients with HF and DM.

METHODS

We identified Medicare beneficiaries in Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure (GWTG-HF) hospitalized between July 2014 and September 2019 with Part D prescription coverage. We evaluated trends in the use of 7 classes of antihyperglycemic therapies (metformin, sulfonylureas, GLP-1RA, SGLT2-inhibitors, DPP-4 inhibitors, thiazolidinediones, and insulins) and 4 classes of HF therapies (evidence-based β-blockers, ACEi or ARB, MRA, and ARNI). Medication fills were assessed at 6 and 3 months before hospitalization, at hospital discharge and at 3 months post-discharge.

RESULTS

Among 35,165 Medicare beneficiaries, the median age was 77 years, 54% were women, and 76% were white; 11,660 (33%) had HFrEF (LVEF ≤ 40%), 3700 (11%) had HFmrEF (LVEF 41%-49%), and 19,805 (56%) had HFpEF (LVEF ≥ 50%). Overall, insulin was the most commonly prescribed antihyperglycemic after HF hospitalization (n = 12,919, 37%), followed by metformin (n = 7460, 21%) and sulfonylureas (n = 7030, 20%). GLP-1RA (n = 700, 2.0%) and SGLT2i (n = 287, 1.0%) use was low and did not improve over time. In patients with HFrEF, evidence-based beta-blocker, RASi, MRA, and ARNI fills during the 6 months preceding HF hospitalization were 63%, 62%, 19%, and 4%, respectively. Fills initially declined prior to hospitalization, but then rose from 3 months before hospitalization to discharge (beta-blocker: 56%-82%; RASi: 51%-57%, MRA: 15%-28%, ARNI: 3%-6%, triple therapy: 8%-20%; P < 0.01 for all). Prescription rates 3 months after hospitalization were similar to those at hospital discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

In-hospital optimization of medical therapy in patients with HF and DM is common in participating hospitals of a large US quality improvement registry.

Heart failure registries - Future directions

Heart failure (HF) is a growing, global public health issue. Despite advances in HF care, many challenges remain and HF outcomes are poor. Some of the major reasons for this are the lack of understanding and treatment for certain HF sub-types as well as the lack of implementation of treatment in areas where effective treatment exists. HF registries provide the opportunity to transform clinical research and patient care. Recently the registry-based randomized clinical trial has emerged as a pragmatic and inexpensive alternative to the gold standard in clinical trial design, the randomized controlled trial. Registries may also provide platforms for strategy trials, implementation trials, and screening. Using examples from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry and others, the present review provides insights into how registry-based research can address many of the unmet needs in HF.

Guideline-directed medical therapy in severe heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: An analysis from the HELP-HF registry

AIM

Persistent symptoms despite guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) and poor tolerance of GDMT are hallmarks of patients with advanced heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, real-world data on GDMT use, dose, and prognostic implications are lacking.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We included 699 consecutive patients with HFrEF and at least one 'I NEED HELP' marker for advanced HF enrolled in a multicentre registry. Beta-blockers (BB) were administered to 574 (82%) patients, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers or angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ACEi/ARB/ARNI) were administered to 381 (55%) patients and 416 (60%) received mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA). Overall, ≥50% of target doses were reached in 41%, 22%, and 56% of the patients on BB, ACEi/ARB/ARNI and MRA, respectively. Hypotension, bradycardia, kidney dysfunction and hyperkalaemia were the main causes of underprescription and/or underdosing, but up to a half of the patients did not receive target doses for unknown causes (51%, 41%, and 55% for BB, ACEi/ARB/ARNI and MRA, respectively). The proportions of patients receiving BB and ACEi/ARB/ARNI were lower among those fulfilling the 2018 HFA-ESC criteria for advanced HF. Treatment with BB and ACEi/ARB/ARNI were associated with a lower risk of death or HF hospitalizations (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48-0.84, and HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58-0.95, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In a large, real-world, contemporary cohort of patients with severe HFrEF, with at least one marker for advanced HF, prescription and uptitration of GDMT remained limited. A significant proportion of patients were undertreated due to unknown reasons suggesting a potential role of clinical inertia either by the prescribing healthcare professional or by the patient. Treatment with BB and ACEi/ARB/ARNI was associated with lower mortality/morbidity.

Association between performance measures and clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure in China: Results from the HERO study

BACKGROUND

There is great heterogeneity in the quality of care among hospitals in China, but studies on the performance measures and prognosis of patients with heart failure (HF) are still deficient.

HYPOTHESIS

Performance measures have been used as a guideline to clinicans, however, the association between them and outcomes among HF patients in China remains unclear.

METHODS

We analyzed 4497 patients with HF from the Heart Failure Registry of Patient Outcomes study. Performance measures were determined according to the guidelines, and the patients were divided into four groups based on a composite performance score. Multiple imputation and Cox proportional-hazard regression models were used to assess the association between the performance measures and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Overall, only 12.5% of patients met the top 25% of the performance measures, whereas 33.5% of patients met the bottom 25% of the measures. A total of 992 (22.2%) patients died within 1 year, involving a larger proportion of patients who had met only the bottom 25% of the performance measures than had met the top 25% (27.0% vs. 16.3%, respectively). The patients who met the top 25% of the measures had a lower 1-year mortality rate (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.78, 95% confidence interval: 0.61-0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

The association between performance measures and mortality appeared to follow a dose-response pattern with a larger degree of compliance with performance measures being associated with a lower mortality rate in patients with HF. Accordingly, the quality of care for patients with HF in China needs to be further improved.

Neuromodulation interventions in the management of heart failure

Despite remarkable improvements in the management of heart failure (HF), HF remains one of the most rapidly growing cardiovascular condition resulting in a substantial burden on healthcare systems worldwide. In clinical practice, however, a relevant proportion of patients are treated with suboptimal combinations and doses lower than those recommended in the current guidelines. Against this background, it remains important to identify new targets and investigate additional therapeutic options to alleviate symptoms and potentially improve prognosis in HF. Therefore, non-pharmacological interventions targeting autonomic imbalance in HF have been evaluated. This paper aims to review the physiology, available clinical data, and potential therapeutic role of device-based neuromodulation in HF.

Improving Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy for Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Review of Implementation Strategies

Despite recent advances in the use of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), achievement of target GDMT use and up-titration to goal dosages continue to be modest. In recent years, a number of interventional approaches to improve the usage of GDMT have been published, but many are limited by single-center experiences with small sample sizes. However, strategies including the use of multidisciplinary teams, dedicated GDMT titration algorithms and clinician audits with feedback have shown promise. There remains a critical need for large, rigorous trials to assess the utility of differing interventions to improve the use and titration of GDMT in HFrEF. Here, we review existing literature in GDMT implementation for those with HFrEF and discuss future directions and considerations in the field.

Uptake of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors in Hospitalized Patients With Heart Failure: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System

BACKGROUND

The use of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) in Veterans Affairs (VA) patients hospitalized with heart failure (HF) has not been reported previously.

METHODS

VA electronic health record data were used to identify patients hospitalized for HF (primary or secondary diagnosis) from 01/2019-11/2022. Patients with SGLT2i allergy, advanced/end-stage chronic kidney disease (CKD) or advanced HF therapies were excluded. We identified factors associated with discharge SGLT2i prescriptions for patients hospitalized due to HF in 2022. We also compared SGLT2i and angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) prescription rates. Hospital-level variations in SGLT2i prescriptions were assessed via the median odds ratio.

RESULTS

A total of 69,680 patients were hospitalized due to HF; 10.3% were prescribed SGLT2i at discharge (4.4% newly prescribed, 5.9% continued preadmission therapy). SGLT2i prescription increased over time and was higher in patients with HFrEF and primary HF. Among 15,762 patients hospitalized in 2022, SGLT2i prescription was more likely in patients with diabetes (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.27; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.09-2.47) and ischemic heart disease (aOR 1.14; 95% CI: 1.03-1.26). Patients with increased age (aOR 0.77 per 10 years; 95% CI: 0.73-0.80) and lower systolic blood pressure (aOR 0.94 per 10 mmHg; 95% CI: 0.92-0.96) were less likely to be prescribed SGLT2i, and SGLT2i prescription was not more likely in patients with CKD (aOR 1.07; 95% CI 0.98-1.16). The adjusted median odds ratio suggested a 1.8-fold variation in the likelihood that similar patients at 2 random VA sites were prescribed SGLT2i (range 0-21.0%). In patients with EF ≤ 40%, 30.9% were prescribed SGLT2i while 26.9% were prescribed ARNI (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

One-tenth of VA patients hospitalized for HF were prescribed SGLT2i at discharge. Opportunities exist to reduce variation in SGLT2i prescription rates across hospitals and to promote its use in patients with CKD and older age.

Management of Tachycardia-Mediated Cardiomyopathy: Experience from the Vancouver General Hospital Cardiac Function Clinic (TMC-EXPLOR Study)

Background

Tachycardia-mediated cardiomyopathy (TMC) is a reversible form of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), most commonly caused by atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter. Evidence for its management is scarce, and practice patterns are highly variable.

Objective

To describe management patterns for HFrEF and atrial arrhythmias in patients with TMC at a specialty heart failure clinic.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study involved adults with HFrEF and a physician-determined diagnosis of TMC, with an initial visit for this problem between October 2018 and October 2019. The 2 primary outcomes, evaluated at 1 year after the initial visit, were the proportion of patients receiving triple therapy (combination of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor [or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blocker if ejection fraction improved to > 40% by 1 year], ß-blocker, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist at any dose) and the proportion receiving or with a plan to receive rhythm control.

Results

A total of 59 participants met the inclusion criteria. The mean age was 73 years, 39 patients (66%) were male, and 42 (71%) had hypertension. At 1-year follow-up, 42 (71%) were receiving triple therapy, and rhythm control was attempted or planned for 20 (34%). Among the 17 patients (29%) not receiving triple therapy, a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist was the agent most commonly omitted.

Conclusions

In a specialty heart failure clinic, most patients with TMC were receiving triple therapy, with a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist being the agent most commonly missing among those not receiving triple therapy. One-third of patients with TMC had received a rhythm-control strategy. These gaps in HFrEF therapy and rhythm control represent key areas for quality improvement initiatives in the management of patients with TMC.

Emerging devices for heart failure management

There have been significant advances in the treatment of heart failure (HF) in recent years, driven by significant strides in guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT). Despite this, HF is still associated with high levels of morbidity and mortality, and most patients do not receive optimal medical therapy. In conjunction with the improvement of GDMT, novel device therapies have been developed to better treat HF. These devices include technology capable of remotely monitoring HF physiology, devices that modulate the autonomic nervous system, and those that structurally change the heart with the ultimate aim of addressing the root causes of HF physiology As these device therapies gradually integrate into the fabric of HF patient care, it becomes increasingly important for modern cardiologists to become familiar with them. Hence, the objective of this review is to shed light on currently emerging devices for the treatment of HF.

Bridging gaps and optimizing implementation of guideline-directed medical therapy for heart failure

Despite robust scientific evidence and strong guideline recommendations, there remain significant gaps in initiation and dose titration of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for heart failure (HF) among eligible patients. Reasons surrounding these gaps are multifactorial, and largely attributed to patient, healthcare professionals, and institutional challenges. Concurrently, HF remains a predominant cause of mortality and hospitalization, emphasizing the critical need for improved delivery of therapy to patients in routine clinical practice. To optimize GDMT, various implementation strategies have emerged in the recent decade such as in-hospital rapid initiation of GDMT, improving patient adherence, addressing clinical inertia, improving affordability, engagement in quality improvement registries, multidisciplinary clinics, and EHR-integrated interventions. This review highlights the current use and barriers to optimal utilization of GDMT, and proposes novel strategies aimed at improving GDMT in HF.

Efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan after six months in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and asymptomatic hypotension

BACKGROUND

It is not clear whether sacubitril/valsartan is beneficial for patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and low systolic blood pressure (SBP). This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and tolerability of sacubitril/valsartan in HFrEF patients with SBP < 100 mmHg.

METHODS & RESULTS

An observational study was conducted on 117 patients, 40.2% of whom had SBP < 100 mmHg without symptomatic hypotension, and 59.8% of whom had SBP ≥ 100 mmHg in an optimized HF follow-up management system. At the 6-month follow-up, 52.4% of patients with SBP < 100 mmHg and 70.0% of those with SBP ≥ 100 mmHg successfully reached the target dosages of sacubitril/valsartan. A reduction in the concentration of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide was similar between patients with SBP < 100 mmHg and SBP ≥ 100 mmHg (1627.5 pg/mL and 1340.1 pg/mL, respectively; P = 0.75). The effect of sacubitril/valsartan on left ventricular ejection fraction was observed in both SBP categories, with a 10.8% increase in patients with SBP < 100 mmHg (P < 0.001) and a 14.0% increase in patients with SBP ≥ 100 mmHg (P < 0.001). The effects of sacubitril/valsartan on SBP were statistically significant and inverse across both SBP categories (P = 0.001), with an increase of 7.5 mmHg in patients with SBP < 100 mmHg and a decrease of 11.5 mmHg in patients with SBP ≥ 100 mmHg. No statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of the occurrence of symptomatic hypotension, deteriorating renal function, hyperkalemia, angioedema, or stroke.

CONCLUSIONS

Within an optimized HF follow-up management system, sacubitril/valsartan exhibited excellent tolerability and prompted left ventricular reverse remodeling in patients with HFrEF who presented asymptomatic hypotension.

Initiation and Up-Titration of Guideline-Based Medications in Hospitalized Acute Heart Failure Patients - A Report From the West Tokyo Heart Failure Registry

BACKGROUND

Despite recommendations from clinical practice guidelines to initiate and titrate guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) during their hospitalization, patients with acute heart failure (AHF) are frequently undertreated. In this study we aimed to clarify GDMT implementation and titration rates, as well as the long-term outcomes, in hospitalized AHF patients.Methods and Results: Among 3,164 consecutive hospitalized AHF patients included in a Japanese multicenter registry, 1,400 (44.2%) with ejection fraction ≤40% were analyzed. We assessed GDMT dosage (β-blockers, renin-angiotensin inhibitors, and mineralocorticoid-receptor antagonists) at admission and discharge, examined the contributing factors for up-titration, and evaluated associations between drug initiation/up-titration and 1-year post-discharge all-cause death and rehospitalization for HF via propensity score matching. The mean age of the patients was 71.5 years and 30.7% were female. Overall, 1,051 patients (75.0%) were deemed eligible for GDMT, based on their baseline vital signs, renal function, and electrolyte values. At discharge, only 180 patients (17.1%) received GDMT agents up-titrated to >50% of the maximum titrated dose. Up-titration was associated with a lower risk of 1-year clinical outcomes (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.58, 95% confidence interval: 0.35-0.96). Younger age and higher body mass index were significant predictors of drug up-titration.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant evidence-practice gaps in the use and dose of GDMT remain. Considering the associated favorable outcomes, further efforts to improve its implementation seem crucial.

Heart failure medical therapy prior to mitral transcatheter edge-to-edge repair: the STS/ACC Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) is recommended before mitral valve transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (MTEER) in patients with heart failure (HF) and severe functional mitral regurgitation (FMR). Whether MTEER is being performed on the background of optimal GDMT in clinical practice is unknown.

METHODS

Patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 50% who underwent MTEER for FMR from 23 July 2019 to 31 March 2022 in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry were identified. Pre-procedure GDMT utilization was assessed. Cox proportional hazards models were constructed to evaluate associations between pre-MTEER therapy (no/single, double, or triple therapy) and risk of 1-year mortality or HF hospitalization (HFH).

RESULTS

Among 4199 patients across 449 sites, beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors were used in 85.1%, 44.4%, 28.6%, and 19.9% before MTEER, respectively. Triple therapy was prescribed for 19.2%, double therapy for 38.2%, single therapy for 36.0%, and 6.5% were on no GDMT. Significant centre-level variation in the proportion of patients on pre-intervention triple therapy was observed (0%-61%; adjusted median odds ratio 1.48 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.25-3.88]; P < .001). In patients eligible for 1-year follow-up (n = 2014; 341 sites), the composite rate of 1-year mortality or HFH was lowest in patients prescribed triple therapy (23.0%) compared with double (24.8%), single (35.7%), and no (41.1%) therapy (P < .01 comparing across groups). Associations persisted after accounting for relevant clinical characteristics, with lower risk in patients prescribed triple therapy [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.73, 95% CI .55-.97] and double therapy (aHR 0.69, 95% CI .56-.86) before MTEER compared with no/single therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Under one-fifth of patients with LVEF <50% who underwent MTEER for FMR in this US nationwide registry were prescribed comprehensive GDMT, with substantial variation across sites. Compared with no/single therapy, triple and double therapy before MTEER were independently associated with reduced risk of mortality or HFH 1 year after intervention.

Optimization of GDMT for patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: can physiological and biological barriers explain the gaps in adherence to heart failure guidelines?

Heart failure is a growing epidemic with high mortality rates and recurrent hospital admissions that creates a burden on affected individuals, their caregivers and the whole healthcare system. Throughout the years, many randomized trials have established the effectiveness of several pharmacological therapies and electrophysiological devices to reduce hospitalizations and improve quality of life and survival, mostly for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). These studies led to the publication of national societies' recommendations to guide clinicians in the management of HFrEF. Yet, many reports have shown significant care gaps in adherence to these recommendations in clinical practice, highlighting suboptimal use and/or dosing of evidence-based therapies. Adherence to guidelines has been shown to be associated with the best prognosis in HFrEF, with patients presenting with intolerances or contraindications having the highest risk of events; however, it remains unclear whether this association is causal or merely a marker of more advanced disease. Furthermore, individual characteristics may limit the possibility of reaching the targeted dosage of specific agents. Herein, we provide a comprehensive overview of clinicians' adherence to heart failure guidelines in a specialized real-life setting, particularly regarding use and optimization of guideline-derived medical therapies, as well as the implementation of more recent agents such as sacubitril/valsartan and SGLT2 inhibitors. We seek potential explanations for suboptimal treatment and its impact on patient outcomes.

Beta-blocker management in patients admitted for acute heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: a review and expert consensus opinion

The role of the beta-adrenergic signaling pathway in heart failure (HF) is pivotal. Early blockade of this pathway with beta-blocker (BB) therapy is recommended as the first-line medication for patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Conversely, in patients with severe acute HF (AHF), including those with resolved cardiogenic shock (CS), BB initiation can be hazardous. There are very few data on the management of BB in these situations. The present expert consensus aims to review all published data on the use of BB in patients with severe decompensated AHF, with or without hemodynamic compromise, and proposes an expert-recommended practical algorithm for the prescription and monitoring of BB therapy in critical settings.

Supra-Normal Left Ventricular Function

Heart failure (HF) is often categorized by left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (LVEF). A new category of HF characterized by supra-normal LVEF (>65%), named HF with supra-normal ejection fraction (HFsnEF), has been recently proposed. Some studies reported that patients with supra-normal LVEF might have an increased risk of long-term major adverse cardiovascular events and U-shaped mortality patterns. Currently, the prognosis of HFsnEF is not well established but seems to be associated with an increased risk of long-term major adverse cardiovascular events. It has been reported that HFsnEF is more prevalent in women and is associated with higher prevalence of nonischemic HF, higher blood urea nitrogen plasma levels, lower levels of natriuretic peptides, and to be less likely treated with β blockers. The pathophysiology of HFsnEF would be associated with microvascular dysfunction because of microvascular inflammation or reduced coronary flow reserve, and low stroke volume index with smaller cardiac chamber dimensions and concentric LV geometry. In this study, we systematically reviewed published data on patients with s supra-normal LV function and reported its definition, proposed pathophysiology, phenotypes, diagnostic strategy, and prognosis.

Effects of recombinant human brain natriuretic peptide combined with tolvaptan on cardiac and renal function and serum inflammatory factors in patients with severe heart failure

This study examined the effects of recombinant human brain natriuretic peptide (rhBNP) combined with tolvaptan on cardiac and renal function and serum inflammatory factors in patients with severe heart failure (HF). This retrospective study included 90 patients with severe HF who were treated at our hospital between January 2019 and August 2021. Patients treated with tolvaptan tablets were assigned to the control group, and those treated with rhBNP combined with tolvaptan were assigned to the observation group. Efficacy, cardiac function, levels of inflammatory factors, renal function, 6 minutes walking test, Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire score, and adverse reactions were assessed. The curative effect (97.78% vs 77.78%) and improvement in cardiac function were greater in the observation group than in the control group (P < .05). Decreased levels of inflammatory factors were seen in both groups after treatment, and the levels of tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin-33, and intercellular adhesion factor-1 in the observation group were lower than those in the control group (P < .05). The 6 minutes walking test was higher and the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire score was lower in the observation group compared with the control group (P < .05). The incidence of adverse reactions such as dry mouth, nausea, polyuria, hypotension, and headache in the observation group was lower than that in the control group (P < .05). In conclusion, for patients with severe HF, rhBNP combined with tolvaptan can improve cardiac function, alleviate symptoms of dyspnea, protect renal function, and reduce serum inflammatory factor levels when compared with tolvaptan alone.

Clinical Inertia Among Outpatients With Heart Failure: Application of Treatment Nonintensification Taxonomy to EPIC-HF Trial

BACKGROUND

The contribution of clinical inertia to suboptimal guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

This study examined reasons for GDMT nonintensification and characterized clinical inertia.

METHODS

In this secondary analysis of EPIC-HF (Electronically Delivered, Patient-Activation Tool for Intensification of Medications for Chronic Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction), a randomized clinical trial evaluating a patient-activation tool on GDMT utilization, we performed a sequential, explanatory mixed-methods study. Reasons for nonintensification among 4 medication classes were assigned according to an expanded published taxonomy using structured chart reviews. Audio transcripts of clinic encounters were analyzed to further characterize nonintensification reasons. Integration occurred during the interpretation phase.

RESULTS

Among 292 HFrEF patients who completed a cardiology visit, 185 (63.4%) experienced no treatment intensification, of whom 90 (48.6%) had at least 1 opportunity for intensification of a medication class with no documented contraindication or barriers (ie, clinical inertia). Nonintensification reasons varied by medication class, and included heightened risk of adverse effects (range 18.2%-31.6%), patient nonadherence (range 0.8%-1.1%), patient preferences and beliefs (range 0.6%-0.9%), comanagement with other providers (range 4.6%-5.6%), prioritization of other issues (range 15.6%-31.8%), multiple categories (range 16.5%-22.7%), and clinical inertia (range 22.7%-31.6%). A qualitative analysis of 32 clinic audio recordings demonstrated common characteristics of clinical inertia: 1) clinician review of medication regimens without education or intensification discussions; 2) patient stability as justification for nonintensification; and 3) shorter encounters for nonintensification vs intensification.

CONCLUSIONS

In this comprehensive study exploring HFrEF prescribing, clinical inertia is a main contributor to nonintensification within an updated taxonomy classification for suboptimal GDMT prescribing. This approach should help target strategies overcoming GDMT underuse.

Geographic Variation in the Quality of Heart Failure Care Among U.S. Veterans

BACKGROUND

The burden of heart failure is growing. Guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMT) reduce adverse outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Whether there is geographic variation in HFrEF quality of care is not well described.

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated variation nationally for prescription of GDMT within the Veterans Health Administration.

METHODS

A cohort of Veterans with HFrEF had their address linked to hospital referral regions (HRRs). GDMT prescription was defined using pharmacy data between July 1, 2020, and July 1, 2021. Within HRRs, we calculated the percentage of Veterans prescribed GDMT and a composite GDMT z-score. National choropleth maps were created to evaluate prescription variation. Associations between GDMT performance and demographic characteristics were evaluated using linear regression.

RESULTS

Maps demonstrated significant variation in the HRR composite score and GDMT prescriptions. Within HRRs, the prescription of beta-blockers to Veterans was highest with a median of 80% (IQR: 77.3%-82.2%) followed by angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (69.3%; IQR: 66.4%-72.1%), sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (10.3%; IQR: 7.7%-12.8%), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (29.2%; IQR: 25.8%-33.9%), and angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (12.2%; IQR: 8.6%-15.3%). HRR composite GDMT z-scores were inversely associated with the HRR median Gini coefficient (R = -0.13; P = 0.0218) and the percentage of low-income residents (R = -0.117; P = 0.0413).

CONCLUSIONS

Wide geographic differences exist for HFrEF care. Targeted strategies may be required to increase GDMT prescription for Veterans in lower-performing regions, including those affected by income inequality and poverty.

Duration of Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction and Outcomes With Sacubitril/Valsartan: Insights From the PARAGON-HF Trial

OBJECTIVE

In this post hoc analysis of the PARAGON-HF (Prospective Comparison of ARNI with ARB Global Outcomes in HFpEF) trial, we evaluated clinical outcomes and responses to sacubitril/valsartan by duration of heart failure (HF) with left ventricular ejection fraction ≥ 45% at initial diagnosis.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The primary outcome was a composite of total hospitalizations due to HF and cardiovascular deaths, analyzed by using a semiparametric proportional rates method, stratified by geographic region. Among 4784 (99.7%) randomized participants in the PARAGON-HF trial for whom baseline HF duration was captured, 1359 (28%) had durations of HF of < 6 months, 1295 (27%) of 6 months-2 years, and 2130 (45%) of > 2 years. Longer HF duration was associated with higher comorbidity burdens, worse health status and lower rates of prior hospitalization due to HF. Over a median follow-up of 35 months, longer HF duration was associated with a higher risk of first and recurrent primary events (per 100 patient-years): < 6 months, 12.0 (95% CI, 10.4-14.0); 6 months-2 years, 12.2 (10.6-14.2); > 2 years, 15.8 (14.2-17.5). Relative treatment effects of sacubitril/valsartan vs valsartan were consistent, irrespective of baseline HF duration on the primary endpoint (Pinteraction = 0.112). Clinically meaningful (≥ 5 point) improvements in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-Clinical Summary Scores were also similarly observed, irrespective of HF duration; (Pinteraction = 0.112). Adverse events were similar between treatment arms across HF duration categories.

CONCLUSIONS

In PARAGON-HF, longer HF duration was independently predictive of adverse HF outcomes. Treatment effects of sacubitril/valsartan were consistent, irrespective of baseline HF duration, suggesting that even ambulatory patients with longstanding HFpEF and predominantly mild symptoms stand to benefit from treatment optimization.

Comparative Outcomes of Sacubitril/Valsartan Use After Hospitalization for Heart Failure Among Medicare Beneficiaries Naïve to Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitors

Sacubitril/valsartan improves outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis). However, data on postdischarge outcomes in renin-angiotensin system inhibitor (RASi)-naïve patients are limited. We included Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥65 years who were hospitalized for HFrEF in the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry between October 2015 and June 2019, had part D prescription coverage, and were not on RASi therapy during the 6 months before hospital admission. We examined the associations between sacubitril/valsartan prescription at hospital discharge and outcomes at 30 days and 1 year after discharge using overlap-weighted median regression and Cox proportional hazards models. The end points included "home time" (defined as days alive and out of any health care institution), mortality, and rehospitalization. Among 3,572 patients with HFrEF and who are naïve to RASi therapy, at discharge, 290 (8.1%) were prescribed sacubitril/valsartan and 1,390 (38.9%) were prescribed ACEis and angiotensin receptor blockers. After adjusting for baseline characteristics, patients prescribed sacubitril/valsartan had a longer median home time (parameter estimate 27.0 days, 95% confidence interval [CI] 12.40 to 41.6, p <0.001) and lower all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0.74, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.91, p = 0.004) at 1 year than patients not prescribed sacubitril/valsartan. The prescription of sacubitril/valsartan was not significantly associated with all-cause rehospitalization (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.03, p = 0.10) or heart failure rehospitalization (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.07, p = 0.19). In a restricted comparison of patients discharged on sacubitril/valsartan versus ACEis and angiotensin receptor blockers, there were no significant differences in the outcomes. In conclusion, in this contemporary population of RASi-naïve patients with HFrEF from routine clinical practice, compared with not initiating, the initiation of sacubitril/valsartan at discharge was associated with longer home time and improvements in overall survival.