Rationale and Design of the ATHENA-HF Trial: Aldosterone Targeted Neurohormonal Combined With Natriuresis Therapy in Heart Failure

Finerenone: a breakthrough mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist for heart failure, diabetes and chronic kidney disease

Background

Aldosterone is categorized as a mineralocorticoid hormone produced in the zona glomerulosa of the adrenal cortex. Aldosterone has considerable action in sodium and water retention along with cardiac remodeling, promoting fibrosis and these detrimental effects have been counteracted by mineralocorticoid receptors antagonists over time. Spironolactone, a non-selective steroidal MRA used extensively is potent but has serious adverse effects like gynecomastia and hyperkalemia. Eplerenone another second generation MRA, though non-steroidal and selective causes hyperkalemia and adversely effecting renal functions.

Main body

Recently Finerenone- a novel MRA has been introduced which is as potent like spironolactone with less adverse effects and improved cardiovascular outcomes particularly in chronic kidney failure with diabetes. The article reviews the physical and chemical properties of Finerenone and compares it with MRAs already in use, and then about the patient specific uses of Finerenone and future avenues of it. Finerenone is non-steroidal selective MRA, with promising results in improving the deterioration of renal functions in CKD with DM, reducing albuminuria with less hyperkalemia along with improvement in cardiovascular outcomes by reducing heart failure events.

Conclusion

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists have a proven role in preventing the adverse effects of RAAS pathway on heart, kidneys and blood vessels. Non-selective steroidal MRAs have potent action but by virtue of their non-selectivity associated with adverse effects like gynecomastia, hirsutism along with hyperkalemia Finerenone is novel non-steroidal & highly selective MRA, with promising results in halting the deterioration of renal functions in CKD with DM, reducing albuminuria, improvement in cardiovascular outcomes by reducing heart failure events albeit with less hyperkalemia. More randomized studies in dedicated HF patients are ongoing with Finerenone to prove it is worth in this sector with huge unmet need despite GDMT. Finerenone alleviates the risk of adverse renal and cardiac outcomes in patients with diabetes and CKD despite baseline medical therapy.

Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists in Heart Failure: An Update

Spironolactone, a steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA), has been used to treat patients with heart failure (HF) for more than half a century. Spironolactone improved outcomes in patients with severely symptomatic HF with reduced ejection fraction, and later, eplerenone expanded the benefits to patients with mildly symptomatic HF with reduced ejection fraction and myocardial infarction complicated by HF. Spironolactone reduced HF events in some patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction, but the results were not generalizable to all patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction. More recently, the nonsteroidal MRA finerenone improved the HF outcomes of patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction, expanding the benefits previously seen among patients with diabetes and albuminuric chronic kidney disease. The use of MRAs has been limited due to excessive concern about hyperkalemia. Education about the limited true risk associated with hyperkalemia, and about how to predict, prevent, and manage hyperkalemia, may lead to wider acceptability and use of these agents. Several ongoing trials are testing steroidal and nonsteroidal MRAs in HF populations. In this review, we perform a critical appraisal of MRA use in HF populations and point toward future directions.

Kidney Dysfunction, Hepatic Impairment, and Lipid Metabolism Abnormalities in Patients with Precapillary Pulmonary Hypertension

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary hypertension (PH) is a global health issue that has profound medical and research implications.

METHODS

This retrospective study examined changes in renal and liver function, as well as lipid metabolism, over a 12-month period in 49 adult patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH). All cases were admitted, managed, and followed up with in the PH Center, County Emergency Clinical Hospital of Targu Mures, Romania.

RESULTS

Kidney dysfunction was observed in 12.24% of cases at baseline, decreasing to 8.16% at 12 months, and CTEPH patients were more affected. In particular, CTEPH patients exhibited an improvement in renal function, confirmed by an increase in their glomerular filtration rates. Hepatic impairment was present in 57.14% of subjects at baseline, declining to 42.86% at 12 months, with significant improvements noted in the PAH group. Lipid metabolic dysregulations were experienced by 22.45% of all patients at baseline, decreasing to 16.33% at 6 months, with a slow elevation to 24.49% at 12 months, but with no statistically significant differences. Pharmacological regimens were adjusted in accordance with the PH groups, a patient's functional and clinical response, and laboratory tests.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate the multi-organ damage in PH and the importance of individualized treatment approaches.

How do we define high and low dose intensity of heart failure medications: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Older adults with heart failure often experience adverse drug events with high doses of heart failure medications. Recognizing whether a patient is on a high or low dose intensity heart failure medication can be helpful for daily practice, since it could potentially guide the physician on which symptoms to look for, whether from overdosing or underdosing. However, the current guideline does not provide sufficient information about the dose intensity below the target dose. Furthermore, the definition of high or low-intensity heart failure medication is unclear, and there is no consensus.

METHODS

To close the knowledge gap, we conducted a scoping review of the current literature to identify the most frequently used definition of high versus low doses of heart failure medications. We searched Pubmed, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library using comprehensive search terms that can capture the intensity of heart failure medications.

RESULTS

We reviewed 464 articles, including 144 articles that had information about beta-blockers (BB), 179 articles about angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi), 75 articles about angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), 80 articles about diuretics, 37 articles about mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA), and 33 articles about angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI). For hydralazine with isosorbide dinitrate or ivabradine, we could not identify any eligible articles. We identified 40 medications with most frequently used definitions of dose intensity. Four medications (nadolol, pindolol, cilazapril, and torsemide) did not reach consensus in definitions. Most of the BBs, ACEis, or ARBs used the definition of low being < 50% of the target dose and high being ≥ 50% of the target dose from the guideline. However, for lisinopril and losartan, the most commonly used definitions of high or low were from pivotal clinical trials with a pre-defined definition of high or low.

CONCLUSION

Our comprehensive scoping review studies identified the most frequently used definition of dose intensity for 40 medications but could not identify the definitions for 4 medications. The results of the current scoping review will be helpful for clinicians to have awareness whether the currently prescribed dose is considered high - requiring close monitoring of side effects, or low - requiring more aggressive up-titration.

Therapies for patients with coexisting heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) are two common comorbidities that share similar pathophysiological mechanisms. There is a growing interest in the potential of targeted therapies to improve outcomes in patients with coexisting HFrEF and NAFLD. This manuscript reviews current and potential therapies for patients with coexisting HFrEF and NAFLD. Pharmacological therapies, including angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, mineralocorticoids receptor antagonist, and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors, have been shown to reduce fibrosis and fat deposits in the liver. However, there are currently no data showing the beneficial effects of sacubitril/valsartan, ivabradine, hydralazine, isosorbide nitrates, digoxin, or beta blockers on NAFLD in patients with HFrEF. This study highlights the importance of considering HFrEF and NAFLD when developing treatment plans for patients with these comorbidities. Further research is needed in patients with coexisting HFrEF and NAFLD, with an emphasis on novel therapies and the importance of a multidisciplinary approach for managing these complex comorbidities.

An overview of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists as a treatment option for patients with heart failure: the current state-of-the-art and future outlook

INTRODUCTION

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) improve cardiovascular outcomes in patients with heart failure. These benefits of MRAs vary in different heart failure populations based on left ventricular ejection fraction and associated comorbidities.

AREAS COVERED

We define the pharmacologic properties of MRAs and the pathophysiological rationale for their utility in heart failure. We outline the current literature on the use of MRAs in different heart failure populations, including reduced and preserved ejection fraction (HFrEF/HFpEF) and acute heart failure decompensation. Finally, we describe the limitations of currently available data and propose future directions of study.

EXPERT OPINION

While there is strong evidence supporting the use of MRAs in HFrEF, evidence in patients with HFpEF or acute heart failure is less definitive. Comorbidities such as obesity or atrial fibrillation could be clinical modifiers of the response to MRAs and potentially alter the risk/benefit ratio in these subpopulations. Emerging evidence for new non-steroidal MRAs reveal promising preliminary results that, if confirmed in large randomized clinical trials, could favor a change in clinical practice.

Multinephron Segment Diuretic Therapy to Overcome Diuretic Resistance in Acute Heart Failure: A Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

The concept of multinephron segment diuretic therapy (MSDT) has been recommended in severe diuretic resistance with only expert opinion and case-level evidence. The purpose of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of MSDT, combining 4 diuretic classes, in acute heart failure (AHF) complicated by diuretic resistance.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A retrospective analysis was conducted in patients hospitalized with AHF at a single medical center who received MSDT, including concomitant carbonic anhydrase inhibitor, loop, thiazide, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist diuretics. Subjects served as their own controls with efficacy evaluated as urine output and weight change before and after MSDT. Serum chemistries, renal replacement therapies, and in-hospital mortality were evaluated for safety. Patients with severe diuretic resistance before MSDT were analyzed as a subcohort. A total of 167 patients with AHF and diuretic resistance received MSDT. MSDT was associated with increased median 24-hour urine output in the first day of therapy compared with the previous day (2.16 L [0.95-4.14 L] to 3.08 L [1.74-4.86 L], P = .003) in the total cohort and in the Severe diuretic resistance cohort (0.91 L [0.43-1.43 L] to 2.08 L [1.13-3.96 L], P < .001). The median cumulative weight loss at day 7 or discharge was -7.4 kg (-15.3 to -3.4 kg) (P = .02). Neither serum sodium, chloride, potassium, bicarbonate, or creatinine changed significantly relative to baseline (P > .05 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

In an AHF cohort with diuretic resistance, MSDT was associated with increased diuresis without changes in serum chemistries or kidney function. Prospective studies of MSDT in AHF and diuretic resistance are warranted.

Early use of remote dielectric sensing after hospitalization to reduce heart failure readmissions

Aims

Readmission after hospitalization for acute decompensated heart failure (HF) remains a major public health problem. Use of remote dielectric sensing (ReDS) to measure lung water volume allows for an objective assessment of volume status and may guide medical optimization for HF. We hypothesized that the use of ReDS would lower 30 day readmission in patients referred to rapid follow‐up (RFU) clinic after HF discharge.

Methods and results

We conducted a retrospective analysis of the use of ReDS for patients scheduled for RFU within 10 days post‐discharge for HF at Mount Sinai Hospital between 1 July 2017 and 31 July 2018. Diuretics were adjusted using a pre‐specified algorithm. The association between use of ReDS and 30 day readmission was evaluated. A total of 220 patients were included. Mean age was 62.9 ± 14.7 years, and 36.4% were female. ReDS was performed in 80 (36.4%) and led to medication adjustment in 52 (65%). Use of ReDS was associated with a lower rate of 30 day cardiovascular readmission [2.6% vs. 11.8%, hazard ratio (HR): 0.21; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.05–0.89; P = 0.04] and a trend towards lower all‐cause readmission (6.5% vs. 14.1%, HR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.16–1.15; P = 0.09) as compared with patients without a ReDS assessment.

Conclusions

ReDS‐guided HF therapy during RFU after HF hospitalization may be associated with lower risk of 30 day readmission.

Aldosterone antagonists in addition to renin angiotensin system antagonists for preventing the progression of chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) is used to reduce proteinuria and retard the progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD). However, resolution of proteinuria may be incomplete with these therapies and the addition of an aldosterone antagonist may be added to further prevent progression of CKD. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2009 and updated in 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of aldosterone antagonists (selective (eplerenone), non-selective (spironolactone or canrenone), or non-steroidal mineralocorticoid antagonists (finerenone)) in adults who have CKD with proteinuria (nephrotic and non-nephrotic range) on: patient-centred endpoints including kidney failure (previously know as end-stage kidney disease (ESKD)), major cardiovascular events, and death (any cause); kidney function (proteinuria, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and doubling of serum creatinine); blood pressure; and adverse events (including hyperkalaemia, acute kidney injury, and gynaecomastia).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 13 January 2020 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that compared aldosterone antagonists in combination with ACEi or ARB (or both) to other anti-hypertensive strategies or placebo in participants with proteinuric CKD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. Data were summarised using random effects meta-analysis. We expressed summary treatment estimates as a risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes, or standardised mean difference (SMD) when different scales were used together with their 95% confidence interval (CI). Risk of bias were assessed using the Cochrane tool. Evidence certainty was evaluated using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-four studies (5745 participants) were included. Risk of bias in the evaluated methodological domains were unclear or high risk in most studies. Adequate random sequence generation was present in 12 studies, allocation concealment in five studies, blinding of participant and investigators in 18 studies, blinding of outcome assessment in 15 studies, and complete outcome reporting in 24 studies. All studies comparing aldosterone antagonists to placebo or standard care were used in addition to an ACEi or ARB (or both). None of the studies were powered to detect differences in patient-level outcomes including kidney failure, major cardiovascular events or death. Aldosterone antagonists had uncertain effects on kidney failure (2 studies, 84 participants: RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.33 to 27.65, I² = 0%; very low certainty evidence), death (3 studies, 421 participants: RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.10 to 3.50, I² = 0%; low certainty evidence), and cardiovascular events (3 studies, 1067 participants: RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.26 to 3.56; I² = 42%; low certainty evidence) compared to placebo or standard care. Aldosterone antagonists may reduce protein excretion (14 studies, 1193 participants: SMD -0.51, 95% CI -0.82 to -0.20, I² = 82%; very low certainty evidence), eGFR (13 studies, 1165 participants, MD -3.00 mL/min/1.73 m², 95% CI -5.51 to -0.49, I² = 0%, low certainty evidence) and systolic blood pressure (14 studies, 911 participants: MD -4.98 mmHg, 95% CI -8.22 to -1.75, I² = 87%; very low certainty evidence) compared to placebo or standard care. Aldosterone antagonists probably increase the risk of hyperkalaemia (17 studies, 3001 participants: RR 2.17, 95% CI 1.47 to 3.22, I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence), acute kidney injury (5 studies, 1446 participants: RR 2.04, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.97, I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence), and gynaecomastia (4 studies, 281 participants: RR 5.14, 95% CI 1.14 to 23.23, I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence) compared to placebo or standard care. Non-selective aldosterone antagonists plus ACEi or ARB had uncertain effects on protein excretion (2 studies, 139 participants: SMD -1.59, 95% CI -3.80 to 0.62, I² = 93%; very low certainty evidence) but may increase serum potassium (2 studies, 121 participants: MD 0.31 mEq/L, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.45, I² = 0%; low certainty evidence) compared to diuretics plus ACEi or ARB. Selective aldosterone antagonists may increase the risk of hyperkalaemia (2 studies, 500 participants: RR 1.62, 95% CI 0.66 to 3.95, I² = 0%; low certainty evidence) compared ACEi or ARB (or both). There were insufficient studies to perform meta-analyses for the comparison between non-selective aldosterone antagonists and calcium channel blockers, selective aldosterone antagonists plus ACEi or ARB (or both) and nitrate plus ACEi or ARB (or both), and non-steroidal mineralocorticoid antagonists and selective aldosterone antagonists.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effects of aldosterone antagonists when added to ACEi or ARB (or both) on the risks of death, major cardiovascular events, and kidney failure in people with proteinuric CKD are uncertain. Aldosterone antagonists may reduce proteinuria, eGFR, and systolic blood pressure in adults who have mild to moderate CKD but may increase the risk of hyperkalaemia, acute kidney injury and gynaecomastia when added to ACEi and/or ARB.

Outcomes of diuretics in rheumatic heart disease with compensated chronic heart failure: a retrospective study

Aims

The purpose of this retrospective propensity score‐matched study was to evaluate the superiority of different application approaches [continuous diuretics use (CDU) vs. intermittent diuretics use (IDU)] and types [loop diuretics (LDs) vs. thiazide diuretics (TDs)] of diuretics on long‐term outcomes for rheumatic heart disease (RHD) patients with compensated chronic heart failure (CHF).

Methods and results

A total of 494 RHD patients with compensated CHF were analysed after propensity score matching. Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to investigate the associations of different diuretic application approaches and types with all‐cause mortality, cardiovascular death (CVD), and cerebrovascular death. Binary logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate the associations of different diuretic application approaches and types with 1‐, 3‐, and 5‐year heart failure (HF) re‐hospitalization as well as new‐onset atrial fibrillation (AF). In the comparison between IDU and CDU strategies for RHD patients with compensated CHF, CDU was associated with increased risks of all‐cause mortality [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 2.47, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.54–3.97, P < 0.001] and CVD (adjusted HR = 3.67, 95% CI: 1.95–6.89, P < 0.001) except cerebrovascular death (adjusted HR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.34–3.41, P = 0.905). CDU was also associated with increased risks of 3‐year [adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 1.80, 95% CI: 1.09–2.96, P = 0.022] and 5‐year (adjusted OR = 2.02, 95% CI: 1.18–3.45, P = 0.010) HF re‐hospitalization risk and new‐onset AF (adjusted OR = 2.34, 95% CI: 1.31–4.20, P = 0.004) except 1‐year HF re‐hospitalization risk (adjusted OR = 1.54, 95% CI: 0.88–2.70, P = 0.130). In the comparison between TDs and LDs among study participants receiving IDU strategy, LDs were only associated with decreased 1‐year HF re‐hospitalization risk (adjusted OR = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.12–0.77, P = 0.012) rather than all‐cause mortality, CVD, cerebrovascular death, 3‐ and 5‐year HF re‐hospitalization, and new‐onset AF (all adjusted P > 0.05). In the comparison between TDs and LDs among study participants receiving CDU strategy, LDs were not associated with cerebrovascular death and 1‐year HF re‐hospitalization (both adjusted P > 0.05) but with increased risks of all‐cause mortality (adjusted HR = 1.80, 95% CI: 1.09–2.99, P = 0.023), CVD (adjusted HR = 1.89, 95% CI: 1.04–3.44, P = 0.037), 3‐year (adjusted OR = 1.91, 95% CI: 1.06–3.43, P = 0.031) and 5‐year (adjusted OR = 2.16, 95% CI: 1.12–4.19, P = 0.022) HF re‐hospitalization, and new‐onset AF (adjusted OR = 2.66, 95% CI: 1.25–5.68, P = 0.012).

Conclusions

Continuous diuretics use (especially LDs) was associated with increased risks of all‐cause mortality, CVD, medium‐term/long‐term HF re‐hospitalization, and new‐onset AF in RHD patients with compensated CHF.

Spironolactone metabolite concentrations in decompensated heart failure: insights from the ATHENA-HF trial

AIMS

In Aldosterone Targeted Neurohormonal Combined with Natriuresis Therapy in Heart Failure (ATHENA-HF), high-dose spironolactone (100 mg daily) did not improve efficacy endpoints over usual care [placebo or continued low-dose spironolactone (25 mg daily) in patients already receiving spironolactone] in the treatment of acute heart failure (HF). We hypothesized that low concentrations of the long-acting active metabolites of spironolactone [canrenone and 7α-thiomethylspironolactone (7α-TMS)] in the high-dose group could have contributed to these neutral results.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In patients randomized to high-dose spironolactone not previously treated with spironolactone (high-dose-naïve, n = 112), concentrations of canrenone and 7α-TMS increased at 48 and 96 h compared to baseline, and between 48 and 96 h (all P < 0.005), indicating that steady-state concentrations had not been reached by 48 h. In patients previously on low-dose, high-dose spironolactone (high-dose-previous, n = 37), concentrations of canrenone increased at 48 and 96 h compared to baseline (both P < 0.0005), with a marginal increase between 48 and 96 h (P = 0.0507). At 48 h, both high-dose groups had higher concentrations of both metabolites than the low-dose spironolactone group (P < 0.0001). Moreover, concentrations of both metabolites were higher in high-dose-previous vs. high-dose-naïve patients (P < 0.01), indicating that previous spironolactone use was significant, and that steady-state has not been reached in high-dose-naïve patients at 48 h. We found limited and inconsistent evidence of correlation between metabolite concentrations and endpoints.

CONCLUSIONS

Lower-than-anticipated concentrations of spironolactone active metabolites were observed for at least 48 h in the high-dose spironolactone group and may have contributed to the absence of pharmacological effects of spironolactone in the ATHENA-HF trial.

Spironolactone in Acute Heart Failure Patients With Renal Dysfunction and Risk Factors for Diuretic Resistance: From the ATHENA-HF Trial

BACKGROUND

Acute heart failure (HF) patients with renal insufficiency and risk factors for diuretic resistance may be most likely to derive incremental improvement in congestion with the addition of spironolactone.

METHODS

The Aldosterone Targeted Neurohormonal Combined with Natriuresis Therapy in Heart Failure (ATHENA-HF) trial randomized 360 acute HF patients with reduced or preserved ejection fraction to spironolactone 100 mg daily or usual care for 96 hours. The current analysis assessed the effects of study therapy within tertiles of baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and subgroups at heightened risk for diuretic resistance.

RESULTS

Across eGFR tertiles, there was no incremental benefit of high-dose spironolactone on any efficacy endpoint, including changes in log N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide and signs and symptoms of congestion (all P for interaction ≥ 0.06). High-dose spironolactone had no significant effect on N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide reduction regardless of blood pressure, diabetes mellitus status, and loop diuretic dose (all P for interaction ≥ 0.38). In-hospital changes in serum potassium and creatinine were similar between treatment groups for all GFR tertiles (all P for interaction ≥ 0.18). Rates of inpatient worsening HF, 30-day worsening HF, and 60-day all-cause mortality were numerically higher among patients with lower baseline eGFR, but relative effects of study treatment did not differ with renal function (all P for interaction ≥ 0.27).

CONCLUSIONS

High-dose spironolactone did not improve congestion over usual care among patients with acute HF, irrespective of renal function and risk factors for diuretic resistance. In-hospital initiation or continuation of spironolactone was safe during the inpatient stay, even when administered at high doses to patients with moderate renal dysfunction.

Efficacy and Safety of Spironolactone in Acute Heart Failure: The ATHENA-HF Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Persistent congestion is associated with worse outcomes in acute heart failure (AHF). Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists administered at high doses may relieve congestion, overcome diuretic resistance, and mitigate the effects of adverse neurohormonal activation in AHF.

Objective

To assess the effect of high-dose spironolactone and usual care on N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels compared with usual care alone.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This double-blind and placebo (or low-dose)-controlled randomized clinical trial was conducted in 22 US acute care hospitals among patients with AHF who were previously receiving no or low-dose (12.5 mg or 25 mg daily) spironolactone and had NT-proBNP levels of 1000 pg/mL or more or B-type natriuretic peptide levels of 250 pg/mL or more, regardless of ejection fraction.

Interventions

High-dose spironolactone (100 mg) vs placebo or 25 mg spironolactone (usual care) daily for 96 hours.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was the change in NT-proBNP levels from baseline to 96 hours. Secondary end points included the clinical congestion score, dyspnea assessment, net urine output, and net weight change. Safety end points included hyperkalemia and changes in renal function.

Results

A total of 360 patients were randomized, of whom the median age was 65 years, 129 (36%) were women, 200 (55.5%) were white, 151 (42%) were black, 8 (2%) were Hispanic or Latino, 9 (2.5%) were of other race/ethnicity, and the median left ventricular ejection fraction was 34%. Baseline median (interquartile range) NT-proBNP levels were 4601 (2697-9596) pg/mL among the group treated with high-dose spironolactone and 3753 (1968-7633) pg/mL among the group who received usual care. There was no significant difference in the log NT-proBNP reduction between the 2 groups (-0.55 [95% CI, -0.92 to -0.18] with high-dose spironolactone and -0.49 [95% CI, -0.98 to -0.14] with usual care, P = .57). None of the secondary end point or day-30 all-cause mortality or heart failure hospitalization rate differed between the 2 groups. The changes in serum potassium and estimated glomerular filtration rate at 24, 48, 72, and 96 hours. were similar between the 2 groups.

Conclusions and Relevance

Adding treatment with high-dose spironolactone to usual care for patients with AHF for 96 hours was well tolerated but did not improve the primary or secondary efficacy end points.

Trial Registration

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02235077.

Relation between therapy-induced changes in natriuretic peptide levels and long-term therapeutic effects on mortality in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction

AIMS

To assess whether natriuretic peptides (NPs) can be used to reliably predict long-term therapeutic effect on clinical outcomes for patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

HFrEF intervention trials with mortality data were identified. Subsequently, we identified trials assessing therapy-induced changes in NPs. We assessed the correlation between the average short-term placebo-corrected drug or device effect on NPs and the longer-term therapeutic effect on clinical outcomes. Of 35 distinct therapies with an identifiable mortality result (n = 105 062 patients), 20 therapies had corresponding data on therapeutic effect on NPs. No correlation was observed between therapy-induced placebo-corrected change in brain natriuretic peptide or N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide and therapeutic effect on all-cause mortality (ACM) (Spearman r = -0.32, P = 0.18 and r = -0.20, P = 0.47, respectively). There was no correlation between therapy-induced placebo-corrected per cent change in NP and intervention effect on ACM or ACM-heart failure hospitalizations (r = -0.30, P = 0.11 and r = 0.10, P = 0.75, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term intervention-induced changes in NP levels are not reliable predictors of therapeutic long-term effect on mortality or morbidity outcomes for patients with HFrEF.

Prognostic Implications of Changes in Amino-Terminal Pro-B-Type Natriuretic Peptide in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure: Insights From ASCEND-HF

BACKGROUND

Amino-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NTproBNP) is closely associated with prognosis in acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). As a result, there has been great interest measuring it during the course of treatment. The prognostic implications in both short-term and follow-up changes in NTproBNP need further clarification.

METHODS

Baseline, 48-72 hour, and 30-day NTproBNP levels were measured in 795 subjects in the ASCEND-HF trial. Multivariable logistic and Cox-proportional hazards models were used to test the association between static, relative, and absolute changes in NTproBNP with outcomes during and after ADHF.

RESULTS

The median NTproBNP at baseline was 5773 (2981-11,579) pg/mL; at 48-72 hours was 3036 (1191-6479) pg/mL; and at 30 days was 2914 (1364-6667) pg/mL. Absolute changes in NTproBNP by 48-72 hours were not associated with 30-day heart failure rehospitalization or mortality (P = .065), relative changes in NTproBNP were nominally associated (P = .046). In contrast, both absolute and relative changes in NTproBNP from baseline to 48-72 hours and to 30 days were closely associated with 180-day mortality (P < .02 for all) with increased discrimination compared to the multivariable models with baseline NTproBNP (P <.05 for models with relative and absolute change at both time points).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the degree of absolute change in NTproBNP was dependent on baseline levels, both short-term absolute and relative changes in NTproBNP were independently and incrementally associated with long-term clinical outcomes. Changes in NTproBNP levels at 30-days were particularly well associated with long-term clinical outcomes.

Spironolactone to increase natriuresis in congestive heart failure with cardiorenal syndrome

BACKGROUND

Signs and symptoms of volume overload are the most frequent reason for hospital admission in acute heart failure (AHF). Diuretics are mainstay treatment, but their optimal type and dose regimen remain unclear, especially in patients with cardiorenal syndrome.

METHODS

This prospective study aimed to include 80 AHF patients with volume overload and cardiorenal syndrome. Through a 2 × 2 factorial design, patients were randomised towards (1) combinational treatment with acetazolamide and low-dose loop diuretics versus high-dose loop diuretics; and (2) open-label oral spironolactone 25 mg OD given upfront versus at discharge. Here reported are the results of the spironolactone treatment arm after complete follow-up of 34/80 patients (since the study was stopped because of slow recruitment). The primary study end-point was incident hypokalaemia (<3.5 mmol/L) or hyperkalaemia (>5.5 mmol/L).

RESULTS

Serum potassium derangements were numerically less frequent in the upfront versus discharge spironolactone group, yet this result was underpowered due to incomplete study recruitment (hyperkalaemia: 6% vs. 11%; hypokalaemia: 13% vs. 28%, respectively; p-value = .270). Natriuresis after 24 h was higher in the upfront vs. discharge spironolactone group (314 ± 142 vs. 200 ± 91 mmol/L, respectively; p-value = .010). Relative change in plasma NT-proBNP level after 72 h was similar among both groups (-16 ± 29% vs. -5 ± 45%, respectively; p value = .393), with no difference in all-cause mortality (p-value = .682) or the combination of all-cause mortality and heart failure readmission (p-value = .799).

DISCUSSION

Spironolactone use upfront in AHF patients at high risk for cardiorenal syndrome is safe and increases natriuresis.

Practical management of concomitant acute heart failure and worsening renal function in the emergency department

Worsening renal function (i.e. any increase in creatinine or decrease in the estimated glomerular filtration rate) is common in patients admitted for acute heart failure in the emergency department. Although worsening renal function (WRF) has been associated with the occurrence of dismal outcomes, this only appears to be the case when associated with clinical deterioration. However, if the clinical status of the patient is improving, a certain increase in serum creatinine may be acceptable. This WRF, which is not associated with clinical deterioration or adverse outcomes (e.g. during treatment up-titration), has been referred to as 'pseudo-WRF' and should not detract clinicians from targeting 'guideline-recommended' therapies. This is an important message for emergency physicians to pursue diuretics as long as signs of pulmonary congestion persist to improve the clinical status of the patient. In the present review, we aim to provide clinicians in acute settings with an integrative and comprehensive approach to cardiorenal interactions in acute heart failure.

Beta-blockers and inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin aldosterone system for chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

BACKGROUND

Beta-blockers and inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin aldosterone system improve survival and reduce morbidity in people with heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. There is uncertainty whether these treatments are beneficial for people with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and a comprehensive review of the evidence is required.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of beta-blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists in people with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and two clinical trial registries on 25 July 2017 to identify eligible studies. Reference lists from primary studies and review articles were checked for additional studies. There were no language or date restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials with a parallel group design enrolling adult participants with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, defined by a left ventricular ejection fraction of greater than 40 percent.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted data. The outcomes assessed included cardiovascular mortality, heart failure hospitalisation, hyperkalaemia, all-cause mortality and quality of life. Risk ratios (RR) and, where possible, hazard ratios (HR) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes. For continuous data, mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) were calculated. We contacted trialists where neccessary to obtain missing data.

MAIN RESULTS

37 randomised controlled trials (207 reports) were included across all comparisons with a total of 18,311 participants.Ten studies (3087 participants) investigating beta-blockers (BB) were included. A pooled analysis indicated a reduction in cardiovascular mortality (15% of participants in the intervention arm versus 19% in the control arm; RR 0.78; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 to 0.99; number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) 25; 1046 participants; 3 studies). However, the quality of evidence was low and no effect on cardiovascular mortality was observed when the analysis was limited to studies with a low risk of bias (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.50 to 1.29; 643 participants; 1 study). There was no effect on all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalisation or quality of life measures, however there is uncertainty about these effects given the limited evidence available.12 studies (4408 participants) investigating mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA) were included with the quality of evidence assessed as moderate. MRA treatment reduced heart failure hospitalisation (11% of participants in the intervention arm versus 14% in the control arm; RR 0.82; 95% CI 0.69 to 0.98; NNTB 41; 3714 participants; 3 studies; moderate-quality evidence) however, little or no effect on all-cause and cardiovascular mortality and quality of life measures was observed. MRA treatment was associated with a greater risk of hyperkalaemia (16% of participants in the intervention group versus 8% in the control group; RR 2.11; 95% CI 1.77 to 2.51; 4291 participants; 6 studies; high-quality evidence).Eight studies (2061 participants) investigating angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) were included with the overall quality of evidence assessed as moderate. The evidence suggested that ACEI treatment likely has little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalisation, or quality of life. Data for the effect of ACEI on hyperkalaemia were only available from one of the included studies.Eight studies (8755 participants) investigating angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) were included with the overall quality of evidence assessed as high. The evidence suggested that treatment with ARB has little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalisation, or quality of life. ARB was associated with an increased risk of hyperkalaemia (0.9% of participants in the intervention group versus 0.5% in the control group; RR 1.88; 95% CI 1.07 to 3.33; 7148 participants; 2 studies; high-quality evidence).We identified a single ongoing placebo-controlled study investigating the effect of angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI) in people with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that MRA treatment reduces heart failure hospitalisation in heart failure with preserverd ejection fraction, however the effects on mortality related outcomes and quality of life remain unclear. The available evidence for beta-blockers, ACEI, ARB and ARNI is limited and it remains uncertain whether these treatments have a role in the treatment of HFpEF in the absence of an alternative indication for their use. This comprehensive review highlights a persistent gap in the evidence that is currently being addressed through several large ongoing clinical trials.

The Effect of Spironolactone on the Incidence of Contrast-Induced Nephropathy in Patients Undergoing Cardiac Catheterization: Study Design and Rationale

Introduction

Patients undergoing coronary catheterization are at high risk of developing contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) acute kidney injury (AKI). Several approaches have been supposed to limit such an effect but with mixed results or non-practical methods. Spironolactone is supposed to be effective as a nephroprotective agent in animal studies. This study will try to measure the effect of spironolactone on the incidence of CIN-AKI in patients undergoing coronary catheterization (angiography angioplasty).

Methods

This study is a single-center, investigator-driven, double-blinded randomized controlled study in Iraq-Basra. More than 400 patients admitted for coronary angio unit in our center will be allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive either spironolactone 200 mg single dose or placebo in addition to their usual premedication.

Planned Outcomes

Primary end point will be CIN defined as more than 25% or 0.3 mg/dl elevation in serum creatinine (S.Cr.) from baseline during the first 2–3 days after the procedure. We hope to identify or answer an important question regarding CIN in such high-risk patients.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier, NCT03329443.

Evaluation and Management of Right-Sided Heart Failure: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Background and Purpose:

The diverse causes of right-sided heart failure (RHF) include, among others, primary cardiomyopathies with right ventricular (RV) involvement, RV ischemia and infarction, volume loading caused by cardiac lesions associated with congenital heart disease and valvular pathologies, and pressure loading resulting from pulmonic stenosis or pulmonary hypertension from a variety of causes, including left-sided heart disease. Progressive RV dysfunction in these disease states is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this scientific statement is to provide guidance on the assessment and management of RHF.

Methods:

The writing group used systematic literature reviews, published translational and clinical studies, clinical practice guidelines, and expert opinion/statements to summarize existing evidence and to identify areas of inadequacy requiring future research. The panel reviewed the most relevant adult medical literature excluding routine laboratory tests using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science through September 2017. The document is organized and classified according to the American Heart Association to provide specific suggestions, considerations, or reference to contemporary clinical practice recommendations.

Results:

Chronic RHF is associated with decreased exercise tolerance, poor functional capacity, decreased cardiac output and progressive end-organ damage (caused by a combination of end-organ venous congestion and underperfusion), and cachexia resulting from poor absorption of nutrients, as well as a systemic proinflammatory state. It is the principal cause of death in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension. Similarly, acute RHF is associated with hemodynamic instability and is the primary cause of death in patients presenting with massive pulmonary embolism, RV myocardial infarction, and postcardiotomy shock associated with cardiac surgery. Functional assessment of the right side of the heart can be hindered by its complex geometry. Multiple hemodynamic and biochemical markers are associated with worsening RHF and can serve to guide clinical assessment and therapeutic decision making. Pharmacological and mechanical interventions targeting isolated acute and chronic RHF have not been well investigated. Specific therapies promoting stabilization and recovery of RV function are lacking.

Conclusions:

RHF is a complex syndrome including diverse causes, pathways, and pathological processes. In this scientific statement, we review the causes and epidemiology of RV dysfunction and the pathophysiology of acute and chronic RHF and provide guidance for the management of the associated conditions leading to and caused by RHF.

Relationship between enteral nutrition and serum levels of inflammatory factors and cardiac function in elderly patients with heart failure

Objective

To investigate enteral nutrition’s effect on serum inflammatory factors and the cardiac function of malnourished elderly patients with heart failure.

Patients and methods

A total of 105 elderly patients with heart failure were randomly divided into 3 groups: Treatment Group A, Treatment Group B, and the Control Group (Group C), each group having 35 patients and being administered conventional heart failure treatment. Group A was treated with 500 mL·d⁻¹ of enteral nutrition for 1 month. Group B was given the same dose of enteral nutrition for 3 months. The Control Group was given free diet. Nutritional risk screening 2002 was used to assess the nutritional status before and after the treatment for each group. New York Heart Association status was recorded as were left ventricular ejection fraction, plasma B-type natriuretic peptide, inteleukin-6, C-reactive protein, and tumor necrosis factor-α.

Results

After the treatment, the body mass index, skinfold thickness of upper arm triceps, muscle circumference of the upper arm, upper arm muscle circumference, total protein, albumin, hemoglobin, and left ventricular ejection fraction in the treatment groups all increased, with relatively obvious relief of symptoms of heart failure. The levels of B-type natriuretic peptide, interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor-α, and C-reactive protein all rose to different extents (P<0.05) and Treatment Group B showed more obvious improvement (P<0.01). Differences shown by the Control Group in each nutrition indicator, serum levels of inflammatory factors, and cardiac function had no statistical significance (P>0.05).

Conclusion

The use of enteral nutrition in conventional treatment of elderly patients with heart failure could improve not only patients’ nutritional status and cardiac function, but also their immune function, thus reducing the levels of inflammatory factors. The longer the treatment period is, the more obvious the improvement in patients’ cardiac function and inflammatory factors will be observed.

Negotiating renal dysfunction when treating patients with heart failure

INTRODUCTION

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is one of the most prevalent comorbidities in HF, and no specific treatment is still available for the so-called cardiorenal syndrome. Areas covered: The aim of this review is to describe the interaction of heart and kidney function and the consequences of cardiorenal syndrome, focusing on the use of available therapeutics. Expert commentary: The presence of CKD has been associated with adverse outcomes in HF regardless of ejection fraction. On the other hand, cardiovascular events are the most common causes of morbidity and mortality among CKD patients, reflecting the close pathophysiological crosstalk between these organs. Multiple mechanisms are involved in the development of cardiorenal syndrome, including hemodynamic, neurohormonal and inflammatory mediators. The management of several HF drugs is a challenge in the presence of CKD mainly due to blunted diuretic response and increased risk of worsening of kidney function. Therefore, finding a balance between the optimization of cardiac and renal outcomes is a real negotiation in the everyday clinical practice.

Diuretic Strategies in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The burden of heart failure in the United States is growing rapidly to epic proportions with serious clinical implications for patients and economic strain for healthcare systems. One of the most common reasons for hospitalization in acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) is excess volume accumulation which leads to untoward symptoms including dyspnea,orthopnea, and edema.

RECENT FINDINGS

Over the past several decades, there has been great interest in exploring various decongestive strategies in order to achieve symptomatic improvement and favorable clinical outcomes. These include different modalities of loop diuretic administration, the adjunctive use of non-loop diuretics, and other diuretic sparing strategies. Herein, we provide an appraisal of these decongestive strategies and discuss novel concepts predicting clinical outcomes based on diuretic response and decongestive adequacy while discussing commonly encountered problems such as worsening renal function in ADHF.

Lessons learned in acute heart failure

Acute heart failure (HF) is a global pandemic with more than one million admissions to hospital annually in the US and millions more worldwide. Post-discharge mortality and readmission rates remain unchanged and unacceptably high. Although recent drug development programmes have failed to deliver novel therapies capable of reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients hospitalized for worsening chronic HF, hospitalized HF registries and clinical trial databases have generated a wealth of information improving our collective understanding of the HF syndrome. This review will summarize key insights from clinical trials in acute HF and hospitalized HF registries over the last several decades, focusing on improving the management of patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction.

Advances in Clinical Cardiology 2016: A Summary of the Key Clinical Trials

INTRODUCTION

The findings of many new cardiology clinical trials over the last year have been published or presented at major international meetings. This paper aims to describe and place in context a summary of the key clinical trials in cardiology presented between January and December 2016.

METHODS

The authors reviewed clinical trials presented at major cardiology conferences during 2016 including the American College of Cardiology (ACC), European Association for Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EuroPCR), European Society of Cardiology (ESC), European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD), Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics (TCT), and the American Heart Association (AHA). Selection criteria were trials with a broad relevance to the cardiology community and those with potential to change current practice.

RESULTS

A total of 57 key cardiology clinical trials were identified for inclusion. Here we describe and place in clinical context the key findings of new data relating to interventional and structural cardiology including delayed stenting following primary angioplasty, contrast-induced nephropathy, management of jailed wires, optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), stenting vs bypass for left main disease, new generation stents (BioFreedom, Orsiro, Absorb), transcatheter aortic valve implantation (Edwards Sapien XT, transcatheter embolic protection), and closure devices (Watchman, Amplatzer). New preventative cardiology data include trials of bariatric surgery, empagliflozin, liraglutide, semaglutide, PCSK9 inhibitors (evolocumab and alirocumab), and inclisiran. Antiplatelet therapy trials include platelet function monitoring and ticagrelor vs clopidogrel for peripheral vascular disease. New data are also presented in fields of heart failure (sacubitril/valsartan, aliskiren, spironolactone), atrial fibrillation (rivaroxaban in patients undergoing coronary intervention, edoxaban in DC cardioversion), cardiac devices (implantable cardioverter defibrillator in non-ischemic cardiomyopathy), and electrophysiology (cryoballoon vs radiofrequency ablation).

CONCLUSION

This paper presents a summary of key clinical cardiology trials during the past year and should be of practical value to both clinicians and cardiology researchers.