Effects of fosinopril on exercise tolerance and clinical deterioration in patients with chronic congestive heart failure not taking digitalis. Fosinopril Heart Failure Study Group

Optimal effectiveness of heart failure management - an umbrella review of meta-analyses examining the effectiveness of interventions to reduce (re)hospitalizations in heart failure

Heart failure (HF) is a major health concern, which accounts for 1-2% of all hospital admissions. Nevertheless, there remains a knowledge gap concerning which interventions contribute to effective prevention of HF (re)hospitalization. Therefore, this umbrella review aims to systematically review meta-analyses that examined the effectiveness of interventions in reducing HF-related (re)hospitalization in HFrEF patients. An electronic literature search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, PsycInfo, Cochrane Reviews, CINAHL, and Medline to identify eligible studies published in the English language in the past 10 years. Primarily, to synthesize the meta-analyzed data, a best-evidence synthesis was used in which meta-analyses were classified based on level of validity. Secondarily, all unique RCTS were extracted from the meta-analyses and examined. A total of 44 meta-analyses were included which encompassed 186 unique RCTs. Strong or moderate evidence suggested that catheter ablation, cardiac resynchronization therapy, cardiac rehabilitation, telemonitoring, and RAAS inhibitors could reduce (re)hospitalization. Additionally, limited evidence suggested that multidisciplinary clinic or self-management promotion programs, beta-blockers, statins, and mitral valve therapy could reduce HF hospitalization. No, or conflicting evidence was found for the effects of cell therapy or anticoagulation. This umbrella review highlights different levels of evidence regarding the effectiveness of several interventions in reducing HF-related (re)hospitalization in HFrEF patients. It could guide future guideline development in optimizing care pathways for heart failure patients.

Anthracycline-related cardiotoxicity in older patients with acute myeloid leukemia: a Young SIOG review paper

The incidence of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) increases with age. Intensive induction chemotherapy containing cytarabine and an anthracycline has been part of the upfront and salvage treatment of AML for decades. Anthracyclines are associated with a significant risk of cardiotoxicity (especially anthracycline-related left ventricular dysfunction [ARLVD]). In the older adult population, the higher prevalence of cardiac comorbidities and risk factors may further increase the risk of ARLVD. In this article of the Young International Society of Geriatric Oncology group, we review the prevalence of ARLVD in patients with AML and factors predisposing to ARLVD, focusing on older adults when possible. In addition, we review the assessment of cardiac function and management of ARLVD during and after treatment. It is worth noting that only a minority of clinical trials focus on alternative treatment strategies in patients with mildly declined left ventricular ejection fraction or at a high risk for ARLVD. The limited evidence for preventive strategies to ameliorate ARLVD and alternative strategies to anthracycline use in the setting of cardiac comorbidities are discussed. Based on extrapolation of findings from younger adults and nonrandomized trials, we recommend a comprehensive baseline evaluation of cardiac function by imaging, cardiac risk factors, and symptoms to risk stratify for ARLVD. Anthracyclines remain an appropriate choice for induction although careful risk-stratification based on cardiac disease, risk factors, and predicted chemotherapy-response are warranted. In case of declined left ventricular ejection fraction, alternative strategies should be considered.

Effect of disease duration in a randomized Phase III trial of rintatolimod, an immune modulator for Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Rintatolimod is a selective TLR3 agonist, which has demonstrated clinical activity for ME/CFS in Phase II and Phase III double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, multi-site clinical trials.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

A hypothesis-based post-hoc analysis of the Intent to Treat (ITT) population diagnosed with ME/CFS from 12 independent clinical sites of a Phase III trial was performed to evaluate the effect of rintatolimod therapy based on disease duration. The clinical activity of rintatolimod was evaluated by exercise treadmill tolerance (ETT) using a modified Bruce protocol. The ITT population (n = 208) was divided into two subsets of symptom duration. Patients with symptom duration of 2-8 years were identified as the Target Subset (n = 75); the remainder (<2 year plus >8 year) were identified as the Non-Target Subset (n = 133). Placebo-adjusted percentage improvements in exercise duration and the vertical rise for the Target Subset (n = 75) were more than twice that of the ITT population. The Non-Target Subset (n = 133) failed to show any clinically significant ETT response to rintatolimod when compared to placebo. Within the Target Subset, 51.2% of rintatolimod-treated patients improved their exercise duration by ≥25% (p = 0.003) despite reduced statistical power from division of the original ITT population into two subsets.

CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE

Analysis of ETT from a Phase III trial has identified within the ITT population, a subset of ME/CFS patients with ≥2 fold increased exercise response to rintatolimod. Substantial improvement in physical performance was seen for the majority (51.2%) of these severely debilitated patients who improved exercise duration by ≥25%. This magnitude of exercise improvement was associated with clinically significant enhancements in quality of life. The data indicate that ME/CFS patients have a relatively short disease duration window (<8 years) to expect a significant response to rintatolimod under the dosing conditions utilized in this Phase III clinical trial. These results may have direct relevance to the cognitive impairment and fatigue being experienced by patients clinically recovered from COVID-19 and free of detectable SARS-CoV-2.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00215800.

Benefits and adverse effects of ACE inhibitors in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors are part of first-line treatment for reduced ejection fraction heart failure (HFrEF). The aim was to assess the benefits and adverse effects of ACE inhibitors in HFrEF with a focus on important patient outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review of double-blind randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and comparison of ACE inhibitors versus placebo, in HFrEF patients published in French or English. Searches were undertaken of Medline, Cochrane Central, and Embase. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and adverse events.

RESULTS

From 636 articles analysed, 11 were included (13,882 patients). For all-cause mortality (5 RCTs, 9277 patients), the number needed to treat (NNT) to avoid one death at 6 months was 50 (33-107). The NNT to prevent one death at 12 months (6 RCTs, 13,016 patients) was 63 (35-314). Under the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, the evidence was of moderate quality. The number needed to harm was 12 (10-15) for cough, 20 (14-31) for hypotension, 23 (17-36) for dizziness, 31 (23-47) for hyperkalaemia, and 49 (30-121) for increased creatinine levels. The quality of evidence was moderate for these criteria except for cough (low quality of evidence).

CONCLUSION

This review focuses on clinical elements necessary in a shared decision-making process. In practice, general practitioners will be able to use these data to discuss ACE inhibitor treatment with HFrEF patients. This study was registered in the PROSPERO registry under the reference number CRD42018096930.

Efficacy of Pharmacologic and Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Therapies in Patients With Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background The treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction has been the subject of numerous randomized controlled trials involving medications and cardiac implantable electronic device therapies. As newer effective pharmacological therapies suggest significant reductions in all-cause mortality, the role of additional device therapy in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction deserves further scrutiny. Methods A systematic review and network meta-analysis on the effect of medication and device therapies in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction on all-cause mortality was performed. Randomized controlled trials published between January 1980 and July 2017 were identified using Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials databases. Pcnetmeta package in R was used to calculate treatment arm-based estimated rates, rate ratios, and probability ranks with 95% credible intervals. Results Combination therapy of ACE (angiotensin-converting enzyme) inhibitors or ARBs (angiotensin receptor blockers) with β-blockers (BBs) alone or in addition to implantable cardiac defibrillators or cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillators demonstrated a significant reduction of all-cause mortality when compared with placebo. By probability rank, implantable cardiac defibrillator+ACE inhibitor or ARB+BB+mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, implantable cardiac defibrillator+ACE inhibitor or ARB+BB, and angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor+BB+mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist combination therapies have the highest probability of being ranked the best treatment. There was no significant difference in the rate of mortality when comparing angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor+BB+mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist to implantable cardiac defibrillator+optimal pharmacological combination therapy. Conclusions BB and renin-angiotensin system blockers alone or in combination with defibrillator device therapy have robust evidence for a reduction in mortality compared with placebo. The comparative efficacy of pharmacological therapy with angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors and device therapy deserves further investigation.

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers on cardiovascular events in patients with heart failure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Heart failure (HF) remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Multiple trials over the past several years have examined the effects of both angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) in the treatment of left ventricular dysfunction, both acutely after myocardial infarction and in chronic heart failure. Yet, there is still confusion regarding the relative efficacy of rennin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibition. Our study was conducted to assess efficacy of ACEIs and ARBs in reducing all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in heart failure patients.

Methods

We included randomized clinical trials compared ACEIs and ARBs treatment (any dose or type) with placebo treatment, no treatment, or other anti-HF drugs treatment, reporting cardiovascular or total mortality with an observation period of at least 12 months. Data sources included Pubmed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Dichotomous outcome data from individual trials were analyzed using the risk ratio measure and its 95%CI with random-effects/ fixed-effects models. We performed meta-regression analyses to identify sources of heterogeneity. All-cause mortality and CV mortality were thought to be the main outcomes.

Results

A total of 47,662 subjects were included with a mean/median follow-up ranged from 12 weeks to 4.5 years. Of all 38 studies, 32 compared ACEIs with control therapy (included 13 arms that compared ACEIs with placebo, 10 arms in which the comparator was active treatment and 9 arms that compared ACEIs with ARBs), and six studies compared ARBs with placebo. ACEIs treatment in patients with HF reduced all-cause mortality to 11% (risk ratio (RR): 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.83–0.96, p = 0.001) and the corresponding value for cardiovascular mortality was 14% (RR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.78–0.94, p = 0.001). However, ARBs had no beneficial effect on reducing all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. In head-to-head analysis, ACEIs was not superior to ARBs for all-cause mortality and cardiovascular deaths.

Conclusions

In HF patients, ACEIs, but not ARBs reduced all-cause mortality and cardiovascular deaths. Thus, ACEIs should be considered as first-line therapy to limit excess mortality and morbidity in this population.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12872-017-0686-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Thirty Years of Evidence on the Efficacy of Drug Treatments for Chronic Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Treatments that reduce mortality and morbidity in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, including angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), β-blockers (BB), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA), and angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI), have not been studied in a head-to-head fashion. This network meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy of these drugs and their combinations regarding all-cause mortality in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A systematic literature review identified 57 randomized controlled trials published between 1987 and 2015, which were compared in terms of study and patient characteristics, baseline risk, outcome definitions, and the observed treatment effects. Despite differences identified in terms of study duration, New York Heart Association class, ejection fraction, and use of background digoxin, a network meta-analysis was considered feasible and all trials were analyzed simultaneously. The random-effects network meta-analysis suggested that the combination of ACEI+BB+MRA was associated with a 56% reduction in mortality versus placebo (hazard ratio 0.44, 95% credible interval 0.26-0.66); ARNI+BB+MRA was associated with the greatest reduction in all-cause mortality versus placebo (hazard ratio 0.37, 95% credible interval 0.19-0.65). A sensitivity analysis that did not account for background therapy suggested that ARNI monotherapy is more efficacious than ACEI or ARB monotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The network meta-analysis showed that treatment with ACEI, ARB, BB, MRA, and ARNI and their combinations were better than the treatment with placebo in reducing all-cause mortality, with the exception of ARB monotherapy and ARB plus ACEI. The combination of ARNI+BB+MRA resulted in the greatest mortality reduction.

Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibition compared with enalapril on the risk of clinical progression in surviving patients with heart failure

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials in heart failure have focused on the improvement in symptoms or decreases in the risk of death and other cardiovascular events. Little is known about the effect of drugs on the risk of clinical deterioration in surviving patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We compared the angiotensin-neprilysin inhibitor LCZ696 (400 mg daily) with the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor enalapril (20 mg daily) in 8399 patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction in a double-blind trial. The analyses focused on prespecified measures of nonfatal clinical deterioration. In comparison with the enalapril group, fewer LCZ696-treated patients required intensification of medical treatment for heart failure (520 versus 604; hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.74-0.94; P=0.003) or an emergency department visit for worsening heart failure (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.85; P=0.001). The patients in the LCZ696 group had 23% fewer hospitalizations for worsening heart failure (851 versus 1079; P<0.001) and were less likely to require intensive care (768 versus 879; 18% rate reduction, P=0.005), to receive intravenous positive inotropic agents (31% risk reduction, P<0.001), and to have implantation of a heart failure device or cardiac transplantation (22% risk reduction, P=0.07). The reduction in heart failure hospitalization with LCZ696 was evident within the first 30 days after randomization. Worsening of symptom scores in surviving patients was consistently more common in the enalapril group. LCZ696 led to an early and sustained reduction in biomarkers of myocardial wall stress and injury (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide and troponin) versus enalapril.

CONCLUSIONS

Angiotensin-neprilysin inhibition prevents the clinical progression of surviving patients with heart failure more effectively than angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL

http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01035255.

A double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, clinical trial of the TLR-3 agonist rintatolimod in severe cases of chronic fatigue syndrome

Background

Chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) is a severely debilitating disease of unknown pathogenesis consisting of a variety of symptoms including severe fatigue. The objective of the study was to examine the efficacy and safety of a TLR-3 agonist, rintatolimod (Poly I: C₁₂U), in patients with debilitating CFS/ME.

Methods and Findings

A Phase III prospective, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial comparing twice weekly IV rintatolimod versus placebo was conducted in 234 subjects with long-standing, debilitating CFS/ME at 12 sites. The primary endpoint was the intra-patient change from baseline at Week 40 in exercise tolerance (ET). Secondary endpoints included concomitant drug usage, the Karnofsky Performance Score (KPS), Activities of Daily Living (ADL), and Vitality Score (SF 36). Subjects receiving rintatolimod for 40 weeks improved intra-patient placebo-adjusted ET 21.3% (p = 0.047) from baseline in an intention-to-treat analysis. Correction for subjects with reduced dosing compliance increased placebo-adjusted ET improvement to 28% (p = 0.022). The improvement observed represents approximately twice the minimum considered medically significant by regulatory agencies. The rintatolimod cohort vs. placebo also reduced dependence on drugs commonly used by patients in an attempt to alleviate the symptoms of CFS/ME (p = 0.048). Placebo subjects crossed-over to receive rintatolimod demonstrated an intra-patient improvement in ET performance at 24 weeks of 39% (p = 0.04). Rintatolimod at 400 mg twice weekly was generally well-tolerated.

Conclusions/Significance

Rintatolimod produced objective improvement in ET and a reduction in CFS/ME related concomitant medication usage as well as other secondary outcomes.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00215800

A cooperative network of trained sites for the conduct of a complex clinical trial: a new concept in multicenter clinical research

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this report is to present a model of physicians in full-time clinical practice participating as investigators in multicenter clinical trials, sponsored by a pharmaceutical or medical device company.

METHODS

This gas-exchange substudy was conducted as a pilot study to establish the feasibility of the 10-member EXERcise testing group of the Duke University Cooperative Cardiovascular Society (EXERDUCCS) consortium to perform a complex multicenter trial using cardiopulmonary exercise testing. An active interchange of information was established involving the principal investigator for the substudy, a dedicated full-time project coordinator, a medical director of the overall EXERDUCCS network site, the project coordinator for the sponsor, and all the participating EXERDUCCS investigators and coordinators.

RESULTS

The sponsor set as a goal of enrollment of 6 subjects per site, and 8 of the 10 sites met this goal. As a result of the successful enrollment and completion of the study and substudy by the EXERDUCCS sites, the sponsor subsequently increased the payment stipends to the sites to compensate for the extra work and expense incurred.

CONCLUSIONS

This cooperative experience accomplished several goals: (1) it allowed a complex clinical trial to be successfully completed in a time frame which would not have been possible using only single unconnected sites; (2) it educated the physician-investigators (and their personnel) in exercise cardiopulmonary; and (3) it prepared the sites for future clinical trials involving this methodology.

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition on functional class in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction-a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The effect of angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors on symptoms in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) is controversial.

AIMS

To perform a meta-analysis of studies evaluating effect of ACE inhibitors on New York Heart Association (NYHA) class in patients with LVSD.

METHODS

Individual data from 10389 patients in NYHA classes I-IV from four large long-term studies (2-4-year follow-up) and summary data from 2302 patients in NYHA classes II-IV from 16 short-term studies (3 months follow-up) were meta-analysed to assess changes in NYHA class.

RESULTS

The large long-term studies showed a significant improvement in the worst NYHA classes (classes II-IV compared to class I) in the ACE inhibitor arm versus placebo, odds ratio (OR) = 0.875 (0.811-0.943) p = 0.0005. This effect was only present in studies which included patients with chronic heart failure and was particularly pronounced on deterioration to the worst NYHA class IV, OR = 0.66 (0.52-0.84) p = 0.001. There was no effect in the studies which included patients after myocardial infarction. The short-term chronic heart failure studies showed a significant improvement in NYHA class; OR for improvement of at least one NYHA class was 2.11 (1.48-2.98, 95% CI) p < 0.0001.

CONCLUSION

ACE inhibition significantly improves symptomatic status measured as NYHA classification in patients with chronic heart failure.

A meta-analysis of the effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors on functional capacity in patients with symptomatic left ventricular systolic dysfunction

AIM

To determine by meta-analysis whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors improve exercise tolerance in patients with symptomatic left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD).

METHODS AND RESULTS

After literature search 13 multi-centre double blind parallel group trials that evaluated the effect of ACE inhibitors vs. placebo on exercise duration were selected. Ninety-four percent of patients were in New York Heart Association class II-IV. The studies were combined using the Cochrane meta-analysis program (Review manager version 4.1). Analyses according to treatment period, exercise protocols and publication periods were performed. Treatment with ACE inhibitor over 4-12 weeks resulted in a beneficial effect on exercise duration (P=0.003 and P=0.0008 for 4- and 12-weeks treatment, respectively), but the magnitude of improvements did not exceed 30 s corresponding to only 5% compared with placebo.

CONCLUSION

In addition to the pronounced effect on mortality and morbidity in patients with symptomatic LVSD, ACE inhibitors have improving effect on functional capacity measured as exercise tolerance time.

Impact of appropriate pharmaceutical therapy for chronic conditions on direct medical costs and workplace productivity: a review of the literature

This paper presents the findings of a literature review investigating the economic impact of appropriate pharmaceutical therapy in treating four prevalent chronic conditions - asthma, diabetes, heart failure, and migraine. The goal of the review was to identify high-quality studies examining the extent to which appropriate pharmaceutical therapy impacts overall medical expenditure (direct costs) and workplace productivity (indirect costs). The working hypothesis in conducting the review was that the costs of pharmaceuticals for the selected chronic conditions are offset by savings in direct and indirect costs in other areas. The literature provides evidence that appropriate drug therapy improves the health status and quality of life of individuals with chronic illnesses while reducing costs associated with utilization of emergency room, inpatient, and other medical services. A growing body of evidence also suggests that workers whose chronic conditions are effectively controlled with medications are more productive. For employers, the evidence translates into potential direct and indirect cost savings. The findings also confirm the importance of pharmaceutical management as a cornerstone of disease management.

Adverse effects of ACE inhibitors in patients with chronic heart failure and/or ventricular dysfunction : meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

BACKGROUND

The evidence-based benefit/risk evaluation of therapeutic interventions in randomised clinical trials should include both the assessment of the benefits and of the adverse outcomes. There is ample evidence that ACE inhibitors improve the symptoms and prognosis of chronic heart failure (CHF) and ventricular dysfunction. However, there is little systematic information on the tolerability and adverse effects associated with their use in these conditions.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the adverse events related to ACE inhibitor use in the treatment of CHF and ventricular dysfunction.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Description of adverse events in reports of randomised clinical trials of ACE inhibitors in CHF or ventricular dysfunction was examined, and a meta-analysis was performed. Trials were included if they were placebo- or standard treatment-controlled, and if the treatment duration was at least 8 weeks. Relative risks and their 95% CIs were estimated with a random effects model.

RESULTS

Only 22 (43%) of 51 original reports contained information on the number of withdrawals and their causes. Missing information from the remaining 29 trials was obtained from the authors. The weighted mean duration of treatment was 100.2 weeks. After excluding administrative reasons, heart failure, myocardial infarction and hypertension, the withdrawal rates attributed to adverse events were 13.8% and 9.4% for the ACE inhibitor and control groups, respectively (RR = 1.54 [95% CI 1.30-1.83]; weighted difference = 3.1 per 100 treated patients [95% CI 1.8-4.4]). Cough, hypotension, renal dysfunction, dizziness, hyperkalaemia, and impotence were all significantly more prevalent among patients treated with ACE inhibitors than among those in the control groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with CHF or ventricular dysfunction enrolled in randomised clinical trials, treatment with an ACE inhibitor for an average of 2 years leads to an additional 3% of treatment withdrawals. In a significant proportion of the reports on these randomised clinical trials, information on adverse events leading to treatment withdrawal was inadequate. Proper evidence-based evaluation of the benefit/risk of therapeutic interventions needs a more systematic approach to reporting of adverse events experiences recorded in clinical trials.

A remarkable medical story: benefits of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in cardiac patients

The development of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE inhibitors) has been one of the most remarkable stories in the treatment of cardiovascular diseases. Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors have several acute and sustained hemodynamic effects that are beneficial in the presence of left ventricular (LV) dysfunction. They increase cardiac output and stroke volume and reduce systemic vascular resistance as well as pulmonary capillary wedge pressure. The hemodynamic benefits are associated with improvement in the signs and symptoms of congestive heart failure (CHF) as well as decreased mortality, regardless of the severity of CHF. In patients with asymptomatic LV dysfunction, therapy with ACE inhibitors prevented the development of CHF and reduced hospitalization and cardiovascular death. They also increase survival when administered early after an acute myocardial infarction (MI). Most recently, ACE inhibition was associated with improved clinical outcomes in a broad spectrum of high-risk patients with preserved LV function. The mechanism of ACE inhibitors benefits is multifactorial and includes prevention of progressive LV remodeling, prevention of sudden death and arrhythmogenicity and structural stability of the atherosclerotic process. Evidence suggests that ACE inhibitors are underutilized in patients with cardiovascular diseases. Efforts should be directed to prescribe ACE inhibitors to appropriate patients in target doses. It is reasonable to believe that ACE inhibitors have a class effect in the management of LV dysfunction with or without CHF and acute MI. Whether the same is true for ACE inhibitors in the prevention of ischemic events is not known yet.

[Evidence based medical treatment of heart failure]

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Recommendations for the treatment of heart failure were carried out by a systematic review of the available evidence of the different pharmacologic treatments.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The review focused on the treatment of chronic and systolic heart failure. All the studies published in english about the pharmacologic treatment of heart failure where identified. The evidence of every pharmacologic treatment was classified according to: a) efficacy variables (reduction of mortality and hospitalizations, improvement of functional class, ejection fraction and exercise tolerance), and b) the level of quality of the evidence according to an evaluation scale. The evidence was also reviewed for the comparisons and the combinations of the pharmacologic treatments, as well as for the toxicity and costs of treatments.

RESULTS

The recommendations were defined according to the NYHA functional class and were classified in the A, B and C categories according to the level of quality of the available evidence. The evidence on mortality was considered the most important. First line drugs, the alternatives and other possible treatments were take into account.

CONCLUSIONS

There is enough evidence based on information about some variables such as reduction of mortality or hospitalizations to carry out treatment recommendations in all stages of heart failure. This point out the interest ant the priority of used them in the evaluation and improvement of the results of heart failure.

Differential effects of fosinopril and enalapril in patients with mild to moderate chronic heart failure. Fosinopril in Heart Failure Study Investigators

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the efficacy and safety of fosinopril in the treatment of chronic heart failure (CHF), patients with mild to moderate CHF and left ventricular ejection fractions <40% were randomly assigned in a double-blind manner to receive fosinopril 5 to 20 mg every day (n = 122) or enalapril 5 to 20 mg every day (n = 132) for 1 year.

RESULTS

The event-free survival time was longer (1.6 vs 1.0 months, P= .032) and the total rate of hospitalizations plus deaths was smaller with fosinopril than with enalapril (19.7% vs 25.0%, P= .028). There was consistently better symptom improvement with fosinopril (P< .05). The incidence of orthostatic hypotension was lower in the fosinopril group (1.6% vs 7.6%, P< .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Fosinopril 5 to 20 mg every day was more effective in improving symptoms and delaying events related to worsening of CHF and produced less orthostatic hypotension than enalapril 5 to 20 mg every day.

Improvement in the mechanical efficiency of walking: an explanation for the "placebo effect" seen during repeated exercise testing of patients with heart failure. Duke University Clinical Cardiology Studies (DUCCS) Exercise Group

To determine the mechanism responsible for the "placebo effect" seen during serial exercise testing of patients with heart failure, we examined metabolic variables for 81 patients who underwent five baseline exercise tests as part of a multicenter drug trial. The patients were 50 men and 31 women with a mean ejection fraction of 30.1% and a mean age of 69 years. From test 1 to 2, the exercise time increased from 419 +/- 140 to 462 +/- 130 seconds before it reached a plateau over the next three tests. Metabolic measurements at test 1 and test 3 revealed no change in peak oxygen consumption ( 1119 +/- 376 to 1105 +/- 346 ml/min). Maximum heart rate, systolic blood pressure, ventilation, and respiratory exchange ratio also were unchanged. The onset of the anaerobic threshold was delayed from 211 +/- 81 to 238 +/- 93 seconds, but there was no change in oxygen consumption at the anaerobic threshold (810 +/- 222 to 795 +/- 220 ml/min). At a predetermined submaximal level, oxygen consumption, ventilation, and respiratory exchange ratio all decreased to a statistically significant degree. These results indicate that a rapid increase in the mechanical efficiency of walking contributes to the placebo effect among patients with heart failure during serial exercise testing and is independent of changes in conditioning or motivation.

Comparison of captopril and ibopamine in mild to moderate heart failure

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effects of ibopamine 100 mg three times daily compared with captopril 25 mg three times daily on exercise capacity in patients with chronic heart failure.

DESIGN

A randomised, double blind, parallel group comparison of the addition of ibopamine versus captopril during a period of 24 weeks.

SETTING

26 outpatient cardiology clinics in seven European countries.

PATIENTS

266 patients, with mild to moderate chronic heart failure (New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class II, 81% and III, 19%) and evidence of an enlarged left ventricle. Patients received concomitant treatment with diuretics and/or digitalis.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Exercise duration after 24 weeks of treatment, compared with baseline.

RESULTS

Mean (SD) ejection fraction was 29 (8)% and the baseline exercise duration in the captopril and ibopamine groups 665 (160) and 675 (174) seconds, respectively. At the end of the study, exercise duration had improved in both groups, by 29 seconds in the ibopamine group (P < 0.01), and by 24 seconds in the captopril group (P < 0.05). There was no difference between groups (P = 0.69, 95% confidence interval -22 to 33). NYHA class, signs and symptoms score, and dyspnoea and fatigue index improved equally in both groups. The total number of adverse events was the same in both treatment groups, but gastrointestinal complaints occurred more often in the ibopamine group. The number of patients with premature withdrawals was no different.

CONCLUSIONS

No difference was detected between the effect of captopril and ibopamine on exercise time in patients with mild to moderate heart failure during a treatment period of 24 weeks.

What is the role of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in congestive heart failure and after myocardial infarction?

OBJECTIVE

To discuss the controversies surrounding the choice of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor, and the timing, dosage, and duration of ACE inhibitor therapy for congestive heart failure (CHF) and after myocardial infarction (MI). The beneficial effects of ACE inhibition in patients with CHF and after MI are reviewed. Human clinical trials are reviewed and their clinical implications are discussed.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE searches (1985-1995) identified human clinical trials and review articles.

DATA EXTRACTION

Landmark human clinical trials with morbidity and mortality end points were included. The validity of the study data were assessed on the basis of study methods, population characteristics, and statistical power.

DATA SYNTHESIS

ACE inhibitors exert beneficial effects in patients with CHF by hemodynamic and neurohormonal mechanisms. The attenuation of ventricular remodeling that occurs with ACE inhibition does not fully explain the results of clinical trials in patients after MI. Routine determination of ejection fraction to guide ACE inhibitor therapy is not as important as the patient's clinical status. Clinicians should titrate the chosen ACE inhibitor on the basis of hemodynamic response to target doses used in major clinical trials. Because the beneficial effects of ACE inhibitors appear to be a class effect, choice of an agent should include cost considerations and the results of clinical trials.

CONCLUSIONS

ACE inhibitor reduce morbidity and mortality in selected CHF and post-MI patients. Patients with symptomatic CHF benefit most from ACE inhibitor therapy, and it should be continued indefinitely. Treatment effects in asymptomatic patients are delayed. The role of ACE inhibitor therapy in preventing morbidity and morality in asymptomatic patients with preserved ventricular function requires further study.