Drug treatment effects on outcomes in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Coronary microvascular dysfunction and its role in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction for future prevention and treatment

Ischemic heart disease has long been established as the leading cause of heart failure, typically as a result of hemodynamically significant and obstructive coronary anatomy. Since, the role of dysfunctional coronary microvascular pathophysiologic mechanisms have also been associated with the development of congestive heart failure (CHF), most notably heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) although with limited clinical evidence. Conventional cardiometabolic and behavioral risk factors common to HFpEF such as diabetes mellitus (DM), obesity, hypertension, dyslipidemia, smoking, and chronic kidney disease foster a pro-inflammatory environment conducive to endothelial dysfunction and improper regulation of vasoactive substances. The impaired relaxation and increased vasoconstriction of damaged endothelium gives rise to impaired coronary blood flow and episodes of transient ischemia. Such coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) has its own implication on cardiovascular pathophysiologic mechanisms beyond symptomatic coronary and myocardial ischemia, and thus its own potential prevention goals and treatment targets for patients with HFpEF, where previous management had been limited. As such, we conducted a literature review to address the current landscape of data which links CMD to HFpEF. Furthermore, we considered the implications of biopsychosocial elements such as race, ethnicity, sex, gender, and the social determinants of health as they relate to the disparate health outcomes of those most at risk for CMD and HFpEF.

Potential effects of beta-blockers in HFpEF

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) poses a significant challenge in contemporary medicine, characterized by poor quality of life, high healthcare costs, and increased mortality. Despite advancements in medical research, treatment strategies for HFpEF remain elusive, with unclear guidance on the use of beta-blockers. While sympathetic overstimulation is common in HFpEF, beta-blockers, though potentially beneficial in reducing sympathetic activity, may exacerbate chronotropic incompetence and decrease exercise tolerance. Additionally, their impact on outcomes in HFpEF patients with concurrent atrial fibrillation is uncertain. Some studies suggest the potential benefits of beta-blockers on diastolic function, yet evidence on clinical endpoints remains inconclusive. Recent research indicates a potential reduction in all-cause mortality with beta-blocker use in HFpEF, although their effect on combined mortality or HF hospitalizations is less clear. Moreover, beta-blocker efficacy may vary depending on ejection fraction subgroups, with more favorable outcomes observed in HFmrEF compared to HFpEF. Current literature underscores the need for large-scale randomized clinical trials to clarify the role of beta-blockers in HFpEF management. Given the limitations of existing evidence, future research is essential to inform updated treatment guidelines and therapeutic protocols tailored to the contemporary clinical landscape.

Contributors and Solutions to High Out-of-Pocket Costs for Heart Failure Medications: A State-of-the-Art Review

As expensive therapeutics rise to the fore of heart failure management, out-of-pocket (OOP) medication costs have become increasingly relevant to patient care. Prescription medication costs influence medical decision-making and affect adherence. Yet, individualized cost estimates are seldom available during clinical encounters when prescription decisions are made. The lack of transparency around medication costs prohibits cost-sensitive shared decision-making and can lead to financial toxicity and delays in therapeutic management. Upcoming policy changes will affect the availability and affordability of heart failure medications in the United States, such as the implementation of a $2,000 cap on OOP drug spending for Medicare Part D Plans in 2025. This state-of-the-art review summarizes the current landscape of cost transparency efforts using heart failure management guidelines and the U.S. health care system as an illustrative example. Understanding the variables involved in determining medication costs and the resources available to reduce OOP cost are paramount for heart failure clinicians and their patients worldwide.

Hospitalization after hydroxychloroquine initiation in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and autoimmune disease

BACKGROUND

Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) reduces cardiovascular events among patients with autoimmune disorders and is being evaluated as a therapeutic option for populations with high-risk cardiovascular disease. However, recent studies have raised concerns about HCQ use and cardiovascular events.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association of HCQ initiation with heart failure-related and all-cause hospitalizations among patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).

METHODS

We conducted a cohort study of patients aged ≥18 years with diagnosed HFpEF and autoimmune disease using MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental databases (2007-2019). Patients were required to initiate HCQ after their first HFpEF diagnosis (HCQ users) or not (HCQ nonusers). For the patients in the HCQ users group, the first HCQ prescription date was assigned as the index date. Index date for the HCQ nonuser group was assigned by prescription-time distribution matching HCQ users, by utilizing the number of days from HFpEF diagnosis to the first HCQ prescription. After 1:≥3 propensity score (PS) matching, Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to compare HF-related and all-cause hospitalizations between users and nonusers.

RESULTS

After PS matching, 2229 patients (592 HCQ users and 1637 HCQ nonusers) were included. After controlling for covariates, patients who received HCQ had lower risks of HF-related hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.24-0.82) and all-cause hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.57-0.83) compared with patients not using HCQ.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with HFpEF and autoimmune disease, initiation of HCQ use was associated with a decreased risk of HF-related and all-cause hospitalizations.

Effect of SGLT2 inhibitors on heart failure outcomes and cardiovascular death across the cardiometabolic disease spectrum: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have been studied in patients with heart failure, type 2 diabetes, chronic kidney disease, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, and acute myocardial infarction. Individual trials were powered to study composite outcomes in one disease state. We aimed to evaluate the treatment effect of SGLT2 inhibitors on specific clinical endpoints across multiple demographic and disease subgroups.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we queried online databases (PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and SCOPUS) up to Feb 10, 2024, for primary and secondary analyses of large trials (n>1000) of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with heart failure, type 2 diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (including acute myocardial infarction). Outcomes studied included composite of first hospitalisation for heart failure or cardiovascular death, first hospitalisation for heart failure, cardiovascular death, total (first and recurrent) hospitalisation for heart failure, and all-cause mortality. Effect sizes were pooled using random-effects models. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42024513836.

FINDINGS

We included 15 trials (N=100 952). Compared with placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors reduced the risk of first hospitalisation for heart failure by 29% in patients with heart failure (hazard ratio [HR] 0·71 [95% CI 0·67-0·77]), 28% in patients with type 2 diabetes (0·72 [0·67-0·77]), 32% in patients with chronic kidney disease (0·68 [0·61-0·77]), and 28% in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (0·72 [0·66-0·79]). SGLT2 inhibitors reduced cardiovascular death by 14% in patients with heart failure (HR 0·86 [95% CI 0·79-0·93]), 15% in patients with type 2 diabetes (0·85 [0·79-0·91]), 11% in patients with chronic kidney disease (0·89 [0·82-0·96]), and 13% in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (0·87 [0·78-0·97]). The benefit of SGLT2 inhibitors on both first hospitalisation for heart failure and cardiovascular death was consistent across the majority of the 51 subgroups studied. Notable exceptions included acute myocardial infarction (22% reduction in first hospitalisation for heart failure; no effect on cardiovascular death) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (26% reduction in first hospitalisation for heart failure; no effect on cardiovascular death).

INTERPRETATION

SGLT2 inhibitors reduced heart failure events and cardiovascular death in patients with heart failure, type 2 diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. These effects were consistent across a wide range of subgroups within these populations. This supports the eligibility of a large population with cardiorenal-metabolic diseases for treatment with SGLT2 inhibitors.

FUNDING

None.

Comparative study on the predictive value of TG/HDL-C, TyG and TyG-BMI indices for 5-year mortality in critically ill patients with chronic heart failure: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The triglyceride glucose (TyG) index, TyG-body mass index (TyG-BMI), and triglyceride-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio (TG/HDL-C) are substitute indicators for insulin resistance (IR). This study aimed to compare the predictive value of these indicators for 5-year mortality in critically ill patients with chronic heart failure (CHF).

METHODS

Critically ill patients with CHF were identified from the Multiparameter Intelligent Monitoring in Intensive Care (MIMIC) III and IV databases. The primary outcome was 5-year mortality. The relationship between the three indices and mortality risk was determined using multivariate Cox proportional hazards models, Kaplan-Meier (K‒M) analysis and restricted cubic splines analysis. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was generated to compare the ability of the three indices to predict mortality. Finally, whether the IR indices would further increase the predictive ability of the basic model including baseline variables with a significance level between survivors and non-survivors was evaluated by ROC curve.

RESULTS

Altogether, 1329 patients with CHF were identified from the databases. Cox proportional hazards models indicated that the TyG index was independently associated with an elevated risk of 5-year mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.56; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.29-1.9), while the TyG-BMI index and TG/HDL-C level were significantly associated with 5-year mortality, with an HR (95% CI) of 1.002 (1.000-1.003) and 1.01 (1.00-1.03), respectively. The K-M analysis revealed that the cumulative incidence of all-cause 5-year death increased with increasing quartiles of the TyG index, TyG-BMI index, or TG/HDL-C ratio. According to the ROC curve, the TyG index outperformed the TyG-BMI and TG/HDL-C ratio at predicting all-cause 5-year mortality (0.608 [0.571-0.645] vs. 0.558 [0.522-0.594] vs. 0.561 [0.524-0.598]). The effect of the TyG index on all-cause mortality was consistent across subgroups, with no significant interaction with randomized factors. Furthermore, adding the TyG index to the basic model for 5-year mortality improved its predictive ability (area under the curve, 0.762 for the basic model vs. 0.769 for the basic model + TyG index); however, the difference was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

As continuous variables, all three indices were significantly associated with 5-year mortality risk in critically ill patients with CHF. Although these IR indices did not improve the predictive power of the basic model in patients with CHF, the TyG index appears to be the most promising index (vs. TyG-BMI and TG/HDL-C ratio) for prevention and risk stratification in critically ill patients with CHF.

The myeloperoxidase inhibitor mitiperstat (AZD4831) does not prolong the QT interval at expected therapeutic doses

Mitiperstat is a myeloperoxidase inhibitor in clinical development for treatment of patients with heart failure and preserved or mildly reduced ejection fraction, non-alcoholic steatohepatits and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. We aimed to assess the risk of QT-interval prolongation with mitiperstat using concentration-QT (C-QT) modeling. Healthy male volunteers were randomized to receive single oral doses of mitiperstat 5, 15, 45, 135, or 405 mg (n = 6 per dose) or matching placebo (n = 10) in a phase 1 study (NCT02712372). Time-matched pharmacokinetic and digital electrocardiogram data were collected at the baseline (pre-dose) and at 11 time-points up to 48 h post-dose. C-QT analysis was prespecified as an exploratory objective. The prespecified linear mixed effects model used baseline-adjusted QT interval corrected for the heart rate by Fridericia's formula (ΔQTcF) as a dependent variable and plasma mitiperstat concentration as an independent variable. Initial exploratory analyses indicated that all model assumptions were met (no effect on heart rate; appropriate use of QTcF; no hysteresis; linear concentration-response relationship). Model-predicted mean baseline-corrected and placebo-adjusted ΔΔQTcF was +0.73 ms (90% confidence interval [CI]: -1.73, +3.19) at the highest anticipated clinical exposure (0.093 μmol/L) during treatment with mitiperstat 5 mg once daily. The upper 90% CI was below the established threshold of regulatory concern. The 16-fold margin to the highest observed exposure was high enough to mean that a positive control was not needed. Mitiperstat is not associated with risk of QT-interval prolongation at expected therapeutic concentrations.

A Review of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitor's Clinical Efficacy in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction

Heart failure (HF) poses a significant healthcare burden, with distinct subtypes based on ventricular function. HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) presents unique epidemiological and mechanistic features compared to HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). The pathophysiology of HFpEF is complex and involves multiple factors. Current pharmacological therapies for HFpEF remain suboptimal, with inconsistent mortality outcomes observed despite improvements in symptoms and quality of life. Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have emerged as promising agents in HF management and hospitalizations, particularly in HFpEF patients. The cardioprotective mechanisms of SGLT2 inhibitors are multifactorial. In this article, we performed a comprehensive review of SGLT2 inhibitor use in HFpEF and discussed the implications in the management of HF.

Beta-blocker therapy in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (B-HFpEF): A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

While beta-blockers are considered the cornerstone of treatment for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, the same may not apply to patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). To date, the benefit of beta-blockers remains uncertain, and there is no current consensus on their effectiveness. This study sought to evaluate the efficacy of beta-blockers on mortality and rehospitalization among patients with HFpEF.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized or observational cohort studies examined the efficacy of beta-blocker therapy in comparison with placebo, control, or standard medical care in patients with HFpEF, defined as left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50 %. The main endpoints were mortality (i.e., all-cause and cardiovascular), rehospitalization (i.e., all-cause and for heart failure) and a composite of the two.

RESULTS

Out of the 13,189 records initially identified, 16 full-text records met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed recruiting a total of 27,188 patients. The mean age range was 62-84 years old, predominantly female, with HFpEF in which 63.4 % of patients received a beta-blocker and 36.6 % did not. The pooled analysis of included cohort studies, of variable follow-up durations, showed a significant reduction in all-cause mortality by 19 % (odds ratio (OR) 0.81; 95 % confidence interval (CI): 0.65-0.99, p = 0.044) whereas rehospitalization for heart failure (OR 1.13; 95 % CI: 0.91-1.41, p = 0.27) or its composite with all-cause mortality (OR 1.01; 95 % CI: 0.78-1.32, p = 0.92) were similar between the beta-blocker and control groups.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis showed that beta-blocker therapy has the potential to reduce all-cause mortality in patients with HFpEF based on observational studies. Nevertheless, it did not affect rehospitalization for heart failure or its composite with all-cause mortality. Large scale randomized trials are needed to clarify this uncertainty.

Pharmacotherapies in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Various pharmacotherapies exist for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), but with unclear comparative efficacy. We searched EMBASE, Medline, and Cochrane Library from inception through August 2021 for all randomized clinical trials in HFpEF (EF >40%) that evaluated beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i). Outcomes assessed were cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, and HF hospitalization. A frequentist network meta-analysis was performed with a random-effects model. We included 22 randomized clinical trials (30,673 participants; mean age = 71.7 ± 4.2 years; females = 49.3 ± 7.7%; median follow-up = 24.4 ± 11.1 months). Compared with placebo, there was no statistically significant difference in cardiovascular mortality [beta-blockers; odds ratio (OR) 0.79 (0.46-1.34), MRA; OR 0.90 (0.70-1.14), ACE OR 0.95 (0.59-1.53), ARB; OR 1.02 (0.87-1.19), ARNI; OR 0.97 (0.74-1.26) and SGLT2i; OR 1.00 (0.84-1.18)] or all-cause mortality [beta blockers; OR 0.75 (0.54-1.04), MRA; OR 0.90 (0.75-1.08) ACE; OR 1.05 (0.71-1.54), ARB; OR 1.03 (0.91-1.15), ARNI; OR 0.99 (0.82-1.20) and SGLT2i; OR 1.00 (0.89-1.13)]. The certainty in these estimates was low or very low. There was a significantly reduction in HF hospitalization with the use of SGLT2i [OR 0.71 (0.62-0.82), moderate certainty], ARNI [OR 0.77 (0.63-0.94), low certainty], and MRA [OR 0.81 (0.66-0.98), moderate certainty]; with corresponding P scores of 0.84, 0.68, and 0.58, respectively. In HFpEF, the use of beta-blockers, MRA, ACE/ARB/ARNI, or SGLT2i was not associated with improved cardiovascular or all-cause mortality. SGLT2i, ARNI, and MRA reduced the risk of HF hospitalizations.

Indole-3-Propionic Acid Protects Against Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction

BACKGROUND

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a common but poorly understood form of heart failure, characterized by impaired diastolic function. It is highly heterogeneous with multiple comorbidities, including obesity and diabetes, making human studies difficult.

METHODS

Metabolomic analyses in a mouse model of HFpEF showed that levels of indole-3-propionic acid (IPA), a metabolite produced by gut bacteria from tryptophan, were reduced in the plasma and heart tissue of HFpEF mice as compared with controls. We then examined the role of IPA in mouse models of HFpEF as well as 2 human HFpEF cohorts.

RESULTS

The protective role and therapeutic effects of IPA were confirmed in mouse models of HFpEF using IPA dietary supplementation. IPA attenuated diastolic dysfunction, metabolic remodeling, oxidative stress, inflammation, gut microbiota dysbiosis, and intestinal epithelial barrier damage. In the heart, IPA suppressed the expression of NNMT (nicotinamide N-methyl transferase), restored nicotinamide, NAD+/NADH, and SIRT3 (sirtuin 3) levels. IPA mediates the protective effects on diastolic dysfunction, at least in part, by promoting the expression of SIRT3. SIRT3 regulation was mediated by IPA binding to the aryl hydrocarbon receptor, as Sirt3 knockdown diminished the effects of IPA on diastolic dysfunction in vivo. The role of the nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide circuit in HFpEF was further confirmed by nicotinamide supplementation, Nnmt knockdown, and Nnmt overexpression in vivo. IPA levels were significantly reduced in patients with HFpEF in 2 independent human cohorts, consistent with a protective function in humans, as well as mice.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings reveal that IPA protects against diastolic dysfunction in HFpEF by enhancing the nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide salvage pathway, suggesting the possibility of therapeutic management by either altering the gut microbiome composition or supplementing the diet with IPA.

Left ventricular ejection fraction: clinical, pathophysiological, and technical limitations

Risk stratification of cardiovascular death and treatment strategies in patients with heart failure (HF), the optimal timing for valve replacement, and the selection of patients for implantable cardioverter defibrillators are based on an echocardiographic calculation of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in most guidelines. As a marker of systolic function, LVEF has important limitations being affected by loading conditions and cavity geometry, as well as image quality, thus impacting inter- and intra-observer measurement variability. LVEF is a product of shortening of the three components of myocardial fibres: longitudinal, circumferential, and oblique. It is therefore a marker of global ejection performance based on cavity volume changes, rather than directly reflecting myocardial contractile function, hence may be normal even when myofibril's systolic function is impaired. Sub-endocardial longitudinal fibers are the most sensitive layers to ischemia, so when dysfunctional, the circumferential fibers may compensate for it and maintain the overall LVEF. Likewise, in patients with HF, LVEF is used to stratify subgroups, an approach that has prognostic implications but without a direct relationship. HF is a dynamic disease that may worsen or improve over time according to the underlying pathology. Such dynamicity impacts LVEF and its use to guide treatment. The same applies to changes in LVEF following interventional procedures. In this review, we analyze the clinical, pathophysiological, and technical limitations of LVEF across a wide range of cardiovascular pathologies.

The current best drug treatment for hypertensive heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

More than 90 % of patients developing heart failure (HF) have hypertension. The most frequent concomitant conditions are type-2 diabetes mellitus, obesity, atrial fibrillation, and coronary disease. HF outcome research focuses on decreasing mortality and preventing hospitalization for worsening HF syndrome. All drugs that decrease these HF endpoints lower blood pressure. Current drug treatments for HF are (i) angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers or angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors, (ii) selected beta-blockers, (iii) steroidal and non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and (iv) sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors. For various reasons, these drug treatments were first studied in HF patients with a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Subsequently, they have been investigated in HF patients with a preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF, HFpEF) of mostly hypertensive etiology, and with modest benefits largely assessed on top of background treatment with the drugs already proven effective in HFrEF. Additionally, diuretics are given on symptomatic indications. Patients with HFpEF may have diastolic dysfunction but also systolic dysfunction visualized by lack of longitudinal shortening. Considering the totality of evidence and the overall need for antihypertensive treatment and/or treatment of hypertensive complications in almost all HF patients, the principal drug treatment of HF appears to be the same regardless of LVEF. Rather than LVEF-guided treatment of HF, treatment of HF should be directed by symptoms (related to the level of fluid retention), signs (tachycardia), severity (NYHA functional class), and concomitant diseases and conditions. All HF patients should be given all the drug classes mentioned above if well tolerated.

What Is the Current Best Drug Treatment for Hypertensive Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction? Review of the Totality of Evidence

BACKGROUND

More than 90% of patients developing heart failure (HF) have an epidemiological background of hypertension. The most frequent concomitant conditions are type 2 diabetes mellitus, obesity, atrial fibrillation, and coronary disease, all disorders/diseases closely related to hypertension.

METHODS

HF outcome research focuses on decreasing mortality and preventing hospitalization for worsening HF syndrome. All drugs that decrease these HF endpoints lower blood pressure. Current drug treatments for HF are (i) angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, or angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors, (ii) selected beta-blockers, (iii) steroidal and nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and (iv) sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors.

RESULTS

For various reasons, these drug treatments were first studied in HF patients with a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, subsequently, they have been investigated and, as we see it, documented as beneficial in HF patients with a preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF, HFpEF) and mostly hypertensive etiology, with effect estimates assessed partly on top of background treatment with the drugs already proven effective in HFrEF. Additionally, diuretics are given on symptomatic indications.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the totality of evidence and the overall need for antihypertensive treatment and/or treatment of hypertensive complications in almost all HF patients, the principal drug treatment of HF appears to be the same regardless of LVEF. Rather than LVEF-guided treatment of HF, treatment of HF should be directed by symptoms (related to the level of fluid retention), signs (tachycardia), severity (NYHA functional class), and concomitant diseases and conditions. All HF patients should be given all the drug classes mentioned above if well tolerated.

Quality of life in heart failure: New data, new drugs and devices

Quality of life (QoL) is a therapeutic goal in heart failure. There are many EBM therapies for improving QoL. In this study, data is presented on new pharmacotherapies and devices that impact QoL in the heart failure population.

The current role of SGLT2 inhibitors in type 2 diabetes and beyond: a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is, gliflozins), the most recent oral antihyperglycaemic agents, provide a cardiorenal protection, an effect independent of their glucose-lowering potency.

AREAS COVERED

The antihyperglycaemic potency of SGLT2is was compared with that of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, especially when added to metformin monotherapy. Main results of cardiovascular/renal outcome trials with SGLT2is were summarized in different populations: patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with or without established cardiovascular disease, patients (with or without T2DM) with heart failure (with reduced or preserved left ventricular ejection fraction) and in patients (with or without T2DM) with chronic kidney disease (CKD, including stage 4). Original papers and meta-analyses of these different trials have consistently reported a reduction in hospitalization for heart failure (alone or combined with cardiovascular mortality) and a reduced progression of CKD, with an overall good safety profile.

EXPERT OPINION

Global use of SGLT2is has increased over time but remains suboptimal despite clinically relevant cardiovascular and renal protection, particularly in patients most likely to benefit. SGLT2is has proven both positive benefit-risk balance and cost-effectiveness in at risk patients. New prospects are expected in other complications, i.e. metabolic-associated fatty liver disease and neurodegenerative disorders.

Beta-Blocker Use and Heart Failure Outcomes in Mildly Reduced and Preserved Ejection Fraction

BACKGROUND

Although studies consistently show that beta-blockers reduce morbidity and mortality in patients with reduced ejection fraction (EF), data are inconsistent in patients with heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) and suggest potential negative effects in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to examine the association of beta-blockers with heart failure (HF) hospitalization and death in patients with HF and EF ≥40% METHODS: Beta-blocker use was assessed at first encounter in outpatients ≥65 years of age with HFmrEF and HFpEF in the U.S. PINNACLE Registry (2013-2017). The associations of beta-blockers with HF hospitalization, death, and the composite of HF hospitalization/death were assessed using propensity-score adjusted multivariable Cox regression models, including interactions of EF × beta-blocker use.

RESULTS

Among 435,897 patients with HF and EF ≥40% (HFmrEF, n = 75,674; HFpEF = 360,223), 289,377 (66.4%) were using a beta-blocker at first encounter; more commonly in patients with HFmrEF vs HFpEF (77.7% vs 64.0%; P < 0.001). There were significant interactions between EF × beta-blocker use for HF hospitalization, death, and composite of HF hospitalization/death (P < 0.001 for all), with higher risk with beta-blocker use as EF increased. Beta-blockers were associated with decreased risk of HF hospitalization and death in patients with HFmrEF but a lack of survival benefit and a higher risk of HF hospitalization in patients with HFpEF, particularly when EF was >60%.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large, real-world, propensity score-adjusted cohort of older outpatients with HF and EF ≥40%, beta-blocker use was associated with a higher risk of HF hospitalization as EF increased, with potential benefit in patients with HFmrEF and potential risk in patients with higher EF (particularly >60%). Further studies are needed to understand the appropriateness of beta-blocker use in patients with HFpEF in the absence of compelling indications.

Inflammation as a therapeutic target in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) accounts for around half of all cases of heart failure and may become the dominant type of heart failure in the near future. Unlike HF with reduced ejection fraction there are few evidence-based treatment strategies available. There is a significant unmet need for new strategies to improve clinical outcomes in HFpEF patients. Inflammation is widely thought to play a key role in HFpEF pathophysiology and may represent a viable treatment target. In this review focusing predominantly on clinical studies, we will summarise the role of inflammation in HFpEF and discuss potential therapeutic strategies targeting inflammation.

Are arrhythmias the drivers of sudden cardiac death in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction? A review

In patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), sudden cardiac death (SCD) accounts for approximately 25-30% of all-cause mortality and 40% of cardiovascular mortality in properly adjudicated large clinical trials. The mechanism of SCD in HFpEF remains unknown but thought to be driven by arrhythmic events. Apart from atrial fibrillation, which is prevalent in approximately 45% of HFpEF patients, the true burden of other cardiac arrhythmias in HFpEF remains undetermined. The incidence and risk of clinically significant advanced cardiac conduction disease with bradyarrhythmias and ventricular arrhythmias remain less known. Recommendations have been made for long-term cardiac rhythm monitoring to determine the incidence of arrhythmias and clarify mechanisms and mode of death in HFpEF patients. In animal studies, spontaneous ventricular arrhythmias and SCD are significantly elevated in HFpEF animals compared with controls without heart failure. In humans, these studies are scant, with a few published small-size studies suggesting an increased incidence of ventricular arrhythmias in HFpEF. Higher rates of clinically significant conduction disease and cardiac pacing are seen in HFpEF compared with the general population. Excepting atrial fibrillation, the predictive effect of other arrhythmias on heart failure hospitalization, all-cause mortality, and precisely SCD remains unknown. Given the high occurrence of SCD in the HFpEF population, it could potentially become a target for therapeutic interventions if driven by arrhythmias. Studies to address these knowledge gaps are urgently warranted. In this review, we have summarized data on arrhythmias and SCD in HFpEF while highlighting avenues for future research in this area.

Evidence-based medication adherence among seniors in the first year after heart failure hospitalisation and subsequent long-term outcomes: a restricted cubic spline analysis of adherence-outcome relationships

PURPOSE

Non-adherence to heart failure (HF) medications is associated with poor outcomes. We used restricted cubic splines (RCS) to assess the continuous relationship between adherence to renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASI) and β-blockers and long-term outcomes in senior HF patients.

METHODS

We identified a population-based cohort of 4234 patients, aged 65-84 years, 56% male, who were hospitalised for HF in Western Australia between 2003 and 2008 and survived to 1-year post-discharge (landmark date). Adherence was calculated using the proportion of days covered (PDC) in the first year post-discharge. RCS Cox proportional-hazards models were applied to determine the relationship between adherence and all-cause death and death/HF readmission at 1 and 3 years after the landmark date.

RESULTS

RCS analysis showed a curvilinear adherence-outcome relationship for both RASI and β-blockers which was linear above PDC 60%. For each 10% increase in RASI and β-blocker adherence above this level, the adjusted hazard ratio for 1-year all-cause death fell by an average of 6.6% and 4.8% respectively (trend p < 0.05) and risk of all-cause death/HF readmission fell by 5.4% and 5.8% respectively (trend p < 0.005). Linear reductions in adjusted risk for these outcomes at PDC ≥ 60% were also seen at 3 years after landmark date (all trend p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

RCS analysis showed that for RASI and β-blockers, there was no upper adherence level (threshold) above 60% where risk reduction did not continue to occur. Therefore, interventions should maximise adherence to these disease-modifying HF pharmacotherapies to improve long-term outcomes after hospitalised HF.

Advances in novel devices for the treatment of heart failure

Heart failure (HF) is one of the leading causes of global health impairment. Current drugs are still limited in their effectiveness in the treatment and reversal of HF: for example, drugs for acute HF (AHF) help to reduce congestion and relieve symptoms, but they do little to improve survival; most conventional drugs for HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) do not improve the prognosis; and drugs have extremely limited effects on advanced HF. In recent years, progress in device therapies has bridged this gap to a certain extent. For example, the availability of the left ventricular assist device has brought new options to numerous advanced HF patients. In addition to this recognizable device, a range of promising novel devices with preclinical or clinical trial results are emerging that seek to treat or reverse HF by providing circulatory support, repairing structural abnormalities in the heart, or providing electrical stimulation. These devices may be useful for the treatment of HF. In this review, we summarized recent advances in novel devices for AHF, HFpEF, and HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) with the aim of providing a reference for clinical treatment and inspiration for novel device development.

Does the Measurement of Ejection Fraction Still Make Sense in the HFpEF Framework? What Recent Trials Suggest

Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is universally accepted as a cardiac systolic function index and it provides intuitive interpretation of cardiac performance. Over the last two decades, it has erroneously become the leading feature used by clinicians to characterize the left ventricular function in heart failure (HF). Notably, LVEF sets the basis for structural and functional HF phenotype classification in current guidelines. However, its diagnostic and prognostic role in patients with preserved or mildly reduced contractile function is less clear. This is related to several concerns due to intrinsic technical, methodological and hemodynamic limitations entailed in LVEF measurement that do not describe the chamber's real contractile performance as expressed by pressure volume loop relationship. In patients with HF and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), it does not reflect the effective systolic function because it is prone to preload and afterload variability and it does not account for both longitudinal and torsional contraction. Moreover, a repetitive measurement could be assessed over time to better identify HF progression related to natural evolution of disease and to the treatment response. Current gaps may partially explain the causes of negative or neutral effects of traditional medical agents observed in HFpEF. Nevertheless, recent pooled analysis has evidenced the positive effects of new therapies across the LVEF range, suggesting a potential role irrespective of functional status. Additionally, a more detailed analysis of randomized trials suggests that patients with higher LVEF show a risk reduction strictly related to overall cardiovascular (CV) events; on the other hand, patients experiencing lower LVEF values have a decrease in HF-related events. The current paper reports the main limitations and shortcomings in LVEF assessment, with specific focus on patients affected by HFpEF, and it suggests alternative measurements better reflecting the real hemodynamic status. Future investigations may elucidate whether the development of non-invasive stroke volume and longitudinal function measurements could be extensively applied in clinical trials for better phenotyping and screening of HFpEF patients.

Sympathetic and hemodynamic responses to exercise in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Excessive sympathetic activity during exercise causes heightened peripheral vasoconstriction, which can reduce oxygen delivery to active muscles, resulting in exercise intolerance. Although both patients suffering from heart failure with preserved and reduced ejection fraction (HFpEF and HFrEF, respectively) exhibit reduced exercise capacity, accumulating evidence suggests that the underlying pathophysiology may be different between these two conditions. Unlike HFrEF, which is characterized by cardiac dysfunction with lower peak oxygen uptake, exercise intolerance in HFpEF appears to be predominantly attributed to peripheral limitations involving inadequate vasoconstriction rather than cardiac limitations. However, the relationship between systemic hemodynamics and the sympathetic neural response during exercise in HFpEF is less clear. This mini review summarizes the current knowledge on the sympathetic (i.e., muscle sympathetic nerve activity, plasma norepinephrine concentration) and hemodynamic (i.e., blood pressure, limb blood flow) responses to dynamic and static exercise in HFpEF compared to HFrEF, as well as non-HF controls. We also discuss the potential of a relationship between sympathetic over-activation and vasoconstriction leading to exercise intolerance in HFpEF. The limited body of literature indicates that higher peripheral vascular resistance, perhaps secondary to excessive sympathetically mediated vasoconstrictor discharge compared to non-HF and HFrEF, drives exercise in HFpEF. Excessive vasoconstriction also may primarily account for over elevations in blood pressure and concomitant limitations in skeletal muscle blood flow during dynamic exercise, resulting in exercise intolerance. Conversely, during static exercise, HFpEF exhibit relatively normal sympathetic neural reactivity compared to non-HF, suggesting that other mechanisms beyond sympathetic vasoconstriction dictate exercise intolerance in HFpEF.

Occult Diastolic Dysfunction and Adverse Clinical Outcomes in Adolescents and Young Adults With Fontan Circulation

Background In Fontan circulation, diastolic dysfunction portends a worse clinical outcome but may be concealed during routine assessment. Invasive evaluation with rapid volume expansion (RVE) can identify patients with occult diastolic dysfunction (ODD). We sought to evaluate the association between ODD and adverse clinical outcomes at medium-term follow-up. Methods and Results We conducted a single-center observational study of patients with Fontan circulation who underwent clinical catheterization with RVE from 2012 to 2017. ODD was defined as post-RVE end-diastolic pressure ≥15 mm Hg. A composite adverse clinical outcome included mortality, cardiac transplant, ventricular assist device, plastic bronchitis, protein-losing enteropathy, arrhythmia, stroke/thrombus, or cardiac-related hospital admission. Proportional hazards regression was used to compare the ODD-positive and ODD-negative groups for risk of the composite adverse clinical outcome. Eighty-nine patients with Fontan circulation (47% female patients) were included at a median age of 14 years. ODD was identified in 31%. Fontan duration was longer in the ODD group (P=0.001). The composite adverse clinical outcome occurred more frequently in the ODD group (52 versus 26%, P=0.03) during a median follow-up duration of 2.9 years after catheterization. ODD (hazard ratio [HR], 2.68 [95% CI, 1.28-5.66]; P=0.02) and Fontan duration (HR, 1.07 [95% CI, 1.02-1.12]; P=0.003) were associated with the composite adverse clinical outcome. When stratified by Fontan duration, ODD remained significantly associated with the hazard of adverse clinical outcomes in patients with a Fontan duration ≥10 years (HR, 2.57 [95% CI, 1.03-6.57]; P=0.04). Conclusions Cardiac catheterization with rapid volume expansion reveals a significant incidence of ODD, which relates to Fontan duration. ODD is associated with an increased hazard of adverse clinical outcomes during medium-term follow-up, especially in patients with longer Fontan duration. ODD may portend a worse prognosis in Fontan circulation.

Triglyceride glucose index and its combination with the Get with the Guidelines-Heart Failure score in predicting the prognosis in patients with heart failure

Background

Heart failure (HF) is associated with generalized insulin resistance (IR). Recent studies demonstrated that triglyceride glucose (TyG) is an effective alternative index of IR. However, the relationship between the TyG index and in-hospital mortality in patients with HF is unclear. In the present study, we aimed to clarify the association between the TyG index and in-hospital mortality in patients with HF.

Methods

A retrospective study consisting of 4,411 patients diagnosed with HF from 2015 to 2018 was conducted. All-cause mortality during hospitalization was the primary endpoint. The association between the TyG index and in-hospital mortality was assessed using the logistic regression analysis.

Results

The risk of in-hospital mortality was significantly associated with increased TyG index (OR: 1.886, 95% CI: 1.421–2.501, p < 0.001) under logistic regression with multivariable adjustment. When divided into three groups based on the TyG index, Tertile 3 demonstrated significantly higher in-hospital mortality than the other two Tertiles (OR: 2.076, 95% CI: 1.284–3.354, p = 0.001). Moreover, the TyG index improved the prediction efficiency of the Get with the Guidelines-Heart Failure (GWTG-HF) score (absolute integrated discrimination improvement = 0.006, p < 0.001; category-free net reclassification improvement = 0.075, p = 0.005). In subgroup analysis, the TyG index exhibited similar predictive performance of in-hospital mortality when groups were stratified based on type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and coronary artery disease (CAD).

Conclusion

TyG is a potential index for predicting in-hospital mortality in patients with HF, independent of T2DM or CAD status. The TyG index may be combined with the GWTG-HF score to further improve its predictive efficacy.

Heart failure with reduced, mildly reduced, or preserved left ventricular ejection fraction: Has reasoning been lost?

Left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (LVEF), defined as LV stroke volume divided by end-diastolic volume, has been systematically used for the diagnosis, classification, and management of heart failure (HF) over the last three decades. HF is classified as HF with reduced LVEF, HF with midrange or mildly reduced LVEF, and HF with preserved LVEF using arbitrary, continuously changing LVEF cutoffs. A prerequisite for using this LVEF-based terminology is knowledge of the LVEF normal range, which is lacking and may lead to erroneous conclusions in HF, especially at the higher end of the LVEF spectrum.

Sex differences in heart mitochondria regulate diastolic dysfunction

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) exhibits a sex bias, being more common in women than men, and we hypothesize that mitochondrial sex differences might underlie this bias. As part of genetic studies of heart failure in mice, we observe that heart mitochondrial DNA levels and function tend to be reduced in females as compared to males. We also observe that expression of genes encoding mitochondrial proteins are higher in males than females in human cohorts. We test our hypothesis in a panel of genetically diverse inbred strains of mice, termed the Hybrid Mouse Diversity Panel (HMDP). Indeed, we find that mitochondrial gene expression is highly correlated with diastolic function, a key trait in HFpEF. Consistent with this, studies of a "two-hit" mouse model of HFpEF confirm that mitochondrial function differs between sexes and is strongly associated with a number of HFpEF traits. By integrating data from human heart failure and the mouse HMDP cohort, we identify the mitochondrial gene Acsl6 as a genetic determinant of diastolic function. We validate its role in HFpEF using adenoviral over-expression in the heart. We conclude that sex differences in mitochondrial function underlie, in part, the sex bias in diastolic function.

Chinese expert consensus on the diagnosis and treatment of chronic heart failure in elderly patients (2021)

Heart failure is a clinical syndrome caused by ventricular insufficiency, which results in decreased activity tolerance and repeated hospitalization, seriously affecting quality of life, and it is the main cause of death in elderly people. In recent years, great progress has been made in the treatment of heart failure, but the prevalence, mortality, and readmission rate among elderly patients with heart failure remain high. Because elderly patients have multiple cardiovascular disease risk factors, coexistence of multiple diseases accompanied by multiple syndromes, multiple medications, and natural decline of body functions, the clinical diagnosis, treatment, rehabilitation, and long-term management of these patients differ from those in other populations. To facilitate clinical practice and application of clinical geriatric medicine, especially among community physicians, experts from the Cardiovascular Group, Geriatrics Branch of the Chinese Medical Association have drafted this consensus to summarize the diagnosis and treatment regimens for elderly patients with chronic heart failure and provide guidance for its clinical diagnosis and treatment in China.

2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" replaces the "2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" and the "2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure." The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose, and manage patients with heart failure.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2020 to December 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant clinical trials and research studies, published through September 2021, were also considered. This guideline was harmonized with other American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines published through December 2021. Structure: Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The 2022 heart failure guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with heart failure, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests. Many recommendations from the earlier heart failure guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data. Value statements are provided for certain treatments with high-quality published economic analyses.

2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure

AIM

The "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" replaces the "2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" and the "2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure." The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose, and manage patients with heart failure.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2020 to December 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant clinical trials and research studies, published through September 2021, were also considered. This guideline was harmonized with other American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines published through December 2021.

STRUCTURE

Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The 2022 heart failure guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with heart failure, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests. Many recommendations from the earlier heart failure guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data. Value statements are provided for certain treatments with high-quality published economic analyses.

2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" replaces the "2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" and the "2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure." The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose, and manage patients with heart failure.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2020 to December 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant clinical trials and research studies, published through September 2021, were also considered. This guideline was harmonized with other American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines published through December 2021. Structure: Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The 2022 heart failure guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with heart failure, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests. Many recommendations from the earlier heart failure guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data. Value statements are provided for certain treatments with high-quality published economic analyses.

Novel oral edaravone attenuates diastolic dysfunction of diabetic cardiomyopathy by activating the Nrf2 signaling pathway

Oxidative stress plays a crucial role in the pathophysiology of diastolic dysfunction associated with diabetic cardiomyopathy. Novel oral edaravone (OED) alleviates oxidative stress by scavenging free radicals and may be suitable for the treatment of chronic diseases such as diabetic cardiomyopathy. Oral administration of OED to type 2 diabetic rats (induced by high-sugar/high-fat diet and intraperitoneal injection of streptozotocin) for 4 w decreased malondialdehyde and increased superoxide dismutase. Moreover, it significantly improved ratios of early to late diastolic peak velocity, myocardium hypertrophy accompanied by decreased cross-sectional areas of cardiomyocytes, the proportion of apoptotic cells, collagen volume fractions, and deposition of collagen I/III. In H9c2 cells, OED reduced reactive oxygen species, cell surface area, and numbers of terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase-mediated dUTP nick end-labeling-positive cells induced by glucolipotoxicity. OED remarkably upregulated expression of the nuclear factor E2-related factor (Nrf2) signaling pathway both in vivo and in vitro. In addition, OED promoted Nrf2 nuclear translocation and upregulated nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate quinone oxidoreductase and heme oxygenase. Silencing of Nrf2 abolished the protective effect of OED in H9c2 cells. Our findings demonstrate that OED has the therapeutic potential to ameliorate diastolic dysfunction associated with diabetic cardiomyopathy. Its effect was mainly achieved by attenuating hyperglycemia and hyperlipidemia-induced cardiomyocyte hypertrophy, apoptosis, and fibrosis by activating the Nrf2 signaling pathway.

Management of Heart Failure in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is increasingly prevalent in patients with heart failure (HF) and HF is one of the leading causes of hospitalisation, morbidity and mortality in patients with impaired renal function. Currently, there is strong evidence to support the symptomatic and prognostic benefits of β-blockers, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone inhibitors (RAASis), angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs) and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA) in patients with HF and CKD stages 1-3. However, ARNIs, RAASis and MRAs are often suboptimally prescribed for patients with CKD owing to concerns about hyperkalaemia and worsening renal function. There is growing evidence for the use of sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors and IV iron therapy in the management of HF in patients with CKD. However, few studies have included patients with CKD stages 4-5 and patients receiving dialysis, limiting the assessment of the safety and efficacy of these therapies in advanced CKD. Interdisciplinary input from HF and renal specialists is required to provide integrated care for the growing number of patients with HF and CKD.

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: recent concepts in diagnosis, mechanisms and management

It is estimated that half of all patients with heart failure (HF) have HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Yet this form of HF remains a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge. Differentiating HFpEF from other causes of dyspnoea may require advanced diagnostic methods, such as exercise echocardiography, invasive haemodynamics and investigations for 'HFpEF mimickers'. While the classification of HF has relied heavily on cut-points in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), recent evidence points towards a gradual shift in underlying mechanisms, phenotypes and response to therapies as LVEF increases. For example, among patients with HF, the proportion of hospitalisations and deaths due to cardiac causes decreases as LVEF increases. Medication classes that are efficacious in HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) have been less so at higher LVEF ranges, decreasing the risk of HF hospitalisation but not cardiovascular or all-cause death in HFpEF. These observations reflect the burden of non-cardiac comorbidities as LVEF increases and highlight the complex pathophysiological mechanisms, both cardiac and non-cardiac, underpinning HFpEF. Treatment with sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors reduces the risk of composite cardiovascular events, driven by a reduction in HF hospitalisations; renin-angiotensin-aldosterone blockers and angiotensin-neprilysin inhibitors result in smaller reductions in HF hospitalisations among patients with HFpEF. Comprehensive management of HFpEF includes exercise as well as treatment of risk factors and comorbidities. Classification based on phenotypes may facilitate a more targeted approach to treatment than LVEF categorisation, which sets arbitrary cut-points when LVEF is a continuum. This narrative review summarises the pathophysiology, diagnosis, classification and management of patients with HFpEF.

The Impact of beta blockade on the cardio-respiratory system and symptoms during exercise

Background

Beta blockers prolong life in patients with cardiovascular diseases. Negative chronotropic and inotropic effects carry the potential to adversely effect peripheral skeletal and airway smooth muscle contributing to further fatigue, dyspnea and exercise intolerance.

Research questions

Do beta-blockers reduce maximal power output (MPO), VO2 max, cardiorespiratory responses, increase the perceived effort required to cycle and breath during cardiopulmonary exercise tests (CPET) and limit the capacity to exercise?

Methods

Retrospective observational study of subjects performing CPET to capacity from 1988 to 2012. Subjects with and without beta-blockers were compared: baseline physiological characteristics, MPO, VO₂ max, heart rate max, ventilation responses and perceived exertion required to cycle and breathe (modified Borg scale). Forward stepwise linear additive regression was performed with MPO as the dependent factor with height, age, gender, muscle strength, FEV1 and DLCO as independent contributors.

Results

42,771 subjects were included 7,787 were receiving beta-blocker [mean age 61 yrs, BMI 28.40 kg/m², 9% airflow obstruction (FEV1/FVC<0.7)] and 34,984 were not [mean age 51yrs, BMI 27.40 kg/m², 11% airflow obstruction]. Heart rate was lower by 18.2% (95% C.I. 18.15–18.38) (p<0.0001) while Oxygen pulse (VO₂/HR) was higher by 19.5% (95% C.I. 19.3–19.7) in those receiving beta blockers. Maximum power output (MPO) was 3.3% lower in those taking beta-blockers. The perceived effort required to cycle and breathe (mBorg) was 8% lower in those taking beta-blockers.

Interpretation

Increases in oxygen pulse minimize the reduction in exercise intolerance and symptom handicap associated with beta-blockers.

•

Comprehensive set of exercise physiology measurements in a large cohort, to delineate any hazardous effects of beta blockade.

•

Beta-blockers attenuate the heart rate at rest and during exercise.

•

Beta-blockade has no meaningful effects on muscle strength, breathing capacity or exercise induced bronchoconstriction.

•

Beta Blockers were not associated with a reduction in Maximal power output.

•

Increases in Oxygen pulse minimize the reduction in exercise intolerance and symptom handicap associated with beta-blockers.

REPERFUSION INJURY IN ACUTE PERIOD OF MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION - WAYS OF PREVENTION AND CORRECTION

OBJECTIVE

The aim: To identify pathophysiological peculiarities of myocardial reperfusion injury and ways of its reduction based on the literature data analysis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Materials and methots: This literature review was made by searching the PubMed database using key words . Additional data were sought in the Google search engine by entering key words: " risk factors, ischemic heart disease, arrhythmia, sudden cardiac death, heart rhythm, heart failure." in the Polish, English, Russian and Ukrainian language versions.

CONCLUSION

Conclusions: Considering conducted data analysis, provided data indicate the prospects of phosphocreatine usage in treatment scheme of heart rhythm disorders and heart failure on the background of myocardial ischemia and elimination of reperfusion injury and myocardial remodeling consequences.

Outcomes of patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction discharged on treatment with neurohormonal antagonists after an episode of decompensation

AIMS

To analyze the frequency with which patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) discharged after an acute heart failure (AHF) episode are treated with antineurohormonal drugs (ANHD), the variables related to ANHD prescription and their relationship with outcomes.

METHODS

We included consecutive HFpEF patients (left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50%) discharged after an AHF episode from 45 Spanish hospitals whose chronic medications and treatment at discharge were available. Patients were classified according to whether they were discharged with or without ANHD, including beta-blockers (BB), renin-angiotensin-aldosterone-system inhibitors (RAASi) and mineralcorticosteroid-receptor antagonists (MRA). Co-primary outcomes consisted of 1-year all-cause mortality and 90-day combined adverse event (revisit to emergency department -ED-, hospitalization due to AHF or all-cause death). Secondary outcomes were 90-day adverse events taken individually. Adjusted associations of ANHD treatment with outcomes were calculated.

RESULTS

We analyzed 3,305 patients with HFpEF (median age: 83, 60% women), 2,312 (70%) discharged with ANHD. The ANHD most frequently prescribed was BB (45.8%). The 1-year mortality was 26.9% (adjusted HR for ANHD patients:1.17, 95%CI=0.98-1.38) and the 90-day combined adverse event was 54.4% (HR=1.14, 95%CI=0.99-1.31). ED revisit was significantly increased by ANHD (HR=1.15, 95%CI=1.01-1.32). MRA and BB were associated with worse results in some co-primary or secondary endpoints, while RAASi (alone) reduced 90-day hospitalization (HR=0.73, 98%CI=0.56-0.96).

CONCLUSION

70% of HFpEF patients are discharged with ANHD after an AHF episode. ANHD do not seem to reduce mortality or adverse events in HFpEF patients, only RAASi could provide some benefits, reducing the risk of hospitalization for AHF.

Evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of current biomarkers in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A number of circulating biomarkers are currently utilized for the diagnosis of chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). However, due to HFpEF heterogeneity, the accuracy of these biomarkers remains unclear.

AIMS

This study aimed to systematically determine the diagnostic accuracy of currently available biomarkers for chronic HFpEF.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, MEDLINE and SCOPUS databases were searched systematically to identify studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy of biomarkers of chronic HFpEF with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥50%. All included studies were independently assessed for quality and relevant information was extracted. Random-effects models were used to estimate the pooled diagnostic accuracy of HFpEF biomarkers.

RESULTS

The search identified 6145 studies, of which 19 were included. Four biomarkers were available for meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) (0.787, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.719-0.842) was higher than that of N-terminal pro-BNP (NT-proBNP) (0.696, 95% CI 0.599-0.779) in chronic HFpEF diagnosis. However, NT-proBNP showed improved specificity (0.882, 95% CI 0.778-0.941) compared to BNP (\0.796, 95% CI 0.672-0.882). Galectin-3 (Gal-3) exhibited a reliable diagnostic adequacy for HFpEF (sensitivity 0.760, 95% CI 0.631-0.855; specificity 0.803, 95% CI 0.667-0.893). However, suppression of tumorigenesis-2 (ST2) displayed limited diagnostic performance for chronic HFpEF diagnosis (sensitivity 0.636, 95% CI 0.465-0.779; specificity 0.595, 95% CI 0.427-0.743).

CONCLUSION

NT-proBNP and BNP appear to be the most reliable biomarkers in chronic HFpEF with NT-proBNP showing higher specificity and BNP showing higher sensitivity. Although Gal-3 appears more reliable than ST2 in HFpEF diagnosis, the conclusions are limited as only three studies were included in this meta-analysis.

The Potential Therapeutic Role of Celastrol in Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction

Analysis of left ventricular systolic dysfunction remained at the centre of heart failure research for many years (also known as heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, HFrEF). Although more than 50% of all heart failure patients experience a form of heart failure characterised by preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), the pathophysiological mechanisms leading to this form of heart failure remain not well-understood. Several evidence-based treatments for HFrEF are in routine use, but there are limited evidence-based therapies for HFpEF. The effects of these remain controversial, with current treatment options being limited to managing the associated symptoms and conditions. Accumulating evidence demonstrates that pro-inflammatory and oxidative stress pathways play key roles in the development and progression of HFpEF, such as the Unfolded Protein Response (UPR) and inducible nitric oxide synthase. Celastrol, derived from medicinal plants, is a bioactive compound with strong anti-inflammatory properties, which could deem it as fruitful in overcoming the effects of such dysregulated UPR. This literature review therefore focuses on Celastrol's anti-inflammatory and antioxidant activities, alongside its other potential therapeutic activities, and its ability to impede the pathways that are thought to be involved in the development of HFpEF, such as the JAK2/STAT pathway, to elucidate the potential therapeutic role of this bioactive compound, in the treatment of HFpEF.

Diagnostic Performance of Serum Biomarkers Fibroblast Growth Factor 21, Galectin-3 and Copeptin for Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction in a Sample of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

More than half of the patients with heart failure have preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), however evidence shows a mortality rate comparable to those with reduced ejection fraction. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether FGF21, galectin-3 and copeptin can be used as biomarkers to identify HFpEF in patients with confirmed type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM). Sixty-nine diabetic patients were enrolled and divided into two groups: patients with HFpEF (n = 40) and those without HFpEF (n = 29). The ability of the studied biomarkers to discriminate HFpEF cases from non-HFpEF subjects were evaluated by the area under the Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curve and the 95% confidence interval (CI). Compared to patients without heart failure, those with HFpEF had significantly higher levels of FGF21 (mean 146.79 pg/mL vs. 298.98 pg/mL). The AUC value of FGF21 was 0.88, 95% CI: [0.80, 0.96], Se = 85% [70.2, 94.3], Sp = 79.3% [60.3, 92.0], at an optimal cut-off value of 217.40 pg/mL. There was no statistical significance associated with galectin-3 and copeptin between patient cohorts. In conclusion, galectin-3 and copeptin levels were not effective for detecting HFpEF, while FGF21 is a promising biomarker for diagnosing HFpEF in DM patients.

β-Blockade for Patients with Hypertension, Ischemic Heart Disease or Heart Failure: Where are We Now?

β-blockers are a heterogeneous class of drugs, with varying selectivity/specificity for β1 vs β2 receptors, intrinsic sympathomimetic activity (ISA), and vasodilatory properties (through β2 stimulation, α receptor blockade or nitric oxide release). These drugs are indicated for the management of arterial hypertension, heart failure or ischemic heart disease (IHD; eg angina pectoris or prior myocardial infarction). Most of the benefit of β-blockade in these conditions arises from blockade of the β1 receptor, and, in practice, the addition of ISA appears to reduce the potential for improved clinical outcomes in people with heart failure or IHD. Aspects of the benefit/risk balance of β-blockers remain controversial, and recent meta-analyses have shed new light on this issue. We have reviewed the current place of cardioselective β-blockade in hypertension, IHD and heart failure, with special reference to the therapeutic profile of a highly selective β1-adrenoceptor blocker, bisoprolol.

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 (LVEF); a review of the evidence is required to determine whether these treatments are beneficial for people with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).

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 HFpEF.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and one clinical trial register on 14 May 2020 to identify eligible studies, with no language or date restrictions. We checked references from trial reports and review articles for additional studies.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials with a parallel group design, enrolling adults with HFpEF, defined by LVEF greater than 40%.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 41 randomised controlled trials (231 reports), totalling 23,492 participants across all comparisons. The risk of bias was frequently unclear and only five studies had a low risk of bias in all domains. Beta-blockers (BBs) We included 10 studies (3087 participants) investigating BBs. Five studies used a placebo comparator and in five the comparator was usual care. The mean age of participants ranged from 30 years to 81 years. A possible reduction in cardiovascular mortality was observed (risk ratio (RR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 to 0.99; number needed to treat for an additional benefit (NNTB) 25; 1046 participants; three studies), however, the certainty of evidence was low. There may be little to no effect on all-cause mortality (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.00; 1105 participants; four studies; low-certainty evidence). The effects on heart failure hospitalisation, hyperkalaemia, and quality of life remain uncertain. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) We included 13 studies (4459 participants) investigating MRA. Eight studies used a placebo comparator and in five the comparator was usual care. The mean age of participants ranged from 54.5 to 80 years. Pooled analysis indicated that MRA treatment probably reduces heart failure hospitalisation (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.98; NNTB = 41; 3714 participants; three studies; moderate-certainty evidence). However, MRA treatment probably has little or no effect on all-cause mortality (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.06; 4207 participants; five studies; moderate-certainty evidence) and cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.11; 4070 participants; three studies; moderate-certainty evidence). MRA treatment may have little or no effect on quality of life measures (mean difference (MD) 0.84, 95% CI -2.30 to 3.98; 511 participants; three studies; low-certainty evidence). MRA treatment was associated with a higher risk of hyperkalaemia (RR 2.11, 95% CI 1.77 to 2.51; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) = 11; 4291 participants; six studies; high-certainty evidence). Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) We included eight studies (2061 participants) investigating ACEIs. Three studies used a placebo comparator and in five the comparator was usual care. The mean age of participants ranged from 70 to 82 years. Pooled analyses with moderate-certainty evidence suggest that ACEI treatment likely has little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.42; 945 participants; two studies), all-cause mortality (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.45; 1187 participants; five studies) and heart failure hospitalisation (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.15; 1019 participants; three studies), and may result in little or no effect on the quality of life (MD -0.09, 95% CI -3.66 to 3.48; 154 participants; two studies; low-certainty evidence). The effects on hyperkalaemia remain uncertain. Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) Eight studies (8755 participants) investigating ARBs were included. Five studies used a placebo comparator and in three the comparator was usual care. The mean age of participants ranged from 61 to 75 years. Pooled analyses with high certainty of evidence suggest that ARB treatment has little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.02, 95% 0.90 to 1.14; 7254 participants; three studies), all-cause mortality (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.11; 7964 participants; four studies), heart failure hospitalisation (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.02; 7254 participants; three studies), and quality of life (MD 0.41, 95% CI -0.86 to 1.67; 3117 participants; three studies). ARB was associated with a higher risk of hyperkalaemia (RR 1.88, 95% CI 1.07 to 3.33; 7148 participants; two studies; high-certainty evidence). Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs) Three studies (7702 participants) investigating ARNIs were included. Two studies used ARBs as the comparator and one used standardised medical therapy, based on participants' established treatments at enrolment. The mean age of participants ranged from 71 to 73 years. Results suggest that ARNIs may have little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.15; 4796 participants; one study; moderate-certainty evidence), all-cause mortality (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.11; 7663 participants; three studies; high-certainty evidence), or quality of life (high-certainty evidence). However, ARNI treatment may result in a slight reduction in heart failure hospitalisation, compared to usual care (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.00; 7362 participants; two studies; moderate-certainty evidence). ARNI treatment was associated with a reduced risk of hyperkalaemia compared with valsartan (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.01; 5054 participants; two studies; moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that MRA and ARNI treatment in HFpEF probably reduces heart failure hospitalisation but probably has little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality and quality of life. BB treatment may reduce the risk of cardiovascular mortality, however, further trials are needed. The current evidence for BBs, ACEIs, and ARBs is limited and does not support their use in HFpEF in the absence of an alternative indication. Although MRAs and ARNIs are probably effective at reducing the risk of heart failure hospitalisation, the treatment effect sizes are modest. There is a need for improved approaches to patient stratification to identify the subgroup of patients who are most likely to benefit from MRAs and ARNIs, as well as for an improved understanding of disease biology, and for new therapeutic approaches.

Prognostic association of medication trajectories with 3-year mortality in heart failure and preserved ejection fraction: findings from the EPICAL2 cohort study

PURPOSE

The aims of this study were to describe combinations of beta-blockers (BB), renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) prescriptions and their trajectories in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) patients, and to assess their effect on the three-year all-cause and cardiovascular (CV)-mortality.

METHODS

We used data from the EPICAL2 cohort of 689 hospitalized HFpEF patients. Medication prescriptions were collected at hospital discharge and at 6, 12, and 24 months after discharge. A multi-trajectory approach was used to conjointly model groups of individuals following similar trajectories over medications prescriptions. We used Cox and Fine-Gray models, to evaluate respectively the associations between 3-year all-cause mortality and CV-mortality and the trajectory groups.

RESULTS

Multi-trajectory modelling revealed five distinct trajectory groups: group1 (N = 232, 33.6%) stable ACEI/ARB and BB prescriptions, group 2 (N = 199, 28.8%) stable ACEI/ARB prescription, group 3 (N = 133, 19.3%) stable BB prescriptions, group 4 (N = 78, 11.3%) stable prescriptions of none of the medications, and group 5 (N = 47, 6.8%) stable ACEI/ARB, BB, and MRA prescriptions. As compared to the group 4 of patients receiving none of the three medications, patients receiving a stable prescription of one or a combination of two or the three medications over 2 years) had a lower overall mortality over 3-year follow-up, i.e., group 1 (HR = 0.5, 95% CI 0.4-0.8), group 2 (HR = 0.6, 95% CI:0.4-0.8), group 3 (HR = 0.5, 95% CI:0.4-0.7), and group 5 (HR = 0.5, 95% CI:0.3-0.9). However, none of these trajectory groups was associated with a lower CV-mortality over 3 years.

CONCLUSION

In an unselected population-based sample of HFpEF patients, the long-term stable use of the combination ACEI/ARB and BB, BB exclusively, ACEI/ARB exclusively, or the combination ACEI/ARB and BB and MRAs was associated with reduced three-year all-cause mortality.

Carvedilol and exercise combination therapy improves systolic but not diastolic function and reduces plasma osteopontin in Col4a3-/- Alport mice

There are currently no Food and Drug Administration-approved treatments for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Here we compared the effects of exercise with and without α/β-adrenergic blockade with carvedilol in Col4a3-/- Alport mice, a model of the phenogroup 3 subclass of HFpEF with underlying renal dysfunction. Alport mice were assigned to the following groups: no treatment control (n = 29), carvedilol (n = 11), voluntary exercise (n = 9), and combination carvedilol and exercise (n = 8). Cardiac function was assessed by echocardiography after 4-wk treatments. Running activity of Alport mice was similar to wild types at 1 mo of age but markedly reduced at 2 mo (1.3 ± 0.40 vs. 4.5 ± 1.02 km/day, P < 0.05). There was a nonsignificant trend for increased running activity at 2 mo by carvedilol in the combination treatment group. Combination treatments conferred increased body weight of Col4a3-/- mice (22.0 ± 1.18 vs. 17.8 ± 0.29 g in untreated mice, P < 0.01), suggesting improved physiology, and heart rates declined by similar increments in all carvedilol-treatment groups. The combination treatment improved systolic parameters; stroke volume (30.5 ± 1.99 vs. 17.8 ± 0.77 μL, P < 0.0001) as well as ejection fraction and global longitudinal strain compared with controls. Myocardial performance index was normalized by all interventions (P < 0.0001). Elevated osteopontin plasma levels in control Alport mice were significantly lowered only by combination treatment, and renal function of the Alport group assessed by urine albumin creatinine ratio was significantly improved by all treatments. The results support synergistic roles for exercise and carvedilol to augment cardiac systolic function of Alport mice with moderately improved renal functions but no change in diastole.NEW & NOTEWORTHY In an Alport mouse model of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), exercise and carvedilol synergistically improved systolic function without affecting diastole. Carvedilol alone or in combination with exercise also improved kidney function. Molecular analyses indicate that the observed improvements in cardiorenal functions were mediated at least in part by effects on serum osteopontin and related inflammatory cytokine cascades. The work presents new potential therapeutic targets and approaches for HFpEF.

Universal definition and classification of heart failure: a report of the Heart Failure Society of America, Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology, Japanese Heart Failure Society and Writing Committee of the Universal Definition of Heart Failure: Endorsed by the Canadian Heart Failure Society, Heart Failure Association of India, Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand, and Chinese Heart Failure Association

In this document, we propose a universal definition of heart failure (HF) as a clinical syndrome with symptoms and/or signs caused by a structural and/or functional cardiac abnormality and corroborated by elevated natriuretic peptide levels and/or objective evidence of pulmonary or systemic congestion. We also propose revised stages of HF as: At risk for HF (Stage A), Pre-HF (Stage B), Symptomatic HF (Stage C) and Advanced HF (Stage D). Finally, we propose a new and revised classification of HF according to left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). This includes HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF): symptomatic HF with LVEF ≤40%; HF with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF): symptomatic HF with LVEF 41-49%; HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF): symptomatic HF with LVEF ≥50%; and HF with improved ejection fraction (HFimpEF): symptomatic HF with a baseline LVEF ≤40%, a ≥10 point increase from baseline LVEF, and a second measurement of LVEF > 40%.

Universal Definition and Classification of Heart Failure: A Report of the Heart Failure Society of America, Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology, Japanese Heart Failure Society and Writing Committee of the Universal Definition of Heart Failure

In this document, we propose a universal definition of heart failure (HF) as the following: HF is a clinical syndrome with symptoms and or signs caused by a structural and/or functional cardiac abnormality and corroborated by elevated natriuretic peptide levels and or objective evidence of pulmonary or systemic congestion. We propose revised stages of HF as follows. At-risk for HF (Stage A), for patients at risk for HF but without current or prior symptoms or signs of HF and without structural or biomarkers evidence of heart disease. Pre-HF (stage B), for patients without current or prior symptoms or signs of HF, but evidence of structural heart disease or abnormal cardiac function, or elevated natriuretic peptide levels. HF (Stage C), for patients with current or prior symptoms and/or signs of HF caused by a structural and/or functional cardiac abnormality. Advanced HF (Stage D), for patients with severe symptoms and/or signs of HF at rest, recurrent hospitalizations despite guideline-directed management and therapy (GDMT), refractory or intolerant to GDMT, requiring advanced therapies such as consideration for transplant, mechanical circulatory support, or palliative care. Finally, we propose a new and revised classification of HF according to left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). The classification includes HF with reduced EF (HFrEF): HF with an LVEF of ≤40%; HF with mildly reduced EF (HFmrEF): HF with an LVEF of 41% to 49%; HF with preserved EF (HFpEF): HF with an LVEF of ≥50%; and HF with improved EF (HFimpEF): HF with a baseline LVEF of ≤40%, a ≥10-point increase from baseline LVEF, and a second measurement of LVEF of >40%.