The effects of digitalis on survival in high-risk patients with coronary artery disease. The Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS)

Safety and efficacy of digoxin: systematic review and meta-analysis of observational and controlled trial data

OBJECTIVE

To clarify the impact of digoxin on death and clinical outcomes across all observational and randomised controlled trials, accounting for study designs and methods.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION

Comprehensive literature search of Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, reference lists, and ongoing studies according to a prospectively registered design (

PROSPERO

CRD42014010783), including all studies published from 1960 to July 2014 that examined treatment with digoxin compared with control (placebo or no treatment).

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Unadjusted and adjusted data pooled according to study design, analysis method, and risk of bias.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome (all cause mortality) and secondary outcomes (including admission to hospital) were meta-analysed with random effects modelling.

RESULTS

52 studies were systematically reviewed, comprising 621,845 patients. Digoxin users were 2.4 years older than control (weighted difference 95% confidence interval 1.3 to 3.6), with lower ejection fraction (33% v 42%), more diabetes, and greater use of diuretics and anti-arrhythmic drugs. Meta-analysis included 75 study analyses, with a combined total of 4,006,210 patient years of follow-up. Compared with control, the pooled risk ratio for death with digoxin was 1.76 in unadjusted analyses (1.57 to 1.97), 1.61 in adjusted analyses (1.31 to 1.97), 1.18 in propensity matched studies (1.09 to 1.26), and 0.99 in randomised controlled trials (0.93 to 1.05). Meta-regression confirmed that baseline differences between treatment groups had a significant impact on mortality associated with digoxin, including markers of heart failure severity such as use of diuretics (P=0.004). Studies with better methods and lower risk of bias were more likely to report a neutral association of digoxin with mortality (P<0.001). Across all study types, digoxin led to a small but significant reduction in all cause hospital admission (risk ratio 0.92, 0.89 to 0.95; P<0.001; n=29,525).

CONCLUSIONS

Digoxin is associated with a neutral effect on mortality in randomised trials and a lower rate of admissions to hospital across all study types. Regardless of statistical analysis, prescription biases limit the value of observational data.

The safety of digoxin as a pharmacological treatment of atrial fibrillation

Digoxin has traditionally been the drug of choice for ventricular rate control in patients with chronic atrial fibrillation (AF), with or without heart failure (HF) with systolic dysfunction. In patients with permanent AF, digoxin monotherapy is ineffective to control ventricular rate during exercise, but the combination of digoxin with a beta-blocker or a non-dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonist can control heart rate both at rest and during exercise. Only a few randomised, controlled studies have evaluated the adverse effects of digoxin in patients with AF in a systematic way and side effects requiring drug withdrawal have rarely been reported. When reported, the most frequent adverse effects were cardiac arrhythmias (ventricular arrhythmias, AV block of varying degrees and sinus pauses). This evidence suggested that, in contrast to other antiarrhythmic drugs, digoxin is a safe drug in patients with AF. However, this safety profile can be erroneous due to the short follow-up of the studies and patient selection. Because patients with HF have been excluded in most studies, the safety profile of digoxin in this population has not been directly addressed. Early recognition that an arrhythmia is related to digoxin intoxication as well as recognition of concomitant medications or medical conditions that may directly alter the pharmacokinetic profile of digoxin, or indirectly alter its cardiac effects by pharmacodynamic interactions remain essential for safe and effective use of digoxin in patients with AF.

Digoxin in heart failure and cardiac arrhythmias

HEART FAILURE

Digoxin therapy has no effect on mortality in heart failure. Digoxin may be useful for maintaining clinical stability and exercise capacity in patients with symptomatic heart failure. Digoxin appears to be of most benefit in patients with severe heart failure, cardiomegaly and a third heart sound. Digoxin should be used as a second-line drug after diuretics, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and beta-blockers in patients with congestive heart failure who are in sinus rhythm. Digoxin should be used as a first-line drug in patients with congestive heart failure who are in atrial fibrillation. ARRHYTHMIAS: Digoxin has a limited, but useful, role, either alone or in combination with other agents such as beta-blockers, diltiazem or verapamil, in achieving satisfactory resting ventricular rate control in patients with chronic atrial fibrillation. In patients who lead a predominantly sedentary lifestyle (perhaps particularly in those who are elderly), digoxin alone may be the agent of choice.

Are coronary patients at higher risk with digoxin therapy? An ongoing controversy

Previous reports have yielded contradictory conclusions regarding the safety of digoxin therapy in patients with acute myocardial infarction. The purpose of our study was to determine whether digoxin therapy is associated with increased mortality in patients with chronic coronary artery disease. We analyzed data from 8173 patients who were screened for participation in the Bezafibrate Infarction Prevention (BIP) trial and who survived an acute myocardial infarction at least 6 months prior to the study. Three-year overall mortality of the 451 (15.5%) patients receiving digoxin (according to the judgement of their treating physician) at the time of screening for BIP participation, was 22.4% compared to 8.3% in the patients who did not receive digoxin. Cardiac mortality was 16.2% in the digoxin-treated group, compared to 4.9% in the non-treated patients. The increased risk associated with digoxin remained statistically significant when patients were stratified according to sex, age groups, functional capacity and the presence of hypertension, diabetes or angina. The administration of digoxin to survivors of an acute myocardial infarction in the chronic phase of their disease, is statistically associated with a 30-50% increase in the risk of overall and cardiac mortality during long-term follow-up. A propensity of increased risk of arrhythmias in ischemic coronary patients may explain this finding.

Heart failure in patients with preserved left ventricular systolic function: do digitalis glycosides have a role?

It is being increasingly appreciated that a substantial number of patients with congestive heart failure (CHF) have relatively preserved systolic function. Although these individuals appear to have a somewhat better prognosis than those with low ejection fractions, they experience significant symptoms and frequently require hospitalization. In these patients, CHF is often attributed to left ventricular diastolic dysfunction, but this represents a potentially misleading over-simplification. In contrast to CHF associated with left ventricular systolic dysfunction, little is known about how to treat patients with preserved systolic function. Perhaps the major point of consensus has been that the use of digitalis glycosides is inappropriate in this group. Unexpectedly, however, in the recently completed Digitalis Investigators Group trial, a subgroup of nearly 1,000 patients with radionuclide ejection fractions > or = 45% experienced a similar reduction in heart failure endpoints with digoxin therapy as patients with 25% to 44% ejection fractions. The purpose of this article is to review the diverse causes of CHF with preserved systolic function and to examine the potential mechanisms by which digoxin may be producing beneficial effect in this setting.

Digoxin therapy and survival in heart failure in sinus rhythm

The effect of digoxin therapy on the survival of heart failure patients in sinus rhythm was assessed using a retrospective case control study. Patients with an acute exacerbation of chronic heart failure secondary to ischemic heart disease were selected. All were in sinus rhythm and all were treated with digoxin. Case-matched controls were identified for all digoxin-treated patients. Long-term survival was ascertained for all 18 digoxin-treated patients and 18 controls who formed the study population. The relative risk of death was 6.4 for digoxin-treated patients (95% confidence interval 0-36) during the period of hospitalization. Te increased risk of death among digoxin-treated patients persisted up to 1 year following discharge from hospital. The results raise further concern regarding the safety of digoxin therapy in managing heart failure exacerbation, when the patients are in sinus rhythm.

Digoxin and increased mortality among patients recovering from acute myocardial infarction: importance of digoxin dose. The SPRINT Study Group

Digoxin therapy has been suggested to increase mortality risk in survivors of acute myocardial infarction. Since digoxin is a drug with a narrow therapeutic/toxic ratio, we raised the hypothesis that the association between digoxin and post myocardial infarction mortality may have a dose-dependent relationship. The purpose of this study was to evaluate this hypothesis. We retrospectively analyzed data from 1731 survivors of acute myocardial infarction. At the time of hospital discharge, 175 patients (10%) were taking digoxin. The exact dosage of digoxin was ascertained in 153 (87%) patients. Patients were divided into two groups based on the weekly dosage of digoxin at hospital discharge: The first group included 41 patients who were treated with a low dose (< or = 1.5 mg per week, usually 0.125 mg daily). The second group included 112 patients treated with a full dose (> 1.5 mg per week, usually 0.25 mg daily). Both groups were comparable with regard to mean age, gender, history of prior myocardial infarction, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and prior angina. There were no significant differences in the incidence of in-hospital complications, such as heart failure, atrial fibrillation, ventricular tachycardia, ventricular fibrillation, and postinfarction angina. One year mortality was significantly higher among patients treated with a full dose [19 of 112 (17%)] than patients treated with a low dose of digoxin [1 of 41 (2%); p < 0.02] Multivariate analysis performed by the Cox proportional hazards model identified treatment with a full dose of digoxin as an independent determinant associated with increased death during the first year after myocardial infarction (hazard ratio 10.7; 95% confidence interval 1.4-80.5). Thus, mortality among myocardial infarction survivors treated with digoxin was related to a full-dose therapy. Patients treated with a low dose experienced a low mortality rate. Our findings raise concern that digoxin may exert a dose-dependent deleterious effect upon the survival of patients recovering from acute myocardial infarction.

Digoxin and mortality in survivors of acute myocardial infarction: observations in patients at low and intermediate risk. The SPRINT Study Group. Secondary Prevention Reinfarction Israeli Nifedipine Trial

Controversy surrounds the safety of digoxin use in patients recovering from acute myocardial infarction. Previous observations yielded contradictory conclusions. To determine whether digoxin therapy is associated with increased mortality in patients recovering from acute myocardial infarction, we analyzed data from 1731 survivors of acute myocardial infarction enrolled in the Secondary Prevention Reinfarction Israeli Nifedipine Trial (SPRINT), from which patients with severe heart failure were excluded. At the time of hospital discharge, 175 patients (10%) were taking digoxin. Mortality over 1 year after infarction was significantly higher in patients treated with digoxin than in patients who were not receiving digoxin [27 of 175 (15%) vs. 60 of 1556 (4%); p < 0.0001]. Digoxin administration was associated with increased mortality in several subsets of patients. Since patients treated with digoxin had baseline characteristics predictive of mortality more frequently than their counterparts, we adjusted for these differences. Multivariate analysis performed by the Cox proportional hazards model identified treatment with digoxin as an independent determinant associated with increased death during the first year after myocardial infarction [relative risk (RR) 2.8; 90% confidence interval (CI) 1.8-4.2]. Subgroup multivariate analysis indicated digoxin as an independent predictor of first year death in 464 patients who developed heart failure during their hospital stay (RR 2.3; 90% CI 1.3-4.0), as well as among 1267 patients who did not (RR 3.4; 90% CI 1.7-6.9). The present study suggests a significant excess mortality associated with digoxin therapy after myocardial infarction. The increased mortality risk may be related to unidentified variables associated with the severity of disease in patients treated with digoxin. However, our findings raise concern that the administration of digoxin may contribute to increased mortality in survivors of acute myocardial infarction.

Post infarct heart failure: what to do in addition to ACE inhibition

ACE (angiotensin converting enzyme) inhibitors are revolutionizing the management of heart failure and are now earning themselves a place in the early treatment of post myocardial infarction (MI) patients who have evidence of left ventricular (LV) dysfunction or, more modestly, evidence of infarct expansion. The aims of ACE inhibitor therapy are to control symptoms, if any, and to improve prognosis. For these indications, they are impressive. Nonetheless, they are not a panacea. Post MI patients face a variety of threats, not least from progression of their underlying ischemic disease, and they should not be denied prognostically advantageous interventions, such as beta-blockers and aspirin. Moreover, ACE inhibitor monotherapy may not be the best management for heart failure itself. The role of other additive agents should not be dismissed.

Digoxin is effective, but is it safe?

In the last 15 years several double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials have unequivocally shown that digitalis decreases symptoms of cardiac failure, results in a reduction in the need for hospitalization for treatment of congestive heart failure, and improves cardiac function. The major unresolved question concerning digitalis use is its safety. There are experimental data and clinical evidence that digitalis use may be associated with an increased mortality, particularly in the first year or two after an acute myocardial infarction. This increased mortality appears to be present even after adjustment for predictor covariants. This conclusion depends on the ability of statistical methods to account for differences in comorbidity. Since the question of digitalis safety remains after myocardial infarction, the physician should carefully examine the indications for administration of digitalis. More than the usual surveillance is required during chronic digitalis administration.

Instantaneous cardiac death in the posthospital period after acute myocardial infarction

Sudden arrhythmic cardiac death is a major unresolved health problem, yet there is no agreement on the chronologic definition of sudden death. This retrospective study investigates the frequency distribution of the chronology of the terminal cardiac event in a large postinfarction population and identifies factors associated with instantaneous (< 1 minute) cardiac death. This study involved 229 patients enrolled in the Multicenter Diltiazem Post-infarction Trial who died during 2-year follow-up and had quantitative information on the chronology of the terminal event. Thirty-two percent of the cardiac deaths occurred instantaneously. Patients who died instantaneously were more likely (p < 0.05) to be men, to have a baseline ejection fraction < 0.40, and to have frequent (> or = 10/hour) and repetitive (> or = 3 in a row) ventricular ectopic complexes (VECs) on an ambulatory electrocardiogram than those who did not die instantaneously. Patients who died instantaneously received more digitalis and class IA antiarrhythmic agents and less beta blockers in the week before death than those dying noninstantaneously. Logistic regression analysis identified 3 independent factors that differentiated instantaneous from noninstantaneous death (relative risk; 95% confidence interval): frequent VECs (2.15; 1.11 to 4.17); digitalis (2.57; 1.31 to 5.06); and no beta blocker medication (2.90; 1.09 to 7.75). Instantaneous death (within 1 minute) was responsible for almost one third of the cardiac deaths that occurred in this postinfarction population. Frequent VECs, digitalis, and absence of beta-blocker therapy distinguished patients who died instantaneously from those who died noninstantaneously.

Heart failure: to digitalise or not? The view against

Despite extensive clinical experience the role of digoxin is still not well defined. In patients with atrial fibrillation digoxin is beneficial for ventricular rate control. For patients in sinus rhythm and heart failure the situation is less clear. Digoxin has a narrow therapeutic:toxic ratio and concentrations are affected by a number of drugs. Also, digoxin has undesirable effects such as increasing peripheral resistance and myocardial demands, and causing arrhythmias. There is a paucity of data from well-designed trials. The trials that are available are generally small with limitations in design and these show variation in patient benefit. More convincing evidence is required showing that digoxin improves symptoms or exercise capacity. Furthermore, no trial has had sufficient power to evaluate mortality. Pooled analysis of the effects of other inotropic drugs shows an excess mortality and there is a possibility that digoxin may increase mortality after myocardial infarction (MI). Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors should be used first as they are safer, do not require blood level monitoring, modify progression of disease, relieve symptoms, improve exercise tolerance and reduce mortality. Caution should be exercised in using digoxin until large mortality trials are completed showing either benefit or harm. Until then digoxin should be considered a third-line therapy.

Recognition and management of digitalis toxicity

The most important step in the management of toxicity due to any of the cardiac glycosides is its recognition. Despite the development of an accurate clinical assay for serum levels of digoxin greater than 20 years ago, digitalis toxicity remains common and difficult to confirm, even if suspected, due primarily to 2 factors. First, the signs and symptoms of digitalis toxicity, most commonly an abnormal electrocardiogram showing ventricular or atrial arrhythmias, with or without some degree of concurrent atrioventricular block, often also occur in patients with congestive heart failure (CHF) and underlying coronary atherosclerosis who are not receiving a cardiac glycoside. Second, due to digoxin's narrow therapeutic ratio, the marked degree of variability in the sensitivity of individual patients to its toxic effects, and the common problem of obtaining blood samples inappropriately during the early distribution phase following dosing, a serum digoxin concentration often does not serve as a reliable indicator of toxicity. Despite these difficulties in diagnosis, the management of digoxin toxicity has been made much more effective with the widespread availability of F(ab) fragments of anti-digoxin antibodies. This drug provides the clinician with a rapidly acting, safe antidote for all commonly used digitalis preparations. Conventional therapy for digoxin toxicity remains the maintenance of serum potassium levels greater than or equal to 4 mEq/liter, reversal of decompensated CHF or overt myocardial ischemia, attention to serum magnesium levels and the patient's acid-base status, appropriate antiarrhythmics in the event of ventricular arrhythmias, and a temporary pacemaker for high-grade atrioventricular block. Nevertheless, the high specificity and documented safety of the antibody preparation provides a needed safety net for the continuing use of cardiac glycosides as first-line inotropic agents in the modern therapy of chronic CHF.

Need for a large randomized trial to evaluate the effects of digitalis on morbidity and mortality in congestive heart failure

Despite major advances in the prevention and treatment of cardiovascular diseases, the incidence and prevalence of congestive heart failure (CHF) have been increasing in recent years. As the average age of the population increases, the prevalence of CHF is expected to continue to increase. The number of deaths in which CHF was considered the underlying or contributing cause increased from 51,000 in 1955 to 274,000 by 1988 in the United States. Even accounting for population growth and an increase in the number of elderly, this represents a 2-fold increase. Additionally, CHF was responsible for about 643,000 hospitalizations in 1988. Digitalis is one of the drugs most commonly prescribed for CHF and has been used for greater than 200 years. In 1990, digoxin was one of the most commonly prescribed drugs in the United States, accounting for greater than 21 million prescriptions. There has been little decline in the drug's use over the last 5 years, indicating that newer treatments for CHF have not replaced the widespread use of digitalis. Despite these findings, considerable controversy surrounds the appropriateness of its role and value in treating CHF patients who are in sinus rhythm. A number of recent, uncontrolled studies have arrived at apparently contradictory conclusions concerning the effects of digitalis on mortality in postmyocardial infarction and heart failure patients. A large, double-blind, randomized, controlled clinical trial to evaluate the effects of digitalis on mortality, morbidity and quality of life is being sponsored by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute in conjunction with the Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Effect of medical therapy on survival of patients with dilated cardiomyopathy

Few studies have been conducted that focus on survival as the end point of medical therapy of CHF. No vigorous studies have been conducted in dogs. It is generally accepted that diuretic therapy is an essential component of the therapy of CHF in cardiomyopathic dogs. Significant symptomatic improvement is afforded by diuretics, and acute death may be prevented. In this context diuretics can be said to improve survival. However, diuretics do not alter the natural progression of cardiomyopathy and in this context do not favorably influence long-term survival. Digitalis glycosides have been shown in humans to improve various parameters of CHF in a subset of patients with either atrial fibrillation or third heart sounds. In dogs, these gallop heart rhythms due to third heart sounds are usually associated with myocardial failure due to dilated cardiomyopathy. In spite of symptomatic improvement, no study has demonstrated an unequivocal favorable effect of digoxin on survival of patients with dilated cardiomyopathy. Likewise, there is no convincing evidence of an adverse effect on survival. Newer, powerful inotropes, such as milrinone, often demonstrate impressive short-term improvements in left ventricular function, clinical signs, and exercise tolerance in patients with CHF. However, their long-term benefits are much less impressive, they are arrhythmogenic, and they have not been shown to prolong survival. In fact, long-term milrinone therapy in humans has had an unfavorable influence on mortality. Vasodilators offer the potential advantage of increasing left ventricular performance without an associated increase in myocardial oxygen demand and cardiac rhythm disturbances. The only vigorous survival study that unequivocally demonstrated improved survival of patients with advanced CHF due to myocardial failure, including dilated cardiomyopathy, was the Consensus Trial. Survival of patients receiving enalapril was significantly better than those receiving placebo. In fact, the trial was stopped prematurely by the ethical review committee when it became obvious that the results favored the enalapril group. Although the use of beta-adrenergic blocking drugs in cardiomyopathic patients with CHF is controversial and associated with a risk of short-term deterioration of left ventricular function, their use in human medicine is gaining acceptance. Although hemodynamic and clinical evidence of improvement has been demonstrated along with withdrawal-associated deterioration, the only study purporting a beneficial effect on survival used retrospective controls.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Technology assessment in the Coronary Artery Surgery Study

The majority of the 26 technology assessment articles from the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS) follow the original purpose of the registry and evaluate the therapeutic capabilities of coronary artery bypass graft surgery. However, these registry data have also been used to identify risk factors for cardiovascular disease, to test diagnostic technologies, and to evaluate technological processes. Consideration of quality of life issues and the availability of cost data provide valuable additions to the continued use of the CASS for technology assessment.

The evolving pattern of digoxin intoxication: observations at a large urban hospital from 1980 to 1988

Digoxin intoxication has been reported to be a common adverse drug reaction with an in-hospital incidence of 6% to 23% and an associated mortality rate as high as 41%. A retrospective review was conducted to assess the accuracy of diagnosis, the morbidity and mortality of digoxin intoxication, and its incidence in hospitalized patients with heart failure. We reviewed the medical records of 219 patients discharged with the diagnosis of digoxin intoxication between 1980 and 1988. Patients were classified as follows: (1) Definite intoxication--patients with symptoms and/or arrhythmias suggestive of digoxin intoxication that resolved after discontinuation of digoxin; (2) possible intoxication--patients with symptoms and/or arrhythmias suggestive of digoxin intoxication in the absence of documented resolution after discontinuation of digoxin, or the presence of other clinical illnesses that could possibly account for those findings; (3) no intoxication--patients whose symptoms or ECG abnormalities were clearly explained by other associated clinical illnesses and persisted after withdrawal of digoxin. We identified only 43 patients (20%) with definite intoxication. The majority of patients discharged with the diagnosis of digoxin intoxication (133 or 60%) were classified as possibly digoxin intoxicated, and 43 patients (20%) had no clinical evidence to support this diagnosis. To estimate the incidence of digoxin intoxication, we also reviewed the medical records of 994 patients admitted in 1987 with heart failure. Of these, 563 were receiving digoxin and in 27 the diagnosis of digoxin intoxication was made by their clinicians. Our review showed that only four were definitely intoxicated (0.8%), and the diagnosis could not be excluded in another 16 (4%).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Cardiac glycosides and congestive heart failure

Although the cardiac glycosides are universally acknowledged to be important agents in the drug therapy of advanced congestive heart failure (CHF), their role in the treatment of more moderate CHF, particularly in patients in sinus rhythm, remains controversial. Over the past decade, several randomized clinical trials have been undertaken to help clarify the appropriate use of the cardiac glycosides in these patients. Although the data are not conclusive, the available evidence indicates that digoxin is efficacious and relatively safe in patients with CHF whether given alone or in combination with vasodilators. Ongoing myocardial ischemia, hypokalemia and reduced drug clearance due to renal disease or drug interactions remain the clinical parameters most closely associated with digitalis toxicity. However, the recent introduction and widespread availability of a safe and rapidly effective antidote to digitalis preparations--Fab fragments of antidigoxin antibodies--offers the clinician a greater margin of safety in the use of the cardiac glycosides than has been available in the past.

Ventricular arrhythmias in congestive heart failure

Despite advances in the treatment of congestive heart failure (CHF), the mortality rate continues to be high. A large number of the deaths are sudden, presumably due to ventricular arrhythmias. Complex ventricular arrhythmias are recorded in as many as 80% of patients with CHF, with nonsustained ventricular tachycardia occurring in 40%. The latter appears to be an independent predictor of mortality. Chronic structural abnormalities responsible for CHF may be the basis for the capability of a ventricle to support life-threatening arrhythmias, which are triggered by premature ventricular contractions. The pathogenesis of arrhythmias is multifactorial. Electrolyte abnormalities, ischemia, catecholamines, inotropic and antiarrhythmic drugs may worsen arrhythmias and increase susceptibility of a ventricle to sustained arrhythmias. Beta-adrenergic blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors have a beneficial effect. The role of various drugs in the pathogenesis and treatment of ventricular arrhythmias is discussed. The efficacy of antiarrhythmic therapy targeted to asymptomatic nonsustained ventricular tachycardia, in order to prevent sudden death, is controversial. Pharmacotherapy guided by electrophysiologic testing is the treatment of choice for patients who have manifest sustained ventricular tachycardia, but patients resuscitated from ventricular fibrillation may require automatic implantable cardioverter defibrillator.

Pathophysiology and current therapy of congestive heart failure

Congestive heart failure is a common clinical syndrome, with a relatively poor prognosis in its advanced stages. During the development of heart failure, there is a decline in myocardial contractility and activation of neurohormonal systems. An overshoot of some of these compensatory mechanisms sets the stage for therapeutic interventions. Any of the three therapeutic classes of drugs (inotropic drugs, diuretics or vasodilators) can be used as first-line therapy. Other classes can be added to produce additive effects on ventricular function. Because vasodilators have been shown to prolong life, they should be used routinely in patients with heart failure. Arrhythmias and sudden death are relatively common in heart failure, although the value of antiarrhythmic therapy is less certain. Although current therapy is very helpful in patients with heart failure, it is clear that preventive approaches will be more effective in decreasing morbidity and mortality.

Risk factor profiles of patients with sudden cardiac death and death from other cardiac causes: a report from the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS)

Identification of patients at risk of sudden death is essential if optimal preventive treatment strategies are to be developed. In the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS) Registry, 19,946 patients were analyzed to characterize baseline clinical, hemodynamic and angiographic features of patients dying from sudden cardiac death and to compare them with features of patients dying from other cardiac causes, of those dying from noncardiac causes and of survivors. Of the 11,843 medically treated patients, 1,621 died during a mean follow-up period of 5.0 years: death was sudden in 557 (34%), nonsudden but cardiac in 813 (50%) and noncardiac in 251 (16%). In 8,103 surgically treated patients, 824 deaths occurred during a mean follow-up period of 5.1 years: death was sudden in 204 (25%), nonsudden but cardiac in 390 (47%) and noncardiac in 230 (28%). In general, the patients (both medically and surgically treated) who died of cardiac causes, either suddenly or nonsuddenly, were similar to each other but significantly different from patients who either survived or died of noncardiac causes. Although patients with an increased risk of any type of cardiac death could be identified, there were no measures of angiographic or hemodynamic characteristics that were significantly different between patients with sudden cardiac death and those with nonsudden cardiac death. Identification of patients at high risk for sudden cardiac death will require approaches in addition to clinical, angiographic and hemodynamic assessment, such as electrophysiologic assessment or monitoring techniques to identify triggering mechanisms.

Long-term oral therapy of congestive heart failure with phosphodiesterase inhibitors

The existing management of severe chronic congestive heart failure carries a dismal prognosis. Mortality over 6 months is 50% by some estimates. This fact, coupled with increasing concern for the safety and efficacy of the digitalis glycosides, has stimulated an intense search for new oral cardiotonic agents suitable for chronic administration. Despite the ability of many phosphodiesterase inhibiting agents to affect profound hemodynamic improvements acutely after oral or intravenous administration, none of the four agents here reviewed in 30 clinical trials has been adequately proven to provide benefit over conventional long-term therapy of severe heart failure. The four drugs to have undergone long-term clinical trials are amrinone, milrinone, enoximone (MDL 17043), and piroximone (MDL 19,025). For amrinone, inefficacy was revealed through carefully designed, placebo-controlled studies despite initial enthusiasm generated by open uncontrolled trials. Enoximone has suffered rapid attenuation of its hemodynamic effectiveness in most studies, and piroximone failed in its only long-term trial. Therefore, final judgment on most of these agents must await completion of controlled clinical trials, and any initial optimism stimulated by the current uncontrolled studies should be met with reservation.

Treatment of congestive heart failure--state of the art and future trends

1. Cardiac failure is a clinical syndrome of symptoms and signs, which can be confirmed by imaging or invasive haemodynamic techniques. It may be caused by systolic or diastolic dysfunction, but systolic dysfunction rarely occurs alone. It is important to ascertain the degree to which each contributes, and the precise aetiology of the condition, particularly in relation to surgically correctable lesions. 2. Non-pharmacological approaches including weight loss, salt restriction and lifestyle changes may be beneficial in some patients, and diuretics, which reduce the load on the heart, are the traditional baseline therapy. 3. Digitalis has been used where problems with contractility predominate, but its beneficial effect has been disputed, and expectations of improvement in patients in sinus rhythm should not be too high. 4. Vasodilators have been considered as the next line of treatment. Arteriolar dilators tend to increase cardiac output, but have little effect on pulmonary artery wedge pressure, and venodilators tend to have the opposite effect. Probably both actions are necessary and angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, which have both, have proved effective in terms of symptoms and survival. 5. Various other inotropic agents have been tried. Phosphodiesterase inhibitors improve exercise tolerance, but may increase the probability of serious arrhythmias, already a significant cause of sudden death. beta 1-partial adrenoceptor agonists such as xamoterol have shown some promise, and anti-arrhythmic therapy has also been considered. 6. Drugs which prevent progression of myocardial damage would prove a great advance, and beta-adrenoceptor antagonists and calcium channel blockers appear to have considerable potential in this area.

How to digitalize and to maintain optimal digoxin levels in congestive heart failure

Due to the narrow therapeutic-to-toxic ratio of digoxin, numerous studies have been done to assess the optimal digoxin level in patients with congestive heart failure. A digoxin level of 0.7-1.5 ng/mL (or 0.9-2.0 nMol/L) is generally considered optimal, but even at these levels toxicity may occur in certain clinical situations such as severe pulmonary disease or when electrolyte or metabolic disturbances are present. The optimal daily maintenance dose of digoxin depends on the preparation given and can be calculated by the equation of Jelliffe, which is largely based on the creatinine clearance of the patient. The daily digoxin dose must also be adjusted to take into consideration disease processes or concomitant drug therapy that can alter the volume of distribution, the biotransformation, or the excretion of the drug.

Digoxin--a redundant drug in congestive cardiac failure

Controversy continues concerning the use of digoxin as a positive inotropic agent in the treatment of heart failure in patients in sinus rhythm. Digoxin is properly used to control the heart rate in patients in atrial fibrillation. The findings from 14 uncontrolled and 6 controlled clinical trials have been examined. Digoxin does exert a small chronic positive inotropic effect. Although some individual patients, particularly those with fluid overload, appear to benefit from digoxin, controlled clinical trials in patients, most of whom have been treated with diuretics, have failed to demonstrate an increase of exercise capacity. No mortality trial has been attempted. Digoxin has the potential to be harmful in patients with ischemic heart disease. Alternative and safer therapies have been shown to be equal or superior to digoxin.

How effective is digitalis in the treatment of congestive heart failure?

The evidence suggests that digitalis glycosides do indeed improve ventricular performance through a sustained but moderate positive inotropic effect. This effect is more marked in failing than in nonfailing myocardium. The clinical studies suggest a moderate salutary effect in patients with chronic CHF who are in sinus rhythm. The drug can be given safely to patients with CAD and in combination with other medications when the physician is aware of those factors leading to increased sensitivity to digitalis.

CASS in retrospect: lessons from the randomized cohort and registry. Coronary Artery Surgery Study

The Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS) was a prospective, randomized evaluation of the value of coronary artery bypass grafting compared with medical therapy for stable, mildly symptomatic coronary artery disease. Also, the CASS registry collected clinic information and follow-up data from 24,959 nonconsecutive patients undergoing cardiac catheterization from 1974 to 1979. CASS has had a major impact on current management of the coronary disease patient and represents an important contribution to the cardiovascular knowledge base. Despite the large size and valuable contributions of CASS, its findings have been widely misinterpreted, especially regarding indications for coronary artery bypass surgery. This review examines CASS from the viewpoint of its methodology and some of its many published reports. A full understanding of CASS is requisite to avoid clinical misapplication of the findings of this study.

Features of cardiac arrest episodes with and without acute myocardial infarction in the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS)

Angiographic evidence of coronary artery disease was present in 16,002 patients in the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS) registry. Of these patients, 551 had a history of cardiac arrest before enrollment angiography. Cardiac arrest was a complication of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in 372 patients (68%). Electrocardiographic documentation of the responsible rhythm was available in 283 patients. Ventricular fibrillation (VF) was present in 112 (60%), ventricular tachycardia (VT) in 41 (22%) and both VT and VF in 26 (14%) patients. Stepwise linear discriminant analysis comparing the 551 cardiac arrest patients with the other 15,451 patients selected left ventricular wall motion score (F = 265), use of digitalis (F = 71), impaired blood supply to any segment (F = 16) and particularly to the anterior wall (F = 11) as discriminating variables associated with cardiac arrest. Patients with cardiac arrest occurring as a complication of AMI were younger (F = 12), had greater impairment of coronary blood supply (F = 7) and were more likely to be on a cholesterol-lowering diet (F = 16) than were patients with arrest remote from infarction. Comparison of patients with VT versus those with VF showed a positive association of VT with age (F = 8), a trend toward worse left ventricular function and presence of a left ventricular aneurysm, but no difference in severity and collateralization of coronary artery disease. It is concluded that cardiac arrest is related to the extent of myocardial damage.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

The mortality risk associated with digitalis treatment after myocardial infarction

We examined the effects of digitalis therapy on postinfarction mortality throughout a 24-month to 48-month follow-up in 867 patients who survived an acute myocardial infarction. During follow-up, 145 patients died (16.7% mortality). At the time of hospital discharge, 31% of the patients were taking digitalis. The digitalis-treated patients were older, had more medical-cardiac risk factors, and had a higher mortality rate throughout the follow-up than the nondigitalis-treated patients. Statistical techniques were used to adjust for clinical imbalances between the digitalis-treated patients and nondigitalis-treated patients. The survival analysis (n = 728 patients) utilized the Cox regression model, and the digitalis-associated mortality risk was identified only after all significant covariates were allowed, so that mortality could be predicted as accurately as possible. Digitalis therapy was associated with a significantly increased postinfarction mortality risk after adjustment for the predictor covariates (relative risk 2.3, 95% confidence interval 1.4-3.7, p less than 0.001). The findings from this large multicenter study suggest that it would be prudent to exercise caution in the use of digitalis in postinfarction patients.

What contribution has cardiac surgery made to the decline in mortality from coronary heart disease?

The number of deaths from coronary artery disease is declining in New Zealand as in some other Western countries. It has been estimated that in 1981 in the Auckland metropolitan area there were 126 fewer deaths than would have been expected from the data in 1974. The contribution made by cardiac surgery to this decline was assessed from the known numbers of patients who were operated on, from their survival rate, and from the predicted mortality of the surgical cohort had they not undergone operation. Such mortality was predicted from past studies of patients with similar symptoms, exercise data, studies of unstable angina, and the coronary artery surgical study registry. From this method it was estimated that coronary surgery accounted for 26% to 42% of the reduction in coronary deaths. Two previous studies estimated, from calculations based on the European study of patients with modest symptoms, that the contribution of cardiac surgery was much lower. Extrapolating data from one subset of patients to a second subset with quite different characteristics is a conceptual fallacy.

Benefit-risk assessment of investigational drugs: current methodology, limitations, and alternative approaches

Development of investigational drugs is a process integrated traditionally into four overlapping phases. The goal is to introduce new therapies to clinical medicine by assessing benefits and risks associated with administering the new drug. Benefit assessment is performed with respect to the disease for which the drug may comprise an effective treatment. In contrast, safety assessment is relatively standardized across many pharmacologic classes of agents. For purposes of benefit-risk assessment, investigational drugs are developed to provide benefit in three major disease categories: acute, episodic, and chronic. Benefit assessment is the major focus of conventional methodologies. Inherent limitations of risk assessment produced by conventional approaches are illustrated by the historical inability to detect toxicities of various drugs until large patient populations have been treated, typically after the drug is marketed. Alternative approaches to overcome these limitations include assessment of safety in studies specifically designed to optimize such evaluation and more extensive safety testing of investigational drugs in patient subgroups at higher risk. Such approaches serve the interest of patients, physicians, and developers by facilitating the development of new therapies by providing a more complete benefit-risk assessment prior to initial marketing of the drug.

Congestive heart failure

A review of the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and treatment of congestive heart failure is presented, with particular attention given to newer modalities of therapy.

Is inotropic therapy appropriate for patients with chronic congestive heart failure? Or is the digitalis leaf withering?

The appropriateness of inotropic therapy in chronic heart failure was examined by critically reviewing five assumptions upon which this form of therapy has been justified. Only the first, that cardiac performance can be acutely improved by inotropic therapy, has been empirically proven. That such acute improvement is sustained appears to be true with non-catecholamine agents whereas the chronic haemodynamic efficacy of oral catecholamines remains in doubt. That any inotropic agent can improve exercise tolerance, make the patient feel better, or effect a change without deleteriously affecting the myocyte is very much in doubt. Thus, although the prospect of using powerful inotropic therapy in the patient with heart failure is theoretically appealing, its utility remains to be proven.

Facilitation of lethal ventricular arrhythmias by therapeutic digoxin in conscious post infarction dogs

The proarrhythmic potential of digoxin, administered in a therapeutic dosage regimen, was evaluated in conscious dogs in the subacute phase of myocardial infarction. In this evaluation, digoxin (0.0125 mg/kg/day intravenously) or vehicle were administered to conscious dogs for periods of 5 to 7 days, commencing 4 to 5 days after anterior myocardial infarction. Before treatment, programmed ventricular stimulation failed to initiate ventricular tachycardia in 26 post infarction dogs. After treatment, programmed stimulation initiated ventricular tachyarrhythmias in only 1 of 13 digoxin-treated dogs (1.36 +/- 0.17 ng/ml serum digoxin) and in 0 of 13 vehicle-treated dogs. However, the incidences of early ventricular fibrilation (4 of 10 digoxin vs 0 of 12 vehicle; p less than 0.05) and of 24-hour mortality (6 of 10 digoxin vs 2 of 12 vehicle; p less than 0.05) occurring in response to the development of posterolateral ischemia in the presence of previous anterior myocardial infarction was significantly greater in digoxin-treated (1.47 +/- 0.19 ng/ml serum digoxin) than in vehicle-treated animals. These findings suggest an enhanced susceptibility toward the development of ischemia-related lethal arrhythmias in the presence of therapeutic digoxin serum concentrations early after myocardial infarction, which is not predicted by programmed ventricular stimulation testing.