Non-cardiac comorbidities and intensive up-titration of oral treatment in patients recently hospitalized for heart failure: Insights from the STRONG-HF trial

AIMS

To assess the potential interaction between non-cardiac comorbidities (NCCs) and the efficacy and safety of high-intensity care (HIC) versus usual care (UC) in the STRONG-HF trial, including stable patients with improved but still elevated natriuretic peptides.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In the trial, eight NCCs were reported: anaemia, diabetes, renal dysfunction, severe liver disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease/asthma, stroke/transient ischaemic attack, psychiatric/neurological disorders, and malignancies. Patients were classified by NCC number (0, 1, 2 and ≥3). The treatment effect of HIC versus UC on the primary endpoint, 180-day death or heart failure (HF) rehospitalization, was compared by NCC number and by each individual comorbidity. Among the 1078 patients, the prevalence of 0, 1, 2 and ≥3 NCCs was 24.3%, 39.8%, 24.5% and 11.4%, respectively. Achievement of full doses of HF therapies at 90 and 180 days in the HIC was similar irrespective of NCC number. In HIC, the primary endpoint occurred in 10.0%, 16.6%, 13.6% and 26.2%, in those with 0, 1, 2 and ≥3 NCCs, respectively, as compared to 19.1%, 25.4%, 23.3% and 26.2% in UC (interaction-p = 0.80). The treatment benefit of HIC versus UC on the primary endpoint did not differ significantly by each individual comorbidity. There was no significant treatment interaction by NCC number in quality-of-life improvement (p = 0.98) or the incidence of serious adverse events (p = 0.11).

CONCLUSIONS

In the STRONG-HF trial, NCCs neither limited the rapid up-titration of HF therapies, nor attenuated the benefit of HIC on the primary endpoint. In the context of a clinical trial, the benefit-risk ratio favours the rapid up-titration of HF therapies even in patients with multiple NCCs.

Heart failure during the COVID-19 pandemic: clinical, diagnostic, management, and organizational dilemmas

The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) infection pandemic has affected the care of patients with heart failure (HF). Several consensus documents describe the appropriate diagnostic algorithm and treatment approach for patients with HF and associated COVID-19 infection. However, few questions about the mechanisms by which COVID can exacerbate HF in patients with high-risk (Stage B) or symptomatic HF (Stage C) remain unanswered. Therefore, the type of HF occurring during infection is poorly investigated. The diagnostic differentiation and management should be focused on the identification of the HF phenotype, underlying causes, and subsequent tailored therapy. In this framework, the relationship existing between COVID and onset of acute decompensated HF, isolated right HF, and cardiogenic shock is questioned, and the specific management is mainly based on local hospital organization rather than a standardized model. Similarly, some specific populations such as advanced HF, heart transplant, patients with left ventricular assist device (LVAD), or valve disease remain under investigated. In this systematic review, we examine recent advances regarding the relationships between HF and COVID-19 pandemic with respect to epidemiology, pathogenetic mechanisms, and differential diagnosis. Also, according to the recent HF guidelines definition, we highlight different clinical profile identification, pointing out the main concerns in understudied HF populations.

P264 Alcohol septal ablation in hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy with mitral insufficiency of mixed mechanism

Alcohol septal ablation is a percutaneous intervention for hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy, aiming to relieve symptoms, as an alternative to surgical myomectomy, in optimally treated but still symptomatic patients, with high surgical risk.

We present the case of 65-year-old female, with persistently elevated blood pressure, presenting with severe dyspnea and angina on exertion and frequent episodes of paroxysmal nocturnal dyspnea. Clinical examination revealed an intense left parasternal systolic murmur. Electrocardiographic findings were sinus rhythm and negative T waves in V2-V6. Transthoracic echocardiography showed a small LV cavity with severe asymmetric left ventricular hypertrophy (maximum basal interventricular septum thickness of 26 mm), with important obstruction in the left ventricular outflow tract - resting gradient 77mmHg, provoked gradient 100mmHg. TOE evaluation of the mitral valve revealed significant mitral regurgitation, with intermitent telesystolic anterior motion of the anterior mitral leaflet and also P2 scallop prolapse.

Further evaluation revealed a 60% stenosis of left anterior descending (LAD) artery of second segment, 60% stenosis of the left internal carotid artery, chronic renal disease (creatinine clearance 80ml/min), and moderate pulmonary hypertension.

Although surgery was initially proposed to the patient, given the high operative risk (EUROSCORE II 8.45%) for a complete surgical procedure (myomectomy, mitral valve repair and coronary bypass), we attempted a stepwise approach to alleviate her symptoms. Intensive medical treatment improved blood pressure control while angioplasty of the LAD alleviated her angina.

Echo-guided alcohol ablation of the interventricular septal wall was performed. Catheter-based contrast injection of a secondary septal branch of the LAD produced a subendocardial contrast in the contact area of anterior mitral valve leaflet; subsequently, embolizing the artery, producing an isolated necrosis at this level, with equalizing the pressure curves between LV and aorta.

Postintervention, initial gradients were 50mmHg at rest, 100mmHg on postextrasystolic measurement. Systolic movement of the anterior leaflet maintained a mezotelesystolic pattern. At 3-months follow-up, LVOT gradients were 27/100mmHg, without any increase in pulmonary artery pressure, but with significant improvement of dyspnea. Further risk assessment by Holter ECG monitoring identified non-sustained ventricular tachycardia, so an ICD was implanted.

The modest reduction in gradient was associated with significant clinical improvement in the patient’s symptomatology. This procedure has been refined in the last years, especially with the introduction of myocardial contrast echocardiography for better localizing the area at risk of infarction and to reduce the amount of alcohol used. Alcohol septal ablation may be part of a stepwise plan to improve symptoms, with lower procedural risks as compared to classic surgery.