Total Heart Failure Hospitalizations Research Articles

Critical re-evaluation of the identification of iron deficiency states and effective iron repletion strategies in patients with chronic heart failure.

According to current guidelines, iron deficiency is defined by a serum ferritin level <100 ng/ml or a transferrin saturation (TSAT) <20% if the serum ferritin level is 100-299 μg/L. These criteria were developed to encourage the use of intravenous iron as an adjunct to erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in the treatment of renal anaemia. However, in patients with heart failure, these criteria are not supported by any pathophysiological or clinical evidence that they identify an absolute or functional iron deficiency state. A low baseline TSAT-but not serum ferritin level-appears to be a reliable indicator of the effect of intravenous iron to reduce major heart failure events. In randomized controlled trials, intravenous iron decreased the risk of cardiovascular death or total heart failure hospitalization in patients with a TSAT <20% (risk ratio 0.67 [0.49-0.92]) but not in patients with a TSAT ≥20% (risk ratio 0.99 [0.74-1.30]), with the magnitude of the risk reduction being proportional to the severity of hypoferraemia. Patients who were enrolled in clinical trials solely because they had a serum ferritin level <100 μg/L showed no significant benefit on heart failure outcomes, and it is noteworthy that serum ferritin levels of 20-300 μg/L lie entirely within the range of normal values for healthy adults. Current guidelines reflect the eligibility criteria of clinical trials, which inadvertently adopted unvalidated criteria to define iron deficiency. Reliance on these guidelines would lead to the treatment of many patients who are not iron deficient (serum ferritin level <100 μg/L but normal TSAT) and ignores the possibility of iron deficiency in patients with a low TSAT but with serum ferritin level of >300 μg/L. Importantly, analyses of benefit based on trial eligibility-driven guidelines substantially underestimate the magnitude of heart-failure-event risk reduction with intravenous iron in patients who are truly iron deficient. Based on all available data, we recommend a new mechanism-based and trial-tested approach that reflects the totality of evidence more faithfully than the historical process adopted by clinical investigators and by the guidelines. Until additional evidence is forthcoming, an iron deficiency state in patients with heart failure should be defined by a TSAT <20% (as long as the serum ferritin level is <400 μg/L), and furthermore, the use of a serum ferritin level <100 μg/L alone as a diagnostic criterion should be discarded.

Randomized investigation of the MitraClip device in heart failure: Design and rationale of the RESHAPE-HF2 trial design.

The safety and effectiveness of the MitraClip device to treat functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) has been tested in previous clinical trials yielding somewhat heterogeneous results in heart failure (HF) patients. Over time, the MitraClip device system has been modified and clinical practice evolved to consider also less severely diseased HF patients with FMR for this therapeutic option. The RESHAPE-HF2 trial aims to assess the safety and effectiveness of the MitraClip device system on top of medical therapy considered optimal in the treatment of clinically significant FMR in symptomatic patients with chronic HF. The RESHAPE-HF2 is an investigator-initiated, prospective, randomized, parallel-controlled, multicentre trial designed to evaluate the use of the MitraClip device (used in the most up-to-date version as available at sites) plus optimal standard of care therapy (device group) compared to optimal standard of care therapy alone (control group). Eligible subjects have signs and symptoms of HF (New York Heart Association [NYHA] class II-IV despite optimal therapy), and have moderate-to-severe or severe FMR, as confirmed by a central echocardiography core laboratory; have an ejection fraction between ≥20% and ≤50% (initially 15-35% for NYHA class II patients, and 15-45% for NYHA class III/IV patients); have been adequately treated per applicable standards, and have received appropriate revascularization and cardiac resynchronization therapy, if eligible; had a HF hospitalization or elevated natriuretic peptides (B-type natriuretic peptide [BNP] ≥300 pg/ml or N-terminal proBNP ≥1000 pg/ml) in the last 90 days; and in whom isolated mitral valve surgery is not a recommended treatment option. The trial has three primary endpoints, which are these: (i) the composite rate of total (first and recurrent) HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular death during 24 months of follow-up, (ii) the rate of total (i.e. first and recurrent) HF hospitalizations within 24 months, and (iii) the change from baseline to 12 months in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall score. The three primary endpoints will be analysed using the Hochberg procedure to control the familywise type I error rate across the three hypotheses. The RESHAPE-HF2 trial will provide sound evidence on the MitraClip device and its effects in HF patients with FMR. The recruitment was recently completed with 506 randomized patients.

Effects of sacubitril/valsartan according to polypharmacy status in PARAGON-HF.

Patients with heart failure (HF) and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) have a particularly high prevalence of comorbidities, often necessitating treatment with many medications. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between polypharmacy status and outcomes in PARAGON-HF. In this post hoc analysis, baseline medication status was available in 4793 of 4796 patients included in the primary analysis of PARAGON-HF. The effects of sacubitril/valsartan, compared with valsartan, were assessed according to the number of medications at baseline: 683 non-polypharmacy (<5 medications); 2750 polypharmacy (5-9 medications), and 1360 hyper-polypharmacy (≥10 medications). The primary outcome was total HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular deaths. Patients with hyper-polypharmacy were older, had more severe limitations due to HF (worse New York Heart Association class and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores), and had greater comorbidity. The non-adjusted risk of the primary outcome was significantly higher in patients taking more medications, and similar trends were seen for HF hospitalization and cardiovascular and all-cause death. The effect of sacubitril/valsartan versus valsartan on the primary outcome from the lowest to highest polypharmacy category was (as a rate ratio): 1.19 (0.76-1.85), 0.94 (0.77-1.15), and 0.77 (0.61-0.96) (pinteraction = 0.16). Treatment-related adverse events were more common in patients in the higher polypharmacy categories but not more common with sacubitril/valsartan, versus valsartan, in any polypharmacy category. Polypharmacy is very common in patients with HFpEF, and those with polypharmacy have worse clinical status and a higher rate of non-fatal and fatal outcomes. The benefit of sacubitril/valsartan was not diminished in patients taking a larger number of medications at baseline.

Effect of Empagliflozin on Heart Failure Outcomes After Acute Myocardial Infarction: Insights From the EMPACT-MI Trial.

Empagliflozin reduces the risk of heart failure (HF) events in patients with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk, chronic kidney disease, or prevalent HF irrespective of ejection fraction. Whereas the EMPACT-MI trial (Effect of Empagliflozin on Hospitalization for Heart Failure and Mortality in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction) showed that empagliflozin does not reduce the risk of the composite of hospitalization for HF and all-cause death, the effect of empagliflozin on first and recurrent HF events after myocardial infarction is unknown. EMPACT-MI was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, event-driven trial that randomized 6522 patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction at risk for HF on the basis of newly developed left ventricular ejection fraction of <45% or signs or symptoms of congestion to receive empagliflozin 10 mg daily or placebo within 14 days of admission. In prespecified secondary analyses, treatment groups were analyzed for HF outcomes. Over a median follow-up of 17.9 months, the risk for first HF hospitalization and total HF hospitalizations was significantly lower in the empagliflozin compared with the placebo group (118 [3.6%] versus 153 [4.7%] patients with events; hazard ratio, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.60, 0.98]; P=0.031, for first HF hospitalization; 148 versus 207 events; rate ratio, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.51, 0.89]; P=0.006, for total HF hospitalizations). Subgroup analysis showed consistency of empagliflozin benefit across clinically relevant patient subgroups for first and total HF hospitalizations. The need for new use of diuretics, renin-angiotensin modulators, or mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists after discharge was less in patients randomized to empagliflozin versus placebo (all P<0.05). Empagliflozin reduced the risk of HF in patients with left ventricular dysfunction or congestion after acute myocardial infarction. URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04509674.

Left Ventricular Function, Congestion, and Effect of Empagliflozin on Heart Failure Risk After Myocardial Infarction

BackgroundEmpagliflozin reduces the risk of heart failure (HF) hospitalizations but not all-cause mortality when started within 14 days of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). ObjectivesThis study sought to evaluate the association of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), congestion, or both, with outcomes and the impact of empagliflozin in reducing HF risk post-AMI. MethodsIn the EMPACT-MI (Trial to Evaluate the Effect of Empagliflozin on Hospitalization for Heart Failure and Mortality in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction) trial, patients were randomized within 14 days of an AMI complicated by either newly reduced LVEF<45%, congestion, or both, to empagliflozin (10 mg daily) or placebo and were followed up for a median of 17.9 months. ResultsAmong 6,522 patients, the mean baseline LVEF was 41 ± 9%; 2,648 patients (40.6%) presented with LVEF <45% alone, 1,483 (22.7%) presented with congestion alone, and 2,181 (33.4%) presented with both. Among patients in the placebo arm of the trial, multivariable adjusted risk for each 10-point reduction in LVEF included all-cause death or HF hospitalization (HR: 1.49; 95% CI: 1.31-1.69; P < 0.0001), first HF hospitalization (HR: 1.64; 95% CI: 1.37-1.96; P < 0.0001), and total HF hospitalizations (rate ratio [RR]: 1.89; 95% CI: 1.51-2.36; P < 0.0001). The presence of congestion was also associated with a significantly higher risk for each of these outcomes (HR: 1.52, 1.94, and RR: 2.03, respectively). Empagliflozin reduced the risk for first (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.60-0.98) and total (RR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.50-0.89) HF hospitalizations, irrespective of LVEF or congestion, or both. The safety profile of empagliflozin was consistent across baseline LVEF and irrespective of congestion status. ConclusionsIn patients with AMI, the severity of left ventricular dysfunction and the presence of congestion was associated with worse outcomes. Empagliflozin reduced first and total HF hospitalizations across the range of LVEF with and without congestion. (Trial to Evaluate the Effect of Empagliflozin on Hospitalization for Heart Failure and Mortality in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction [EMPACT-MI]; NCT04509674)

Cause-Specific Healthcare Costs Following Hospitalization for Heart Failure and Cost Offset With SGLT2 Inhibitor Therapy

BackgroundLittle is known regarding differences in cause-specific costs between heart failure (HF) with ejection fraction (EF) ≤40% vs >40%, and potential cost implications of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) therapy. ObjectivesThe study sought to compare cause-specific health care costs following hospitalization for HF with EF ≤40% vs >40% and estimate the cost offset with implementation of SGLT2i therapy. MethodsThe authors examined Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized for HF in the Get With The Guidelines–Heart Failure registry from 2016 to 2020. Mean per-patient total (excluding drug costs) and cause-specific costs from discharge through 1-year follow-up were calculated and compared between EF ≤40% vs >40%. The authors then estimated risk reductions on total all-cause and HF hospitalizations in a trial-level meta-analysis of 5 pivotal trials of SGLT2is in HF. Finally, they applied these relative treatment effects to Medicare beneficiaries eligible for SGLT2is to estimate the projected cost offset with implementation of SGLT2is, excluding drug costs. ResultsAmong 146,003 patients, 50,598 (34.7%) had EF ≤40% and 95,405 (65.3%) had EF >40%. Mean total cost through 1 year was $40,557. Total costs were similar between EF groups overall but were higher for EF ≤40% among patients surviving the 1-year follow-up period. Patients with EF >40% had higher costs caused by non-HF and noncardiovascular hospitalizations, and skilled nursing facilities (all P < 0.001). Trial-level meta-analysis of the 5 SGLT2i clinical trials estimated 11% (rate ratio: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.84-0.93; P < 0.001) and 29% (rate ratio: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.66-0.76; P < 0.001) relative reductions in rates of total all-cause and HF hospitalizations, respectively, regardless of EF. Reductions in all-cause and HF hospitalizations were projected to reduce annual costs of readmission by $2,451 to $2,668 per patient with EF ≤40% and $1,439 to 2,410 per patient with EF >40%. ConclusionsIn this large cohort of older U.S. adults hospitalized for HF, cause-specific costs of care differed among patients with EF ≤40% vs >40%. SGLT2is significantly reduced the rate of HF and all-cause hospitalizations irrespective of EF in clinical trials, and implementation of SGLT2is in clinical practice is projected to reduce costs by $1,439 to 2,668 per patient over the 1 year postdischarge, excluding drug costs.

Sacubitril/Valsartan-Related Hypotension in Patients With Heart Failure and Preserved or Mildly Reduced Ejection Fraction

BackgroundHypotension is a potential adverse effect of sacubitril/valsartan, but there are limited data regarding the predictors and implications of treatment-related hypotension in heart failure (HF) with mildly reduced and preserved ejection fraction. ObjectivesWe investigated predictors of treatment-associated hypotension, clinical outcomes after hypotension, and the relationship between left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and incidence of hypotension in the PARAGON-HF (Prospective Comparison of ARNI with ARB Global Outcomes in HF with Preserved Ejection Fraction) trial. MethodsPARAGON-HF randomized patients with chronic HF (≥45%) to sacubitril/valsartan or valsartan. Following randomization, hypotension was defined as investigator-reported hypotension with a systolic blood pressure <100 mm Hg. Predictors of hypotension were assessed using multivariable Cox models. Associations between hypotension and clinical outcomes were evaluated in time-updated Cox models. The relationship among treatment, LVEF, and incident rates of hypotension and clinical outcomes was estimated using Poisson regression models. ResultsOf 4,796 patients in PARAGON-HF, 637 (13%) experienced hypotension, more frequently in the sacubitril/valsartan arm (P < 0.001). Following documented hypotension, patients had higher risk of cardiovascular death and total HF hospitalizations (adjusted RR: 1.63; 95% CI: 1.27-2.09; P < 0.001) and all-cause death (adjusted HR: 1.62; 95% CI: 1.28-2.05; P < 0.001). LVEF modified the association between sacubitril/valsartan and risk of hypotension (Pinteraction = 0.019) such that patients with LVEF ≥60% experienced substantially higher treatment-related risks of hypotension. ConclusionsIn PARAGON-HF, a higher LVEF was associated with an increased risk of hypotension in patients treated with sacubitril/valsartan compared with valsartan. Because these subjects are also less likely to derive clinical benefit from sacubitril/valsartan, our data reinforce that the benefit/risk ratio favors the use of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with LVEF below normal, but not at higher LVEF. (Efficacy and Safety of LCZ696 Compared to Valsartan, on Morbidity and Mortality in Heart Failure Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction [PARAGON-HF]; NCT01920711)

Dapagliflozin versus sacubitril-valsartan for heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction.

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is associated with an increased risk of heart failure (HF) hospitalizations and cardiovascular death (CVD). Both dapagliflozin and sacubitril-valsartan have recently shown convincing reductions in the combined risk of CVD and HF hospitalizations in patients with HF and mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) or HFpEF. We aimed to investigate the cost-per-outcome implications of dapagliflozin vs sacubitril-valsartan in the treatment of HFmrEF or HFpEF patients. We compared the annualized cost needed to treat (CNT) to prevent the composite outcome of total HF hospitalizations and CVD with dapagliflozin or sacubitril-valsartan. The CNT was estimated by multiplying the annualized number needed to treat (aNNT) by the annual cost of therapy. The aNNT was calculated based on data collected from the DELIVER trial for dapagliflozin and a pooled analysis of the PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF trials for sacubitril-valsartan. Costs were based on 2022 US prices. Scenario analyses were performed to attenuate the differences in the studies' populations. The aNNT with dapagliflozin in DELIVER was 30 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 21-62) versus 44 (95% CI: 25-311) with sacubitril-valsartan in a pooled analysis of PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF, with an annual cost of $4,951 and $5,576, respectively. The corresponding CNTs were $148,547.13 (95% CI: $103,982.99-$306,997.39) for dapagliflozin and $245,346.77 (95% CI: $139,401.58-1,734,155.60) for sacubitril-valsartan for preventing the composite outcome of CVD and HF hospitalizations. The CNT for preventing all-cause mortality was lower for dapagliflozin than sacubitril-valsartan $1,128,958.15 [CI: $401,077.24-∞] vs $2,185,816.71 [CI: $607,790.87-∞]. Dapagliflozin provides a better monetary value than sacubitril-valsartan in preventing the composite outcome of total HF hospitalizations and CVD among patients with HFmrEF or HFpEF.

Benefits of intravenous iron supplementation in heart failure.

Introduction: Iron deficiency (ID) is one of the most frequent comorbidities in patients with heart failure (HF) and is estimated to be present in up to 80% of acute patients regardless of their ejection fraction. Randomized controlled trials have shown that supplementary intravenous iron results in improved clinical outcomes; however, the current understanding of the effects of intravenous iron on morbidity and mortality remains limited. Study and results: The meta-analysis pooled individual participant data from three randomized placebo-controlled trials of ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) in adult patients (n = 4,501) with heart failure and iron deficiency (CONFIRM-HF, AFFIRM-AHF, and HEART-FID). FCM therapy significantly reduced the co-primary composite endpoint of total cardiovascular hospitalizations and cardiovascular death, with a rate ratio (RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.75 to 0.98; p = 0.029). FCM therapy was associated with a 17% relative rate reduction in total cardiovascular hospitalizations (RR 0.83; 95% CI 0.73 to 0.96; p = 0.009) and a 16% relative rate reduction in total heart failure hospitalizations (RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.71 to 0.98; p = 0.025). Lessons learned: The meta-analysis shows that in iron-deficient patients with heart failure and reduced or mildly reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, intravenous ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) is associated with a reduced risk of total cardiovascular hospitalization and cardiovascular mortality. These findings indicate that intravenous FCM should be considered in iron-deficient patients with heart failure and reduced or mildly reduced ejection fractions.

Daprodustat and Heart Failure in CKD.

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are at higher risk for heart failure. The hypoxia inducible factor prolyl hydroxylase inhibitor daprodustat is an orally acting alternative to conventional injectable erythropoietin-stimulating agents (ESA) for the treatment of anemia in patients with CKD. Whether daprodustat affects the risk of heart failure hospitalization is unknown. The ASCEND-D (n=2,964) and ASCEND-ND (n=3,872) trials compared daprodustat to conventional ESA in patients with anemia of CKD who did or did not require dialysis, respectively. We identified risk factors for heart failure hospitalization and assessed the effect of daprodustat compared to conventional ESA on heart failure hospitalizations. History of heart failure, diabetes, and higher systolic blood pressure were independently associated with heart failure hospitalization in both trials, irrespective of treatment assignment. The number of first heart failure hospitalizations was greater in the daprodustat arm in patients not receiving dialysis (hazard ratio [HR] 1.22 [0.95-1.56], p=0.12] and in patients receiving dialysis (HR 1.10 [0.84-1.45], p=0.47), though these differences were not statistically significant. HRs in patients with and without history of heart failure were 1.37 (0.89-2.11) vs 1.08 (0.79-1.46) (p-interaction=0.36) in ASCEND-ND, and 1.52 (0.97-2.38) vs 0.93 (0.66-1.30) (p-interaction=0.09) in ASCEND-D, respectively. In post hoc analyses, daprodustat increased total (first and recurrent) heart failure hospitalizations in participants not receiving dialysis (rate ratio 1.46 [1.11-1.92], p=0.007) ) but not in participants receiving dialysis (rate ratio 1.01 [0.74-1.39], p=0.93). Daprodustat did not significantly affect the risk of a composite outcome of first heart failure hospitalization or death. A greater number of first heart failure hospitalization events occurred in patients treated with daprodustat compared with conventional ESA, but this difference did not reach statistical significance. Differences in the number of heart failure hospitalization events were most apparent in patients not receiving dialysis and in patients with history of heart failure.

Clinical implications of subclinical left ventricular dysfunction in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: The PARAGON-HF study.

Left ventricular (LV) subclinical impairment has been described in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). We assessed the relationship between LV myocardial deformation by strain imaging and recurrent hospitalization for heart failure (HF) or cardiovascular death in a large international HFpEF population. We assessed two-dimensional speckle-tracking based global longitudinal strain (GLS) in 790 patients (mean age 74 ± 8 years, 54% female) with adequate image quality enrolled in the PARAGON-HF echocardiography study. We examined the relationship of GLS with total HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular death (the primary composite outcome) after accounting for clinical confounders. Approximately 47% of the population had evidence of LV subclinical dysfunction, defined as absolute GLS <16%. Impaired GLS was significantly associated with higher values of circulating baseline N-terminal pro-B-type-natriuretic peptide. After a median follow-up of 3.0 years, there were 407 total HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular deaths. After multivariable adjustment, worse GLS was associated with a greater risk for the primary composite outcome (adjusted hazard ratio per 1% decrease: 1.06; 95% confidence interval 1.02-1.11; p = 0.008). GLS did not modify the treatment effect of sacubitril/valsartan compared with valsartan for the composite outcome (p for interaction >0.1). In a large HFpEF population, impaired LV function was observed even among patients with preserved ejection fraction, and was associated with an increased risk of total HF hospitalizations or cardiovascular death, accounting for clinical confounders. These findings highlight the key role of subtle LV systolic impairment in the pathophysiology of HFpEF.

Recurrent Hospitalizations and Response to Vericiguat in Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction

BackgroundIn VICTORIA (Vericiguat Global Study in Subjects With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction), vericiguat compared with placebo reduced cardiovascular death or heart failure (HF) hospitalization in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction. ObjectivesThis study explored the association between vericiguat and recurrent hospitalizations and subsequent mortality after HF hospitalization. MethodsThe treatment effect of vericiguat on the burden of HF hospitalizations was evaluated by assessing total HF hospitalization and cardiovascular death in the overall trial and based on baseline N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide levels with and without adjustment for VICTORIA model covariates (ie, baseline variables associated with the primary endpoint) assessed via the Andersen-Gill method. Associations between vericiguat and recurrent hospitalization and mortality adjusted for VICTORIA model covariates are reported. ResultsThere were 1,222 total HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular deaths among 2,526 patients in the vericiguat group and 1,336 total events among 2,524 patients in the placebo group (unadjusted HR: 0.89 [95% CI: 0.81-0.97] and adjusted HR: 0.92 [95% CI: 0.84-1.01]). In the subgroup with N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide levels ≤2,816 pg/mL (ie, Q1 and Q2; median or below), there was a suggestion of a benefit with vericiguat (adjusted HRs of 0.80 [95% CI: 0.64-1.01] and 0.77 [95% CI: 0.62-0.94], respectively) compared with those above this value (adjusted HRs of 1.12 [95% CI: 0.93-1.34] and 0.87 [95% CI: 0.74-1.04] for Q3 and Q4). There was no significant difference in treatment effect between patients with vs without an HF hospitalization. After HF hospitalization, the all-cause mortality rate (events per 100 patient-years) was 48.6 for vericiguat and 44.1 for placebo. ConclusionsAdditional investigation of the association between vericiguat and cardiovascular death and total HF hospitalizations by recurrent event analysis did not show a statistically significant reduction in events. Mortality was high after HF hospitalization, emphasizing the need for further therapies to reduce morbidity and mortality. (Vericiguat Global Study in Subjects With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction [VICTORIA]; NCT02861534)

The effects of Dapagliflozin in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with complications of cardiovascular disease

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a complex metabolic disorder in which concomitant insulin resistance and beta-cell impairment lead to hyperglycemia. Cardiovascular problems are more common in T2DM but after the discovery of the dapagliflozin class of SGLT2 (Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2) inhibitor, the rate of cardiovascular disease (CVD) reduced slightly including heart failure (HF). Numerous recent clinical studies emphasized that dapagliflozin as monotherapy and combined therapy with another hypoglycemic agent help to improve glycaemic control and decrease blood pressure and body weight. In the present review, the safety and efficacy of dapagliflozin have been highlighted in patients with HFrEF(Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction), after comparison with placebo and dapagliflozin. It decreased the risk of total HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular death with a low-hypoglycaemic effect. Recurrent hospitalizations are a common problem in patients with HFrEF and it is also preventable. This review article also emphasized the comparative effects of drugs and placebo to prove the effectiveness of drugs and a further reduction in the rate of heart failure. The mild adverse effect is observed in clinical trials where urinary tract infection is most common.

The beneficial effects of adherence to outpatient telecare intervention on clinical outcomes after an episode of acute heart failure: insights from the prospective randomised controlled AMULET trial

Abstract Background The prevention of hospitalisations and deaths is a major therapeutic aim in patients with heart failure (HF). In our previously published prospective randomised controlled trial, we demonstrated that an outpatient intervention comprising nurse-led non-invasive assessments, telemedicine support and remote cardiologist decision-making (AMULET telecare) reduced the risk of HF hospitalisation or cardiovascular death by 31% during the 12-month follow-up in HF patients after an episode of acute HF. Purpose To present the results of the prespecified per-protocol analysis of the AMULET trial that reveal the impact of AMULET telecare adherence on the prognosis of patients. Methods Patients with HF and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤49% and who experienced an episode of acute HF in the past 6 months were randomly assigned to receive either AMULET telecare (n=298) or standard care (n=305). Those who completed the predefined schedule of AMULET telecare (n=190) and all standard care patients were included in the per-protocol population. Results In this per-protocol analysis, when compared to standard care, the implementation of AMULET telecare reduced the risk of the primary outcome, a composite of unplanned HF hospitalisation or cardiovascular death (by 51%), and the following secondary outcomes: first unplanned HF hospitalisation, first unplanned cardiovascular hospitalisation, first all-cause unplanned hospitalisation, total unplanned HF hospitalisations and the number of days lost due to HF hospitalisations or death. There was no statistically significant difference in cardiovascular mortality, mortality due to HF and overall mortality between the study groups (Table). Conclusions Adherence to AMULET telecare enhances the positive effects of this intervention on the prognosis of HF patients with an LVEF≤49% after an episode of acute HF.

Intravenous Iron for Heart Failure: Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

While the administration of intravenous (IV) iron to those with heart failure has been implicated to be associated with a possible reduction in hospitalizations and improvement in symptoms, a recent large multicenter trial only showed modest benefits in reducing hospitalization, necessitating the updated systematic review. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, searching the MEDLINE and EMBASE database until January 9, 2023. Outcomes included total heart failure hospitalizations, first heart failure hospitalization, six-minute walk test (6MWT) distance, and incidence of infection. There were 13 studies with 3410 participants (1,790 with IV iron). Pooled analysis that reported the incidence of cardiovascular death showed that patients with IV iron did not have significantly lower odds of cardiovascular death or first heart failure hospitalization. In contrast, those who received IV iron had significantly lower total heart failure hospitalization (pooled odds ratio (OR) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44-0.90, I2 59.0%, P = .017) and a composite of cardiovascular death and first heart failure hospitalization (pooled OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.47-0.64, I2 0%, P = .656). While the efficacy is modest, IV iron therapy could be associated with reduced hospitalization for heart failure without significant adverse events.

Current Role of SLGT2 Inhibitors in the Management of the Whole Spectrum of Heart Failure: Focus on Dapagliflozin.

Heart failure (HF) is associated with a high morbidity and mortality burden. In light of more recent evidence, SGLT2 inhibitors are currently recommended as first-line therapy in managing patients with HF, regardless of ejection fraction, to reduce HF burden. The DAPA-HF and DELIVER trials, and particularly, the pooled analysis of both studies, have shown that dapagliflozin significantly reduces the risk of cardiovascular death, all-cause death, total HF hospitalizations, and MACE in the whole spectrum of HF, with sustained benefits over time. Recent data have shown that the full implementation of dapagliflozin in clinical practice would translate into a robust reduction in hospitalizations for HF and death in real-life populations. Many pathophysiological mechanisms have been involved in these benefits, particularly the positive effects of dapagliflozin on reversing cardiac (atrial and ventricular) remodeling, reducing cardiac fibrosis and inflammation, and improving endothelial dysfunction. In this manuscript, we reviewed from a practical point of view the role of dapagliflozin in the management of the whole spectrum of patients with HF.

Use of Win Statistics to Analyze Outcomes in the DAPA-HF and DELIVER Trials

BackgroundThe primary end point in most heart failure (HF) trials is a composite of time to a first worsening HF event or cardiovascular death. Prevention of recurrent events and improvements in symptoms/quality of life are also important for patients but are usually analyzed separately. Win statistics can integrate all these outcomes into a single composite end point, which is analyzed in hierarchical order, reflecting the clinical importance of each component.MethodsThe Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in Heart Failure (DAPA-HF, n=4744) and Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the Lives of Patients with Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure (DELIVER, n=6263) trials enrolled patients with New York Heart Association class II, III, or IV HF, elevated natriuretic peptides, and either an ejection fraction of 40% or less (DAPA-HF) or greater than 40% and left atrial enlargement/left ventricular hypertrophy (DELIVER). We examined the effects of dapagliflozin compared with placebo on a hierarchical composite outcome, including cardiovascular death, total (first and recurrent) HF hospitalizations, total urgent HF visits, and improvement/deterioration in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score (KCCQ-TSS; range from 0 to 100, with a higher score indicating fewer symptoms and physical limitations) at 8 months.ResultsFor this composite outcome, the win ratio was 1.30 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.23 to 1.36) in the pooled cohort, 1.33 (95% CI, 1.23 to 1.43) in the DAPA-HF trial, and 1.27 (95% CI, 1.18 to 1.36) in the DELIVER trial. Win odds and net benefit in overall patients were 1.19 (95% CI, 1.14 to 1.24) and 8.7% (95% CI, 6.6 to 10.9%), respectively. In the overall pooled cohort, the majority of wins and losses were accounted for by KCCQ-TSS; 52.4% were settled by the KCCQ-TSS tier in the pooled cohort.ConclusionsIn both the DAPA-HF and DELIVER trials, dapagliflozin led to a significant improvement in composite outcomes that incorporated patient-reported outcomes along with total HF events, as well as cardiovascular deaths. These analyses provided a comprehensive presentation of win statistics and illustrated the utility and flexibility of win statistics in describing the effects of dapagliflozin in two recent clinical trials in patients with HF. (Funded by British Heart Foundation Centre of Research Excellence and others; clinical trial registration numbers, NCT03036124 and NCT03619213.)

Pharmacological Treatments in Heart Failure With Mildly Reduced and Preserved Ejection Fraction: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

BackgroundMedical treatment for heart failure with preserved ejection (HFpEF) and heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) has weaker evidence compared with reduced ejection fraction, despite recent trials with an angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) and sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is). ObjectivesThe authors aimed to estimate the aggregate therapeutic benefit of drugs for HFmrEF and HFpEF. MethodsThe authors performed a systematic review of MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and Web of Science for randomized trials including patients with heart failure (HF) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) >40%, treated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (analyzed together as renin-angiotensin system inhibitors [RASi]), beta-blockers (BBs), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), digoxin, ARNI, and SGLT2i. An additive component network meta-analysis was performed. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular (CV) death and first hospitalization for heart failure (HHF); secondary outcomes were CV death, total HHF, and all-cause mortality. ResultsThe authors identified 13 studies with a total of 29,875 patients and a mean LVEF of 56.3% ± 8.7%. ARNI, MRA, and SGLT2i separately, but not RASi, BB, or digoxin, reduced the primary composite outcome compared with placebo. The combination of ARNI, BB, MRA, and SGLT2i was the most effective (HR: 0.47 [95% CI: 0.31-0.70]); this was largely explained by the triple combination of ARNI, MRA, and SGLT2i (HR: 0.56 [95% CI 0.43-0.71]). Results were similar for CV death (HR: 0.63 [95% CI 0.43-0.91] for ARNI, MRA, and SGLT2i) or total HHF (HR: 0.49 [95% CI 0.33-0.71] for ARNI, MRA, and SGLT2i) alone. In a subgroup analysis, only SGLT2i had a consistent benefit among all LVEF subgroups, whereas the triple combination had the greatest benefit in HFmrEF, robust benefit in patients with LVEF 50% to 59%, and a statistically marginal benefit in patients with LVEF ≥60%. ConclusionsIn patients with HF and LVEF>40%, the quadruple combination of ARNI, BB, MRA, and SGLT2i provides the largest reduction in the risk of CV death and HHF; driven by the robust effect of the triple combination of ARNI, MRA, and SGLT2i. The benefit was more pronounced in HFmrEF patients.

Efficacy of ferric carboxymaltose in heart failure with iron deficiency: an individual patient data meta-analysis.

Whereas a beneficial effect of intravenous ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) on symptoms and exercise capacity among patients with iron deficiency and heart failure (HF) has been consistently demonstrated, the effects of treatment on clinical events remain the subject of research. This meta-analysis aimed to characterize the effects of FCM therapy on hospitalizations and mortality. Patient-level data from randomized, placebo-controlled FCM trials including adults with HF and iron deficiency with ≥52 weeks follow-up were analysed. The co-primary efficacy endpoints were (i) composite of total/recurrent cardiovascular hospitalizations and cardiovascular death and (ii) composite of total HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular death, through 52 weeks. Key secondary endpoints included individual composite endpoint components. Event rates were analysed using a negative binomial model. Treatment-emergent adverse events were also examined. Three FCM trials with a total of 4501 patients were included. Ferric carboxymaltose was associated with a significantly reduced risk of co-primary endpoint 1 (rate ratio 0.86; 95% confidence interval 0.75-0.98; P = .029; Cochran Q: 0.008), with a trend towards a reduction of co-primary endpoint 2 (rate ratio 0.87; 95% confidence interval 0.75-1.01; P = .076; Cochran Q: 0.024). Treatment effects appeared to result from reduced hospitalization rates, not improved survival. Treatment appeared to have a good safety profile and was well tolerated. In iron-deficient patients with HF with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, intravenous FCM was associated with significantly reduced risk of hospital admissions for HF and cardiovascular causes, with no apparent effect on mortality.

Intravenous ferric carboxymaltose for iron repletion following acute heart failure in patients with and without diabetes: a subgroup analysis of the randomized AFFIRM-AHF trial.

In AFFIRM-AHF, treatment of iron deficiency with intravenous ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) reduced the risk of heart failure (HF) hospitalization and improved quality of life (QoL) vs placebo in patients stabilized following an acute HF (AHF) episode, with no effect on cardiovascular (CV) death. Diabetes and iron deficiency frequently accompany AHF. This post hoc analysis explored the effects of diabetes on outcomes in AFFIRM-AHF patients. Patients were stratified by diabetes yes/no at baseline. The effects of FCM vs placebo on primary (total HF hospitalizations and CV death) and secondary (total CV hospitalizations and CV death; CV death; total HF hospitalizations; time to first HF hospitalization or CV death; and days lost due to HF hospitalizations or CV death) endpoints at Week 52 and change vs baseline in disease-specific QoL (12-item Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire [KCCQ-12]) at Week 24 were assessed by subgroup. For each endpoint, the interaction between diabetes status and treatment outcome was explored. Of 1108 AFFIRM-AHF patients, 475 (FCM: 231; placebo: 244) had diabetes and 633 (FCM:327; placebo: 306) did not have diabetes. Patients with diabetes were more commonly male (61.5% vs 50.9%), with a higher frequency of ischemic HF etiology (57.9% vs 39.0%), prior HF history (77.7% vs 66.5%), and comorbidities (including previous myocardial infarction [49.3% vs 32.9%] and chronic kidney disease [51.4% vs 32.4%]) than those without diabetes. The annualized event rate/100patient-years with FCM vs placebo for the primary endpoint was 66.9 vs 80.9 in patients with diabetes (rate ratio [RR]: 0.83, 95% CI 0.58-1.81) and 51.3 vs 66.9 in patients without diabetes (RR:0.77, 95% CI 0.55-1.07), with no significant interaction between diabetes status and treatment effect (pinteraction = 0.76). Similar findings were observed for secondary outcomes. Change from baseline in KCCQ-12 overall summary score was numerically greater with FCM vs placebo at almost all time points in both subgroups, with no interaction between diabetes and treatment effect at Week 24. The clinical and QoL benefits observed with intravenous FCM in patients with iron deficiency following stabilization from an AHF episode are independent of diabetes status. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02937454 (registered 10.18.2016).