25
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Echocardiographically defined haemodynamic categorization predicts prognosis in ambulatory heart failure patients treated with sacubitril/valsartan

      research-article
      1 , , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 1 , 3 , 6 , 7 , 7 , 2 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 10 , 1 , 4 , 7 , 11 , 5 , 9 , 12 , 8 , 2 , 13 , Working Group on Heart Failure of the Italian Society of Cardiology
      ESC Heart Failure
      John Wiley and Sons Inc.
      heart failure, ejection fraction, haemodynamic, prognosis, sacubitril/valsartan

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Aim

          Echo‐derived haemodynamic classification, based on forward‐flow and left ventricular (LV) filling pressure (LVFP) correlates, has been proposed to phenotype patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). To assess the prognostic relevance of baseline echocardiographically defined haemodynamic profile in ambulatory HFrEF patients before starting sacubitril/valsartan.

          Methods and results

          In our multicentre, open‐label study, HFrEF outpatients were classified into 4 groups according to the combination of forward flow (cardiac index; CI:< or ≥2.0 L/min/m 2) and early transmitral Doppler velocity/early diastolic annular velocity ratio (E/e′: ≥ or <15): Profile‐A: normal‐flow, normal‐pressure; Profile‐B: low‐flow, normal‐pressure; Profile‐C: normal‐flow, high‐pressure; Profile‐D: low‐flow, high‐pressure. Patients were started on sacubitril/valsartan and followed‐up for 12.3 months (median). Rates of the composite of death/HF‐hospitalization were assessed by multivariable Cox proportional‐hazards models. Twelve sites enrolled 727 patients (64 ± 12 year old; LVEF: 29.8 ± 6.2%). Profile‐D had more comorbidities and worse renal and LV function. Target dose of sacubitril/valsartan (97/103 mg BID) was more likely reached in Profile‐A (34%) than other profiles (B: 32%, C: 24%, D: 28%, P < 0.001). Event‐rate (per 100 patients per year) progressively increased from Profile‐A to Profile‐D (12.0%, 16.4%, 22.9%, and 35.2%, respectively, P < 0.0001). By covariate‐adjusted Cox model, profiles with low forward‐flow (B and D) remained associated with poor outcome ( P < 0.01). Adding this categorization to MAGGIC‐score and natriuretic peptides, provided significant continuous net reclassification improvement (0.329; P < 0.001). Intermediate and high‐dose sacubitril/valsartan reduced the event's risk independently of haemodynamic profile.

          Conclusions

          Echocardiographically‐derived haemodynamic classification identifies ambulatory HFrEF patients with different risk profiles. In real‐world HFrEF outpatients, sacubitril/valsartan is effective in improving outcome across different haemodynamic profiles.

          Related collections

          Most cited references20

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          2016 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure: The Task Force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC)Developed with the special contribution of the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Recommendations for cardiac chamber quantification by echocardiography in adults: an update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging.

            The rapid technological developments of the past decade and the changes in echocardiographic practice brought about by these developments have resulted in the need for updated recommendations to the previously published guidelines for cardiac chamber quantification, which was the goal of the joint writing group assembled by the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. This document provides updated normal values for all four cardiac chambers, including three-dimensional echocardiography and myocardial deformation, when possible, on the basis of considerably larger numbers of normal subjects, compiled from multiple databases. In addition, this document attempts to eliminate several minor discrepancies that existed between previously published guidelines. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2015. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Angiotensin–Neprilysin Inhibition versus Enalapril in Heart Failure

              We compared the angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor LCZ696 with enalapril in patients who had heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction. In previous studies, enalapril improved survival in such patients. In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 8442 patients with class II, III, or IV heart failure and an ejection fraction of 40% or less to receive either LCZ696 (at a dose of 200 mg twice daily) or enalapril (at a dose of 10 mg twice daily), in addition to recommended therapy. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes or hospitalization for heart failure, but the trial was designed to detect a difference in the rates of death from cardiovascular causes. The trial was stopped early, according to prespecified rules, after a median follow-up of 27 months, because the boundary for an overwhelming benefit with LCZ696 had been crossed. At the time of study closure, the primary outcome had occurred in 914 patients (21.8%) in the LCZ696 group and 1117 patients (26.5%) in the enalapril group (hazard ratio in the LCZ696 group, 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 0.87; P<0.001). A total of 711 patients (17.0%) receiving LCZ696 and 835 patients (19.8%) receiving enalapril died (hazard ratio for death from any cause, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.93; P<0.001); of these patients, 558 (13.3%) and 693 (16.5%), respectively, died from cardiovascular causes (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.89; P<0.001). As compared with enalapril, LCZ696 also reduced the risk of hospitalization for heart failure by 21% (P<0.001) and decreased the symptoms and physical limitations of heart failure (P=0.001). The LCZ696 group had higher proportions of patients with hypotension and nonserious angioedema but lower proportions with renal impairment, hyperkalemia, and cough than the enalapril group. LCZ696 was superior to enalapril in reducing the risks of death and of hospitalization for heart failure. (Funded by Novartis; PARADIGM-HF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01035255.).
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                franklloyddini@gmail.com
                Journal
                ESC Heart Fail
                ESC Heart Fail
                10.1002/(ISSN)2055-5822
                EHF2
                ESC Heart Failure
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                2055-5822
                05 February 2022
                April 2022
                : 9
                : 2 ( doiID: 10.1002/ehf2.v9.2 )
                : 1107-1117
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Cardiac, Thoracic and Vascular Department University of Pisa Pisa Italy
                [ 2 ] Cardiology and Cardiovascular Pathophysiology University of Perugia Perugia Italy
                [ 3 ] Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine Section of Cardiology University of Messina Messina Italy
                [ 4 ] Chair of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Surgery and Dentistry University of Salerno Salerno Italy
                [ 5 ] Department of Cardiology University Hospital Foggia Foggia Italy
                [ 6 ] Department of Cardiology University Hospital of Parma Parma Italy
                [ 7 ] Division of Cardiology Fondazione I.R.C.C.S. Policlinico San Matteo Pavia Italy
                [ 8 ] Department of Cardiology University of Brescia and ASST Spedali Civili di Brescia Brescia Italy
                [ 9 ] Cardiovascular Diseases Unit, Department of Internal Medicine University of Siena Siena Italy
                [ 10 ] Heart Failure Unit, AORN dei Colli Monaldi Hospital Naples Italy
                [ 11 ] Department of Translational Medical Sciences Federico II University Naples Italy
                [ 12 ] Heart Failure Unit, Cardiology Department Guglielmo da Saliceto Hospital, AUSL Piacenza Italy
                [ 13 ] CERICLET‐Centro Ricerca Clinica e Traslazionale University of Perugia Perugia Italy
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence to: Frank L. Dini, Cardiac, Thoracic and Vascular Department, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa, 2. 56124 Pisa, Italy. Phone: 0039 (050) 995231; Fax: 0039 (050) 995308. Email: franklloyddini@ 123456gmail.com

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1458-4820
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9296-4397
                Article
                EHF213779 ESCHF-21-00510
                10.1002/ehf2.13779
                8934975
                35122477
                48533d5f-bca5-4e69-b5c9-799faadff767
                © 2022 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

                History
                : 06 November 2021
                : 27 May 2021
                : 05 December 2021
                Page count
                Figures: 5, Tables: 3, Pages: 11, Words: 4062
                Funding
                Funded by: Progetto , doi 10.13039/501100003196;
                Award ID: NET‐2016‐02363853
                Categories
                Original Article
                Original Articles
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                April 2022
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:6.1.2 mode:remove_FC converted:21.03.2022

                heart failure,ejection fraction,haemodynamic,prognosis,sacubitril/valsartan

                Comments

                Comment on this article