The coexistence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and heart failure (HF), either with reduced (HFrEF) or preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), is frequent (30–40% of patients) and associated with a ...higher risk of HF hospitalization, all‐cause and cardiovascular (CV) mortality. The most important causes of HF in T2DM are coronary artery disease, arterial hypertension and a direct detrimental effect of T2DM on the myocardium. T2DM is often unrecognized in HF patients, and vice versa, which emphasizes the importance of an active search for both disorders in the clinical practice. There are no specific limitations to HF treatment in T2DM. Subanalyses of trials addressing HF treatment in the general population have shown that all HF therapies are similarly effective regardless of T2DM. Concerning T2DM treatment in HF patients, most guidelines currently recommend metformin as the first‐line choice. Sulphonylureas and insulin have been the traditional second‐ and third‐line therapies although their safety in HF is equivocal. Neither glucagon‐like preptide‐1 (GLP‐1) receptor agonists, nor dipeptidyl peptidase‐4 (DPP4) inhibitors reduce the risk for HF hospitalization. Indeed, a DPP4 inhibitor, saxagliptin, has been associated with a higher risk of HF hospitalization. Thiazolidinediones (pioglitazone and rosiglitazone) are contraindicated in patients with (or at risk of) HF. In recent trials, sodium–glucose co‐transporter‐2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, empagliflozin and canagliflozin, have both shown a significant reduction in HF hospitalization in patients with established CV disease or at risk of CV disease. Several ongoing trials should provide an insight into the effectiveness of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with HFrEF and HFpEF in the absence of T2DM.
Cardiomyopathies are a heterogeneous group of heart muscle diseases and an important cause of heart failure (HF). Current knowledge on incidence, pathophysiology and natural history of HF in ...cardiomyopathies is limited, and distinct features of their therapeutic responses have not been systematically addressed. Therefore, this position paper focuses on epidemiology, pathophysiology, natural history and latest developments in treatment of HF in patients with dilated (DCM), hypertrophic (HCM) and restrictive (RCM) cardiomyopathies. In DCM, HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has high incidence and prevalence and represents the most frequent cause of death, despite improvements in treatment. In addition, advanced HF in DCM is one of the leading indications for heart transplantation. In HCM, HF with preserved ejection (HFpEF) affects most patients with obstructive, and ∼10% of patients with non‐obstructive HCM. A timely treatment is important, since development of advanced HF, although rare in HCM, portends a poor prognosis. In RCM, HFpEF is common, while HFrEF occurs later and more frequently in amyloidosis or iron overload/haemochromatosis. Irrespective of RCM aetiology, HF is a harbinger of a poor outcome. Recent advances in our understanding of the mechanisms underlying the development of HF in cardiomyopathies have significant implications for therapeutic decision‐making. In addition, new aetiology‐specific treatment options (e.g. enzyme replacement therapy, transthyretin stabilizers, immunoadsorption, immunotherapy, etc.) have shown a potential to improve outcomes. Still, causative therapies of many cardiomyopathies are lacking, highlighting the need for the development of effective strategies to prevent and treat HF in cardiomyopathies.
Background
We assessed the prevalence of newly diagnosed prediabetes and type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and their impact on long-term mortality in patients hospitalized for worsening heart failure ...with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).
Methods
We included patients hospitalized with HFrEF and New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class II–III. Baseline two-hour oral glucose tolerance test was used to classify patients as normoglycaemic or having newly diagnosed prediabetes or T2DM. Outcomes included post-discharge all-cause and cardiovascular mortality during the median follow-up of 2.1 years.
Results
At baseline, out of 150 patients (mean-age 57 ± 12 years; 88% male), prediabetes was diagnosed in 65 (43%) patients, and T2DM in 29 (19%) patients. These patients were older and more often with NYHA class III symptoms, but distribution of comorbidities was similar to normoglycaemic patients. Taking normoglycaemic patients as a reference, adjusted risk of all-cause mortality was significantly increased both in patients with prediabetes (hazard ratio, 2.6; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.1–6.3; p = 0.040) and in patients with T2DM (hazard ratio, 5.3; 95% CI, 1.7–15.3; p = 0.023). Likewise, both prediabetes (hazard ratio, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.1–7.9; p = 0.041) and T2DM (hazard ratio, 9.7; 95% CI 2.9–36.7; p = 0.018) independently increased the risk of cardiovascular mortality compared with normoglycaemic individuals. There was no interaction between either prediabetes or T2DM and heart failure aetiology or gender on study outcomes (all interaction p-values > 0.05).
Conclusions
Newly diagnosed prediabetes and T2DM are highly prevalent in patients hospitalized for worsening HFrEF and NYHA functional class II–III. Importantly, they impose independently increased long-term risk of higher all-cause and cardiovascular mortality.
Despite a myriad of causes, pericardial diseases present in few clinical syndromes. Acute pericarditis should be differentiated from aortic dissection, myocardial infarction, pneumonia/pleuritis, ...pulmonary embolism, pneumothorax, costochondritis, gastroesophageal reflux/neoplasm, and herpes zoster. High-risk features indicating hospitalization are: fever >38 °C, subacute onset, large effusion/tamponade, failure of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), previous immunosuppression, trauma, anticoagulation, neoplasm, and myopericarditis. Treatment comprises 10–14-days NSAID plus 3 months colchicine (2 × 0.5 mg; 1 × 0.5 mg in patients <70 kg). Corticosteroids are avoided, except for autoimmunity, as they facilitate the recurrences. Echo-guided pericardiocentesis (±fluoroscopy) is indicated for tamponade and effusions >2 cm. Smaller effusions are drained if neoplastic, purulent or tuberculous etiology is suspected. In recurrent pericarditis, repeated testing for autoimmune and thyroid disease is appropriate. Pericardioscopy and pericardial/epicardial biopsy may clarify the etiology. Familial clustering was recently associated with tumor necrosis factor receptor-associated periodic syndrome (TNFRSF1A gene mutation). Treatment includes 10–14 days NSAIDs with colchicine 0.5 mg bid for up to 6 months. In non-responders, low-dose steroids, intrapericardial steroids, azathioprine, and cyclophosphamide can be tried. Successful management with interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (anakinra) was recently reported. Pericardiectomy remains the last option in >2 years severely symptomatic patients. In constriction, expansion of the heart is impaired by the rigid, chronically inflamed/thickened pericardium (no thickening ~20 %). Chest radiography, echocardiography, computerized tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, hemodynamics, and endomyocardial biopsy indicate the diagnosis. Pericardiectomy is the only treatment for permanent constriction. Predictors of poor survival are prior radiation, renal dysfunction, high pulmonary artery pressures, poor left ventricular function, hyponatremia, age, and simultaneous HIV and tuberculous infection.
Diabetes is an independent risk factor for heart failure progression. Sacubitril/valsartan, a combination angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, improves morbidity and mortality in patients with ...heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), compared with the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor enalapril, and improves peripheral insulin sensitivity in obese hypertensive patients. We aimed to investigate the effect of sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril on HbA
and time to first-time initiation of insulin or oral antihyperglycaemic drugs in patients with diabetes and HFrEF.
In a post-hoc analysis of the PARADIGM-HF trial, we included 3778 patients with known diabetes or an HbA
≥6·5% at screening out of 8399 patients with HFrEF who were randomly assigned to treatment with sacubitril/valsartan or enalapril. Of these patients, most (98%) had type 2 diabetes. We assessed changes in HbA
, triglycerides, HDL cholesterol and BMI in a mixed effects longitudinal analysis model. Time to initiation of oral antihyperglycaemic drugs or insulin in subjects previously not treated with these agents were compared between treatment groups.
There were no significant differences in HbA
concentrations between randomised groups at screening. During the first year of follow-up, HbA
concentrations decreased by 0·16% (SD 1·40) in the enalapril group and 0·26% (SD 1·25) in the sacubitril/valsartan group (between-group reduction 0·13%, 95% CI 0·05-0·22, p=0·0023). HbA
concentrations were persistently lower in the sacubitril/valsartan group than in the enalapril group over the 3-year follow-up (between-group reduction 0·14%, 95% CI 0·06-0·23, p=0·0055). New use of insulin was 29% lower in patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan (114 7% patients) compared with patients receiving enalapril (153 10%; hazard ratio 0·71, 95% CI 0·56-0·90, p=0·0052). Similarly, fewer patients were started on oral antihyperglycaemic therapy (0·77, 0·58-1·02, p=0·073) in the sacubitril/valsartan group.
Patients with diabetes and HFrEF enrolled in PARADIGM-HF who received sacubitril/valsartan had a greater long-term reduction in HbA
than those receiving enalapril. These data suggest that sacubitril/valsartan might enhance glycaemic control in patients with diabetes and HFrEF.
Novartis.
Left ventricular mass index (LVMI) increase has been described in hypertension (HTN), but less is known about its association with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). As these conditions frequently co-exist, we ...investigated the association of T2DM, HTN and both with echocardiographic parameters, and hypothesized that patients with both had highest LVMI, followed by patients with only T2DM or HTN. Study population included 101 T2DM patients, 62 patients with HTN and no T2DM, and 76 patients with T2DM and HTN, excluded for ischemic heart disease. Demographic and clinical data, biochemical measurements, stress echocardiography, transthoracic 2D Doppler and tissue Doppler echocardiography were performed. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the independent association with T2DM. Linear regression models and Pearson's correlation were used to assess the correlations between LVMI and other parameters. Patients with only T2DM had significantly greater LVMI (84.9 ± 20.3 g/m
) compared to patients with T2DM and HTN (77.9 ± 16 g/m
) and only HTN (69.8 ± 12.4 g/m
). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, T2DM was associated with LVMI (OR 1.033, 95%CI 1.003-1.065, p = 0.029). A positive correlation of LVMI was found with fasting glucose (p < 0.001) and HbA1c (p = 0.0003). Increased LVMI could be a potential, pre-symptomatic marker of myocardial structural change in T2DM.
PDF
