Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Review Murphy, Sean P; Ibrahim, Nasrien E; Januzzi, Jr, James L
JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association,
2020-Aug-04, Letnik:
324, Številka:
5
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Worldwide, the burden of heart failure has increased to an estimated 23 million people, and approximately 50% of cases are HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).
Heart failure is a clinical ...syndrome characterized by dyspnea or exertional limitation due to impairment of ventricular filling or ejection of blood or both. HFrEF occurs when the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is 40% or less and is accompanied by progressive left ventricular dilatation and adverse cardiac remodeling. Assessment for heart failure begins with obtaining a medical history and physical examination. Also central to diagnosis are elevated natriuretic peptides above age- and context-specific thresholds and identification of left ventricular systolic dysfunction with LVEF of 40% or less as measured by echocardiography. Treatment strategies include the use of diuretics to relieve symptoms and application of an expanding armamentarium of disease-modifying drug and device therapies. Unless there are specific contraindications, patients with HFrEF should be treated with a β-blocker and one of an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, or angiotensin receptor blocker as foundational therapy, with addition of a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist in patients with persistent symptoms. Ivabradine and hydralazine/isosorbide dinitrate also have a role in the care of certain patients with HFrEF. More recently, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have further improved disease outcomes, significantly reducing cardiovascular and all-cause mortality irrespective of diabetes status, and vericiguat, a soluble guanylate cyclase stimulator, reduces heart failure hospitalization in high-risk patients with HFrEF. Device therapies may be beneficial in specific subpopulations, such as cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with interventricular dyssynchrony, transcatheter mitral valve repair in patients with severe secondary mitral regurgitation, and implantable cardiac defibrillators in patients with more severe left ventricular dysfunction particularly of ischemic etiology.
HFrEF is a major public health concern with substantial morbidity and mortality. The management of HFrEF has seen significant scientific breakthrough in recent decades, and the ability to alter the natural history of the disease has never been better. Recent developments include SGLT2 inhibitors, vericiguat, and transcatheter mitral valve repair, all of which incrementally improve prognosis beyond foundational neurohormonal therapies. Disease morbidity and mortality remain high, with a 5-year survival rate of 25% after hospitalization for HFrEF.
Increases in cardiac troponin indicative of myocardial injury are common in patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) and are associated with adverse outcomes such as arrhythmias and death. ...These increases are more likely to occur in those with chronic cardiovascular conditions and in those with severe COVID-19 presentations. The increased inflammatory, prothrombotic, and procoagulant responses following severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection increase the risk for acute nonischemic myocardial injury and acute myocardial infarction, particularly type 2 myocardial infarction, because of respiratory failure with hypoxia and hemodynamic instability in critically ill patients. Myocarditis, stress cardiomyopathy, acute heart failure, and direct injury from SARS-CoV-2 are important etiologies, but primary noncardiac conditions, such as pulmonary embolism, critical illness, and sepsis, probably cause more of the myocardial injury. The structured use of serial cardiac troponin has the potential to facilitate risk stratification, help make decisions about when to use imaging, and inform stage categorization and disease phenotyping among hospitalized COVID-19 patients.
Abstract Background Sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors may reduce cardiovascular and heart failure risk in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Objectives To examine the ...effects of canagliflozin on cardiovascular biomarkers in older patients with T2DM. Methods In 666 T2DM patients randomized to receive canagliflozin 100 or 300 mg or placebo, we assessed median percent change in serum N-terminal pro-B type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), high-sensitivity troponin I (hsTnI) , soluble (s)ST2, and galectin-3 from baseline to 26, 52, and 104 weeks. Results Both serum NT-proBNP and serum hsTnI levels increased in placebo recipients but remained largely unchanged in those randomized to canagliflozin. Hodges-Lehmann estimates of the difference in median percent change between pooled canagliflozin and placebo were –15.0%, –16.1%, and –26.8% for NT-proBNP, and –8.3%, –11.9%, and –10.0% for hsTnI at weeks 26, 52, and 104, respectively (all P <0.05). Serum sST2 was unchanged with canagliflozin and placebo over 104 weeks. Serum galectin-3 modestly increased from baseline with canagliflozin versus placebo, with significant differences observed at 26 and 52 weeks but not at 104 weeks. These results remained unchanged when only patients with complete samples were assessed. Conclusions Compared to placebo, treatment with canagliflozin delayed rise in serum NT-proBNP and hsTnI over 2 years in older T2DM patients. These cardiac biomarker data provide support for beneficial cardiovascular effect of SGLT2 inhibitors in T2DM.
It has long been observed that heart failure (HF) is associated with measures of systemic inflammation. In recent years, there have been significant advancements in our understanding of how ...inflammation contributes to the pathogenesis and progression of HF. However, although numerous studies have validated the association between measures of inflammation and HF severity and prognosis, clinical trials of anti-inflammatory therapies have proven mostly unsuccessful. On this backdrop emerges the yet unmet goal of targeting precise phenotypes within the syndrome of HF; if such precise definitions can be realized, and with better understanding of the roles played by specific inflammatory mediators, the expectation is that targeted anti-inflammatory therapies may improve prognosis in patients whose HF is driven by inflammatory pathobiology. Here, the authors describe mechanistic links between inflammation and HF, discuss traditional and novel inflammatory biomarkers, and summarize the latest evidence from clinical trials of anti-inflammatory therapies.
Biomarkers and diagnostics in heart failure Gaggin, Hanna K.; Januzzi, James L.
Biochimica et biophysica acta,
December 2013, 2013-Dec, 2013-12-00, Letnik:
1832, Številka:
12
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
Heart failure (HF) biomarkers have dramatically impacted the way HF patients are evaluated and managed. B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal proBNP (NT-proBNP) are the gold standard ...biomarkers in determining the diagnosis and prognosis of HF, and studies on natriuretic peptide-guided HF management look promising. An array of additional biomarkers has emerged, each reflecting different pathophysiological processes in the development and progression of HF: myocardial insult, inflammation and remodeling. Novel biomarkers, such as mid-regional pro atrial natriuretic peptide (MR-proANP), mid-regional pro adrenomedullin (MR-proADM), highly sensitive troponins, soluble ST2 (sST2), growth differentiation factor (GDF)-15 and Galectin-3, show potential in determining prognosis beyond the established natriuretic peptides, but their role in the clinical care of the patient is still partially defined and more studies are needed. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled: Heart failure pathogenesis and emerging diagnostic and therapeutic interventions.
► BNP and NT-proBNP are gold standard HF biomarkers in diagnosis and prognosis of HF. ► BNP and NT-proBNP-guided HF management look promising. ► Novel biomarkers include MR-proANP, MR-proADM, troponins, sST2, GDF-15, galectin-3. ► Novel biomarkers show promise in HF prognosis beyond BNP and NT-proBNP. ► The role of novel biomarkers in clinical care is still only partially defined.
Until recently, biomarker testing in heart failure (HF) syndromes has been viewed as an elective supplement to diagnostic evaluation of patients suspected to suffer from this condition. This approach ...to the use of biomarker testing contrasts with other cardiovascular diagnoses such as acute myocardial infarction, for which biomarkers are integral to disease process definition, risk stratification, and in some cases treatment decision making.
In this review we consider various perspectives on the evaluation of biomarkers in HF. In addition, we examine recent advances in the understanding of established biomarkers in HF (such as the natriuretic peptides), the elucidation of novel biomarkers potentially useful for the evaluation and management of patients with HF, and the growing understanding of important and relevant comorbidities in HF. We also review candidate biomarkers from a number of classes: (a) myocyte stretch, (b) myocyte necrosis, (c) systemic inflammation, (d) oxidative stress, (e) extracellular matrix turnover, (f) neurohormones, and (g) biomarkers of extracardiac processes, such as renal function.
Novel applications of established biomarkers of HF as well as elucidation and validation of emerging assays for HF syndromes have collectively led to a growing interest in the more widespread use of such testing in patients affected by the diagnosis.
The relationship between the benefits of empagliflozin in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) has not been reported.
The ...authors sought to evaluate the relationship between NT-proBNP and empagliflozin effects in EMPEROR-Reduced (Empagliflozin Outcome Trial in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction).
Patients with HFrEF were randomly assigned to placebo or empagliflozin 10 mg daily. NT-proBNP was measured at baseline, 4 weeks, 12 weeks, 52 weeks, and 100 weeks. Patients were divided into quartiles of baseline NT-proBNP.
Incidence rates for each study outcome were 4- to 6-fold higher among those in the highest versus lowest NT-proBNP quartiles (≥3,480 vs <1,115 pg/mL). Study participants with higher NT-proBNP had 2- to 3-fold total hospitalizations higher than the lowest NT-proBNP quartile. Empagliflozin reduced risk for major cardiorenal events without heterogeneity across NT-proBNP quartiles (primary endpoint P
= 0.94; renal composite endpoint P
= 0.71). Empagliflozin treatment significantly reduced NT-proBNP at all timepoints examined; by 52 weeks, the adjusted mean difference from placebo was 13% (P < 0.001). An NT-proBNP in the lowest quartile (<1,115 pg/mL) 12 weeks after randomization was associated with lower risk for subsequent cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization regardless of baseline concentration. Treatment with empagliflozin resulted in 27% higher adjusted odds of an NT-proBNP concentration of <1,115 pg/mL by 12 weeks compared with placebo (P = 0.01).
In EMPEROR-Reduced, higher baseline NT-proBNP concentrations were associated with greater risk for adverse heart failure or renal outcomes, but empagliflozin reduced risk regardless of baseline NT-proBNP concentration. The NT-proBNP concentration after treatment with empagliflozin better informs subsequent prognosis than pretreatment concentrations. (Empagliflozin Outcome Trial in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction EMPEROR-Reduced; NCT03057977).
Since natriuretic peptides were successfully integrated into the clinical practice of heart failure (HF), the possibility of using new biomarkers to advance the management of affected patients has ...been explored. While a huge number of candidate HF biomarkers have been described recently, very few have made the difficult translation from initial promise to clinical application. These markers mirror the complex pathophysiology of heart failure at various levels: cell loss (troponin), fibrosis (ST2 and galectin‐3), infection (procalcitonin), and renal disease (several renal markers). In this review, we examine the best emerging candidates for clinical assessment and management of patients with HF.
PDF
