Search

Abstract Aims The current European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines provide clear indications for the treatment of acute and chronic heart failure (HF). Nevertheless, there is a constant need for real‐world evidence regarding the effectiveness, adherence, and persistence of drug therapy. We investigated the use of sacubitril/valsartan for the treatment of HF with reduced ejection fraction in real‐world clinical practice in Italy. Methods and results An observational, retrospective, non‐interventional cohort study based on electronic medical records from nine specialized hospital HF centres in Italy was carried out on patients with prescription of sacubitril/valsartan. Overall, 948 patients had a prescription of sacubitril/valsartan, with 924 characterized over 6 months and followed up for 12 months. Pharmacoutilization data at 1 year of follow‐up were available for 225 patients {mean age 69.7 years [standard deviation (SD) = 10.8], 81.8% male}. Of those, 398 (45.2%) reached the target dose of sacubitril/valsartan of 97/103 mg in a mean time of 6.9 (SD = 6.2) weeks. Blood pressure and hypotension in 61 patients (65%) and worsening of chronic kidney disease in 10 patients (10.6%) were the main reasons for not reaching the target dose. Approximatively 50% of patients had a change in sacubitril/valsartan dose during follow‐up, and 158 (70.2%) were persistent with the treatment during the last 3 months of follow‐up. A sensitivity analysis (persistence during the last 4 months of follow‐up) showed persistence for 162 patients (72.0%). Adherence data, available for 387 patients, showed full adherence for 205 (53%). Discontinuation (102/717 patients, 14.2%) was mainly due to hypotension and occurred after a mean time of 34.3 (SD = 28.7) weeks. During follow‐up, out of 606 patients with available data, 434 patients (71.6%) had an HF add‐on drug or drugs concomitant with sacubitril/valsartan. HF‐related hospitalization during follow‐up was numerically higher in non‐persistent (16/67 patients, 23.9%) vs. patients persistent to sacubitril/valsartan (30/158, 19%) (P = 0.405). Conclusions Real‐world data on the use of sacubitril/valsartan in clinical practice in Italy show a rapid titration to the target dose, high therapeutic adherence enabling a good level of therapeutic management in line with ESC guidelines for patients with reduced ejection fraction.

Abstract Aims Sodium‐glucose cotransporter type 2 inhibitors (SGLT‐2i) represent a unique class of anti‐hyperglycaemic agents for type 2 diabetes mellitus that selectively inhibit renal glucose reabsorption, thereby increasing urinary excretion of glucose. Several studies have demonstrated the cardioprotective effects of SGLT‐2i in patients with heart failure (HF), unrelated to its glucosuric effect. It is unclear whether the benefits of SGLT‐2i therapy also rely on the improvement of left ventricular (LV) and/or right ventricular (RV) function in patients with HF. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of SGLT‐2i on LV and RV function through conventional and advanced echocardiographic parameters with a special focus on RV function in patients with HF. Methods and results The Biventricular Evaluation of Gliflozins effects In chroNic Heart Failure (BEGIN‐HF) study is an international multicentre, prospective study that will evaluate the effect of SGLT‐2i on echocardiographic parameters of myocardial function in patients with chronic stable HF across the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) spectrum. Patients with New York Heart Association Class II/III symptoms, estimated glomerular filtration rate > 25 mL/min/1.73 m2, age > 18 years, and those who were not previously treated with SGLT‐2i will be included. All patients will undergo conventional, tissue‐derived imaging (TDI), and strain echocardiography in an ambulatory setting, at time of enrolment and after 6 months of SGLT‐2i therapy. The primary endpoint is the change in LV function as assessed by conventional, TDI, and myocardial deformation speckle tracking parameters. Secondary outcomes include changes in RV and left atrial function as assessed by conventional and deformation speckle tracking echocardiography. Univariate and multivariate analyses will be performed to identify predictors associated with primary and secondary endpoints. Conclusions The BEGIN‐HF will determine whether SGLT‐2i therapy improves LV and/or RV function by conventional and advanced echocardiography in patients with HF irrespective of LVEF.

Abstract Aims Sacubitril/valsartan has changed the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), due to the positive effects on morbidity and mortality, partly mediated by left ventricular (LV) reverse remodelling (LVRR). The aim of this multicenter study was to identify echocardiographic predictors of LVRR after sacubitril/valsartan administration. Methods and results Patients with HFrEF requiring therapy with sacubitril/valsartan from 13 Italian centres were included. Echocardiographic parameters including LV global longitudinal strain (GLS) and global peak atrial longitudinal strain by speckle tracking echocardiography were measured to find the predictors of LVRR [= LV end‐systolic volume reduction ≥10% and ejection fraction (LVEF) improvement ≥10% at follow‐up] at 6 month follow‐up as the primary endpoint. Changes in symptoms [New York Heart Association (NYHA) class] and neurohormonal activations [N‐terminal pro‐brain natriuretic peptide (NT‐proBNP)] were also evaluated as secondary endpoints; 341 patients (excluding patients with poor acoustic windows and missing data) were analysed (mean age: 65 ± 10 years; 18% female, median LVEF 30% [inter‐quartile range: 25−34]). At 6 month follow‐up, 82 (24%) patients showed early complete response (LVRR and LVEF ≥ 35%), 55 (16%) early incomplete response (LVRR and LVEF

Abstract Aims The angiotensin receptor‐neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) sacubitril/valsartan (Sac/Val) demonstrated to be superior to enalapril in reducing hospitalizations, cardiovascular and all‐cause mortality in patients with ambulatory heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), in particular when it is maximally up‐titrated. Unfortunately, the target dose is achieved in less than 50% of HFrEF patients, thus undermining the beneficial effects on the outcomes. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the role of Sac/Val and its titration dose on reverse cardiac remodelling and determine which echocardiographic index best predicts the up‐titration success. Methods and results From January 2020 to June 2021, we retrospectively identified 95 patients (65.6 [59.1–72.8] years; 15.8% females) with chronic HFrEF who were prescribed Sac/Val from the HF Clinics of 5 Italian University Hospitals and evaluated the tolerability of Sac/Val high dose (the ability of the patient to achieve and stably tolerate the maximum dose) as the primary endpoint in the cohort. We used a multivariable logistic regression analysis, with a stepwise backward selection method, to determine the independent predictors of Sac/Val maximum dose tolerability, using, as candidate predictors, only variables with a P‐value < 0.1 in the univariate analyses. Candidate predictors identified for the multivariable backward logistic regression analysis were age, sex, body mass index (BMI), chronic kidney disease (CKD), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), dyslipidaemia, atrial fibrillation, systolic blood pressure (SBP), baseline tolerability of ACEi/ARBs maximum dose, left ventricle global longitudinal strain (LVgLS), LV ejection fraction (EF), tricuspid annulus plane systolic excursion (TAPSE), right ventricle (RV) fractional area change (FAC), RV global and free wall longitudinal strain (RVgLS and RV‐FW‐LS). After the multivariable analysis, only one categorical (ACEi/ARBs maximum dose at baseline) and three continuous (younger age, higher SBP, and higher TAPSE), resulted significantly associated with the study outcome variable with a strong discriminatory capacity (area under the curve 0.874, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.794–0.954) to predict maximum Sac/Val dose tolerability. Conclusions Our study is the first to analyse the potential role of echocardiography and, in particular, of RV dysfunction, measured by TAPSE, in predicting Sac/Val maximum dose tolerability. Therefore, patients with RV dysfunction (baseline TAPSE

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/m2) and early transmitral Doppler velocity/early diastolic annular velocity ratio (E/e′: ≥ or

Abstract Aims Ventilation vs. carbon dioxide production (VE/VCO2) is among the strongest cardiopulmonary exercise testing prognostic parameters in heart failure (HF). It is usually reported as an absolute value. The current definition of normal VE/VCO2 slope values is inadequate, since it was built from small groups of subjects with a particularly limited number of women and elderly. We aimed to define VE/VCO2 slope prediction formulas in a sizable population and to test whether the prognostic power of VE/VCO2 slope in HF was different if expressed as a percentage of the predicted value or as an absolute value. Methods and results We calculated the linear regressions between age and VE/VCO2 slope in 1136 healthy subjects (68% male, age 44.9 ± 14.5, range 13–83 years). We then applied age‐adjusted and sex‐adjusted formulas to predict VE/VCO2 slope to HF patients included in the metabolic exercise test data combined with cardiac and kidney indexes score database, which counts 6112 patients (82% male, age 61.4 ± 12.8, left ventricular ejection fraction 33.2 ± 10.5%, peakVO2 14.8 ± 4.9, mL/min/kg, VE/VCO2 slope 32.7 ± 7.7) from 24 HF centres. Finally, we evaluated whether the use of absolute values vs. percentages of predicted VE/VCO2 affected HF prognosis prediction (composite of cardiovascular mortality + urgent transplant or left ventricular assist device). We did so in the entire cardiac and kidney indexes score population and separately in HF patients with severe (peakVO2 < 14 mL/min/kg, n = 2919, 61.1 events/1000 pts/year) or moderate (peakVO2 ≥ 14 mL/min/kg, n = 3183, 19.9 events/1000 pts/year) HF. In the healthy population, we obtained the following equations: female, VE/VCO2 = 0.052 × Age + 23.808 (r = 0.192); male, VE/VCO2 = 0.095 × Age + 20.227 (r = 0.371) (P = 0.007). We applied these formulas to calculate the percentages of predicted VE/VCO2 values. The 2‐year survival prognostic power of VE/VCO2 slope was strong, and it was similar if expressed as absolute value or as a percentage of predicted value (AUCs 0.686 and 0.690, respectively). In contrast, in severe HF patients, AUCs significantly differed between absolute values (0.637) and percentages of predicted values (0.650, P = 0.0026). Moreover, VE/VCO2 slope expressed as a percentage of predicted value allowed to reclassify 6.6% of peakVO2 < 14 mL/min/kg patients (net reclassification improvement = 0.066, P = 0.0015). Conclusions The percentage of predicted VE/VCO2 slope value strengthens the prognostic power of VE/VCO2 in severe HF patients, and it should be preferred over the absolute value for HF prognostication. Furthermore, the widespread use of VE/VCO2 slope expressed as percentage of predicted value can improve our ability to identify HF patients at high risk, which is a goal of utmost clinical relevance.