Search

During the COVID-19 pandemic, reductions in heart failure (HF) hospitalizations have been widely reported, and there is an urgent need to understand how HF care has been reorganized in countries with different infection levels, vaccination rates and healthcare services. The OPTIMIZE Heart Failure Care program has a global network of investigators in 42 countries, with first-hand experience of the impact of the pandemic on HF management in different care settings. The national coordinators were surveyed to assess: 1) the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic for continuity of HF care, from both a hospital and patient perspective; 2) the organizational changes enacted to ensure continued HF care; and 3) lessons learned for the future of HF care. Contributions were obtained from 37 national coordinators in 29 countries. We summarize their input, highlighting the issues raised and using the example of three very different settings (Italy, Brazil, and Taiwan) to illustrate the similarities and differences across the OPTIMIZE program.

BACKGROUND: Guideline-recommended doses of angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs), and β blockers are similar for men and women with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), even though there are known sex differences in pharmacokinetics of these drugs. We hypothesised that there might be sex differences in the optimal dose of ACE inhibitors or ARBs and β blockers in patients with HFrEF.METHODS: We did a post-hoc analysis of BIOSTAT-CHF, a prospective study in 11 European countries of patients with heart failure in whom initiation and up-titration of ACE inhibitors or ARBs and β blockers was encouraged by protocol. We included only patients with left ventricular ejection fraction less than 40%, and excluded those who died within the first 3 months. Primary outcome was a composite of time to all-cause mortality or hospitalisation for heart failure. Findings were validated in ASIAN-HF, an independent cohort of 3539 men and 961 women with HFrEF.FINDINGS: Among 1308 men and 402 women with HFrEF from BIOSTAT-CHF, women were older (74 [12] years vs 70 [12] years, pINTERPRETATION: This study suggests that women with HFrEF might need lower doses of ACE inhibitors or ARBs and β blockers than men, and brings into question what the true optimal medical therapy is for women versus men.FUNDING: European Commission.

Aims To examine sex differences in clinical characteristics, echocardiographic features, quality of life and 1-year death or heart failure (HF) hospitalization outcomes in patients with/without diabetes mellitus (DM).Methods and results Utilizing the Asian Sudden Cardiac Death in HF (ASIAN-HF) registry, 5255 patients (mean age 59.6 +/- 13.1, 78% men) with symptomatic HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) were stratified by DM status to address the research aims. Despite similar prevalence of DM between Asian men (43%) and women (42%), the odds of DM increased at lower body mass index in women vs. men (>= 23 vs. >= 27.5 kg/m(2), P-interaction = 0.014). DM was more strongly related to chronic kidney disease in women vs. men [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.33-2.57 vs. OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.11-1.56, P-interaction = 0.009]. Sex also modified the relationship between DM and left ventricular geometry (P-interaction = 0.003), whereby DM was associated with amore concentric left ventricular geometry in women than men. Women had lower quality of life than men (P Conclusions Asian women with HFrEF were more likely to have DM despite a lean body mass index, a greater burden of chronic kidney disease and more concentric left ventricular geometry, compared to men. Furthermore, DM confers worse quality of life, irrespective of sex, and a greater risk of adverse outcomes in women than men. These data underscore the need for sex-specific approaches to diabetes in patients with HF.

The Asian Pacific Society of Cardiology convened a consensus statement panel for optimising cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in type 2 diabetes, and reviewed the current literature. Relevant articles were appraised using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system, and consensus statements were developed in two meetings and were confirmed through online voting. The consensus statements indicated that lifestyle interventions must be emphasised for patients with prediabetes, and optimal glucose control should be encouraged when possible. Sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) are recommended for patients with chronic kidney disease with adequate renal function, and for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. In addition to SGLT2i, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists are recommended for patients at high risk of CV events. A blood pressure target below 140/90 mmHg is generally recommended for patients with type 2 diabetes. Antiplatelet therapy is recommended for secondary prevention in patients with atherosclerotic CV disease.

Objective. To quantify the extent of hyperlipidemia and its treatment in patients with stable coronary heart disease (CHD) or an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in the Philippines. Methods. The Dyslipidemia International Study (DYSIS) II was an observational, multinational study conducted in patients aged ≥18 years with stable CHD or being hospitalized with an ACS. A full lipid profile was evaluated at baseline, and for the ACS cohort, at 4 months after discharge from hospital. Achievement of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) targets and the use of lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) were assessed. Results. A total of 232 patients were enrolled from 10 centers in the Philippines, 184 with stable CHD and 48 being hospitalized with an ACS. The mean LDL-C level for the CHD patients was 88.0±40.1 mg/dL, with 33.3% achieving the target of

A gap in the knowledge on the status of heart failure (HF) in Asia versus other regions led to the creation of a working group of Asian experts from 9 countries or regions (Hong Kong, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam). Each expert sought the best available data from local publications, registries, or clinical practice. The prevalence of HF in Asia was generally similar to global values (1% to 3%), but with some outliers. There were substantial variations in healthcare spending, and the average cost of HF hospitalization varied from 813 US$ in Indonesia to nearly 9000 US$ in South Korea. Comorbidities were frequent, particularly hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and dyslipidemia. Modifiable risk factors such as smoking were alarmingly common in some countries. Asian HF patients spent between 5 and 12.5days in hospital, and 3% to 15% were readmitted for HF by 30days. The pharmacological treatment of Asian patients generally followed international guidelines, including renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system inhibitors (61% to 90%), diuretics (76% to 99%), beta-blockers (32% to 78%), and digoxin (19% to 53%), with some room for improvement in terms of life-saving therapies. Our review supports implementation of a more comprehensive and organized approach to HF care in Asia.

Heart failure (HF) is a major and increasing global public health problem. In Asia, aging populations and recent increases in cardiovascular risk factors have contributed to a particularly high burden of HF, with outcomes that are poorer than those in the rest of the world. Representation of Asians in landmark HF trials has been variable. In addition, HF patients from Asia demonstrate clinical differences from patients in other geographic regions. Thus, the generalizability of some clinical trial results to the Asian population remains uncertain. In this article, we review differences in HF phenotype, HF management, and outcomes in patients from East and Southeast Asia. We describe lessons learned in Asia from recent HF registries and clinical trial databases and outline strategies to improve the potential for success in future trials. This review is based on discussions among scientists, clinical trialists, industry representatives, and regulatory representatives at the CardioVascular Clinical Trialist Asia Forum in Singapore on July 4, 2014.

Acute coronary syndromes (ACS) remain a leading cause of mortality and morbidity in the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region. International guidelines advocate invasive procedures in all but low-risk ACS patients; however, a high proportion of ACS patients in the APAC region receive solely medical management due to a combination of unique geographical, socioeconomic, and population-specific barriers. The APAC ACS Medical Management Working Group recently convened to discuss the ACS medical management landscape in the APAC region. Local and international ACS guidelines and the global and APAC clinical evidence-base for medical management of ACS were reviewed. Challenges in the provision of optimal care for these patients were identified and broadly categorized into issues related to (1) accessibility/systems of care, (2) risk stratification, (3) education, (4) optimization of pharmacotherapy, and (5) cost/affordability. While ACS guidelines clearly represent a valuable standard of care, the group concluded that these challenges can be best met by establishing cardiac networks and individual hospital models/clinical pathways taking into account local risk factors (including socioeconomic status), affordability and availability of pharmacotherapies/invasive facilities, and the nature of local healthcare systems. Potential solutions central to the optimization of ACS medical management in the APAC region are outlined with specific recommendations.

Background: Chronic heart failure (HF) disease as an emerging epidemic has a high economic-psycho-social burden, hospitalization, readmission, morbidity and mortality rates despite many clinical practice guidelines’ evidenced-based and consensus driven recommendations that include trials’ initial-baseline data. Objective: To show that the survival and hospitalization-free event rates in the reviewed chronic HF clinical practice guidelines’ class I-A recommendations as initial HF drug therapy (IDT) is possibly a combination and ‘start-to-end’ synergistic effect of the add-on (‘end’) HF drug therapy (ADT) to the baseline (‘start’) HF drug therapy (BDT). Methodology: The references cited in the chronic HF clinical practice guidelines of the 2005, 2009, and 2013 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology (AHA/ACC), the 2006 Heart Failure Society of America (HFSA), and the 2005, 2008, and 2012 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) were reviewed and compared with the respective guidelines’ and other countries’ recommendations. Results: The BDT using glycosides and diuretics is 79%-100% in the cited HF trials. The survival rates attributed to the BDT (‘start’) is 46%-89% and IDT (‘end’) 61%-92.8%, respectively. The hospitalization-free event rate of the BDT group: 47.1% to 85.3% and IDT group 61.8%-90%, respectively. Thus, the survival and hospitalization-free event rates of the ADT is 0.4%-15% and 4.6% to 14.7%, respectively. The extrapolated BDT survival is 8%-51% based on a 38% estimated natural HF survival rate for the time period109. Conclusion: The contribution of baseline HF drug therapy (BDT) is relevant in terms of survival and hospitalization-free event rates compared to the HF class 1-A guidelines initial drug therapy recommendations (IDT). Further, the proposed initial HF drug (‘end’) therapy (IDT) has possible synergistic effects with the baseline HF drug (‘start’) therapy (BDT) and is essentially the add on HF drug therapy (ADT) in our analysis. The polypharmacy HF treatment is a synergistic effect due to BDT and ADT.

Cardiovascular diseases, to which coronary artery disease (CAD) is a significant contributor, are a leading cause of long-term morbidity and mortality worldwide. In the years ahead, it is estimated that approximately half of the world's cardiovascular burden will occur in the Asian region. Currently there is a large gap in secondary prevention, with unrealized health gains resulting from underuse of evidence-based medications, including beta-blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), aspirin and other antiplatelet agents, and lipid-lowering drugs. Despite the almost universal recommendation for these drugs in unstable CAD, their under-prescription is well documented for patients with acute heart failure, non-obstructive CAD, and for secondary prevention of CAD.This article reviews the burden of CAD in Asian countries together with guidelines supporting evidence-based medication use from a secondary prevention perspective.The MEDLINE database was searched from 2000 to 2013, inclusive, for country-specific data related to CAD and supplemented with unpublished registry data.In the post-discharge setting following hospital admission for acute coronary syndromes, medication prescription rates were low. Beta-blocker prescription rates ranged from 49% in China to 99% in Singapore, ACE-inhibitor/ARB prescription rates ranged from 28% in China to 96% in Singapore, and lipid-lowering therapy rates ranged from 47% in China to 97% in Singapore. Aspirin/antiplatelet drug prescription rates ranged from 86% in Indonesia to 99.5% in Singapore. Recommendations are provided to improve patient outcomes and reduce the disease burden in Asia.Despite recommendations issued in international and national guidelines, use of CAD medications in Asia remains suboptimal. In the absence of clear contraindications, all patients with unstable CAD should receive these agents as secondary prevention. This averts the need to target drug use according to risk, with high-risk features paradoxically associated with under-prescribing of such drugs.

Following publication of the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) Guidelines in 2006, the use of β-blockers as first-line therapy in hypertension has been somewhat controversial. However, a recent reappraisal of the European Society of Hypertension guidelines highlights that these agents exhibit similar BP lowering efficacy to other classes of agents, prompting a re-examination of the utility of these agents in various patient populations. The authors felt that it is important to address this controversy and provide an Asian perspective on the place of β-blockers in current clinical practice and the benefits of β-blockade in selected patient populations. In addition to their use as a potential first-line therapy in uncomplicated hypertension, β-blockers have a particular role in patients with hypertension and comorbidities such as heart failure or coronary artery disease, including those who had a myocardial infarction. One advantage which β-blockers offer is the additional protective effects in patients with prior cardiovascular events. Some of the disadvantages attributed to β-blockers appear more related to the older drugs in this class and further appraisal of the efficacy and safety profile of newer β-blockers will lend support to the current guideline recommendations in Asian countries and encourage increased appropriate use of β-blockade in current clinical practice within Asia.