A case of repetitive myocardial infarction with unobstructed coronaries due to Churg-Strauss syndrome

© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.BackgroundMyocardial infarction is most commonly caused by thrombosis occurring on a background of coronary atherosclerosis, resulting in reduced coronary flow. Less often, myocardial infarction can occur in the absence of coronary disease. The pathomechanism of myocardial infarction in such patients is heterogeneous and more challenging to diagnose and treat. European Society of Cardiology published a position paper on myocardial infarction in patients with non-obstructive coronary disease, with definitions and recommendations for investigations, in what has hitherto been an under-recognized and under-investigated Cinderella-like condition. However, the importance of obtaining a diagnosis is all the more important, since one treatment approach with revascularization and antithrombotic treatment does not ‘fit all’.Case summaryA 70-year-old male patient presented with chest pain at rest, associated with rise in troponin and without ECG changes. A diagnosis of non-ST elevation myocardial infarction was made. Coronary angiography showed a smooth stenosis which resolved with administration of intracoronary nitrate. A diagnosis of coronary artery spasm was made, and treatment initiated. After 18 months, the patient had recurrent chest pains at rest, unresponsive to glyceryl trinitrate (GTN). Cardiac magnetic resonance revealed extension of subendocardial infarction, without inducible ischaemia. CT coronary angiogram (CTCA) showed non-obstructive coronaries. Blood tests showed significant eosinophilia, raised troponin, and C-reactive protein (CRP) that fluctuated without correlation with symptoms or any ECG changes. A diagnosis of Churg–Strauss syndrome was made, and immunosuppression commenced.DiscussionChurg–Strauss syndrome is an autoimmune vasculitis in patients with history of atopy or late-onset asthma which when involving coronary arteries can lead to myocardial injury mimicking acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Identification is important to allow initiation of immunosuppression which can prevent development or progression.Peer reviewedFinal Published versio

Pharmacology of new treatments for hyperkalaemia: patiromer and sodium zirconium cyclosilicate.

Hyperkalaemia is a life-threatening condition, resulting from decreased renal function or dysfunctional homoeostatic mechanisms, often affecting patients with cardiovascular (CV) disease. Drugs such as renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASi) are known to improve outcomes in CV patients but can also cause drug-induced hyperkalaemia. New therapeutic options exist to enhance potassium excretion in these patients. To this aim, we reviewed pharmacological properties and available data on patiromer and sodium zirconium cyclosilicate for the treatment of hyperkalaemia. These agents have been shown in randomized trials to significantly reduce serum potassium in patients with hyperkalaemia on renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors. Additional research should focus on their long-term effects/safety profiles and drug-drug interactions

Pharmacology of new treatments for hyperkalaemia: patiromer and sodium zirconium cyclosilicate.

Hyperkalaemia is a life-threatening condition, resulting from decreased renal function or dysfunctional homoeostatic mechanisms, often affecting patients with cardiovascular (CV) disease. Drugs such as renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASi) are known to improve outcomes in CV patients but can also cause drug-induced hyperkalaemia. New therapeutic options exist to enhance potassium excretion in these patients. To this aim, we reviewed pharmacological properties and available data on patiromer and sodium zirconium cyclosilicate for the treatment of hyperkalaemia. These agents have been shown in randomized trials to significantly reduce serum potassium in patients with hyperkalaemia on renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors. Additional research should focus on their long-term effects/safety profiles and drug-drug interactions

Monitoring of biomarkers in heart failure.

The role of biomarkers is increasingly recognized in heart failure (HF) management, for diagnosis, prognostication, and screening of high-risk patients. Beyond natriuretic peptides and troponins, the utility of novel, emerging biomarkers is less established. This document reflects the key points of a Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) consensus meeting on biomarker monitoring in HF

Hyperkalemia and Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System Inhibitors Dose Therapy in Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction.

Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASi) are known to improve outcomes in patients who have heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). To reduce mortality in these patients, RAASi should be uptitrated to the maximally tolerated dose. However, RAASi may also cause hyperkalemia. As a result of this side-effect, doses of RAASi are reduced, discontinued and seldom reinstated. Thus, the therapeutic target needed in these patients is often not reached because of hyperkalemia. Also, submaximal dosing of RAASi may be a result of symptomatic hypotension, syncope, hypoperfusion, reduced kidney function and other factors. The reduction of RAASi dose leads to adverse outcomes, such as an increased risk of mortality. Management of these side-effects is pivotal to maximise the use of RAASi in HFrEF, particularly in high-risk patients

Comparative effectiveness of enalapril, lisinopril, and ramipril in the treatment of patients with chronic heart failure: a propensity score-matched cohort study

Background: Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) are recommended as first-line therapy in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). The comparative effectiveness of different ACEIs is not known. Methods and results: 4,723 out-patients with stable HFrEF prescribed either enalapril, lisinopril, or ramipril were identified from three registries in Norway, England, and Germany. In three separate matching procedures, patients were individually matched with respect to both dose equivalents and their respective propensity scores for ACEI treatment. During a follow-up of 21,939 patient-years, 360 (49.5%), 337 (52.4%), and 1,119 (33.4%) patients died amongst those prescribed enalapril, lisinopril, and ramipril, respectively. In univariable analysis of the general sample, enalapril and lisinopril were both associated with higher mortality as compared with ramipril treatment (HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.30-1.65, p < 0.001, and HR 1.38, CI 1.22-1.56, p < 0.001, respectively). Patients prescribed enalapril or lisinopril had similar mortality (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.92-1.24, p = 0.41). However, there was no significant association between ACEI choice and all-cause mortality in any of the matched samples (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.91-1.25, p = 0.40; HR 1.12, 95% CI 0.96-1.32, p = 0.16; and HR 1.08, HR 1.10, 95% CI 0.93-1.31, p = 0.25 for enalapril vs. ramipril, lisinopril vs. ramipril, and enalapril vs. lisinopril, respectively). Results were confirmed in subgroup analyses with respect to age, sex, left ventricular ejection fraction, NYHA functional class, cause of HFrEF, rhythm, and systolic blood pressure. Conclusion: Our results suggest that enalapril, lisinopril and ramipril are equally effective in the treatment of patients with HFrEF when given at equivalent doses

Comparative efficacy of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) for cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) improve cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D). The comparative efficacy of individual SGLT2i remains unclear. We searched PubMed, www.clinicaltrials.gov and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomised controlled trials exploring the use of canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, empagliflozin or ertugliflozin in patients with T2D. Comparators included placebo or any other active treatment. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. Secondary endpoints were cardiovascular mortality and worsening heart failure (HF). Evidence was synthesised using network meta-analysis (NMA). Sixty-four trials reporting on 74,874 patients were included. The overall quality of evidence was high. When compared with placebo, empagliflozin and canagliflozin improved all three endpoints, whereas dapagliflozin improved worsening HF. When compared with other SGLT2i, empagliflozin was superior for all-cause and cardiovascular mortality reduction. Empagliflozin, canagliflozin and dapagliflozin had similar effects on improving worsening HF. Ertugliflozin had no effect on any of the three endpoints investigated. Sensitivity analyses including extension periods of trials or excluding studies with a treatment duration of < 52 weeks confirmed the main results. Similar results were obtained when restricting mortality analyses to patients included in cardiovascular outcome trials (n = 38,719). Empagliflozin and canagliflozin improved survival with empagliflozin being superior to the other SGLT2i. Empagliflozin, canagliflozin and dapagliflozin had similar effects on improving worsening HF. Prospective head-to-head comparisons would be needed to confirm these results

Epidemiology and long-term outcome in outpatients with chronic heart failure in Northwestern Europe

Objective: To describe the epidemiology, long-term outcomes and temporal trends in mortality in ambulatory patients with chronic heart failure (HF) with reduced (HFrEF), mid-range (HFmrEF) or preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) from three European countries. Methods: We identified 10 312 patients from the Norwegian HF Registry and the HF registries of the universities of Heidelberg, Germany, and Hull, UK. Patients were classified according to baseline left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and time of enrolment (period 1: 1995–2005 vs period 2: 2006–2015). Predictors of mortality were analysed by use of univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses. Results: Among 10 312 patients with stable HF, 7080 (68.7%), 2086 (20.2%) and 1146 (11.1%) were classified as having HFrEF, HFmrEF or HFpEF, respectively. A total of 4617 (44.8%) patients were included in period 1, and 5695 (55.2%) patients were included in period 2. Baseline characteristics significantly differed with respect to type of HF and time of enrolment. During a median follow-up of 66 (33–105) months, 5297 patients (51.4%) died. In multivariable analyses, survival was independent of LVEF category (p>0.05), while mortality was lower in period 2 as compared with period 1 (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.91, p<0.001). Significant predictors of all-cause mortality regardless of HF category were increasing age, New York Heart Association functional class, N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide and use of loop diuretics. Conclusion: Ambulatory patients with HF stratified by LVEF represent different phenotypes. However, after adjusting for a wide range of covariates, long-term survival is independent of LVEF category. Outcome significantly improved during the last two decades irrespective from type of HF