Additive beneficial effects of beta blockers in the prevention of symptomatic heart failure

The prevention of symptomatic heart failure represents the treatment of patients in the A and B stages of AHA/ACC heart failure classification. Stage A refers to patients without structural heart disease but at risk to develop chronic heart failure. The major risk factors in stage A are hypertension, diabetes, atherosclerosis, family history of coronary artery disease and history of cardiotoxic drug use. In this stage, blockers hypertension is the primary area in which beta blockers may be useful. Beta blockers seem not to be superior to other medication in reducing the development of heart failure due to hypertension. Stage B heart failure refers to structural heart disease but without symptoms of heart failure. This includes patients with asymptomatic valvular disease, asymptomatic left ventricular (LV) dysfunction, previous myocardial infarction with or without LV dysfunction. In asymptomatic valvular disease no data are available on the efficacy of beta blockers to prevent heart failure. In asymptomatic LV dysfunction only few asymptomatic patients have been enrolled in the trials which tested beta blockers. NYHA I patients were barely 228 in the MDC, MERIT and ANZ trials altogether. The REVERT trial was the only trial focusing on NYHA I patients with LV ejection fraction less than 40%. Metoprolol extended release on top of ACE inhibitors ameliorated LV systolic volume and ejection fraction. A post hoc analysis of the SOLVD Prevention trial demonstrated that beta blockers reduced death and development of heart failure. Similar results were reported in post MI patients in a post hoc analysis of the SAVE trial (Asymptomatic LV failure post myocardial infarction). In the CAPRICORN trial about 65% of the patients were not taking diuretics and then could be considered asymptomatic. The study revealed a reduction in mortality and a non-significant trend toward reduction of death and hospital admission for heart failure. Conclusions: beta blockers are not specifically indicated in stage A heart failure. On the contrary, in most of the stage B patients, and particularly after MI, beta blockers are indicated to reduce mortality and, probably, also the progression toward symptomatic heart failure

Full-dose atorvastatin versus conventional medical therapy after non-ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction in patients with advanced non-revascularisable coronary artery disease

Aims: This study tested the hypothesis that the addition of full-dose atorvastatin (80 mg/day) to conventional medical treatment could reduce ischaemic recurrences after non-ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction (NSTE-AMI) in patients with severe and diffuse coronary artery disease (CAD) not amenable to any form of mechanical revascularisation. Methods and results: The study was an open-label, randomised, controlled, blinded end-point classification trial, employing the PROBE (Prospective Open Treatment and Blinded End Point Evaluation) design. A total of 290 patients (mean age 74.6 +/- 9.6 years) with NSTE-AMI and angiographic evidence of severe and diffuse CAD, not amenable to revascularisation by either coronary surgery or angioplasty, were randomised to atorvastatin 80 mg/day (n = 144) or conventional medical treatment (n = 146). A primary end point event (combination of cardiovascular death, non-fatal acute myocardial reinfarction and disabling stroke within 12 months of randomisation) occurred in 16.0% of patients treated with atorvastatin 80 mg/day and in 26.7% of patients receiving conventional treatment (HR 0.56; 95% CI 0.33-0.93, p = 0.027). The study was not blinded. Consequently, a bias in the assessment of clinical outcome cannot be completely excluded. Conclusions: In conclusion, when compared with a conventional treatment strategy, full-dose therapy with atorvastatin 80 mg/day provides greater protection against ischaemic recurrences after NSTE-AMI in patients with severe, diffuse, non-revascularisable CAD

From risk charts to guidelines: tools for evaluation and management of cardiovascular risk

Despite the wide improvement of diagnostic techniques and the introduction of effective pharmacological and instrumental therapeutic strategies aimed to the treatment of cardiovascular diseases, their incidence and lethality are still elevated, with economic implications increasingly less sustainable by the public medical systems. The modern practice of cardiovascular prevention requires, thus, that diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, both at population level and on the single patient, should be more and more precise, effective, and appropriate. From this point of view, a correct global cardiovascular risk stratification assumes a preponderant relevance, in order to allow an adequate therapeutical response. For this purpose several work instruments, as risk charts and guidelines, namely dedicated to arterial hypertension and dyslipidemias, were developed and offered to clinicians interested in cardiovascular prevention. The aim of this review is to illustrate, in synthesis, those instruments, aiming to facilitate their implementation, thus reducing the actual gap between theoretical indications and the real world

After ACC/AHA and ESC Guidelines Pre-operative cardiological evaluation in non-cardiac surgery: certainties, controversial areas and opportunities for a team approach

A standardized and evidence-based approach to the cardiological management of patients undergoing noncardiac surgery has been recently defined by Task Forces of the American Heart Association (AHA), American College of Cardiology (ACC) and the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) that published their guidelines in 2007 and 2009, respectively. Both the recommendations moved from risk indices to a practical, stepwise approach of the patient, which integrates clinical risk factors and test results with the estimated stress of the planned surgical procedure. In the present paper the main topics of the guidelines are discussed, and moreover, emphasis is placed on four controversial issues such as the use of prophylactic coronary revascularization in patients with myocardial ischemia, the perioperative management of patients with congestive heart failure, the routine use of betablockers and statins, and, finally, the management of antiplatelet therapies in patients with coronary stents. In addition to promoting an improvement of immediate perioperative care, the preoperative cardiological evaluation should be a challenge for identifying subjects with enhanced risk of cardiovascular events, who should be treated and monitored during a long-term follow-up