18 research outputs found

    Noncardiac Comorbidities in Heart Failure With Reduced Versus Preserved Ejection Fraction

    Get PDF
    AbstractHeart failure patients are classified by ejection fraction (EF) into distinct groups: heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) or heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Although patients with heart failure commonly have multiple comorbidities that complicate management and may adversely affect outcomes, their role in the HFpEF and HFrEF groups is not well-characterized. This review summarizes the role of noncardiac comorbidities in patients with HFpEF versus HFrEF, emphasizing prevalence, underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms, and outcomes. Pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus, anemia, and obesity tend to be more prevalent in HFpEF patients, but renal disease and sleep-disordered breathing burdens are similar. These comorbidities similarly increase morbidity and mortality risk in HFpEF and HFrEF patients. Common pathophysiologic mechanisms include systemic and endomyocardial inflammation with fibrosis. We also discuss implications for clinical care and future HF clinical trial design. The basis for this review was discussions between scientists, clinical trialists, and regulatory representatives at the 10th Global CardioVascular Clinical Trialists Forum

    Antithrombotic Therapy and Major Adverse Limb Events in Patients With Chronic Lower Extremity Arterial Disease : systematic review and meta-analysis from the European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy in Collaboration with the European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Aorta and Peripheral Vascular Diseases

    No full text
    AIMS: The role and selection of antithrombotic therapy to improve limb outcomes in chronic lower extremity artery disease (LEAD) is still debated. We conducted a meta-analysis to examine the efficacy and safety of antithrombotic and more intense antithrombotic therapy on limb outcomes and limb salvage in patients with chronic LEAD. METHODS AND RESULTS: Study inclusion criteria were: enrolment of patients with LEAD, randomized allocation to more vs. less intense antithrombotic therapy [more vs. less intense single-antiplatelet therapy (SAPT); dual-antiplatelet therapy vs. SAPT; dual antithrombotic therapy vs. SAPT or oral anticoagulant]; enrolment of ≥200 patients; reporting of at least one of following outcomes: limb amputation or revascularization. Seven randomized studies enrolling 30 447 patients were included. Over a median follow-up of 24 months, more vs. less intense antithrombotic therapy or placebo significantly reduced the risk of limb revascularization [relative risk (RR) 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83-0.94] and limb amputation (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.46-0.86), as well as stroke (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.70-0.97). There was no statistically significant effect on the risk of myocardial infarction (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.87-1.11), all-cause (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.86-1.01), and cardiovascular death (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.86-1.08). Risk of major bleeding increased (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.04-1.44). CONCLUSION: In patients with LEAD, more intense antithrombotic therapy reduces the risk of limb amputation and revascularization as well as stroke with an increase in the risk of bleeding events
    corecore