Esomeprazole and aspirin fixed combination for the prevention of cardiovascular events

Low dose aspirin therapy plays a fundamental role in both the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular events. Although the evidence using low dose aspirin for secondary prevention is well-established, the decision to use aspirin for primary prevention is based on an evaluation of the patient’s risk of cardiovascular events compared to their risk of adverse events, such as bleeding. In addition to the risk of bleeding associated with long term aspirin administration, upper gastrointestinal side effects, such as dyspepsia often lead to discontinuation of therapy, which places patients at an increased risk for cardiovascular events. One option to mitigate adverse events and increase adherence is the addition of esomeprazole to the medication regimen. This review article provides an evaluation of the literature on the concomitant use of aspirin and esomeprazole available through February 2013. The efficacy, safety, tolerability, cost effectiveness, and patient quality of life of this regimen is discussed. A summary of the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between aspirin and esomeprazole, as well as other commonly used cardiovascular medications are also reviewed. The addition of esomeprazole to low dose aspirin therapy in patients at high risk of developing gastric ulcers for the prevention of cardiovascular disease, significantly reduced their risk of ulcer development. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies suggested that esomeprazole did not affect the pharmacokinetic parameters or the antiplatelet effects of aspirin. Therefore, for those patients who are at a high risk of developing a gastrointestinal ulcer, the benefit of adding esomeprazole likely outweighs the risks of longer term proton pump inhibitor use, and the combination can be recommended. Administering the two agents separately may also be more economical. On the other hand, for those patients at lower risk of developing a gastrointestinal ulcer, both the additional risk and cost make the inclusion of a proton pump inhibitor unwarranted

Right heart failure: toward a common language

Abstract In this guideline, the International Right Heart Foundation Working Group moves a step forward to develop a common language to describe the development and defects that exemplify the common syndrome of right heart failure. We first propose fundamental definitions of the distinctive components of the right heart circulation and provide consensus on a universal definition of right heart failure. These definitions will form the foundation for describing a uniform nomenclature for right heart circulatory failure with a view to foster collaborative research initiatives and conjoint education in an effort to provide insight into mechanisms of disease unique to the right heart

A clinical and cost-effectiveness analysis of the HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device for transplant-ineligible patients: a United Kingdom perspective

Background: The clinical and cost-effectiveness of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) therapy for patients with advanced heart failure (HF) who are ineligible for heart transplantation is debated in the UK. This study develops an indirect comparison between the fully magnetically levitated HeartMate 3 (HM 3) LVAD and medical therapy (MT) to evaluate expected clinical and cost-effectiveness in the UK National Health Service (NHS) context. Methods: We performed an economic analysis comparing the HM3 pump against the HeartMate II LVAD (MOMENTUM 3), and then another analysis comparing MT with the first- and second-generation HeartMate XVE pump LVAD and HeartMate II LVAD for the same patient population (REMATCH and ROADMAP, respectively). By bridging those 2 analyses, an indirect comparison between HM3 and MT in the form of a network meta-analysis was developed. A literature search was performed to select the most appropriate pair of studies for this purpose. Outcomes were adjusted to produce Kaplan-Meier curves for the cost-effectiveness evaluation by using a decision-analytic model. Data were extrapolated linearly over a 5-year time horizon. Uncertainty and additional scenarios were addressed by one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Local costs and health utility were used from England, thereby representing the UK context. Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for LVAD vs MT in transplant ineligible patients with advanced HF was estimated to be £47,361 per quality-adjusted life year gained, with a 97.1% probability of being cost-effective at £50,000. In a subgroup of patients who are inotropic therapy dependent (INTERMACS 1-3 severity profile), the ICER was £45,616, while for a population with less-ill ambulatory HF (INTERMACS profile 4-7) the ICER changed to £64,051. Conclusions: This study provides evidence that HM3 LVAD therapy in advanced HF patients ineligible for heart transplantation may be cost-effective compared to MT in the NHS UK-England context. The ICER is lowest for patients dependent on inotropic support, but exceeds the willingness to pay threshold of £50,000 in ambulatory noninotropic therapy dependent advanced HF patients

Advanced cancer is also a heart failure syndrome: a hypothesis

We present the hypothesis that advanced stage cancer is also a heart failure syndrome. It can develop independently of or in addition to cardiotoxic effects of anti-cancer therapies. This includes an increased risk of ventricular arrhythmias. We suggest the pathophysiologic link for these developments includes generalized muscle wasting (i.e. sarcopenia) due to tissue homeostasis changes leading to cardiac wasting associated cardiomyopathy. Cardiac wasting with thinning of the ventricular wall increases ventricular wall stress, even in the absence of ventricular dilatation. In addition, arrhythmias may be facilitated by cellular wasting processes affecting structure and function of electrical cells and conduction pathways. We submit that in some patients with advanced cancer (but not terminal cancer), heart failure therapy or defibrillators may be relevant treatment options. The key points in selecting patients for such therapies may be the predicted life expectancy, quality of life at intervention time, symptomatic burden, and consequences for further anti-cancer therapies. The cause of death in advanced cancer is difficult to ascertain and consensus on event definitions in cancer is not established yet. Clinical investigations on this are called for. Broader ethical considerations must be taken into account when aiming to target cardiovascular problems in cancer patients. We suggest that focused attention to evaluating cardiac wasting and arrhythmias in cancer will herald a further evolution in the rapidly expanding field of cardio-oncology

901-25 The Paradox of Donor Stimulation of Endothelial-induced Smooth Muscle Growth

Cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) is the major cause of long-term morbidity and mortality in cardiac transplant recipients. It appears to be related to immune damage to the coronary endothelial cells, resulting in intimal proliferation. In order to delineate the mechanisms by which CAY can occur, a co-culture model of human endothelial cells (EC) and smooth muscle cells (SMC) obtained from the donor at the time of organ procurement was utilized. These cells were separated by collagenase digestion, and cultured for four passages. EC and SMC were then grown to confluence in the separate chambers of a co-culture plate separated by a 0.45 micron Millipore filter. Preserved lymphocytes (LYMPH) obtained from the donor and pooled blood lymphocytes from the recipient 3-4 weeks following transplant were added to the EC well so as to cause an immunologic stimulation of the EC. None of the recipients were exposed to monoclonal or polyclonal antibodies to lymphocytes. All cultures and assays were done in triplicate. Results are as follows:Patient#% Increase in donor lymph H3thymidinep ValueDonor 1+510.04Donor 2+450.05Donor 3+1040.05Donor 4+250.01Donor 5-19NSThe donor EC/donor LYMPH co-culture stimulated SMC growth measured by H3thymidine incorporation in 4 of 5 patients. The donor EC/recipient LYMPH co-culture did not result in significant SMC H3thymidine incorporation.ConclusionThese paradoxical findings of a lack in significant SMC proliferation in the recipient stimulated donor cells continue to raise questions in relation to the effects of circulating lymphocytes on the development of cardiac allograft vasculopathy

Incremental Reduction in Risk of Death Associated with Use of Guideline-Recommended Therapies in Patients with Heart Failure: A Nested Case-Control Analysis of IMPROVE HF

Background: Several therapies are guideline-recommended to reduce mortality in patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, but the incremental clinical effectiveness of these therapies has not been well studied. We aimed to evaluate the individual and incremental benefits of guideline-recommended HF therapies associated with 24-month survival. Methods and results: We performed a nested case-control study of HF patients enrolled in IMPROVE HF. Cases were patients who died within 24 months and controls were patients who survived to 24 months, propensity-matched 1:2 for multiple prognostic variables. Logistic regression was performed, and the attributable mortality risk from incomplete application of each evidence-based therapy among eligible patients was calculated. A total of 1376 cases and 2752 matched controls were identified. β-Blocker and cardiac resynchronization therapy were associated with the greatest 24-month survival benefit (adjusted odds ratio for death 0.42, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.34–0.52; and 0.44, 95% CI, 0.29–0.67, respectively). Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation, and HF education were also associated with benefit, whereas aldosterone antagonist use was not. Incremental benefits were observed with each successive therapy, plateauing once any 4 to 5 therapies were provided (adjusted odds ratio 0.31, 95% CI, 0.23–0.42 for 5 or more versus 0/1, P<0.0001). Conclusions: Individual, with a single exception, and incremental use of guideline-recommended therapies was associated with survival benefit, with a potential plateau at 4 to 5 therapies. These data provide further rationale to implement guideline-recommended HF therapies in the absence of contraindications to patients with HF and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction

Primary results of long-term outcomes in the MOMENTUM 3 pivotal trial and continued access protocol study phase: a study of 2200 HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device implants

AIM: The MOMENTUM 3 pivotal trial established superiority of the HeartMate 3 (HM3) left ventricular assist device (LVAD), a fully magnetically levitated centrifugal-flow pump, over the HeartMate II axial-flow pump. We now evaluate HM3 LVAD outcomes in a single-arm prospective continuous access protocol (CAP) post-pivotal trial study. METHODS AND RESULTS: We enrolled 2200 HM3 implanted patients (515 pivotal trial and 1685 CAP patients) and compared outcomes including survival free of disabling stroke or reoperation to replace or remove a malfunctioning device (primary composite endpoint), overall survival and major adverse events at 2 years. The 2-year primary endpoint [76.7% vs. 74.8%; adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71-1.08, P = 0.21] and overall survival (81.2% vs. 79.0%) were similar among CAP and pivotal cohorts despite sicker patients (more intra-aortic balloon pump use and INTERMACS profile 1) in CAP who were more often intended for destination therapy. Survival was similar between the CAP and pivotal trial in transplant ineligible patients (79.1% vs. 76.7%; adjusted HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.68-1.16, P = 0.38). In a pooled analysis, the 2-year primary endpoint was similar between INTERMACS profiles 1-2 (\u27unstable\u27 advanced heart failure), profile 3 (\u27stable\u27 on inotropic therapy), and profiles 4-7 (\u27stable\u27 ambulatory advanced heart failure) (75.7% vs. 77.6% vs. 72.9%, respectively). The net burden of adverse events was lower in CAP (adjusted rate ratio 0.93, 95% CI 0.88-0.98, P = 0.006), with consequent decrease in hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: The primary results of accumulating HM3 LVAD experience suggest a lower adverse event burden and similar survival compared to the pivotal MOMENTUM 3 trial