Hyperkalaemia in Heart Failure

Hyperkalaemia has become an increasingly prevalent finding in patients with heart failure (HF), especially with renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors and angiotensin–neprilysin inhibitors being the cornerstone of medical therapy. Patients living with HF often have other comorbidities, such as diabetes and chronic kidney disease, which predispose to hyperkalaemia. Until now, we have not had any reliable or tolerable therapies for the treatment of hyperkalaemia to facilitate implementation or achievement of target doses of RAAS inhibition. Patiromer sorbitex calcium and sodium zirconium cyclosilicate are two novel potassium-binding resins that have shown promise in the management of patients predisposed to developing recurrent hyperkalaemia, and their use may allow for further optimisation of guideline directed medical therapy

Reflecting on the Advancements of HFrEF Therapies Over the Last Two Decades and Predicting What Is Yet to Come

What was once considered a topic best avoided, managing heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has become the focus of many drug and device therapies. While the four pillars of guideline-directed medical therapies have successfully reduced heart failure hospitalizations, and some have even impacted cardiovascular mortality in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), patient-reported outcomes have emerged as important endpoints that merit greater emphasis in future studies. The prospect of an oral inotrope seems more probable now as targets for drug therapies have moved from neurohormonal modulation to intracellular mechanisms and direct cardiac myosin stimulation. While we have come a long way in safely providing durable mechanical circulatory support to patients with advanced HFrEF, several percutaneous device therapies have emerged, and many are under investigation. Biomarkers have shown promise in not only improving our ability to diagnose incident heart failure but also our potential to implicate specific pathophysiological pathways. The once forgotten concept of discordance between pressure and volume, the forgotten splanchnic venous and lymphatic compartments, have all emerged as promising targets for diagnosing and treating heart failure in the not-so-distant future. The increase in heart failure-related cardiogenic shock (CS) has revived interest in defining optimal perfusion targets and designing RCTs in CS. Rapid developments in remote monitoring, telemedicine, and artificial intelligence promise to change the face of heart failure care. In this state-of-the-art review, we reminisce about the past, highlight the present, and predict what might be the future of HFrEF therapies

Trends, Management and Outcomes of Acute Myocardial Infarction in Chronic Liver Disease

Peer reviewedPostprin

Management of Worsening Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction:<i>JACC </i>Focus Seminar 3/3

Despite worsening heart failure (HF) being extremely common, expensive, and associated with substantial risk of death, there remain no dedicated clinical practice guidelines for the specific management of these patients. The lack of a management guideline is despite a rapidly evolving evidence-base, as a number of recent clinical trials have demonstrated multiple therapies to be safe and efficacious in this high-risk population. Herein, we propose a framework for treating worsening HF with reduced ejection fraction with the sense of urgency it deserves. This includes treating congestion; managing precipitants; and establishing a foundation of rapid-sequence, simultaneous, and/or in-hospital initiation of quadruple medical therapy for HF with reduced ejection fraction, with the top priority being at least low doses of all 4 medications. Moreover, to maximally reduce residual clinical risk, we further propose consideration of upfront simultaneous use of vericiguat (ie, quintuple medical therapy) and administration of intravenous iron for those who are iron deficient.</p

Pseudo cardiac tamponade in the setting of excess pericardial fat

Cardiac tamponade is the phenomenon of hemodynamic compromise caused by a pericardial effusion. Following a myocardial infarction, the most common causes of pericardial fluid include early pericarditis, Dressler's syndrome, and hemopericardium secondary to a free wall rupture. On transthoracic echocardiography, pericardial fluid appears as an echo-free space in between the visceral and parietal layers of the pericardium. Pericardial fat has a similar appearance on echocardiography and it may be difficult to discern the two entities. We present a case of a post-MI patient demonstrating pseudo tamponade physiology in the setting of excessive pericardial fat

Sacubitril/valsartan in heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction: a pre-specified participant-level pooled analysis of PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF

Background and aims: The PARAGLIDE-HF trial demonstrated reductions in natriuretic peptides with sacubitril/valsartan compared with valsartan in patients with heart failure (HF) with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction who had a recent worsening HF event, but was not adequately powered to examine clinical outcomes. PARAGON-HF included a subset of PARAGLIDE-HF-like patients who were recently hospitalized for HF. Participant-level data from PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF were pooled to better estimate the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in reducing cardiovascular and renal events in HF with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction. Methods: Both PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF were multicenter, double-blind, randomized, active-controlled trials of sacubitril/valsartan vs. valsartan in patients with HF with mildly reduced or preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF &gt;40% in PARAGLIDE-HF and ≥45% in PARAGON-HF). In the pre-specified primary analysis, we pooled participants in PARAGLIDE-HF (all of whom were enrolled during or within 30 days of a worsening HF event) with a ‘PARAGLIDE-like’ subset of PARAGON-HF (those hospitalized for HF within 30 days). We also pooled the entire PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF populations for a broader context. The primary endpoint for this analysis was the composite of total worsening HF events (including first and recurrent HF hospitalizations and urgent visits) and cardiovascular death. The secondary endpoint was the pre-specified renal composite endpoint for both studies (≥50% decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate from baseline, end-stage renal disease, or renal death). Results: Compared with valsartan, sacubitril/valsartan significantly reduced total worsening HF events and cardiovascular death in both the primary pooled analysis of participants with recent worsening HF (n=1,088; rate ratio [RR] 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-0.99; P=0.042) and in the pooled analysis of all participants (n=5,262; RR 0.86; 95% CI: 0.75-0.98; P=0.027). In the pooled analysis of all participants, first nominal statistical significance was reached by day 9 after randomization and treatment benefits were larger in those with LVEF ≤60% (RR 0.78; 95% CI 0.66-0.91) compared with those with LVEF &gt;60% (RR 1.09; 95% CI 0.86-1.40; Pinteraction=0.021). Sacubitril/valsartan was also associated with lower rates of the renal composite endpoint in the primary pooled analysis (hazard ratio [HR] 0.67; 95% CI 0.43-1.05; P=0.080) and the pooled analysis of all participants (HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.44-0.83; P=0.002). Conclusions: In pooled analyses of PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF, sacubitril/valsartan reduced cardiovascular and renal events among patients with HF with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction. These data provide support for use of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with HF with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction, particularly among those with an LVEF below normal, regardless of care setting

Left ventricular function, congestion, and effect of empagliflozin on heart failure risk after myocardial infarction

Background Empagliflozin reduces the risk of heart failure (HF) hospitalizations but not all-cause mortality when started within 14 days of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Objective To evaluate the association between left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), congestion, or both on outcomes and the impact of empagliflozin in reducing HF risk post-MI. Methods In the EMPACT-MI trial, patients were randomized within 14 days of an AMI complicated by either newly reduced LVEF&lt;45%, congestion, or both to empagliflozin 10 mg daily or placebo and followed for a median of 17.9 months. Results Among 6522 patients, the mean baseline LVEF was 41%+9%; 2648 patients (40.6%) presented with LVEF&lt;45% alone, 1483 (22.7%) presented with congestion alone, and 2181 (33.4%) presented with both. Among patients in the placebo arm, multivariable adjusted risk for each 10-point reduction in LVEF included all-cause death or HF hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR] 1.49; 95%CI, 1.31-1.69; P&lt;0.0001), first HF hospitalization (HR, 1.64; 95%CI, 1.37-1.96; P&lt;0.0001), and total HF hospitalizations (rate ratio [RR], 1.89; 95%CI, 1.51-2.36; P&lt;0.0001). Presence of congestion was also associated with a significantly higher risk for each of these outcomes (HR 1.52, 1.94, and RR 2.03, respectively). Empagliflozin reduced the risk for first (HR 0.77, 95%CI 0.60-0.98) and total (RR 0.67, 95%CI 0.50-0.89) HF hospitalization, irrespective of LVEF or congestion or both. The safety profile of empagliflozin was consistent across baseline LVEF and irrespective of congestion status. Conclusions In patients with AMI, severity of LV dysfunction and the presence of congestion was associated with worse outcomes. Empagliflozin reduced first and total HF hospitalizations across the range of LVEF with and without congestion

Omecamtiv mecarbil in chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, GALACTIC‐HF: baseline characteristics and comparison with contemporary clinical trials

Aims: The safety and efficacy of the novel selective cardiac myosin activator, omecamtiv mecarbil, in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is tested in the Global Approach to Lowering Adverse Cardiac outcomes Through Improving Contractility in Heart Failure (GALACTIC‐HF) trial. Here we describe the baseline characteristics of participants in GALACTIC‐HF and how these compare with other contemporary trials. Methods and Results: Adults with established HFrEF, New York Heart Association functional class (NYHA) ≥ II, EF ≤35%, elevated natriuretic peptides and either current hospitalization for HF or history of hospitalization/ emergency department visit for HF within a year were randomized to either placebo or omecamtiv mecarbil (pharmacokinetic‐guided dosing: 25, 37.5 or 50 mg bid). 8256 patients [male (79%), non‐white (22%), mean age 65 years] were enrolled with a mean EF 27%, ischemic etiology in 54%, NYHA II 53% and III/IV 47%, and median NT‐proBNP 1971 pg/mL. HF therapies at baseline were among the most effectively employed in contemporary HF trials. GALACTIC‐HF randomized patients representative of recent HF registries and trials with substantial numbers of patients also having characteristics understudied in previous trials including more from North America (n = 1386), enrolled as inpatients (n = 2084), systolic blood pressure &lt; 100 mmHg (n = 1127), estimated glomerular filtration rate &lt; 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 (n = 528), and treated with sacubitril‐valsartan at baseline (n = 1594). Conclusions: GALACTIC‐HF enrolled a well‐treated, high‐risk population from both inpatient and outpatient settings, which will provide a definitive evaluation of the efficacy and safety of this novel therapy, as well as informing its potential future implementation