Baylor Heart and Vascular Institute

Packer, M. (2020). “Are the benefits of SGLT2 inhibitors in heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction influenced by background therapy? Expectations and realities of a new standard of care.” Eur Heart J Apr 29. pii: ehaa344. [Epub ahead of print].

Full text of this article.

With the completion of two large-scale trials of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with chronic heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction, we are poised to add yet another drug to our portfolio of cardioprotective agents. These disease-modifying drugs target important, but distinct, pathways that promote cardiomyocyte dysfunction and demise, and it is critical that physicians prescribe all of them in combination to all appropriate patients who do not have demonstrable intolerance. Yet, <1% of patients with chronic heart failure are receiving currently recommended drugs at doses that have been shown to prolong life.1 According to modelling estimates, when compared with no neurohormonal blockade, the use of a broad-based combination of disease-modifying drugs at target doses may reduce the risk of death by as much as 75%. It is time that physicians who treat patients with heart failure took notice. (Excerpt from text; no abstract available.)

Dewan, P., A. Jackson, P. S. Jhund, L. Shen, J. P. Ferreira, M. C. Petrie, W. T. Abraham, A. S. Desai, K. Dickstein, L. Kober, M. Packer, J. L. Rouleau, S. D. Solomon, K. Swedberg, M. R. Zile and J. J. V. McMurray (2020). “The prevalence and importance of frailty in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction – an analysis of PARADIGM-HF and ATMOSPHERE.” Eur J Heart Fail Apr 30. [Epub ahead of print].

Full text of this article.

AIMS: Frailty, characterized by loss of homeostatic reserves and increased vulnerability to physiological decompensation, results from an aggregation of insults across multiple organ systems. Frailty can be quantified by counting the number of ‘health deficits’ across a range of domains. We assessed the frequency of, and outcomes related to, frailty in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). METHODS AND RESULTS: Using a cumulative deficits approach, we constructed a 42-item frailty index (FI) and applied it to identify frail patients enrolled in two HFrEF trials (PARADIGM-HF and ATMOSPHERE). In keeping with previous studies, patients with FI 0.210). The frailest patients were older and had more symptoms and signs of heart failure. Women were frailer than men. All outcomes were worse in the frailest, with high rates of all-cause death or all-cause hospitalization: 40.7 (39.1-42.4) vs. 22.1 (21.2-23.0) per 100 person-years in the non-frail; adjusted hazard ratio 1.63 (1.53-1.75) (P < 0.001). The rate of all-cause hospitalizations, taking account of recurrences, was 61.5 (59.8-63.1) vs. 31.2 (30.3-32.2) per 100 person-years (incidence rate ratio 1.76; 1.62-1.90; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Frailty is highly prevalent in HFrEF and associated with greater deterioration in quality of life and higher risk of hospitalization and death. Strategies to prevent and treat frailty are needed in HFrEF.

Cedars, A., K. M. Tecson, A. N. Zaidi, A. Lorts and P. A. McCullough (2020). “Impact of Durable Ventricular Assist Device Support on Outcomes of Patients with Congenital Heart Disease Waiting for Heart Transplant.” Asaio j 66(5): 513-519.

Full text of this article.

The number of congenital heart disease (CHD) patients with heart failure is expanding. These patients have a high probability of dying while awaiting heart transplant. The potential for durable ventricular assist devices (VAD) to improve waiting list survival in CHD is unknown. We conducted an analysis of the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database for the primary outcome of death or delisting due to clinical worsening while listed for heart transplant. We compared CHD patients with non-CHD patients matched for listing status. Multivariable models were constructed to account for confounding variables. Congenital heart disease patients were less likely to have a VAD and were more likely to experience the primary outcome of death or delisting due to clinical worsening compared to non-CHD patients. Ventricular assist devices decreased the probability of experiencing the primary outcome for non-CHD but not for CHD patients with a final listing status of 1A. Ventricular assist devices increased the probability of experiencing the primary outcome among CHD patients for those with a final listing status of 1B with no impact in non-CHD patients. Among non-CHD patients who died or were delisted, the time to the primary outcome was delayed by VAD, with a similar trend in CHD. Except for patients with a final listing status of 1B, VAD does not adversely affect waiting list outcomes in CHD patients listed for heart transplant. Ventricular assist devices may prolong waiting list survival among high-risk CHD patients.

Weir, M. R., P. A. McCullough, J. B. Buse and J. Anderson (2020). “Renal and Cardiovascular Effects of Sodium Glucose Co-Transporter 2 Inhibitors in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Chronic Kidney Disease: Perspectives on the Canagliflozin and Renal Events in Diabetes with Established Nephropathy Clinical Evaluation Trial Results.” Am J Nephrol Mar 13:1-13. [Epub ahead of print].

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) risk is elevated in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Disease management in these patients has been generally focused on glycemic control and controlling other renal and cardiac risk factors as, historically, few protective therapies have been available. The Canagliflozin and Renal Events in Diabetes with Established Nephropathy Clinical Evaluation -(CREDENCE) trial of canagliflozin was the first study to demonstrate renal protection with a sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor in patients with T2DM and CKD, and these results could have important implications for clinical practice. SUMMARY: In CREDENCE, participants with T2DM and estimated glomerular filtration rate 30-<90 mL/min/1.73 m2 and urinary albumin-creatinine ratio >300-5,000 mg/g who were treated with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker for >/=4 weeks prior to randomization at either the maximum labeled or tolerated dose were randomized to receive either canagliflozin 100 mg or placebo. Canagliflozin significantly reduced the risk of the primary composite outcome of doubling of serum creatinine, end-stage kidney disease, or renal or cardiovascular (CV) death compared with placebo (hazard ratio 0.70, 95% CI 0.59-0.82; p = 0.00001). Canagliflozin also reduced the risk of secondary renal and CV outcomes. The safety profile of canagliflozin in CREDENCE was generally similar to previous studies of canagliflozin. No imbalances were observed between canagliflozin and placebo in the risk of amputation or fracture in the CREDENCE population. Key Messages: The positive renal and CV effects of canagliflozin observed in the -CREDENCE trial could have a substantial impact on improving outcomes for patients with T2DM and CKD.

Shah, P. B., F. G. P. Welt, E. Mahmud, A. Phillips, N. S. Kleiman, M. N. Young, M. Sherwood, W. Batchelor, D. D. Wang, L. Davidson, J. Wyman, S. Kadavath, M. Szerlip, J. Hermiller, D. Fullerton and S. Anwaruddin (2020). “Triage Considerations for Patients Referred for Structural Heart Disease Intervention During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic: An ACC /SCAI Consensus Statement.” JACC Cardiovasc Interv Apr 3. pii: S1936-8798(20)30867-0. [Epub ahead of print].

Full text of this article.

The COVID-19 pandemic has strained health care resources around the world causing many institutions to curtail or stop elective procedures. This has resulted in the inability to care for patients valvular and structural heart disease (SHD) in a timely fashion potentially placing these patients at increased risk for adverse cardiovascular complications including congestive heart failure and death. The effective triage of these patients has become challenging in the current environment as clinicians have had to weigh the risk of bringing susceptible patients into the hospital environment during the COVID-19 pandemic versus the risk of delaying a needed procedure. In this document, we suggest guidelines as to how to triage patients in need of SHD interventions and provide a framework of how to decide when it may be appropriate to proceed with intervention despite the ongoing pandemic. In particular, we address the triage of patients in need of trans-catheter aortic valve replacement and percutaneous mitral valve repair. We also address procedural issues and considerations for the function of structural heart disease teams during the COVID-19 pandemic