Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2) (remove)
Document Type
- Journal article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Keywords
- heart failure (2) (remove)
Background
The importance of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and anaemia has not been comprehensively studied in asymptomatic patients at risk for heart failure (HF) versus those with symptomatic HF. We analysed the prevalence, characteristics and prognostic impact of both conditions across American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) precursor and HF stages A–D.
Methods and results
2496 participants from three non-pharmacological German Competence Network HF studies were categorized by ACC/AHA stage; stage C patients were subdivided into C1 and C2 (corresponding to NYHA classes I/II and III, respectively). Overall, patient distribution was 8.1%/35.3%/32.9% and 23.7% in ACC/AHA stages A/B/C1 and C2/D, respectively. These subgroups were stratified by the absence ( – ) or presence ( +) of CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] < 60 mL/min/1.73m2) and anaemia (haemoglobin in women/men < 12/ < 13 g/dL). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 5-year follow-up. Prevalence increased across stages A/B/C1 and C2/D (CKD: 22.3%/23.6%/31.6%/54.7%; anaemia: 3.0%/7.9%/21.7%/33.2%, respectively), with concordant decreases in median eGFR and haemoglobin (all p < 0.001). Across all stages, hazard ratios [95% confidence intervals] for all-cause mortality were 2.1 [1.8–2.6] for CKD + , 1.7 [1.4–2.0] for anaemia, and 3.6 [2.9–4.6] for CKD + /anaemia + (all p < 0.001). Population attributable fractions (PAFs) for 5-year mortality related to CKD and/or anaemia were similar across stages A/B, C1 and C2/D (up to 33.4%, 30.8% and 34.7%, respectively).
Conclusions
Prevalence and severity of CKD and anaemia increased across ACC/AHA stages. Both conditions were individually and additively associated with increased 5-year mortality risk, with similar PAFs in asymptomatic patients and those with symptomatic HF.
OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the tolerability and feasibility of titration of 2 distinctly acting beta-blockers (BB) in elderly heart failure patients with preserved (HFpEF) and reduced (HFrEF) left ventricular ejection fraction.
BACKGROUND: Broad evidence supports the use of BB in HFrEF, whereas the evidence for beta blockade in HFpEF is uncertain.
METHODS: In the CIBIS-ELD (Cardiac Insufficiency Bisoprolol Study in Elderly) trial, patients >65 years of age with HFrEF (n = 626) or HFpEF (n = 250) were randomized to bisoprolol or carvedilol. Both BB were up-titrated to the target or maximum tolerated dose. Follow-up was performed after 12 weeks. HFrEF and HFpEF patients were compared regarding tolerability and clinical effects (heart rate, blood pressure, systolic and diastolic functions, New York Heart Association functional class, 6-minute-walk distance, quality of life, and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide).
RESULTS: For both of the BBs, tolerability and daily dose at 12 weeks were similar. HFpEF patients demonstrated higher rates of dose escalation delays and treatment-related side effects. Similar HR reductions were observed in both groups (HFpEF: 6.6 beats/min; HFrEF: 6.9 beats/min, p = NS), whereas greater improvement in NYHA functional class was observed in HFrEF (HFpEF: 23% vs. HFrEF: 34%, p < 0.001). Mean E/e' and left atrial volume index did not change in either group, although E/A increased in HFpEF. CONCLUSIONS: BB tolerability was comparable between HFrEF and HFpEF. Relevant reductions of HR and blood pressure occurred in both groups. However, only HFrEF patients experienced considerable improvements in clinical parameters and Left ventricular function. Interestingly, beta-blockade had no effect on established and prognostic markers of diastolic function in either group. Long-term studies using modern diagnostic criteria for HFpEF are urgently needed to establish whether BB therapy exerts significant clinical benefit in HFpEF. (Comparison of Bisoprolol and Carvedilol in Elderly Heart Failure HF] Patients: A Randomised, Double-Blind Multicentre Study CIBIS-ELD]; ISRCTN34827306).