Optimising pacemaker therapy and medical therapy in pacemaker patients for heart failure: protocol for the OPT-PACE randomised controlled trial.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Paton MF
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6661620 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Optimising pacemaker therapy and medical therapy in pacemaker patients for heart failure: protocol for the OPT-PACE randomised controlled trial.
Paton Maria F MF Gierula John J Jamil Haqeel A HA Lowry Judith E JE Byrom Rowena R Gillott Richard G RG Chumun Hemant H Cubbon Richard M RM Cairns David A DA Stocken Deborah D DD Kearney Mark T MT Witte Klaus K KK
BMJ open 20190717 7
<h4>Introduction</h4>Permanent artificial pacemaker implantation is a safe and effective treatment for bradycardia and is associated with extended longevity and improved quality of life. However, the most common long-term complication of standard pacemaker therapy is pacemaker-associated heart failure. Pacemaker follow-up is potentially an opportunity to screen for heart failure to assess and optimise patient devices and medical therapy.<h4>Methods and analysis</h4>The study is a multicentre, ph ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Patients with heart failure (HF) syndromes have been categorized as those with reduced ejection fraction (EF) or preserved EF (HFpEF), and ischemia plays a key role in both types. HF remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, and with the aging of our population this burden continues to rise, predominantly as a result of hospitalizations for HFpEF. Patients with obstructive coronary artery disease more likely have HF with reduced EF, rather than HFpEF, secondary to acute ischemic injury resulting in myocardial infarction, and large outcomes trials of treatments with neurohumoral inhibition have documented reduced adverse outcomes. In contrast, similar treatments in patients with HFpEF have not proven beneficial. This therapeutic dilemma may be attributed, in part, to heterogeneity in the underlying pathophysiology with different systemic and myocardial signaling pathways, despite similar clinical presentations and findings, in patients with HFpEF. Also, emerging evidence indicates that impaired myocardial perfusion and inflammation secondary to multiple comorbidities are key mechanisms in HFpEF. We will thoroughly review the role of ischemic heart disease in the pathogenesis of HF with reduced EF and HFpEF, and discuss the medical management strategies available for these conditions.
| S-EPMC6534154 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Uncoordinated contraction from electromechanical delay worsens heart failure pathophysiology and prognosis, but restoring coordination with biventricular pacing, known as cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), improves both. However, not every patient qualifies for CRT. We show that heart failure with synchronous contraction is improved by inducing dyssynchrony for 6 hours daily by right ventricular pacing using an intracardiac pacing device, in a process we call pacemaker-induced transient asynchrony (PITA). In dogs with heart failure induced by 6 weeks of atrial tachypacing, PITA (starting on week 3) suppressed progressive cardiac dilation as well as chamber and myocyte dysfunction. PITA enhanced ?-adrenergic responsiveness in vivo and normalized it in myocytes. Myofilament calcium response declined in dogs with synchronous heart failure, which was accompanied by sarcomere disarray and generation of myofibers with severely reduced function, and these changes were absent in PITA-treated hearts. The benefits of PITA were not replicated when the same number of right ventricular paced beats was randomly distributed throughout the day, indicating that continuity of dyssynchrony exposure is necessary to trigger the beneficial biological response upon resynchronization. These results suggest that PITA could bring the benefits of CRT to the many heart failure patients with synchronous contraction who are not CRT candidates.
| S-EPMC4858435 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:There are major gaps in use of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for patients with heart failure (HF). Patient-reported data outlining patient goals and preferences associated with GDMT are not available. Objective:To survey patients with chronic HF to better understand their experiences and perceptions of living with HF, including their familiarity and concerns with important GDMT therapies. Design, Setting, and Participants:Study participants were recruited from the GfK KnowledgePanel, a probability-sampled online panel representative of the US adult population. English-speaking adults who met the following criteria were eligible if they were (1) previously told by a physician that they had HF; (2) currently taking medications for HF; and (3) had no history of left ventricular assist device or cardiac transplant. Data were collected between October and November 2018. Analysis began in December 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures:The survey included 4 primary domains: (1) relative importance of disease-related goals, (2) challenges associated with living with HF, (3) decision-making process associated with HF medication use, and (4) awareness and concerns about available HF medications. Results:Of 30?707 KnowledgePanel members who received the initial survey, 15?091 (49.1%) completed the screening questions, 440 were eligible and began the survey, and 429 completed the survey. The median (interquartile range) age was 68 (60-75) years and most were white (320 [74.6%]), male (304 [70.9%]), and had at least a high school education (409 [95.3%]). Most survey responders reported familiarity with ?-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, and diuretics. Overall, 107 (24.9%) reported familiarity with angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors or mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. Overall, 136 patients (42.5%) reported have safety concerns regarding angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, and 133 (38.5%) regarding ?-blockers, 35 (37.9%) regarding mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, 38 (36.5%) regarding angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, and 123 (37.2%) regarding diuretics. Between 27.7% (n = 26) and 38.5% (n = 136) reported concerns regarding the effectiveness of ?-blockers, angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, or diuretics, while 41% (n = 132) were concerned with the effectiveness of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers. Conclusions and Relevance:In this survey study, many patients were not familiar with GDMT for HF, with familiarity lowest for angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. Among patients not familiar with these therapies, significant proportions questioned their effectiveness and/or safety. Enhanced patient education and shared decision-making support may be effective strategies to improve the uptake of GDMT for HF in US clinical practice.
| S-EPMC6865328 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The objective of our study was to evaluate the real-world effects of an aggressive, personalized protocol for guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) titration in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). We conducted a two-center retrospective cohort study. Patients with HFrEF who presented to a HF clinic from January 2020 to December 2022 were placed on a GDMT protocol. 180 patients were included in the study. Mean GDMT score significantly increased from 4.7 to 5.9 (p < 0.001) between initial and final visits. Mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) significantly increased from 28 % to 33 % (+5 %, p < 0.001). 27 (15.7 %) of the 172 patients with complete New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification data had improvement by at least 1 class, while 2 (1.2 %) patients had worsening NYHA classification. 140 (77.8 %) patients had no unplanned hospitalizations between visits. 21 (11.7 %) patients had an unplanned hospitalization for acute HF during the study period with a mean time from first clinic visit to hospitalization of 183 days (range: 13-821 days). 2 (1.1 %) patients were hospitalized due to GDMT-associated adverse drug events (i.e. hypotension, hyperkalemia). 7 (3.9 %) patients died during the study period, which was lower than the predicted 1-year death rate for our cohort (12.3 %) using the MAGGIC score. In conclusion, an aggressive, personalized protocol for GDMT titration in patients with HFrEF led to significant improvements in LVEF, NYHA classification, hospitalization, and mortality in a real-world setting. This protocol may help serve as a road map to lessen the gap between clinical knowledge and practice surrounding optimization of GDMT and move HFrEF patients toward a path to recovery.
| S-EPMC11362780 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTrial findings show cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) and graded exercise therapy (GET) can be effective treatments for chronic fatigue syndrome, but patients' organisations have reported that these treatments can be harmful and favour pacing and specialist health care. We aimed to assess effectiveness and safety of all four treatments.MethodsIn our parallel-group randomised trial, patients meeting Oxford criteria for chronic fatigue syndrome were recruited from six secondary-care clinics in the UK and randomly allocated by computer-generated sequence to receive specialist medical care (SMC) alone or with adaptive pacing therapy (APT), CBT, or GET. Primary outcomes were fatigue (measured by Chalder fatigue questionnaire score) and physical function (measured by short form-36 subscale score) up to 52 weeks after randomisation, and safety was assessed primarily by recording all serious adverse events, including serious adverse reactions to trial treatments. Primary outcomes were rated by participants, who were necessarily unmasked to treatment assignment; the statistician was masked to treatment assignment for the analysis of primary outcomes. We used longitudinal regression models to compare SMC alone with other treatments, APT with CBT, and APT with GET. The final analysis included all participants for whom we had data for primary outcomes. This trial is registered at http://isrctn.org, number ISRCTN54285094.FindingsWe recruited 641 eligible patients, of whom 160 were assigned to the APT group, 161 to the CBT group, 160 to the GET group, and 160 to the SMC-alone group. Compared with SMC alone, mean fatigue scores at 52 weeks were 3·4 (95% CI 1·8 to 5·0) points lower for CBT (p = 0·0001) and 3·2 (1·7 to 4·8) points lower for GET (p = 0·0003), but did not differ for APT (0·7 [-0·9 to 2·3] points lower; p = 0·38). Compared with SMC alone, mean physical function scores were 7·1 (2·0 to 12·1) points higher for CBT (p = 0·0068) and 9·4 (4·4 to 14·4) points higher for GET (p = 0·0005), but did not differ for APT (3·4 [-1·6 to 8·4] points lower; p=0·18). Compared with APT, CBT and GET were associated with less fatigue (CBT p = 0·0027; GET p = 0·0059) and better physical function (CBT p=0·0002; GET p<0·0001). Subgroup analysis of 427 participants meeting international criteria for chronic fatigue syndrome and 329 participants meeting London criteria for myalgic encephalomyelitis yielded equivalent results. Serious adverse reactions were recorded in two (1%) of 159 participants in the APT group, three (2%) of 161 in the CBT group, two (1%) of 160 in the GET group, and two (1%) of 160 in the SMC-alone group.InterpretationCBT and GET can safely be added to SMC to moderately improve outcomes for chronic fatigue syndrome, but APT is not an effective addition.FundingUK Medical Research Council, Department of Health for England, Scottish Chief Scientist Office, Department for Work and Pensions.
| S-EPMC3065633 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Guidelines recommend that patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) have medical therapy titrated to target doses derived from clinical trials, as tolerated. The degree to which titration occurs in contemporary U.S. practice is unknown. OBJECTIVES:This study sought to characterize longitudinal titration of HFrEF medical therapy in clinical practice and to identify associated factors and reasons for medication changes. METHODS:Among 2,588 U.S. outpatients with chronic HFrEF in the CHAMP-HF (Change the Management of Patients with Heart Failure) registry with complete medication data and no contraindications to medical therapy, use and dose of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI)/angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB), angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), beta-blocker, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) were examined at baseline and at 12-month follow-up. RESULTS:At baseline, 658 (25%), 525 (20%), 287 (11%), and 45 (2%) patients were receiving target doses of MRA, beta-blocker, ACEI/ARB, and ARNI therapy, respectively. At 12 months, proportions of patients with medication initiation or dose increase were 6% for MRA, 10% for beta-blocker, 7% for ACEI/ARB, and 10% for ARNI; corresponding proportions with discontinuation or dose decrease were 4%, 7%, 11%, and 3%, respectively. Over 12 months, <1% of patients were simultaneously treated with target doses of ACEI/ARB/ARNI, beta-blocker, and MRA. In multivariate analysis, across the classes of medications, multiple patient characteristics were associated with a higher likelihood of initiation or dose increase (e.g., previous HF hospitalization, higher blood pressure, lower ejection fraction) and discontinuation or dose decrease (e.g., previous HF hospitalization, impaired quality of life, more severe functional class). Medical reasons were the most common reasons for discontinuations and dose decreases of each therapy, but the relative contributions from patient preference, health team, and systems-based reasons varied by medication. CONCLUSIONS:In this contemporary U.S. registry, most eligible HFrEF patients did not receive target doses of medical therapy at any point during follow-up, and few patients had doses increased over time. Although most patients had no alterations in medical therapy, multiple clinical factors were independently associated with medication changes. Further quality improvement efforts are urgently needed to improve guideline-directed medication titration for HFrEF.
| S-EPMC7197490 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Heart failure continues to be one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Myocardial infarction is the primary causative agent of chronic heart failure resulting in cardiomyocyte necrosis and the subsequent formation of fibrotic scar tissue. Current pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapies focus on managing symptoms of heart failure yet remain unable to reverse the underlying pathology. Heart transplantation usually cannot be relied on, as there is a major discrepancy between the availability of donors and recipients. As a result, heart failure carries a poor prognosis and high mortality rate. As the heart lacks significant endogenous regeneration potential, novel therapeutic approaches have incorporated the use of stem cells as a vehicle to treat heart failure as they possess the ability to self-renew and differentiate into multiple cell lineages and tissues. This review will discuss past, present, and future clinical trials, factors that influence stem cell therapy outcomes as well as ethical and safety considerations. Preclinical and clinical studies have shown a wide spectrum of outcomes when applying stem cells to improve cardiac function. This may reflect the infancy of clinical trials and the limited knowledge on the optimal cell type, dosing, route of administration, patient parameters and other important variables that contribute to successful stem cell therapy. Nonetheless, the field of stem cell therapeutics continues to advance at an unprecedented pace. We remain cautiously optimistic that stem cells will play a role in heart failure management in years to come.
| S-EPMC8080540 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:A model of general practitioner (GP) and pharmacist collaboration in primary care may be an effective strategy to reduce medication-related problems and provide better support to patients after discharge. The aim of this study is to investigate whether a model of structured pharmacist and GP care reduces hospital readmissions in high-risk patients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:This protocol details a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomised trial that will recruit participants over 9 months with a 12-month follow-up. There will be 14 clusters each representing a different general practice medical centre. A total of 2240 participants will be recruited from hospital who attend an enrolled medical centre, take five or more long-term medicines or whose reason for admission was related to heart failure or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.The intervention is a multifaceted service, involving a pharmacist integrated into a medical centre to assist patients after hospitalisation. Participants will meet with the practice pharmacist and their GP after discharge to review and reconcile their medicines and discuss changes made in hospital. The pharmacist will follow-up with the participant and liaise with other health professionals involved in the participant's care. The control will be usual care, which usually involves a patient self-organising a visit to their GP after hospital discharge.The primary outcome is the rate of unplanned, all-cause hospital readmissions over 12 months, which will be analysed using a mixed effects Poisson regression model with a random effect for cluster and a fixed effect to account for any temporal trend. A cost analysis will be undertaken to compare the healthcare costs associated with the intervention to those of usual care. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The study has received ethical approval (HREC/16/QRBW/410). The study findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conferences and reports to key stakeholders. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:ACTRN12616001627448.
| S-EPMC5719661 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Heart failure is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in society. Current medical therapy centres on neurohormonal modulation with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and ?-blockers. There is growing evidence for the use of metabolic manipulating agents as adjunctive therapy in patients with heart failure. We aim to determine the effect of perhexiline on cardiac energetics and alterations in substrate utilisation in patients with non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy.A multi-centre, prospective, randomised double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 50 subjects with non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy recruited from University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust and Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust. Baseline investigations include magnetic resonance spectroscopy to assess cardiac energetic status, echocardiography to assess left ventricular function and assessment of symptomatic status. Subjects are then randomised to receive 200 mg perhexiline maleate or placebo daily for 4 weeks with serum drug level monitoring. All baseline investigations will be repeated at the end of the treatment period. A subgroup of patients will undergo invasive investigations with right and left heart catheterisation to calculate respiratory quotient, and mechanical efficiency. The primary endpoint is an improvement in the phosphocreatine to adenosine triphosphate ratio at 4 weeks. Secondary end points are: i) respiratory quotient; ii) mechanical efficiency; iii) change in left ventricular (LV) function.ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00841139 ISRCTN: ISRCTN72887836.
| S-EPMC3125337 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceTimely and complete disclosure of medical device defects is necessary to manage patient care safely and effectively.ObjectivesTo determine if the manufacturer's recommendations following the recall of a medical device were timely and complete, the follow-up information and data provided to patients and physicians were adequate for managing patient care, and the actions taken by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regarding the recall were appropriate.Design, setting, and participantsThis single-center retrospective case series included 90 of 448 patients who were implanted with a cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemaker at the Minneapolis Heart Institute from May 2003 through January 2011; this pacemaker was recalled in November 2015. In addition, returned product reports submitted by the manufacturer to the FDA via the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database from January 2008 through December 2018 were analyzed.Main outcomes and measuresClinical outcomes were serious adverse clinical events that occurred before and after the November 2015 recall notifying physicians and patients that the device's battery could fail unexpectedly because of high internal impedance. Technical outcomes were signs and causes of failure.ResultsFive of 90 patients observed during 2015 experienced syncope when their pacemakers stopped pacing owing to battery or wire connection defects prior to the recall. Of the 90 patients, 37 (41%) were men, and the median (interquartile range) age at implantation was 71.3 (66.1-78.2) years. Analysis of the MAUDE data revealed that battery failures prior to the recall were associated with serious adverse events that included 1 death, 1 cardiac arrest, 5 syncopal attacks, and 6 heart failure exacerbations; 3 additional prerecall syncopal events were caused by wire connection defects. The manufacturer and the FDA were aware of the battery and wire connection defects for 19 months before issuing the recall, yet the wire connection problem was not included in the advisory and physicians were not informed that interrogating the pacemaker could result in loss of pacing. The FDA classified the recall as class II rather than the more critical class I.Conclusions and relevanceThis case series study of patients implanted with a defective pacemaker found that the pacemaker recall was delayed and that subsequent communications did not include all critical information needed for safe and effective patient care. These findings should prompt reforms in how the medical device industry and the FDA manage future medical device recalls.
| S-EPMC6990820 | biostudies-literature