Dataset Information

Less loop diuretic use in patients on sacubitril/valsartan undergoing remote pulmonary artery pressure monitoring.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

Control of pulmonary pressures monitored remotely reduced heart failure hospitalizations mainly by lowering filling pressures through the use of loop diuretics. Sacubitril/valsartan improves heart failure outcomes and increases the kidney sensitivity for diuretics. We explored whether sacubitril/valsartan is associated with less utilization of loop diuretics in patients guided with haemodynamic monitoring in the CardioMEMS European Monitoring Study for Heart Failure (MEMS-HF).

Methods and results

The MEMS-HF population (n = 239) was separated by the use of sacubitril/valsartan (n = 68) or no use of it (n = 164). Utilization of diuretics and their doses was prespecified in the protocol and was monitored in both groups. Multivariable regression, ANCOVA, and a generalized linear model were used to fit baseline covariates with furosemide equivalents and changes for 12 months. MEMS-HF participants (n = 239) were grouped in sacubitril/valsartan users [n = 68, 64 ± 11 years, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 25 ± 9%, cardiac index (CI) 1.89 ± 0.4 L/min/m² ] vs. non-users (n = 164, 70 ± 10 years, LVEF 36 ± 16%, CI 2.11 ± 0.58 L/min/m² , P = 0.0002, P < 0.0001, and P = 0.0015, respectively). In contrast, mean pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) values were comparable between groups (29 ± 11 vs. 31 ± 11 mmHg, P = 0.127). Utilization of loop diuretics was lower in patients taking sacubitril/valsartan compared with those without (P = 0.01). Significant predictor of loop diuretic use was a history of renal failure (P = 0.005) but not age (P = 0.091). After subjects were stratified by sacubitril/valsartan or other diuretic use, PAP was nominally, but not significantly lower in sacubitril/valsartan-treated patients (baseline: P = 0.52; 6 months: P = 0.07; 12 months: P = 0.53), while there was no difference in outcome or PAP changes. This difference was observed despite lower CI (P = 0.0015). Comparable changes were not observed for other non-loop diuretics (P = 0.21).

Conclusions

In patients whose treatment was guided by remote PAP monitoring, concomitant use of sacubitril/valsartan was associated with reduced utilization of loop diuretics, which could potentially be relevant for outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Bohm M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8787966 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), which is a common co-morbidity in patients with maintenance hemodialysis (MHD), results in substantial mortality and morbidity. However, there are still no effective therapeutic drugs available for HFpEF currently. Sacubitril/valsartan has been shown to significantly improve clinical outcomes and reverse myocardial remodeling among patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). The effect of sacubitril/valsartan in MHD patients with HFpEF remains unclear. Our study was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in MHD patients with HFpEF. Methods A total of 247 MHD patients with HFpEF treated with sacubitril/valsartan were included in this retrospective study. Patients were followed up regularly after medication treatment. The alterations in clinical, biochemical, and echocardiographic parameters before and after taking sacubitril/valsartan were collected. In addition, the safety of the sacubitril/valsartan treatment was also assessed. Among those 247 patients with MHD, 211 patients were already in treatment with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi)/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) before being treated with sacubitril/valsartan. We also performed an analysis to compare the differences between the 211 patients who had previously received ACEi/ARB treatment and the 36 patients who were sacubitril/valsartan naive. Results Among those 247 patients with MHD, compared with baseline levels, systolic blood pressure (BP) (149.7 ± 23.6 vs. 137.2 ± 21.0 mmHg, P < 0.001), diastolic BP (90.2 ± 16.1 vs. 84.5 ± 14.1 mmHg, P < 0.001), heart rate (83.5 ± 12.5 vs. 80.0 ± 8.7 bpm, P < 0.001), N-terminal B-type natriuretic peptide precursor (NT-proBNP) [29125.0 (11474.5, 68532.0) vs. 12561.3 (4035.0, 37575.0) pg/ml, P < 0.001], and cardiac troponin I [0.044 (0.025, 0.078) vs. 0.0370 (0.020, 0.064) μg/L, P = 0.009] were markedly decreased after treatment with sacubitril/valsartan. New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class showed a notable trend of improvement after 3–12 months of follow-up. Echocardiographic parameters including left ventricular posterior wall thickness (LVPWT) (11.8 ± 2.0 vs. 10.8 ± 1.9 mm, P < 0.001), intraventricular septal thickness in diastole (11.8 ± 2.0 vs. 11.2 ± 2.0 mm, P < 0.001), left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (53.8 ± 6.9 vs. 51.2 ± 7.1 mm, P < 0.001), left atrial diameter (LAD) (40.5 ± 6.2 vs. 37.2 ± 7.2 mm, P < 0.001), left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) [143.0 (111.5, 174.0) vs. 130.0 (105.0, 163.0) ml, P < 0.001], left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) [57.0 (43.0, 82.5) vs. 48.0 (38.0, 74.0) ml, P < 0.001], and pulmonary arterial systolic pressure [39.0 (30.5, 50.0) vs. 28.0 (21.0, 37.5) mmHg, P < 0.001] were significantly reduced after initiating the treatment of sacubitril/valsartan. The parameters of left ventricular diastolic function including E/A ratio [0.8 (0.7, 1.3) vs. 0.9 (0.8, 1.3), P = 0.008], maximal tricuspid regurgitation velocity [2.7 (2.5, 3.2) vs. 2.4 (2.0, 2.8) m/s, P < 0.001], septal e’wave velocity (8.0 ± 0.6 vs. 8.2 ± 0.5 cm/s, P = 0.001), lateral e’ wave velocity (9.9 ± 0.8 vs. 10.2 ± 0.7 cm/s, P < 0.001), E/e’ [8.3 (6.4, 11.8) vs. 7.2 (6.1, 8.9), P < 0.001], and left atrial volume index (37.9 ± 4.2 vs. 36.4 ± 4.1 ml/m2, P < 0.001) were significantly improved by sacubitril/valsartan. Among 211 patients who were already in treatment with ACEi/ARB and 36 patients who were sacubitril/valsartan naive, the improvement of cardiac function demonstrated by clinical outcomes and echocardiographic parameters were similar to the previous one of the 247 MHD patients with HFpEF. During the follow-up, none of the patients showed severe adverse drug reactions. Conclusion Our study suggested that sacubitril/valsartan treatment in MHD patients with HFpEF was effective and safe.

Project description:BackgroundGuidelines recommend targeting systolic blood pressure (SBP) <130 mm Hg in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) with limited data.ObjectivesThis study sought to determine the optimal achieved SBP and whether the treatment effects of sacubitril/valsartan on outcomes are related to BP lowering, particularly among women who derive greater benefit from sacubitril/valsartan.MethodsUsing 4,795 trial participants, this study related baseline and time-updated mean achieved SBP quartiles (<120, 120 to 129, 130 to 139, ≥140 mm Hg) to the primary outcome (cardiovascular death and total heart failure hospitalization), its components, myocardial infarction or stroke, and a renal composite outcome. At the 16-week visit, the study assessed the relationship between SBP change and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary score (KCCQ-OSS) and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP). The study analyzed whether the BP-lowering effects of sacubitril/valsartan accounted for its treatment effects.ResultsAverage age was 73 ± 8 years, and 52% of participants were women. After multivariable adjustment, baseline and mean achieved SBP of 120 to 129 mm Hg demonstrated the lowest risk for all outcomes. Sacubitril/valsartan reduced SBP by 5.2 mm Hg (95% confidence interval: 4.4 to 6.0) compared with valsartan at 4 weeks, which was not modified by baseline SBP. However, sacubitril/valsartan reduced SBP more in women (6.3 mm Hg) than men (4.0 mm Hg) (interaction p = 0.005). Change in SBP was directly associated with change in NT-proBNP (p < 0.001) but not KCCQ-OSS (p = 0.40). The association between sacubitril/valsartan and the primary outcome was not modified by baseline SBP (interaction p = 0.50) and was similar when adjusting for time-updated SBP, regardless of sex.ConclusionsBaseline and mean achieved SBP of 120 to 129 mm Hg identified the lowest risk patients with HFpEF. Baseline SBP did not modify the treatment effect of sacubitril/valsartan, and the BP-lowering effects of sacubitril/valsartan did not account for its effects on outcomes, regardless of sex. (Prospective Comparison of ARNI With ARB Global Outcomes in HF With Preserved Ejection Fraction [PARAGON-HF]; NCT01920711).

Project description:Randomized clinical trials have shown that sacubitril-valsartan reduces the risks of mortality and hospitalization in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), but patients with kidney failure requiring dialysis were excluded. To investigate the comparative effectiveness of sacubitril-valsartan vs angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (ACEIs or ARBs) in patients with HFrEF requiring hemodialysis. This retrospective, 1:1 propensity score-matched comparative effectiveness study included patients who were 18 years or older with HFrEF, enrolled in Medicare Parts A, B, and D, and survived at least 90 days receiving in-center hemodialysis from July 8, 2015, to December 31, 2020. Patients were excluded for less than 180 days of continuous Medicare Parts A, B, and D primary payer coverage or prior dispensing of sacubitril-valsartan. Data analysis was conducted from September 23, 2023, to June 25, 2024. New use of sacubitril-valsartan vs new or continued use of ACEIs or ARBs. The associations between initiation of sacubitril-valsartan therapy and all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, all-cause hospitalization, and HF hospitalization were assessed using Cox proportional hazards regression models in a propensity score-matched sample. Participants included 1:1 matched pairs of 1434 sacubitril-valsartan users and 1434 ACEI or ARB users (mean [SD] age, 64 [13] years). Of the 2868 matched participants, 996 (65%) were male; 987 (34%) were Black or African American and 1677 (58%) were White; and median dialysis vintage was 3.8 (IQR, 1.8-6.3) years. The median follow-up was 0.9 (IQR, 0.4-1.7) years. Sacubitril-valsartan (vs ACEI or ARB) therapy was associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.82 [95% CI, 0.73-0.92]) and all-cause hospitalization (HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.79-0.93]) but not cardiovascular mortality (HR, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.86-1.19]) or HF hospitalization (HR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.82-1.02]). There was a decrease in hyperkalemia (HR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.62-0.81]) and no difference in hypotension (HR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.83-1.19]). Only 195 participants (14%) ever received the maximum combination dose of sacubitril (97 mg twice daily) and valsartan (103 mg twice daily). In this comparative effectiveness study of patients with HFrEF requiring hemodialysis, sacubitril-valsartan therapy was associated with beneficial effects in all-cause mortality and all-cause hospitalization.