Dataset Information

Lack of evidence for intravenous vasodilators in ED patients with acute heart failure: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT: There are nearly 700,000 annual US emergency department (ED) visits for acute heart failure (AHF). Although blood pressure is elevated on most of these visits, acute therapy remains focused on preload and not afterload reduction. Data from recent prospective studies suggest that patients with AHF with concomitant acute hypertension benefit from intravenous (IV) vasodilators. To better understand the use of vasodilators for such patients, we conducted a systematic review of (1) currently available intravenous vasodilators for ED patients with AHF, or (2) intravenous vasodilators that are not yet available, but have completed phase III clinical trials in AHF, and may be available for ED use in the future. We used multiterm search queries to retrieve research involving nitroglycerin, nitroprusside, enalaprilat, hydralazine, relaxin, and nesiritide. A total of 2001 unique citations were identified from 3 databases: PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL. Of these, 1966 were excluded on the basis of established review criteria, leaving 35 published articles for inclusion. Our primary finding was that intravenous nitrovasodilators, when used in the treatment of AHF in ED and ED-like settings, do improve short-term symptoms and appear safe to administer. There are no data suggesting that they impact mortality. Other commonly used vasodilators such as hydralazine and enalaprilat have very little published data about their safety and efficacy. Of note, few studies enrolled patients early in their course of treatment. Thus, to assess the specific impact of vasodilator therapy on both short- and long-term outcomes, future research efforts should focus on patient recruitment in the ED setting.

SUBMITTER: Alexander P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4344879 | biostudies-other | 2015 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Lack of evidence for intravenous vasodilators in ED patients with acute heart failure: a systematic review.

Alexander Pauline P Alkhawam Lora L Curry Jason J Levy Phillip P Pang Peter S PS Storrow Alan B AB Collins Sean P SP

The American journal of emergency medicine 20140918 2

There are nearly 700,000 annual US emergency department (ED) visits for acute heart failure (AHF). Although blood pressure is elevated on most of these visits, acute therapy remains focused on preload and not afterload reduction. Data from recent prospective studies suggest that patients with AHF with concomitant acute hypertension benefit from intravenous (IV) vasodilators. To better understand the use of vasodilators for such patients, we conducted a systematic review of (1) currently availabl ...[more]

PMID: 25530194

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Dyspnea is the most common presenting symptom among patients hospitalized for acute heart failure (AHF). Dyspnea relief constitutes a clinically relevant therapeutic target and endpoint for clinical trials and regulatory approval. However, there have been no widely accepted dyspnea measurement standards in AHF. By systematic review and mapping the current evidence of the applied scales, timing, and results of measurement, we hope to provide some new insights and recommendations for dyspnea measurement. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched from inception until August 27, 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with dyspnea severity measured as the endpoint in patients with AHF were included. Results: Out of a total of 63 studies, 28 had dyspnea as the primary endpoint. The Likert scale (34, 54%) and visual analog scale (VAS) (22, 35%) were most widely used for dyspnea assessment. Among the 43 studies with detailed results, dyspnea was assessed most frequently on days 1, 2, 3, and 6 h after randomization or drug administration. Compared with control groups, better dyspnea relief was observed in the experimental groups in 21 studies. Only four studies that assessed tolvaptan compared with control on the proportion of dyspnea improvement met the criteria for meta-analyses, which did not indicate beneficial effect of dyspnea improvement on day 1 (RR: 1.16; 95% CI: 0.99-1.37; p = 0.07; I 2 = 61%). Conclusion: The applied scales, analytical approaches, and timing of measurement are in diversity, which has impeded the comprehensive evaluation of clinical efficacy of potential therapies managing dyspnea in patients with AHF. Developing a more general measurement tool established on the unified unidimensional scales, standardized operation protocol to record the continuation, and clinically significant difference of dyspnea variation may be a promising approach. In addition, to evaluate the effect of experimental therapies on dyspnea more precisely, the screening time and blinded assessment are factors that need to be considered.

Project description:IntroductionAFFIRM-AHF and IRONMAN demonstrated lower rates of the combined endpoint recurrent heart failure (HF) hospitalizations and cardiovascular death (CVD) using intravenous (IV) ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) and ferric derisomaltose (FDI), respectively in patients with HF and iron deficiency (ID) utilizing prespecified COVID-19 analyses.Material and methodsWe meta-analyzed efficacy, between trial heterogeneity and data robustness for the primary endpoint and CVD in AFFIRM-AHF and IRONMAN. As sensitivity analysis, we analyzed data from all eligible exploratory trials investigating FCM/FDI in HF.ResultsFCM/FDI reduced the primary endpoint (RR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.69-0.95, p = 0.01, I2 = 0%), with the number needed to treat (NNT) being 7. Power was 73% and findings were robust with fragility index (FI) of 94 and fragility quotient (FQ) of 0.041. Effects of FCM/FDI were neutral concerning CVD (OR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.71-1.09, p = 0.24, I2 = 0%). Power was 21% while findings were fragile with reverse FI of 14 and reversed FQ of 0.006. The sensitivity analysis from all eligible trials (n = 3258) confirmed positive effects of FCM/FDI on the primary endpoint (RR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.66-0.90, p = 0.0008, I2 = 0%), with NNT being 6. Power was 91% while findings were robust (FI of 147 and FQ of 0.045). Effect on CVD was neutral (RR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.71-1.07, p = 0.18, I2 = 0%). Power was 10% while findings were fragile (reverse FI of 7 and reverse FQ of 0.002). Rate of infections (OR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.71-1.02, p = 0.09, I2 = 0%), vascular disorder (OR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.57-1.25, p = 0.34, I2 = 0%) and general or injection-site related disorders (OR = 1.39, 95% CI 0.88-1.29, p = 0.16, I2 = 30%) were comparable between groups. There was no relevant heterogeneity (I2 > 50%) between the trials for any of the analyzed outcomes.ConclusionsUse of FCM/FDI is safe and reduces the composite of recurrent HF hospitalizations and CVD, while effects on CVD alone are based on available level of data indeterminate. Findings concerning composite outcomes exhibit a high level of robustness without heterogeneity between trials with FCM and FDI.

Project description:AimsIn the coming decade, heart failure (HF) represents a major global healthcare challenge due to an ageing population and rising prevalence combined with scarcity of medical resources and increasing healthcare costs. A transitional care strategy within the period of clinical worsening of HF before hospitalization may offer a solution to prevent hospitalization. The outpatient treatment of worsening HF with intravenous or subcutaneous diuretics as an alternative strategy for hospitalization has been described in the literature.Methods and resultsIn this systematic review, the available evidence for the efficacy and safety of outpatient treatment with intravenous or subcutaneous diuretics of patients with worsening HF is analysed. A search was performed in the electronic databases MEDLINE and EMBASE. Of the 11 included studies 10 were single-centre, using non-randomized, observational registries of treatment with intravenous or subcutaneous diuretics for patients with worsening HF with highly variable selection criteria, baseline characteristics, and treatment design. One study was a randomized study comparing subcutaneous furosemide with intravenous furosemide. In a total of 984 unique individual patients treated in the reviewed studies, only a few adverse events were reported. Re-hospitalization rates for HF at 30 and 180 days were 28 and 46%, respectively. All-cause re-hospitalization rates at 30 and 60 days were 18-37 and 22%, respectively. The highest HF re-hospitalization was 52% in 30 days in the subcutaneous diuretic group and 42% in 30 days in the intravenous diuretic group.ConclusionsThe reviewed studies present practice-based results of treatment of patients with worsening HF with intravenous or subcutaneous diuretics in an outpatient HF care unit and report that it is effective by relieving symptoms with a low risk of adverse events. The studies do not provide satisfactory evidence for reduction in rates of re-hospitalization or improvement in mortality or quality of life. The conclusions drawn from these studies are limited by the quality of the individual studies. Prospective randomized studies are needed to determine the safety and effectiveness of outpatient intravenous or subcutaneous diuretic treatment for patient with worsening HF.

Dataset Information

Lack of evidence for intravenous vasodilators in ED patients with acute heart failure: a systematic review.

Publications

Lack of evidence for intravenous vasodilators in ED patients with acute heart failure: a systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets