Search

Aims: Patients surviving an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) are at risk of developing symptomatic heart failure (HF) or premature death. We hypothesized that sacubitril/valsartan, effective in the treatment of chronic HF, prevents development of HF and reduces cardiovascular death following high-risk AMI compared to a proven angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor. This paper describes the study design and baseline characteristics of patients enrolled in the Prospective ARNI vs. ACE inhibitor trial to DetermIne Superiority in reducing heart failure Events after Myocardial Infarction (PARADISE-MI) trial.Methods and Results: PARADISE-MI, a multinational (41 countries), double-blind, active-controlled trial, randomized patients within 0.5-7 days of presentation with index AMI to sacubitril/valsartan or ramipril. Transient pulmonary congestion and/or left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤40% and at least one additional factor augmenting risk of HF or death (age ≥70 years, estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 , diabetes, prior myocardial infarction, atrial fibrillation, LVEF <30%, Killip class ≥III, ST-elevation myocardial infarction without reperfusion) were required for inclusion. PARADISE-MI was event-driven targeting 708 primary endpoints (cardiovascular death, HF hospitalization or outpatient development of HF). Randomization of 5669 patients occurred 4.3 ± 1.8 days from presentation with index AMI. The mean age was 64 ± 12 years, 24% were women. The majority (76%) qualified with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; acute percutaneous coronary intervention was performed in 88% and thrombolysis in 6%. LVEF was 37 ± 9% and 58% were in Killip class ≥II.Conclusions: Baseline therapies in PARADISE-MI reflect advances in contemporary evidence-based care. With enrollment complete PARADISE-MI is poised to determine whether sacubitril/valsartan is more effective than a proven ACE inhibitor in preventing development of HF and cardiovascular death following AMI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Cardio-oncology clinics optimise the cardiovascular status of cancer patients but there is a limited description of their structure, case mix, activity and results. The purpose of this paper is to describe the activity and outcomes of a cardio-oncology service, particularly with respect to supporting optimal cancer treatment and survival.Methods and Results: We prospectively studied patients referred to our service from February 2011 to February 2016. New York Heart Association (NYHA) class and parameters of cardiac function were measured at baseline and after optimisation by our service. Up-titration of cardiac treatment, continuation of cancer therapy and mortality were used as outcome measures. Of the 535 patients (55.8% females) referred, rates of cardiotoxicity for anthracyclines, anti-HER2 agents and tyrosine kinase inhibitors were 75.8%, 69.8% and 62.1%, respectively. Patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) (n =128) were younger, had higher rates of hypertension and previous exposure to chemotherapy/radiotherapy (P < 0.001). At a median follow-up of 360 days, 93.8% of the patients with LVSD showed improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (45% pre vs. 53% post; P < 0.001) and NYHA class (NYHA III-IV in 22% pre vs. 10% post; P = 0.01). All patients with normal left ventricular ejection fraction and biochemical or functional myocardial toxicity and 88% of patients with LVSD were deemed fit for continuation of cancer therapy after cardiovascular optimisation.Conclusions: Through the establishment of a cardio-oncology service, it is feasible to achieve high rates of cardiac optimisation and cancer treatment continuation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims Registries and surveys improve knowledge of the ‘real world’. This paper aims to describe baseline clinical profiles, management strategies, and the in-hospital outcome of patients admitted to hospital for an acute heart failure (AHF) episode. Methods and results IN-HF Outcome is a nationwide, prospective, multicentre, observational study conducted in 61 Cardiology Centres in Italy. Up to December 2009, 5610 patients had been enrolled, 1855 (33%) with AHF and 3755 (67%) with chronic heart failure (CHF). Baseline and in-hospital outcome data of AHF patients are presented. Mean age was 72 ± 12 years, and 39.8% were female. Hospital admission was due to new-onset heart failure (HF) in 43% of cases. Co-morbid conditions were observed more frequently in the worsening HF group, while those with de novo HF showed a higher heart rate, blood pressure, and more preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Electrical devices were previously implanted in 13.3% of the entire group. Inotropes were administered in 19.4% of the patients. The median duration of hospital stay was 10 days (interquartile range 7–15). All-cause in-hospital death was 6.4%, similar in worsening and de novo HF. Older age, hypotension, cardiogenic shock, pulmonary oedema, symptoms of hypoperfusion, hyponatraemia, and elevated creatinine were independent predictors of all-cause death. Conclusion Our registry confirms that in-hospital mortality in AHF is still high, with a long length of stay. Pharmacological treatment seems to be practically unchanged in the last decades, and the adherence to HF guidelines concerning implantable cardioverter defibrillators/cardiac resynchronization therapy is still very low. Some AHF phenotypes are characterized by worst prognosis and need specific research projects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]