Search

Risk stratification in heart failure with mildly-reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) remains challenging. We evaluated the predictive value of advanced glycation end products (AGEs) and plasma concentrations of extracellular vesicles (EVs) for the systolic and diastolic dysfunction progression in HFmrEF patients. Skin AGE accumulation was measured using AGE Reader. Plasma EV concentrations were measured using flow cytometry. Among 74 patients enrolled, 13 (18%) had systolic dysfunction progression and 5 (7%) had diastolic dysfunction progression during 6.5 months follow-up. Leukocyte EVs concentrations were higher in patients with systolic dysfunction progression (p = 0.002) and predicted the progression with 75.0% sensitivity and 58.3% specificity, independent of other clinical variables (OR 4.72, 95% CI 0.99-22.31). Skin AGE levels and concentrations of other EV subtypes were not associated with systolic or diastolic dysfunction progression. Increased leukocyte EVs concentrations are associated with 4.7-fold higher odds of systolic dysfunction progression in HFmrEF patients., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is associated with multiple cardiovascular and noncardiovascular comorbidities and risk factors which increase the risk of thrombotic complications, such as atrial fibrillation, chronic kidney disease, arterial hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Subsequently, thromboembolic risk stratification in this population poses a great challenge. Since date from the large randomized clinical trials mostly include both patients with truly preserved EF, and those with heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction, there is an unmet need to characterize the patients with truly preserved EF. Considering the significant evidence gap in this area, we sought to describe the coagulation disorders and thrombotic complications in patients with HFpEF and discuss the specific thromboembolic risk factors in patients with HFpEF, with the goal to tailor risk stratification to an individual patient., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: AS reports research support and consulting fees from Adamed, AstraZeneca, Gedeon Richter; AG reports research support and consulting fees from Adamed, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim; JB reports consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim and Novartis; PEP reports consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim; WAEP reports research support and consulting fees from AstraZeneca. All other authors have nothing to declare., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Sodium glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and glucagon-like-peptide-1 receptor (GLP-1-R) agonists are novel therapeutic agents used for the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Recently, large-scale randomized clinical trials have been conducted to assess the cardiovascular safety of these medications. The findings of these trials have revealed that both SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1-R agonists exhibit favorable cardioprotective effects, including reduction in cardiovascular and all-cause mortality, a decreased risk of chronic kidney disease progression, a decrease in hospitalization for heart failure (HF), an effect shown by SGLT2 inhibitors, and stroke prevention, an effect shown by GLP-1-R agonists. Based on the results from above studies, the European and American Diabetes Associations have issued new recommendations strongly endorsing the use of SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1-R agonists in combination with metformin for patients with T2DM who have additional cardiovascular (CV) comorbidities or risk factors. The primary aim of this combined therapy is to prevent CV events. Although both medication groups offer beneficial effects, they demonstrate slightly different profiles. SGLT2 inhibitors have exhibited better effects regarding a reduced incidence of HF, whereas GLP-1-R agonists have shown a reduced risk of CV events, particularly stroke. Moreover, recent European Society of Cardiology as well as American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association guidelines of HF treatment stressed the importance of SGLT2 inhibitor administration in patients with HF regardless of T2DM. In this context, we present and discuss the outcomes of the most recent trials investigating the impact of SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1-R agonists on renal and cardiovascular outcomes in patients, both with and without T2DM. Additionally, we explore the synergistic effects of combining SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1-R agonists in patients with cardiovascular disease.

Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest.