Search

Aims: Loop diuretics may exacerbate cardiorenal syndrome (CRS) in heart failure (HF). Direct sodium removal (DSR) using the peritoneal membrane, in conjunction with complete diuretic withdrawal, may improve CRS and diuretic resistance. Methods and results: Patients with HF requiring high‐dose loop diuretics were enrolled in two prospective, single‐arm studies: RED DESERT (n = 8 euvolaemic patients), and SAHARA (n = 10 hypervolaemic patients). Loop diuretics were withdrawn, and serial DSR was utilized to achieve and maintain euvolaemia. At baseline, participants required a median 240 mg (interquartile range [IQR] 200–400) oral furosemide equivalents/day, which was withdrawn in all participants during DSR (median time of DSR 4 weeks [IQR 4–6]). Diuretic response (queried by formal 40 mg intravenous furosemide challenge and 6 h urine sodium quantification) increased substantially from baseline (81 ± 37 mmol) to end of DSR (223 ± 71 mmol, p < 0.001). Median time to re‐initiate diuretics was 87 days, and the median re‐initiation dose was 8% (IQR 6–10%) of baseline. At 1 year, diuretic dose remained substantially below baseline (30 [IQR 7.5–40] mg furosemide equivalents/day). Multiple dimensions of kidney function such as filtration, uraemic toxin excretion, kidney injury, and electrolyte handling improved (p < 0.05 for all). HF‐related biomarkers including N‐terminal pro‐B‐type natriuretic peptide, carbohydrate antigen‐125, soluble ST2, interleukin‐6, and growth differentiation factor‐15 (p < 0.003 for all) also improved. Conclusions: In patients with HF and diuretic resistance, serial DSR therapy with loop diuretic withdrawal was feasible and associated with substantial and persistent improvement in diuretic resistance and several cardiorenal parameters. If replicated in randomized controlled studies, DSR may represent a novel therapy for diuretic resistance and CRS. Clinical Trial Registration: RED DESERT (NCT04116034), SAHARA (NCT04882358). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Implantable devices form an integral part of the management of patients with heart failure (HF) and provide adjunctive therapies in addition to cornerstone drug treatment. Although the number of these devices is growing, only few are supported by robust evidence. Current devices aim to improve haemodynamics, improve reverse remodelling, or provide electrical therapy. A number of these devices have guideline recommendations and some have been shown to improve outcomes such as cardiac resynchronization therapy, implantable cardioverter‐defibrillators and long‐term mechanical support. For others, more evidence is still needed before large‐scale implementation can be strongly advised. Of note, devices and drugs can work synergistically in HF as improved disease control with devices can allow for further optimization of drug therapy. Therefore, some devices might already be considered early in the disease trajectory of HF patients, while others might only be reserved for advanced HF. As such, device therapy should be integrated into HF care programmes. Unfortunately, implementation of devices, including those with the greatest evidence, in clinical care pathways is still suboptimal. This clinical consensus document of the Heart Failure Association (HFA) and European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) describes the physiological rationale behind device‐provided therapy and also device‐guided management, offers an overview of current implantable device options recommended by the guidelines and proposes a new integrated model of device therapy as a part of HF care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key Points: Question: Does torsemide reduce all-cause mortality compared with furosemide in patients with heart failure following hospitalization? Findings: In this randomized clinical trial of 2859 patients, 26.1% of patients randomized to torsemide and 26.2% randomized to furosemide died over a median follow-up of 17.4 months without a significant difference between groups. Meaning: Among patients discharged after hospitalization for heart failure, torsemide compared with furosemide did not result in a significant difference in all-cause mortality over 12 months; however, interpretation of these findings is limited by loss to follow-up and participant crossover and nonadherence. Importance: Although furosemide is the most commonly used loop diuretic in patients with heart failure, some studies suggest a potential benefit for torsemide. Objective: To determine whether torsemide results in decreased mortality compared with furosemide among patients hospitalized for heart failure. Design, Setting, and Participants: TRANSFORM-HF was an open-label, pragmatic randomized trial that recruited 2859 participants hospitalized with heart failure (regardless of ejection fraction) at 60 hospitals in the United States. Recruitment occurred from June 2018 through March 2022, with follow-up through 30 months for death and 12 months for hospitalizations. The final date for follow-up data collection was July 2022. Interventions: Loop diuretic strategy of torsemide (n = 1431) or furosemide (n = 1428) with investigator-selected dosage. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was all-cause mortality in a time-to-event analysis. There were 5 secondary outcomes with all-cause mortality or all-cause hospitalization and total hospitalizations assessed over 12 months being highest in the hierarchy. The prespecified primary hypothesis was that torsemide would reduce all-cause mortality by 20% compared with furosemide. Results: TRANSFORM-HF randomized 2859 participants with a median age of 65 years (IQR, 56-75), 36.9% were women, and 33.9% were Black. Over a median follow-up of 17.4 months, a total of 113 patients (53 [3.7%] in the torsemide group and 60 [4.2%] in the furosemide group) withdrew consent from the trial prior to completion. Death occurred in 373 of 1431 patients (26.1%) in the torsemide group and 374 of 1428 patients (26.2%) in the furosemide group (hazard ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.89-1.18]). Over 12 months following randomization, all-cause mortality or all-cause hospitalization occurred in 677 patients (47.3%) in the torsemide group and 704 patients (49.3%) in the furosemide group (hazard ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.83-1.02]). There were 940 total hospitalizations among 536 participants in the torsemide group and 987 total hospitalizations among 577 participants in the furosemide group (rate ratio, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.84-1.07]). Results were similar across prespecified subgroups, including among patients with reduced, mildly reduced, or preserved ejection fraction. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients discharged after hospitalization for heart failure, torsemide compared with furosemide did not result in a significant difference in all-cause mortality over 12 months. However, interpretation of these findings is limited by loss to follow-up and participant crossover and nonadherence. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03296813 This clinical trial compares the efficacy of torsemide vs furosemide in decreasing the risk of death from any cause among patients hospitalized for heart failure (regardless of ejection fraction). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Novel pharmacologic treatment options reduce mortality and morbidity in a cost‐effective manner in patients with heart failure (HF). Undisputedly, the effective implementation of these agents is an essential element of good clinical practice, which is endorsed by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines on acute and chronic HF. Yet, physicians struggle to implement these therapies as they have to balance the true and/or perceived risks versus their substantial benefits in clinical practice. Any worsening of biomarkers of renal function is often perceived as being disadvantageous and is in clinical practice one of the most common reasons for ineffective drug implementation. However, even in this context, they clearly reduce mortality and morbidity in HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) patients, even in patients with poor renal function. Furthermore these agents are also beneficial in HF with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) and sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors more recently demonstrated a beneficial effect in HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). The emerge of several new classes (angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitor [ARNI], SGLT2 inhibitors, vericiguat, omecamtiv mecarbil) and the recommendation by the 2021 ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic HF of early initiation and titration of quadruple disease‐modifying therapies (ARNI/angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitor + beta‐blocker + mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist and SGLT2 inhibitor) in HFrEF increases the likelihood of treatment‐induced changes in renal function. This may be (incorrectly) perceived as deleterious, resulting in inertia of starting and uptitrating these lifesaving therapies. Therefore, the objective of this consensus document is to provide advice of the effect HF drugs on renal function. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Diuretic resistance is a common complication impairing decongestion during hospitalization for acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). The current understanding of diuretic resistance mechanisms in ADHF is based upon extrapolations from other disease states and healthy volunteers. However, accumulating evidence suggests that the dominant mechanisms in other populations have limited influence on diuretic response in ADHF. Additionally, the ability to rapidly and reliably diagnose diuretic resistance is inadequate using currently available tools. Aims: The Mechanisms of Diuretic Resistance (MDR) Study is designed to rigorously investigate the mechanisms of diuretic resistance and develop tools to rapidly predict diuretic response in a prospective cohort hospitalized with ADHF. Methods: Study assessments occur serially during the ADHF hospitalization and after discharge. Each assessment includes a supervised 6‐hour urine collection with baseline blood and timed spot urine collections following loop diuretic administration. Patient characteristics, medications, physical exam findings, and both in‐hospital and post‐discharge HF outcomes are collected. Patients with diuretic resistance are eligible for a randomized sub‐study comparing an increased loop diuretic dose with combination diuretic therapy of loop diuretic plus chlorothiazide. Conclusions: The Mechanisms of Diuretic Resistance Study will establish a prospective patient cohort and biorepository to investigate the mechanisms of diuretic resistance and urine biomarkers to rapidly predict loop diuretic resistance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Appropriate interpretation of changes in markers of kidney function is essential during the treatment of acute and chronic heart failure. Historically, kidney function was primarily assessed by serum creatinine and the calculation of estimated glomerular filtration rate. An increase in serum creatinine, also termed worsening renal function, commonly occurs in patients with heart failure, especially during acute heart failure episodes. Even though worsening renal function is associated with worse outcome on a population level, the interpretation of such changes within the appropriate clinical context helps to correctly assess risk and determine further treatment strategies. Additionally, it is becoming increasingly recognized that assessment of kidney function is more than just glomerular filtration rate alone. As such, a better evaluation of sodium and water handling by the renal tubules allows to determine the efficiency of loop diuretics (loop diuretic response and efficiency). Also, though neurohumoral blockers may induce modest deteriorations in glomerular filtration rate, their use is associated with improved long-term outcome. Therefore, a better understanding of the role of cardio-renal interactions in heart failure in symptom development, disease progression and prognosis is essential. Indeed, perhaps even misinterpretation of kidney function is a leading cause of not attaining decongestion in acute heart failure and insufficient dosing of guideline-directed medical therapy in general. This position paper of the Heart Failure Association Working Group on Cardio-Renal Dysfunction aims at improving insights into the interpretation of renal function assessment in the different heart failure states, with the goal of improving heart failure care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Acute heart failure hospitalizations complicated by diuretic resistance are associated with worse outcomes. Yet, quantification of the frequency and accompanying risk from loop diuretic resistance is limited by the absence of a comprehensive definition with universal clinical application. Herein, we outline limitations of the current metrics used to identify and define diuretic resistance. We discuss the best available methods to identify and prognosticate outcomes in diuretic resistance. We propose a mechanism-based classification system of diuretic resistance by anatomical location as follows: pre-nephron resistance, pre-loop of Henle resistance, loop of Henle resistance, and post-loop of Henle resistance. Within this paradigm, we compare and contrast historical beliefs of resistance mechanisms with current literature specific to patients with heart failure. We recommend a treatment pathway to restore diuretic efficacy with a literature review of the various combination diuretic strategies and ongoing clinical trials that may impact current best practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In patients with transient IRF and adequate decongestion ( I n i = 15), mortality was only 7% and very similar to the patients with adequate decongestion without IRF ( I n i = 274, 9%). Notably, patients with IRF and inadequate decongestion had a dramatically increased risk of death compared to their well decongested non-IRF counterparts. B This article refers to 'Decongestion discriminates risk for one-year mortality in patients with improving renal function in acute heart failure' by N. Wettersten I et al i ., published in this issue on pages 1122-1130. b Researchers and clinicians continue attempts at decoding the meaning of changes in creatinine during the treatment of acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). [Extracted from the article]

Aims: We conducted a prospective study of emergency department (ED) patients with acute heart failure (AHF) to determine if worsening HF (WHF) could be predicted based on urinary electrolytes during the first 1–2 h of ED care. Loop diuretics are standard therapy for AHF patients. A subset of patients hospitalized for AHF will develop a blunted natriuretic response to loop diuretics, termed diuretic resistance, which often leads to WHF. Early detection of diuretic resistance could facilitate escalation of therapy and prevention of WHF. Methods and results: Patients were eligible if they had an ED AHF diagnosis, had not yet received intravenous diuretics, had a systolic blood pressure > 90 mmHg, and were not on dialysis. Urine electrolytes and urine output were collected at 1, 2, 4, and 6 h after diuretic administration. Worsening HF was defined as clinically persistent or WHF requiring escalation of diuretics or administration of intravenous vasoactives after the ED stay. Of the 61 patients who qualified in this pilot study, there were 10 (16.3%) patients who fulfilled our definition of WHF. At 1 h after diuretic administration, patients who developed WHF were more likely to have low urinary sodium (9.5 vs. 43.0 mmol; P < 0.001) and decreased urine sodium concentration (48 vs. 80 mmol/L; P = 0.004) than patients without WHF. All patients with WHF had a total urine sodium of <35.4 mmol at 1 h (100% sensitivity and 60% specificity). Conclusions: One hour after diuretic administration, a urine sodium excretion of <35.4 mmol was highly suggestive of the development of WHF. These relationships require further testing to determine if early intervention with alternative agents can prevent WHF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Loop diuretic resistance is a common barrier to effective decongestion in acute heart failure (AHF), and is associated with poor outcome. Specific mechanisms underlying diuretic resistance are currently unknown in contemporary AHF patients. We therefore aimed to determine the relative importance of defects in diuretic delivery vs. renal tubular response in determining diuretic response (DR) in AHF. Methods and results Fifty AHF patients treated with intravenous bumetanide underwent a 6-h timed urine collection for sodium and bumetanide clearance. Whole-kidney DR was defined as sodium excreted per doubling of administered loop diuretic and represents the sum of defects in drug delivery and renal tubular response. Tubular DR, defined as sodium excreted per doubling of renally cleared (urinary) loop diuretic, captures resistance specifically in the renal tubule. Median administered bumetanide dose was 3.0 (2.0-4.0) mg with 52 (33-77)% of the drug excreted into the urine. Significant between-patient variability was present as the administered dose only explained 39% of variability in the quantity of bumetanide in urine. Cumulatively, factors related to drug delivery such as renal bumetanide clearance, administered dose, and urea clearance explained 28% of the variance in whole-kidney DR. However, resistance at the level of the renal tubule (tubular DR) explained 71% of the variability in whole-kidney DR. Conclusion Defects at the level of the renal tubule are substantially more important than reduced diuretic delivery in determining diuretic resistance in patients with AHF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) as identified by a reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) is a common comorbidity in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). The presence of CKD is associated with more severe heart failure, and CKD itself is a strong independent risk factor of poor cardiovascular outcome. Furthermore, the presence of CKD often influences the decision to start, uptitrate, or discontinue possible life-saving HFrEF therapies. Because pivotal HFrEF randomized clinical trials have historically excluded patients with stage 4 and 5 CKD (eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2), information on the efficacy and tolerability of HFrEF therapies in these patients is limited. However, more recent HFrEF trials with novel classes of drugs included patients with more severe CKD. In this review on medical therapy in patients with HFrEF and CKD, we show that for both all-cause mortality and the combined end point of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization, most drug classes are safe and effective up to CKD stage 3B (eGFR minimum 30 mL/min/1.73 m2). For more severe CKD (stage 4), there is evidence of safety and efficacy of sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, and to a lesser extent, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, vericiguat, digoxin and omecamtiv mecarbil, although this evidence is restricted to improvement of cardiovascular death/heart failure hospitalization. Data are lacking on the safety and efficacy for any HFrEF therapies in CKD stage 5 (eGFR < 15 mL/min/1.73 m2 or dialysis) for either end point. Last, although an initial decline in eGFR is observed on initiation of several HFrEF drug classes (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers/mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists/angiotensin receptor blocker neprilysin inhibitors/sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors), renal function often stabilizes over time, and the drugs maintain their clinical efficacy. A decline in eGFR in the context of a stable or improving clinical condition should therefore not be cause for concern and should not lead to discontinuation of life-saving HFrEF therapies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Hyponatraemia is strongly associated with adverse outcomes in heart failure. However, accumulating evidence suggests that chloride may play an important role in renal salt sensing and regulation of neurohormonal and sodium-conserving pathways. Our objective was to determine the prognostic importance of hypochloraemia in patients with heart failure.Methods and Results: Patients in the BEST trial with baseline serum chloride values were evaluated (n = 2699). Hypochloraemia was defined as a serum chloride ≤96 mmol/L and hyponatraemia as serum sodium ≤135 mmol/L. Hypochloraemia was present in 13.0% and hyponatraemia in 13.7% of the population. Chloride and sodium were only modestly correlated (r = 0.53), resulting in only 48.7% of hypochloraemic patients having concurrent hyponatraemia. Both hyponatraemia and hypochloraemia identified a population with greater disease severity; however, renal function tended to be worse and loop diuretic doses higher with hypochloraemia. In univariate analysis, lower serum sodium or serum chloride as continuous parameters were each strongly associated with mortality (P < 0.001). However, when both parameters were included in the same model, serum chloride remained strongly associated with mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 1.3 per standard deviation decrease, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.18-1.42, P < 0.001], whereas sodium was not (HR 0.97 per standard deviation decrease, 95% CI 0.89-1.06, P = 0.52).Conclusion: Serum chloride is strongly and independently associated with worsened survival in patients with chronic heart failure and accounted for the majority of the risk otherwise attributable to hyponatraemia. Given the critical role of chloride in a number of regulatory pathways central to heart failure pathophysiology, additional research is warranted in this area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors improve health status in heart failure (HF) across the left ejection fraction ejection spectrum. However, the effects of SGLT1 and SGLT2 inhibition on health status are unknown. These prespecified analyses of the SOLOIST-WHF (Effect of Sotagliflozin on Cardiovascular Events in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Post Worsening Heart Failure) trial examined the effects of sotagliflozin vs placebo on HF-related health status. SOLOIST-WHF randomized patients hospitalized or recently discharged after a worsening HF episode to receive sotagliflozin or placebo. The primary endpoint was total number of HF hospitalizations, urgent HF visits, and cardiovascular death. Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-12 (KCCQ-12) score was a prespecified secondary endpoint. This analysis evaluated change in the KCCQ-12 score from baseline to month 4. Of 1,222 patients randomized, 1,113 (91%) had complete KCCQ-12 data at baseline and 4 months. The baseline KCCQ-12 score was low overall (median: 41.7; Q1-Q3: 27.1-58.3) and improved by 4 months in both groups. Sotagliflozin vs placebo reduced the risk of the primary endpoint consistently across KCCQ-12 tertiles (P trend = 0.54). Sotagliflozin-treated patients vs those receiving placebo experienced modest improvement in KCCQ-12 at 4 months (adjusted mean change: 4.1 points; 95% CI: 1.3-7.0 points; P = 0.005). KCCQ-12 improvements were consistent across prespecified subgroups, including left ventricular ejection fraction <50% or ≥50%. More patients receiving sotagliflozin vs those receiving placebo had at least small (≥5 points) improvements in KCCQ-12 at 4 months (OR: 1.38; 95% CI: 1.06-1.80; P = 0.017). Sotagliflozin improved symptoms, physical limitations, and quality of life within 4 months after worsening HF, with consistent benefits across baseline demographic and clinical characteristics. (Effect of Sotagliflozin on Cardiovascular Events in Participants With Type 2 Diabetes Post Worsening Heart Failure [SOLOIST-WHF]; NCT03521934) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

More than 1 million heart failure hospitalizations occur annually, and congestion is the predominant cause. Rehospitalizations for recurrent congestion portend poor outcomes independently of age and renal function. Persistent congestion trumps serum creatinine increases in predicting adverse heart failure outcomes. No decongestive pharmacological therapy has reduced these harmful consequences. Simplified ultrafiltration devices permit fluid removal in lower-acuity hospital settings, but with conflicting results regarding safety and efficacy. Ultrafiltration performed at fixed rates after onset of therapy-induced increased serum creatinine was not superior to standard care and resulted in more complications. In contrast, compared with diuretic agents, some data suggest that adjustment of ultrafiltration rates to patients' vital signs and renal function may be associated with more effective decongestion and fewer heart failure events. Essential aspects of ultrafiltration remain poorly defined. Further research is urgently needed, given the burden of congestion and data suggesting sustained benefits of early and adjustable ultrafiltration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]