Search

Introduction: Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) has significantly improved outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, GDMT prescribing remains suboptimal. The purpose of this study was to survey cardiologists, internists, and pharmacists on their approach to GDMT prescribing., Methods: A survey containing 20 clinical vignettes of patients with HFrEF was answered by 127 cardiologists, 68 internists, and 89 pharmacists. Each vignette presented options for adjusting GDMT. Responses were dichotomized to the answer of interest. A mixed-effect model was used to calculate the odds of changing GDMT between pharmacists and physicians., Results: Pharmacists were more likely to make changes to GDMT compared with internists (92.1% vs 82%; odds ratio [OR] 3.02 [1.50-6.06]; p=0.002). In medically-naïve patients, pharmacists were more likely to initiate beta-blockers than internists (45.4% vs 32.0%; OR 2.19 [1.00-4.79], p=0.049). Pharmacists were more likely than both internists and cardiologists to initiate mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (34.4% vs 11.5%; OR 4.95 [2.41-10.18]; p<0.001 and 34.4% vs 13.9%; OR 3.95 [2.16-7.21]; p<0.001). Pharmacists were more likely than both internists and cardiologists to titrate beta-blockers (30.9% vs 16.4%; OR 3.15 [1.92-5.19]; p<0.001 and 30.9% vs 22.0%; OR 1.88 [0.18-2.87]; p=0.0030). Pharmacists were more likely than internists to titrate angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI) (61.8% vs 34.1%; OR 3.54 [1.50-8.39]; p=0.004)., Conclusions: The survey results show pharmacists were more likely to make any adjustments to GDMT than internists and cardiologists. Pharmacists prefer adding spironolactone and titrating beta-blockers compared with cardiologists and internists. Compared with only internists, pharmacists were more likely to initiate beta-blockers and titrate the dose of ARNI., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Background: Despite the strong evidence supporting guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), prescription rates in clinical practice are still lacking., Methods: A survey containing 20 clinical vignettes of patients with HFrEF was answered by a national sample of 127 cardiologists and 68 internal/family medicine physicians. Each vignette had 4-5 options for adjusting GDMT and the option to make no medication changes. Survey respondents could only select one option. For analysis, responses were dichotomized to the answer of interest., Results: Cardiologists were more likely to make GDMT changes than general medicine physicians (91.8% vs. 82.0%; OR 1.84 [1.07-3.19]; p = 0.020). Cardiologists were more likely to initiate beta-blockers (46.3% vs. 32.0%; OR 2.38 [1.18-4.81], p = 0.016), angiotensin receptor blocker/neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) (63.8% vs. 48.1%; OR 1.76 [1.01-3.09], p = 0.047), and hydralazine and isosorbide dinitrate (HYD/ISDN) (38.2% vs. 23.7%; OR 2.47 [1.48-4.12], p < 0.001) compared to general medicine physicians. No differences were found in initiating angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker (ACEi/ARBs), initiating mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA), sodium-glucose transporter protein 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, digoxin, or ivabradine., Conclusions: Our results demonstrate cardiologists were more likely to adjust GDMT than general medicine physicians. Future focus on improving GDMT prescribing should target providers other than cardiologists to improve care in patients with HFrEF., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) optimization can improve outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction., Objectives: The objective of this study was to determine if a novel computable algorithm appropriately recommended GDMT., Methods: Clinical trial data from the GUIDE-IT (Guiding Evidence-Based Therapy Using Biomarker Intensified Treatment in Heart Failure) and HF-ACTION (Heart Failure: A Controlled Trial Investigating Outcomes of Exercise Training) trials were evaluated with a computable medication optimization algorithm that outputs GDMT recommendations and a medication optimization score (MOS). Algorithm-based recommendations were compared to medication changes. A Cox proportional-hazards model was used to estimate the associations between MOS and the composite primary end point for both trials., Results: The algorithm recommended initiation of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker, beta-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists in 52.8%, 34.9%, and 68.1% of GUIDE-IT visits, respectively, when not prescribed the drug. Initiation only occurred in 20.8%, 56.9%, and 15.8% of subsequent visits. The algorithm also identified dose titration in 48.8% of visits for angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blockers and 39.4% of visits for beta-blockers. Those increases only occurred in 24.3% and 36.8% of subsequent visits. A higher baseline MOS was associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization (HR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.21-0.80; P  = 0.009) in GUIDE-IT and all-cause death and hospitalization (HR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.44-0.84; P  = 0.003) in HF-ACTION., Conclusions: The algorithm accurately identified patients for GDMT optimization. Even in a clinical trial with robust protocols, GDMT could have been further optimized in a meaningful number of visits. The algorithm-generated MOS was associated with a lower risk of clinical outcomes. Implementation into clinical care may identify and address suboptimal GDMT in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction., Competing Interests: Dr Dorsch is supported by R18 HS026874 from the Agency for Health Research and Quality, R01 AG062582 and R61 HL155498 from the 10.13039/100000002National Institutes of Health, and the American Health Association Health IT Strategically Focused Research Network. Dr Hummel is supported by a grant from 10.13039/100000738Veterans Affairs CARA-009-16F9050 and R01 AG062582 and R61 HL155498 from the 10.13039/100000002National Institutes of Health. Dr Koelling is supported by R01 AG062582 from the 10.13039/100000002National Institutes of Health. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (© 2023 The Authors.)

Background & Aims: Dietary sodium restriction is recommended by current guidelines to reduce blood pressure and decrease the risk of cardiovascular disease. Current methods to assess sodium intake such as dietary questionnaires and 24-h urine collection are cumbersome, and the results are not readily available to patients. In this analysis, we evaluated using chloride and creatinine dipsticks as a convenient method to monitor sodium intake, in addition to patients' ability to practice this method independently., Methods: This is a post-hoc analysis of a previously published trial, LowSalt4Life, that measured change in sodium consumption over 8 weeks to evaluate the effect of a just-in-time adaptive mobile application intervention. Participants were instructed on how to complete and interpret Quantab® chloride and Multistix® PRO 10 LS creatinine dipstick measurements at home and upload a picture of their results. A pharmacy student interpreted the chloride dipsticks, and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to assess interrater reliability between the participant and pharmacy student. Predicted 24-h sodium values were calculated by the Kawasaki and Mann methods and compared to actual 24-h sodium excretion., Results: There was a strong interobserver correlation between interpretations of the chloride dipsticks, with the ICC values 0.90, 0.97, 0.99, and 0.98 at weeks 2, 4, 6, and 8, respectively. There was a moderate correlation between the dipstick predicted 24-h sodium excretion and actual 24-h sodium excretion at baseline (r = 0.506; P < 0.001), and a weak correlation at week 8 (r = 0.187; P = 0.217). When corrected creatinine values were used, the dipstick predicted 24-h sodium excretion correlated with the actual 24-h sodium excretion at baseline and week 8 (r = 0.512; P < 0.001 and r = 0.451; P = 0.002)., Conclusions: Our analysis suggests that chloride and creatinine dipsticks have the potential to predict total daily excretion of sodium. This method provides patients with an easy, convenient, and accurate method to assess sodium excretion at home. Further research is needed to identify the optimal timing of performing the dipstick analysis as well as ways to improve the creatinine measurement of the urine samples., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03099343; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03099343., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The study was approved by the University of Michigan IRB. The data used for this analysis is not open to the public. Dr. Hummel is supported by a grant from Veterans Affairs, CARA-009-16F9050. Dr. Dorsch has received research funding from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, National Institute of Health, and the American Heart Association in the past 2 years., (Copyright © 2022 European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. All rights reserved.)

Over the past decade, soluble guanylate cyclase (sGC) activators and stimulators have been developed and studied to improve outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). The sGC enzyme plays an important role in the nitric oxide (NO)-sGC-cyclic guanosine monophosphate (cGMP) pathway, that has been largely untargeted by current guideline directed medical therapy (GDMT) for HFrEF. Disruption of the NO-sCG-cGMP pathway can be widely observed in patients with HFrEF leading to endothelial dysfunction. The disruption is caused by an oxidized state resulting in low bioavailability of NO and cGMP. The increase in reactive oxygen species can also result in an oxidized, and subsequently heme free, sGC enzyme that NO is unable to activate, furthering the endothelial dysfunction. The novel sGC stimulators enhance the sensitivity of sGC to NO, and independently stimulate sGC, while the sGC activators target the oxidized and heme free sGC to stimulate cGMP production. This review will discuss the pathophysiologic basis for sGC stimulator and activator use in HFrEF, review the pre-clinical and clinical data, and propose a place in the HFrEF armamentarium for this novel pharmacotherapeutic class.