| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Funck-Brentano, Christian, et al.
(författare)
-
Influence of order and type of drug (bisoprolol vs. enalapril) on outcome and adverse events in patients with chronic heart failure: a post hoc analysis of the CIBIS-III trial
- 2011
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Heart Failure. - : Wiley. - 1879-0844 .- 1388-9842. ; 13:7, s. 765-772
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-Is) and beta-blockers are associated with improved outcome in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). In this post hoc analysis of the CIBIS III trial, we examined the influence of the order of drug administration on clinical events and achieved dose. We also assessed the relations between dose levels and baseline variables or adverse events. Methods and results In the CIBIS III trial, 1010 patients (mean age: 72.4 years; mean ejection fraction: 28.8%; male: 68.2%) with stable CHF were randomized to up-titration of monotherapy with either bisoprolol (target dose 10 mg o.d.) or enalapril (target dose 10 mg b.i.d.) for 6 months, followed by their combination for 6-24 months. Endpoints were mortality or all-cause hospitalization, mortality alone and mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization. The study drug (ACE-I or beta-blocker) was last prescribed at >= 50% of target dose to significantly more patients for the first initiated drug in both treatment groups (both P < 0.001). Sixty per cent of endpoints were reached during the monotherapy phase and randomized treatment during monotherapy was not a predictor of the three assessed outcomes. Monotherapy phase was the strongest independent predictor of outcome (P < 0.0001 for all endpoints). Older age, NYHA class III, impaired renal function, lower body weight and blood pressure at baseline, and hypotension, bradycardia and heart failure during treatment were associated with the inability to reach high dose of both study drugs. Conclusion The order of drug administration plays an important role in whether CHF patients reach target doses of bisoprolol and enalapril. For both study drugs, the dose level reached was associated with baseline characteristics and adverse events. In CHF patients not treated with an ACE-I or a beta-blocker, the duration of monotherapy with either type of drug should be shorter than 6 months.
|
|
| 3. |
- Gheorghiade, Mihai, et al.
(författare)
-
Assessing and grading congestion in acute heart failure : a scientific statement from the acute heart failure committee of the heart failure association of the European Society of Cardiology and endorsed by the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine.
- 2010
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Heart Failure. - : Wiley. - 1388-9842 .- 1879-0844. ; 12:5, s. 423-33
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Patients with acute heart failure (AHF) require urgent in-hospital treatment for relief of symptoms. The main reason for hospitalization is congestion, rather than low cardiac output. Although congestion is associated with a poor prognosis, many patients are discharged with persistent signs and symptoms of congestion and/or a high left ventricular filling pressure. Available data suggest that a pre-discharge clinical assessment of congestion is often not performed, and even when it is performed, it is not done systematically because no method to assess congestion prior to discharge has been validated. Grading congestion would be helpful for initiating and following response to therapy. We have reviewed a variety of strategies to assess congestion which should be considered in the care of patients admitted with HF. We propose a combination of available measurements of congestion. Key elements in the measurement of congestion include bedside assessment, laboratory analysis, and dynamic manoeuvres. These strategies expand by suggesting a routine assessment of congestion and a pre-discharge scoring system. A point system is used to quantify the degree of congestion. This score offers a new instrument to direct both current and investigational therapies designed to optimize volume status during and after hospitalization. In conclusion, this document reviews the available methods of evaluating congestion, provides suggestions on how to properly perform these measurements, and proposes a method to quantify the amount of congestion present.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Krum, Henry, et al.
(författare)
-
Effect on Mode of Death of Heart Failure Treatment Started with Bisoprolol Followed by Enalapril, Compared to the Opposite Order: Results of the Randomized CIBIS III Trial
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Cardiovascular Therapeutics. - : Wiley. - 1755-5914. ; 29:2, s. 89-98
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- P>Background: Mode of death in chronic heart failure (CHF) may be of relevance to choice of therapy for this condition. Sudden death is particularly common in patients with early and/or mild/moderate CHF. beta-Blockade may provide better protection against sudden death than ACE inhibition (ACEI) in this setting. Methods: We randomized 1010 patients with mild or moderate, stable CHF and left ventricular ejection fraction < 35%, without ACEI, beta-blocker or angiotensin-receptor-blocker therapy, to either bisoprolol (n = 505) or enalapril (n = 505) for 6 months, followed by their combination for 6-24 months. The two strategies were blindly compared regarding adjudicated mode of death, including sudden death and progressive pump failure death. Results: During the monotherapy phase, 8 of 23 deaths in the bisoprolol-first group were sudden, compared to 16 of 32 in the enalapril-first group: hazard ratio (HR) for sudden death 0.50; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.21-1.16; P = 0.107. At 1 year, 16 of 42 versus 29 of 60 deaths were sudden: HR 0.54; 95% CI 0.29-1.00; P = 0.049. At study end, 29 of 65 versus 34 of 73 deaths were sudden: HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.51-1.38; P = 0.487. Comparable figures for pump failure death were: monotherapy, 7 of 23 deaths versus 2 of 32: HR 3.43; 95% CI 0.71-16.53; P = 0.124, at 1 year, 13 of 42 versus 5 of 60: HR 2.57; 95% CI 0.92-7.20; P = 0.073, at study end, 17 of 65 versus 7 of 73: HR 2.39; 95% CI 0.99-5.75; P = 0.053. There were no significant between-group differences in any other fatal events. Conclusion: Initiating therapy with bisoprolol compared to enalapril decreased the risk of sudden death during the first year in this mild systolic CHF cohort. This was somewhat offset by an increase in pump failure deaths in the bisoprolol-first cohort.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Papp, Zoltan, et al.
(författare)
-
Levosimendan: Molecular mechanisms and clinical implications Consensus of experts on the mechanisms of action of levosimendan
- 2012
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Cardiology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0167-5273. ; 159:2, s. 82-87
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- The molecular background of the Ca2+-sensitizing effect of levosimendan relates to its specific interaction with the Ca2+-sensor troponin C molecule in the cardiac myofilaments. Over the years, significant preclinical and clinical evidence has accumulated and revealed a variety of beneficial pleiotropic effects of levosimendan and of its long-lived metabolite, OR-1896. First of all, activation of ATP-sensitive sarcolemmal K+ channels of smooth muscle cells appears as a powerful vasodilator mechanism. Additionally, activation of ATP-sensitive K+ channels in the mitochondria potentially extends the range of cellular actions towards the modulation of mitochondrial ATP production and implicates a pharmacological mechanism for cardioprotection. Finally, it has become evident, that levosimendan possesses an isoform-selective phosphodiesterase-inhibitory effect. Interpretation of the complex mechanism of levosimendan action requires that all potential pharmacological interactions are analyzed carefully in the framework of the currently available evidence. These data indicate that the cardiovascular effects of levosimendan are exerted via more than an isolated drug-receptor interaction, and involve favorable energetic and neurohormonal changes that are unique in comparison to other types of inodilators. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Swedberg, Karl, 1944, et al.
(författare)
-
Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of chronic heart failure: executive summary (update 2005): The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Chronic Heart Failure of the European Society of Cardiology
- 2005
-
Ingår i: European heart journal. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 26:11, s. 1115-40
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Preamble Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents aim to present all the relevant evidence on a particular issue in order to help physicians to weigh the benefits and risks of a particular diagnostic or therapeutic procedure. They should be helpful in everyday clinical decision-making. A great number of Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents have been issued in recent years by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and by different organizations and other related societies. This profusion can put at stake the authority and validity of guidelines, which can only be guaranteed if they have been developed by an unquestionable decision-making process. This is one of the reasons why the ESC and others have issued recommendations for formulating and issuing Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents. In spite of the fact that standards for issuing good quality Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents are well defined, recent surveys of Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents published in peer-reviewed journals between 1985 and 1998 have shown that methodological standards were not complied with in the vast majority of cases. It is therefore of great importance that guidelines and recommendations are presented in formats that are easily interpreted. Subsequently, their implementation programmes must also be well conducted. Attempts have been made to determine whether guidelines improve the quality of clinical practice and the utilization of health resources. The ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines (CPG) supervises and coordinates the preparation of new Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents produced by Task Forces, expert groups, or consensus panels. The chosen experts in these writing panels are asked to provide disclosure statements of all relationships they may have which might be perceived as real or potential conflicts of interest. These disclosure forms are kept on file at the European Heart House, headquarters of the ESC. The Committee is also responsible for the endorsement of these Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents or statements. The Task Force has classified and ranked the usefulness or efficacy of the recommended procedure and/or treatments and the Level of Evidence as indicated in the tables on page 3.
|
|
