| 1. |
- O'Connor, C. M., et al.
(author)
-
Effect of nesiritide in patients with acute decompensated heart failure
- 2011
-
In: The New England journal of medicine. - : Massachusetts Medical Society. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 365:1, s. 32-43
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Nesiritide is approved in the United States for early relief of dyspnea in patients with acute heart failure. Previous meta-analyses have raised questions regarding renal toxicity and the mortality associated with this agent. METHODS: We randomly assigned 7141 patients who were hospitalized with acute heart failure to receive either nesiritide or placebo for 24 to 168 hours in addition to standard care. Coprimary end points were the change in dyspnea at 6 and 24 hours, as measured on a 7-point Likert scale, and the composite end point of rehospitalization for heart failure or death within 30 days. RESULTS: Patients randomly assigned to nesiritide, as compared with those assigned to placebo, more frequently reported markedly or moderately improved dyspnea at 6 hours (44.5% vs. 42.1%, P=0.03) and 24 hours (68.2% vs. 66.1%, P=0.007), but the prespecified level for significance (P
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Metra, M., et al.
(author)
-
Geographic Differences in Patients in a Global Acute Heart Failure Clinical Trial (from the ASCEND-HF Trial)
- 2016
-
In: American Journal of Cardiology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0002-9149. ; 117:11, s. 1771-1778
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- A growing number of countries and geographical regions are involved in major clinical trials. Acute Study of Clinical Effectiveness of Nesiritide in Decompensated Heart Failure is the largest trial in acutely decompensated heart failure (HF) with patients from 5 geographical regions: North America (NA), Latin America (LA), Western Europe (WE), Central Europe (CE), and Asia-Pacific (AP). Data from the 5 geographical, areas were compared including baseline characteristics, medications, 30-day outcomes (mortality and mortality or HF hospitalization), and 180-day mortality. Of the 7,141 study patients, 3,243 (45.4%) were from NA (average of 15.2 patients/site), 1,762 (24.7%) from AP (28.4 patients/site), 967 (13.5%) from CE (20.2 patients/site), 665 (9.3%) from LA (17.1 patients/site), and 504 (7.1%) from WE (14.4 patients/site). There were marked differences in co-morbidities, clinical profile, medication use, length of stay, 30-day event rates, and 180-day mortality by region. Compared with NA, the adjusted risk for death or HF hospitalization at 30 days was significantly lower in CE (odds ratio [OR] 0.46, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.64), WE (OR 0.52 95% CI 0.35 to 0.75), and AP (OR 0.62 95% CI 0.48 to 0:79) and numerically lower in LA (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.04) with similar results for 180-day mortality. In conclusion, in patients with acutely decompensated HF, major differences in baseline characteristics, treatments, length of the hospital stay, and 30-day HF rehospitalization rates, and 180-day mortality were found in patients enrolled from different, geographical areas. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 6. |
- Metra, M., et al.
(author)
-
Effects of low-dose oral enoximone administration on mortality, morbidity, and exercise capacity in patients with advanced heart failure: the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group ESSENTIAL trials
- 2009
-
In: European Journal of Heart Failure. - 1522-9645. ; 30:24, s. 3015-26
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- AIMS: Use of inotropic agents in patients with heart failure (HF) has been limited by adverse effects on outcomes. However, administration of positive inotropes at lower doses and concomitant treatment with beta-blockers might increase benefit-risk ratio. We investigated the effects of low doses of the positive inotrope enoximone on symptoms, exercise capacity, and major clinical outcomes in patients with advanced HF who were also treated with beta-blockers and other guideline-recommended background therapy. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Studies of Oral Enoximone Therapy in Advanced HF (ESSENTIAL) programme consisted of two identical, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials that differed only by geographic location (North and South America: ESSENTIAL-I; Europe: ESSENTIAL-II). Patients with New York Heart Association class III-IV HF symptoms, left ventricular ejection fraction < or = 30%, and one hospitalization or two ambulatory visits for worsening HF in the previous year were eligible for participation in the trials. The trials had three co-primary endpoints: (i) the composite of time to all-cause mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization, analysed in the two ESSENTIAL trials combined; (ii) the 6 month change from baseline in the 6 min walk test distance (6MWTD); and (iii) the Patient Global Assessment (PGA) at 6 months, both analysed in each trial separately. ESSENTIAL-I and -II randomized 1854 subjects at 211 sites in 16 countries. In the combined trials, all-cause mortality and the composite, first co-primary endpoint did not differ between the two treatment groups [hazard ratio (HR) 0.97; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80-1.17; and HR 0.98; 95% CI 0.86-1.12, respectively, for enoximone vs. placebo]. The two other co-primary endpoints were analysed separately in the two ESSENTIAL trials, as prospectively designed in the protocol. The 6MWTD increased with enoximone, compared with placebo, in ESSENTIAL-I (P = 0.025, not reaching, however, the pre-specified criterion for statistical significance of P < 0.020), but not in ESSENTIAL-II. No difference in PGA was observed in either trial. CONCLUSION: Although low-dose enoximone appears to be safe in patients with advanced HF, major clinical outcomes are not improved.
|
|
| 7. |
- Bohm, M., et al.
(author)
-
Twenty-four-hour heart rate lowering with ivabradine in chronic heart failure: insights from the SHIFT Holter substudy
- 2015
-
In: European Journal of Heart Failure. - : Wiley. - 1388-9842. ; 17:5, s. 518-26
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- AIMS: Analysis of 24-h Holter recordings was a pre-specified substudy of SHIFT (Systolic Heart Failure Treatment with the If Inhibitor Ivabradine Trial) for exploring the heart rhythm safety of ivabradine and to determine effects of ivabradine on 24-h, daytime, and night-time heart rate (HR) compared with resting office HR. METHODS AND RESULTS: The 24-h Holter monitoring was performed at baseline and 8 months after randomization to ivabradine (n = 298) or matching placebo (n = 304) titrated maximally to 7.5 mg b.i.d. in patients with baseline HR >/=70 b.p.m. Patients received guideline-based optimized heart failure therapy including ACE inhibitors and/or ARBs in 93% and beta-blockers at maximally tolerated doses in 93%. After 8 months, HR over 24 h decreased by 9.5 +/- 10.0 b.p.m. with ivabradine, from 75.4 +/- 10.3 b.p.m. (P < 0.0001), and by 1.2 +/- 8.9 b.p.m. with placebo, from 74.8 +/- 9.7 b.p.m. (P < 0.0001 for difference vs. ivabradine). HR reduction with ivabradine was similar in resting office and in 24-h, awake, and asleep recordings, with beneficial effects on HR variability and no meaningful increases in supraventricular or ventricular arrhythmias. At 8 months, 21.3% on ivabradine vs. 8.5% on placebo had >/=1 episode of HR <40 b.p.m. (P < 0.0001). No episode of HR <30 b.p.m. was recorded; 3 (1.2%) patients had RR intervals >2.5 s on ivabradine vs. 4 (1.6%) patients on placebo. No RR intervals >3 s were identified in patients taking ivabradine. CONCLUSION: Ivabradine safely and significantly lowers HR and improves HR variability in patients with systolic heart failure, without inducing significant bradycardia, ventricular arrhythmias, or supraventricular arrhythmias.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Abrahamsson, Putte, 1965, et al.
(author)
-
Risk following hospitalization in stable chronic systolic heart failure
- 2013
-
In: European Journal of Heart Failure. - : Wiley. - 1388-9842 .- 1879-0844. ; 18:5, s. 885-91
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- AIMS: We explored the impact of being hospitalized due to worsening heart failure (WHF) or a myocardial infarction (MI) on subsequent mortality in a large contemporary data set of patients with stable chronic systolic heart failure (HF). METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 6558 patients with stable systolic HF, 6505 with analysable data, with an EF of
|
|
| 10. |
- Bohm, M., et al.
(author)
-
Influence of Cardiovascular and Noncardiovascular Co-morbidities on Outcomes and Treatment Effect of Heart Rate Reduction With Ivabradine in Stable Heart Failure (from the SHIFT Trial)
- 2015
-
In: The American journal of cardiology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0002-9149 .- 1879-1913. ; 116:12, s. 1890-7
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Incidence of chronic heart failure (HF) increases with age and cardiovascular (CV) morbidity. Co-morbidities increase hospitalization and mortality in HF, and non-CV co-morbidities may lead to preventable hospitalizations. We studied the impact of co-morbidities on mortality and morbidity in Systolic Heart Failure Treatment with the If Inhibitor Ivabradine Trial, and investigated whether the impact of ivabradine was affected by co-morbidities. We analyzed the Systolic Heart Failure Treatment with the If Inhibitor Ivabradine Trialpopulation, with moderate-to-severe HF and left ventricular dysfunction (in sinus rhythm with heart rate at rest >/=70 beats/min), according to co-morbidity: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus, anemia, stroke, impaired renal function, myocardial infarction, hypertension, and peripheral artery disease. Co-morbidity load was classed as 0, 1, 2, 3, 4+ or 1 to 2 co-morbidities, or 3+ co-morbidities. Co-morbidities were evenly distributed between the placebo and ivabradine groups. Patients with more co-morbidities were likely to be older, women, had more advanced HF, were less likely to be on beta blockers, with an even distribution on ivabradine 2.5, 5, or 7.5 mg bid and placebo at all co-morbidity loads. Number of co-morbidities was related to outcomes. Cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization events significantly increased (p <0.0001) with co-morbidity load, with the most events in patients with >3 co-morbidities for both, ivabradine and placebo. There was no interaction between co-morbidity load and the treatment effects of ivabradine. Hospitalization rate was lower at all co-morbidity loads for ivabradine. In conclusion, cardiac and noncardiac co-morbidities significantly affect CV outcomes, particularly if there are >3 co-morbidities. The effect of heart rate reduction with ivabradine is maintained at all co-morbidity loads.
|
|
