Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology and Therapeutics最新文献

Aims: This study aimed to assess the safety of electric cardioversion in the absence of anesthetists assistance. We also evaluated the efficacy and safety of this procedure in older adults (≥80 years) compared to younger populations. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the data of patients who underwent electric cardioversion at our cardiology department. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to age: ≥ 80 years and <80 years old. Results: The study included 218 participants, 73 were aged 80 years or more (mean age: 84.8 years), and 145 were younger than 80 years (mean age: 66.7 years). Electric cardioversion was effective in 97.3% of older patients and 96.5% of younger patients (P = 1.00). No thromboembolic complications were observed in either of the groups. Asystole >5 s occurred immediately after shock in 4.1% of older and 2.1% of younger patients (P = .405). Propofol was used as a sedative, with a mean dose of 0.83 mg/kg versus 0.93 mg/kg, in older and younger patients, respectively. Intubation, medical intervention, or other advanced resuscitation techniques were not required. During hospitalization, arrhythmia recurred in 9.6% and 12.4% of the older and younger patients, respectively (P = .537). Conclusions: Electrical cardioversion is an effective and safe procedure regardless of patient age. Sedation with propofol administered by cardiologists was safe. Adverse events were not considered serious or reversible.

Background: Dofetilide and sotalol are potassium channel antagonists that require inpatient QTc monitoring during initiation, due to increased risk of fatal arrhythmias. Elderly patients are especially subject to an increased risk of fatal arrhythmias due to polypharmacy, comorbidities, and physiologic cardiac changes with aging. This study will describe the tolerability and risk factors associated with the initiation of sotalol or dofetilide in patients ≥80 years of age. Methodology: This is a multicenter, retrospective, descriptive study of patients ≥80 years old who were initiated on either dofetilide or sotalol between May 8, 2018 and July 31, 2021 at institutions within the Mayo Clinic Health System. The percentage of patients who received nonpackage insert recommended doses was identified. Incidence of and reasons for dose reductions or discontinuations due to safety-related events or clinical concerns during the initial loading period were collected. Results: The final analysis included 104 patients. The majority of patients (75%) received nonstandard initial doses of dofetilide or sotalol based on baseline estimated creatinine clearance or QTc. Overall, 39% (N = 41) of patients experienced a dose reduction or discontinuation due to a safety-related event or concern. Patients who received nonstandard initial doses of dofetilide or sotalol had 4.7 times greater odds of experiencing a safety-related event requiring dose reduction or discontinuation. Conclusion: Following package insert dosing in elderly patients increases safety and tolerability relative to more aggressive dosing of dofetilide or sotalol.

Background and Objectives: The efficacy and safety of a lower target dose of sacubitril/valsartan (angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor [ARNI]) for treating heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in Chinese patients with moderate-to-severe chronic kidney disease (CKD) remain unknown. We performed a retrospective study to compare the efficacy of ARNI with that of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in patients with HFrEF and moderate-to-severe CKD. Methods: This retrospective study included 129 patients. An inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis was performed to compare the baseline characteristics and outcomes between the 2 groups. The incidence of death due to cardiovascular disease, rehospitalization due to heart failure after treatment, and improvement in cardiac function symptoms (New York Heart Association [NYHA]) were assessed after 12 months. Improvements of ejection fraction (EF), N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) level, left ventricular end-systolic diameter (LVESD), and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) were compared. Results: Compared with the ACEI/ARB group, the ARNI group, with 90.77% (59/65) in the lower target dose group, showed a lower rate of death due to cardiovascular disease (6.6% vs 0.9% after IPTW) and a lower incidence of rehospitalization (46.5% vs 30.4% after IPTW). NYHA class, estimated glomerular filtration rate, EF, NT-ProBNP levels, LVEDD, and LVESD improved in the ARNI group. None of the patients withdrew from treatment because of adverse drug reactions. Conclusion: Our study showed that ARNI resulted in a greater improvement in heart failure than ACEIs/ARBs in patients with HFrEF and moderate-to-severe CKD.

Purpose: This study was to investigate the association between the use of Sodium-glucose Cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) or angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI; ie, Sacubitril + valsartan, Product name ENTRESTO) and the risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in patients with coexisting diabetes and heart failure. Specifically, the study compared outcomes between patients using SGLT2i or valsartan + sacubitril and those not using these medications.

Methods: This study utilized data from the National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD) from 2017 to 2018. The case group consisted of 8691 patients with coexisting diabetes and heart failure who did not use SGLT2i or Entresto, while the control group consisted of 8691 patients with coexisting diabetes and heart failure who used SGLT2i or Entresto. The primary outcome was ASCVD, including a composite of cardiovascular death and hospitalization for worsening heart failure. Secondary outcomes included all-cause death, cause of cardiovascular death, and recurrence of heart failure, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke (including ischemic stroke and hemorrhagic stroke) and new renal replacement therapy.

Results: The study found that the use of SGLT2 inhibitors or ARNI was associated with a lower risk of ASCVD in patients with coexisting diabetes and heart failure.

Conclusion: The study suggests that the use of SGLT2 inhibitors, alone or in combination with Entresto, may be effective in reducing the risk of ASCVD and its associated adverse outcomes in patients with diabetes and heart failure. This finding has important implications for the management of these conditions.

Introduction: Sodium-glucose cotransporter- 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have become a cornerstone in heart failure (HF), Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and cardiovascular disease (CVD) management. In the current retrospective study, we aimed to assess efficacy and safety of SGLT2 inhibitors early following acute myocardial infarction (AMI).

Methods: Patients with T2DM hospitalized for AMI in 2017-2020 were divided according to SGLT2 inhibitors therapy status on discharge (with vs without therapy). Primary outcome was defined as a composite of hospitalizations for HF, recurrent AMI, and cerebrovascular accident (CVA). Secondary outcomes included hospitalizations for any cause, total cumulative number of hospitalizations, and all-cause mortality.

Results: A total of 69 patients (mean age 59.2 ± 8.2 years) with AMI discharged with SGLT2 inhibitors were compared to 253 patients (mean age 62.5 ± 9.8) with no SGLT2 inhibitors. During the first year post-AMI, 4 (5.8%) patients in the treatment group and 16 (6.3%) in the control group were hospitalized for CV events (p = 1.0). Patients in the SGLT2 inhibitors group had lower rates of hospitalization for any cause (31.9% vs 47.8%, P = 0.02), with no change in mortality (0% vs 3.6%, P = 0.21). After multivariate regression analysis, only female gender was associated with increased risk for readmission, mainly due to urinary tract infections. No events of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) or limb amputation were reported.

Conclusions: We found that early initiation of SGLT2 inhibitors in T2DM patients following AMI is safe and decreases the risk of hospitalization for any cause.

Acute heart failure, advanced cardiac failure, cardiac surgery, and sepsis are conditions that require simultaneous treatment to stimulate contractility and/or reduce systemic vascular resistance, with levosimendan and milrinone being treatment options. This research's aim is to review the current indications and evidence for these medications across various scenarios. Evidence suggests that levosimendan is a non-inferior alternative to dobutamine and superior to milrinone in treating low cardiac output syndrome following cardiac surgery. In cases of septic shock, levosimendan has been linked to lower mortality rates compared to placebo, while milrinone's efficacy remains inconclusive. Furthermore, postoperative patients undergoing correction for congenital heart disease have shown reduced mechanical ventilation time and intensive care unit stays when treated with levosimendan, although differences exist between the populations assigned to each intervention. In conclusion, levosimendan, compared to milrinone, appears to offer better hemodynamic favorability in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. However, additional research is necessary to further understand its impact on hemodynamic outcomes, mortality, intensive care unit, and hospital stays in patients with cardiogenic shock of both ischemic and non-ischemic etiologies, as well as septic shock.

Purpose: The molecular etiology of atrial fibrillation (AF) and its treatment are poorly understood. AF involves both electrical and structural features. Vericiguat can ameliorate cardiac remodeling in heart failure. The effects of vericiguat on AF, however, are unclear. Here, the actions of vericiguat on atrial structural and electrical remodeling in AF and its possible mechanisms were investigated. Methods and Results: Thirty-six rabbits were randomly allocated to four groups, namely, sham, RAP (pacing with 600 beats/min over three weeks), vericiguat-treated (three weeks' pacing plus daily oral dose of 1.5 mg/kg of vericiguat), and vericiguat-treated only. HL-1 cells received rapid pacing with or without vericiguat. Parameters including electrophysiology, echocardiography, histology, Ca²⁺ levels, and I_CaL density, as well as levels of TRPC6, CaN, NFAT4, p-NFAT4, Cav1.2, collagen I, collagen III, and ST2 were measured. Significant changes of above proteins expression level, circulating biochemical indices, Ca²⁺ concentrations, and I_CaL density in both animals and cell models, these effects were significantly restored by vericiguat. Vericiguat also reversed the enlarged atrium and significantly reduced myocardial fibrosis, together with preventing reduced atrial effective refractory periods (AERPs) and AF induction rate. Conclusion: Vericiguat thus ameliorated AF-associated structural and electrical remodeling. These findings suggest the potential of vericiguat for treating AF.

The dawn of cardioprotection by infarct size reduction originated from the idea to favourably alter the oxygen demand-supply balance of the ischaemic/infarcting myocardium by reducing the contractile determinants of its oxygen consumption. This idea is probably not correct, since the ischaemic/infarcting myocardium does not contract anyway. None of the successful initial preclinical attempts of infarct size reduction translated into clinical practice, except for timely reperfusion which has become and still is the backbone of all clinical infarct therapy up today. The idea of cardioprotection gained momentum again with the recognition of ischaemic conditioning, and a myriad of preclinical studies have identified molecules and mechanisms of such self-defence mechanism. Although there are positive clinical proof-of-concept studies, ischaemic conditioning strategies and drugs related to its signal transduction have not translated into clinical practice. We are currently trying to understand the obstacles to translation from successful preclinical studies on cardioprotection to clinical practice, but are also waiting for an innovative mechanistic breakthrough.

Introduction: Ventricular remodeling is a mal-adaptive process. Both angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and sacubitril/valsartan have been shown to reverse remodeling in mostly uncontrolled observational studies. There is a lack of head-to-head studies. Methods: This cohort study compares the remodeling effects of angiotensin receptor blockers combined with a neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) and perindopril in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) patients between January 2017 and December 2020. Inclusion criteria: (i) age > 18 years, (ii) recent diagnosis of de-novo HFrEF (EF < 40%), (iii) baseline echocardiography performed not more than 2 months prior to treatment onset, and (iv) follow-up echocardiography performed not earlier than 6 months and not later than 18 months posttreatment onset. No prior treatment with renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors was permitted in the ARNI group. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV), and left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) were analyzed. A two-way repeated measure ANOVA (for normally distributed) and generalized estimating equation test for nonnormally distributed interval dependent variables. Mean comparison between and within groups was performed using the Bonferroni test. Results: Following an average treatment period of 9 months, LVEF improved from 24.9% to 36.4% for ARNI and from 28.7% to 40.5% for perindopril, increments of 11.5% and 11.8% resp. (Bonferroni test [P ≤ .05]). LVEDV was reduced by 8.4 mL and 3.2 mL, and LVESV by 17.9 mL and 10.8 mL for ARNI and perindopril resp. Only the reduction of LVESV for ARNI was statistically significant (P = .007). Conclusion: Both ARNI and perindopril yielded a significant improvement in the LVEF within 9 months. The remodeling effect of ARNI seems stronger because of the greater improvements in left ventricular volumes.