Progress in cardiovascular diseases最新文献

This comprehensive review highlights the significant advancements in Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD) therapy, emphasizing its evolution from the early pulsatile flow systems to the cutting-edge continuous-flow devices, particularly the HeartMate 3 (HM3) LVAD. These advancements have notably improved survival rates, reduced complications, and enhanced the quality of life (QoL) for patients with advanced heart failure. The dual role of LVADs, as a bridge-to-transplantation and destination therapy is discussed, highlighting the changing trends and policies in their application. The marked reduction in hemocompatibility-related adverse events (HRAE) with the HM3 LVAD, compared to previous models signifies ongoing progress in the field. Challenges such as managing major infections are discussed, including innovative solutions like energy transfer systems aimed at eliminating external drivelines. It explores various LVAD-associated complications, including HRAE, infections, hemodynamic-related adverse events, and cardiac arrhythmias, and underscores emerging strategies for predicting post-implantation outcomes, fostering a more individualized patient care approach. Tools such as the HM3 risk score are introduced for predicting survival based on pre-implant factors, along with advanced imaging techniques for improved complication prediction. Additionally, the review highlights potential new technologies and therapies in LVAD management, such as hemodynamic ramp tests for optimal speed adjustment and advanced remote monitoring systems. The goal is to automate LVAD speed adjustments based on real-time hemodynamic measurements, indicating a shift towards more effective, patient-centered therapy. The review concludes optimistically that ongoing research and potential future innovations hold the promise of revolutionizing heart failure management, paving the way for more effective and personalized treatment modalities.

The treatment of heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has substantially developed over the past decades. More than ever before, the application of appropriate evidence-based medical therapy for HFrEF is associated with remarkable improvements in survival, noteworthy increases in quality of life, and a marked reduction in symptomatic HF sufficient to warrant hospitalization. These enhanced clinical outcomes are driven by the “four pillars” of HF therapy: 1) evidence-based beta blockers, 2) Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors /angiotensin II receptor blockers or angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, 3) mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and most recently, 4) sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors. Despite robust evidence from well-conducted randomized clinical trials, guideline-directed medical therapies with established cardiovascular benefits remain significantly underutilized in clinical practice, particularly among under-represented minority populations. This phenomenon has led to class 1 level recommendations from the 2022 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology/Heart Failure Society of America Guidelines to address HF disparities among vulnerable populations as follows. In this article, we highlight the difference between health equality and health equity and discuss the need to address equity in the treatment of heart failure, ensuring that the impressive progress made in the treatment of HFrEF is equally beneficial to all individuals. We discuss strategies to reduce and ultimately eliminate disparities in the determinants of health that particularly affect marginalized groups, including the socioeconomic determinants and racism as a threat to public health. Finally, we discuss and propose a combination of the four pillars of ethics with the four pillars of GDMT to optimize and personalize treatment of all patients with HFrEF, to achieve true equity in the treatment of HF.

With the rising incidence of heart failure (HF) and increasing burden of morbidity, mortality, and healthcare expenditures, primary prevention of HF targeting individuals in at-risk HF (Stage A) and pre-HF (Stage B) Stages has become increasingly important with the goal to decrease progression to symptomatic (Stage C) HF. Identification of risk based on traditional risk factors (e.g., cardiovascular health which can be assessed with the American Heart Association's Life's Essential 8 framework), adverse social determinants of health, inherited risk of cardiomyopathies, and identification of risk-enhancing factors, such as patients with viral disease, exposure to cardiotoxic chemotherapy, and history of adverse pregnancy outcomes should be the first step in evaluation for HF risk. Next, use of guideline-endorsed risk prediction tools such as Pooled Cohort Equations to Prevent Heart Failure provide quantification of absolute risk of HF based in traditional risk factors. Risk reduction through counseling on traditional risk factors is a core focus of implementation of prevention and may include the use of novel therapeutics that target specific pathways to reduce risk of HF, such as mineralocorticoid receptor agonists (e.g., fineronone), angiotensin-receptor/neprolysin inhibitors, and sodium glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors. These interventions may be limited in at-risk populations who experience adverse social determinants and/or individuals who reside in rural areas. Thus, strategies like telemedicine may improve access to preventive care. Gaps in the current knowledge base for risk-based prevention of HF are highlighted to outline future research that may target approaches for risk assessment and risk-based prevention with the use of artificial intelligence, genomics-enhanced strategies, and pragmatic trials to develop a guideline-directed medical therapy approach to reduce risk among individuals with Stage A and Stage B HF.

Despite robust scientific evidence and strong guideline recommendations, there remain significant gaps in initiation and dose titration of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for heart failure (HF) among eligible patients. Reasons surrounding these gaps are multifactorial, and largely attributed to patient, healthcare professionals, and institutional challenges. Concurrently, HF remains a predominant cause of mortality and hospitalization, emphasizing the critical need for improved delivery of therapy to patients in routine clinical practice. To optimize GDMT, various implementation strategies have emerged in the recent decade such as in-hospital rapid initiation of GDMT, improving patient adherence, addressing clinical inertia, improving affordability, engagement in quality improvement registries, multidisciplinary clinics, and EHR-integrated interventions. This review highlights the current use and barriers to optimal utilization of GDMT, and proposes novel strategies aimed at improving GDMT in HF.

Transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy (ATTR-CM) is an underrecognized cause of heart failure (HF). ATTR-CM can lead to a number of cardiovascular manifestations including HF, rhythm disturbances, and valvular disease that ultimately limit quality of life and prognosis. Due to advances in diagnostic modalities and therapeutic options, the prevalence of ATTR-CM is rising. There are several classes of medications under active investigation, though most therapies are most efficacious if instituted early on in the disease course. As such, early clinical recognition and prompt diagnosis are crucial to improving disease related outcomes. In this review, we highlight clinical manifestations of ATTR-CM as well as contemporary diagnostic and treatment approaches to the disease.

Heart failure (HF) is a common disease with increasing prevalence around the world. There is high morbidity and mortality associated with poorly controlled HF along with increasing costs and strain on healthcare systems due to a high rate of rehospitalization and resource utilization. Despite the establishment of clear evidence-based guideline directed medical therapies (GDMT) proven to improve HF morbidity and mortality, there remains significant clinical inertia to optimizing HF patients on GDMT. Only a minority of HF patients are prescribed on all four classes of GDMT. To bridge the gap between the vulnerable population of HF patients and lifesaving GDMT, HF implementation is of increasing importance. HF implementation involves strategies and techniques to improve GDMT optimization along with other modalities to improve HF management. HF implementation meets patients where they are, including at the time of acute decompensation in the inpatient setting, at the vulnerable discharge stage, and at the chronic management stage in the outpatient setting. Inpatient HF implementation strategies include protocolized rapid titration of GDMT, site-level audit-and-feedback, virtual GDMT optimization teams, and electronic health record notifications and alerts. Discharge HF implementation strategies include education at patient and provider levels, discharge summaries, and HF transitional programs. Outpatient HF implementation strategies include digital innovations such as electronic health record utilization and mobile applications, population level strategies such as registries and clinical dashboards), changes in HF team structure and member roles, remote monitoring with implanted devices and telemonitoring, and hospital at home care model. With a growing population of HF patients, there is an increasing need for novel and creative HF implementation and monitoring methods.

Obesity is a major public health challenge worldwide. It is costly, predisposes to many cardiovascular (CV) diseases (CVD), is increasing at an alarming rate, and disproportionately affects people of low-socioeconomic status. It has a myriad of deleterious effects on the body, particularly on the CV system. Obesity is a major risk factor for heart failure (HF) and highly prevalent in this population, particularly in those with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), to the extent that an obesity HFpEF phenotype has been proposed in the literature. However, once HF is developed, an obesity paradox exists where those with obesity have better short- and mid-term survival than normal or underweight individuals, despite a greater risk for hospitalizations. It may be argued that excess energy reserve, younger patient population, higher tolerability of HF therapy and better nutritional status may account for at least part of the obesity paradox on survival. Furthermore, body mass index (BMI) may not be an accurate measure of body composition, especially in HF, where there is an excess volume status. BMI also fails to delineate fat-free mass and its components, which is a better predictor of functional capacity and cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF), which particularly is increasingly being recognized as a risk modifier in both healthy individuals and in persons with comorbidities, particularly in HF. Notably, when CRF is accounted for, the obesity paradox disappears, suggesting that improving CRF might represent a therapeutic target with greater importance than changes in body weight in the setting of HF.

In this narrative review, we discuss the current trends in obesity, the causal link between obesity and HF, an update on the obesity paradox, and a description of the major flaws of BMI in this population. We also present an overview of the latest in HF therapy, weight loss, CRF, and the application of these therapeutic approaches in patients with HF and concomitant obesity.