R. Alharethi, R. A. Butschek, Kismet Rasmusson, B. Whisenant
{"title":"肌病性瓣膜病的协同作用","authors":"R. Alharethi, R. A. Butschek, Kismet Rasmusson, B. Whisenant","doi":"10.1136/heartjnl-2022-321214","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With recent advancements in the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) including the addition of angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitor, sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and transcatheter edgetoedge mitral valve repair (TEER), the treatment of patients with cardiomyopathy and secondary mitral regurgitation (SMR) has become increasingly complex and can lead to suboptimal utilisation of indicated therapies. Tanaka and colleagues have provided a realworld analysis of guidelinedirected medical therapy (GDMT) among HFREF patients with SMR and managed with TEER. Their findings reinforce the importance of engaging focused heart failure (HF) cardiologists and allied teams to optimise medical therapy before and after TEER. Consistent with the 2021 European Society of Cardiology guideline on HF management, the authors define GDMT as modulation of the renin–angiotensin–aldosterone and sympathetic nervous systems with triple therapy including renin–angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors, betablockers (BBs) and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) noting that SGLT2is were approved after study completion. Their results demonstrated the clinical benefits of maintaining triple therapy neuromodulation following TEER. They have thus provided a pragmatic and simple threshold of GDMT that will undoubtedly improve the care of patients with SMR undergoing TEER. Tanaka et al retrospectively divided patients with SMR and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <50% who underwent TEER into GDMT and nonGDMT cohorts. Local heart teams optimised medical therapy and decided when to perform TEER. As such, this is a realworld population of patients with SMR managed with TEER. GDMT was defined as patients who received triple therapy at the time of discharge with RAS inhibitors, BBs and MRAs of any doses. Nevertheless, among the GDMT cohort, only 21% of patients received target doses of BBs, and only 12% received target doses of RAS inhibitors. NonGDMT patients were prescribed optimal medical therapy per the local heart team consensus including BBs in 84% (16% with target doses), and RAS inhibitors in 60% (12% at target doses). While all GDMT patients were prescribed MRAs, only 22% of nonGDMT patients were prescribed MRAs. Among patients without GDMT, 42% had factors related to ineligibility (ie, systolic blood pressure <100 mm Hg, heart rate <60 bpm or estimated glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min/m). This underscores the difference between relative ineligibility to a medication and the intolerance to this medication with the inherent complexity of providing detailed reasons for intolerance of GDMT, which were not recorded in this study. We are not sure if the lack of triple therapy in the nonGDMT cohort and the less than target doses of medications in both cohorts represents the absolute maximally tolerated medical therapy. Twoyear mortality was compared between groups after calculating propensity scores and performing an inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis. Patients discharged with tripletherapy GDMT (BBs, RAS inhibitors and MRAs) had markedly lower incidence of mortality compared with those discharged without GDMT (19.8% vs 31.1%, p=0.011). Patients with GDMT similarly had a higher rate of left ventricular reverse remodelling 1 year after TEER compared with those without GDMT. As pointed out by the authors, this study must be interpreted within the limitations of a retrospective, observational study. While the authors attempted to correct for selection bias by using an IPTWadjusted approach, confounders may have impacted the outcomes. The ability to tolerate tripletherapy GDMT may convey a favourable prognosis. Patients discharged with tripletherapy GDMT were younger and had better renal function with less haemodialysis. Nevertheless, the obvious conclusion as suggested by the authors is that optimisation of medical therapy with a combination of RAS inhibitors, BBs and MRAs is crucial to improve clinical outcomes in patients undergoing TEER for SMR. The working definition of GDMT of triple neurohormonal inhibition with BBs, RAS inhibitors and MRAs serves as a minimal threshold when TEER may be considered and as a priority for discharge following TEER. The relatively low rate of target doses in both groups emphasises the difficulty in achieving targeted doses and the importance of involving a HF expert in the management of patients with HFrEF. Among patients in the Cardiovascular Outcomes Assessment of the MitraClip Percutaneous Therapy for Heart Failure Patients with Functional Mitral Regurgitation (COAPT) Trial, 8.65% of those randomised to TEER and GDMT started a new BB or increased their current BB dose by 100% compared with 3.8% randomised to GDMT alone (p=0.01) consistent with the frequent clinical observation that TEER increases SBP and facilitates enhanced medical therapy. Importantly, given no significant change of GDMT doses on followup after TEER, the Tanaka study redemonstrates the need for longitudinal care with continued, ongoing attempts to find the maximally tolerated dose of GDMT. These TEER findings mirror the results from several other accounts of underutilization of GDMT in patients with HFrEF. In 2018, the Change the Management of Patients with Heart Failure, CHAMPSHF registry collected rates of GDMT across community cardiology and primary care practices revealing a shocking underutilization of appropriate therapies in patients with HFrEF (less than 25% were on triple therapy as previously mentioned and only 1% were on target doses). Continued gaps in GDMT optimisation were again confirmed in the 2021 Care Optimization Through Patient and Hospital Engagement Clinical Trial for Heart Failure, CONNECTHF study revealing suboptimal GDMT rates, despite hospital and postdischarge quality improvement efforts. The implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization device study that found HF medical therapy to be under prescribed before and after ICD/cardiac resynchronisation device implantation, and patients with optimal medical therapy after rhythm device therapy to have increased survival and fewer HF hospitalisations. The recent HFrEF guideline codifies the term Improved LVEF referring to patients with previous HFrEF who now Cardiology, Intermountain Medical Center, Murray, Utah, USA","PeriodicalId":9311,"journal":{"name":"British Heart Journal","volume":"108 1","pages":"1670 - 1671"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The synergy of myopathic valvular disease\",\"authors\":\"R. Alharethi, R. A. Butschek, Kismet Rasmusson, B. Whisenant\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/heartjnl-2022-321214\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"With recent advancements in the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) including the addition of angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitor, sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and transcatheter edgetoedge mitral valve repair (TEER), the treatment of patients with cardiomyopathy and secondary mitral regurgitation (SMR) has become increasingly complex and can lead to suboptimal utilisation of indicated therapies. Tanaka and colleagues have provided a realworld analysis of guidelinedirected medical therapy (GDMT) among HFREF patients with SMR and managed with TEER. Their findings reinforce the importance of engaging focused heart failure (HF) cardiologists and allied teams to optimise medical therapy before and after TEER. Consistent with the 2021 European Society of Cardiology guideline on HF management, the authors define GDMT as modulation of the renin–angiotensin–aldosterone and sympathetic nervous systems with triple therapy including renin–angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors, betablockers (BBs) and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) noting that SGLT2is were approved after study completion. Their results demonstrated the clinical benefits of maintaining triple therapy neuromodulation following TEER. They have thus provided a pragmatic and simple threshold of GDMT that will undoubtedly improve the care of patients with SMR undergoing TEER. Tanaka et al retrospectively divided patients with SMR and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <50% who underwent TEER into GDMT and nonGDMT cohorts. Local heart teams optimised medical therapy and decided when to perform TEER. As such, this is a realworld population of patients with SMR managed with TEER. GDMT was defined as patients who received triple therapy at the time of discharge with RAS inhibitors, BBs and MRAs of any doses. Nevertheless, among the GDMT cohort, only 21% of patients received target doses of BBs, and only 12% received target doses of RAS inhibitors. NonGDMT patients were prescribed optimal medical therapy per the local heart team consensus including BBs in 84% (16% with target doses), and RAS inhibitors in 60% (12% at target doses). While all GDMT patients were prescribed MRAs, only 22% of nonGDMT patients were prescribed MRAs. Among patients without GDMT, 42% had factors related to ineligibility (ie, systolic blood pressure <100 mm Hg, heart rate <60 bpm or estimated glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min/m). This underscores the difference between relative ineligibility to a medication and the intolerance to this medication with the inherent complexity of providing detailed reasons for intolerance of GDMT, which were not recorded in this study. We are not sure if the lack of triple therapy in the nonGDMT cohort and the less than target doses of medications in both cohorts represents the absolute maximally tolerated medical therapy. Twoyear mortality was compared between groups after calculating propensity scores and performing an inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis. Patients discharged with tripletherapy GDMT (BBs, RAS inhibitors and MRAs) had markedly lower incidence of mortality compared with those discharged without GDMT (19.8% vs 31.1%, p=0.011). Patients with GDMT similarly had a higher rate of left ventricular reverse remodelling 1 year after TEER compared with those without GDMT. As pointed out by the authors, this study must be interpreted within the limitations of a retrospective, observational study. While the authors attempted to correct for selection bias by using an IPTWadjusted approach, confounders may have impacted the outcomes. The ability to tolerate tripletherapy GDMT may convey a favourable prognosis. Patients discharged with tripletherapy GDMT were younger and had better renal function with less haemodialysis. Nevertheless, the obvious conclusion as suggested by the authors is that optimisation of medical therapy with a combination of RAS inhibitors, BBs and MRAs is crucial to improve clinical outcomes in patients undergoing TEER for SMR. The working definition of GDMT of triple neurohormonal inhibition with BBs, RAS inhibitors and MRAs serves as a minimal threshold when TEER may be considered and as a priority for discharge following TEER. The relatively low rate of target doses in both groups emphasises the difficulty in achieving targeted doses and the importance of involving a HF expert in the management of patients with HFrEF. Among patients in the Cardiovascular Outcomes Assessment of the MitraClip Percutaneous Therapy for Heart Failure Patients with Functional Mitral Regurgitation (COAPT) Trial, 8.65% of those randomised to TEER and GDMT started a new BB or increased their current BB dose by 100% compared with 3.8% randomised to GDMT alone (p=0.01) consistent with the frequent clinical observation that TEER increases SBP and facilitates enhanced medical therapy. Importantly, given no significant change of GDMT doses on followup after TEER, the Tanaka study redemonstrates the need for longitudinal care with continued, ongoing attempts to find the maximally tolerated dose of GDMT. These TEER findings mirror the results from several other accounts of underutilization of GDMT in patients with HFrEF. In 2018, the Change the Management of Patients with Heart Failure, CHAMPSHF registry collected rates of GDMT across community cardiology and primary care practices revealing a shocking underutilization of appropriate therapies in patients with HFrEF (less than 25% were on triple therapy as previously mentioned and only 1% were on target doses). Continued gaps in GDMT optimisation were again confirmed in the 2021 Care Optimization Through Patient and Hospital Engagement Clinical Trial for Heart Failure, CONNECTHF study revealing suboptimal GDMT rates, despite hospital and postdischarge quality improvement efforts. The implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization device study that found HF medical therapy to be under prescribed before and after ICD/cardiac resynchronisation device implantation, and patients with optimal medical therapy after rhythm device therapy to have increased survival and fewer HF hospitalisations. The recent HFrEF guideline codifies the term Improved LVEF referring to patients with previous HFrEF who now Cardiology, Intermountain Medical Center, Murray, Utah, USA\",\"PeriodicalId\":9311,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Heart Journal\",\"volume\":\"108 1\",\"pages\":\"1670 - 1671\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Heart Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2022-321214\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Heart Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2022-321214","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
随着最近在治疗心力衰竭伴射血分数降低(HFrEF)方面的进展,包括血管紧张素受体- neprilysin抑制剂、钠-葡萄糖共转运蛋白2抑制剂(SGLT2i)和经导管边缘二尖瓣修复(TEER),心肌病和继发性二尖瓣反流(SMR)患者的治疗变得越来越复杂,并可能导致适应症治疗的次优利用。Tanaka及其同事对伴有SMR的HFREF患者的指导药物治疗(GDMT)进行了现实分析,并采用TEER进行管理。他们的研究结果强调了专注心力衰竭(HF)心脏病专家和相关团队在TEER前后优化药物治疗的重要性。与2021年欧洲心脏病学会心衰管理指南一致,作者将GDMT定义为通过包括肾素血管紧张素系统(RAS)抑制剂、β受体阻滞剂(BBs)和矿皮质激素受体拮抗剂(MRAs)在内的三联疗法调节肾素血管紧张素醛酮和交感神经系统,并指出SGLT2is在研究完成后获得批准。他们的结果证明了TEER后维持三联疗法神经调节的临床益处。因此,他们提供了一个实用而简单的GDMT阈值,这无疑将改善SMR患者接受TEER的护理。Tanaka等回顾性地将接受TEER的SMR和左室射血分数(LVEF) <50%的患者分为GDMT和非ongdmt两组。当地心脏团队优化了医疗治疗并决定了何时进行TEER。因此,这是一个用TEER治疗SMR患者的真实世界人群。GDMT被定义为在出院时接受任何剂量的RAS抑制剂、BBs和mra三联治疗的患者。然而,在GDMT队列中,只有21%的患者接受了目标剂量的BBs,只有12%的患者接受了目标剂量的RAS抑制剂。根据当地心脏团队共识,NonGDMT患者被处方最佳药物治疗,包括84%的bb(16%的目标剂量)和60%的RAS抑制剂(12%的目标剂量)。虽然所有GDMT患者都开了mra,但只有22%的非ongdmt患者开了mra。在没有GDMT的患者中,42%存在与不合格相关的因素(即收缩压<100 mm Hg,心率<60 bpm或估计肾小球滤过率<30 mL/min/m)。这强调了一种药物的相对不适宜性和对这种药物的不耐受之间的差异,提供GDMT不耐受的详细原因固有的复杂性,这在本研究中没有记录。我们不确定在nonGDMT队列中缺乏三联治疗以及两个队列中低于目标剂量的药物是否代表绝对最大耐受的药物治疗。在计算倾向得分并进行治疗加权逆概率(IPTW)分析后,比较两组之间的两年死亡率。三联治疗GDMT (BBs、RAS抑制剂和MRAs)出院的患者死亡率明显低于未治疗GDMT出院的患者(19.8% vs 31.1%, p=0.011)。与没有GDMT的患者相比,患有GDMT的患者在TEER后1年的左心室反向重构率同样更高。正如作者所指出的,这项研究必须在回顾性观察性研究的限制范围内进行解释。虽然作者试图通过使用IPTWadjusted方法来纠正选择偏差,但混杂因素可能会影响结果。耐受三联治疗GDMT的能力可能预示着良好的预后。三联治疗GDMT出院的患者年龄较小,肾功能较好,血液透析较少。然而,作者提出的明显结论是,优化RAS抑制剂、BBs和MRAs联合药物治疗对于改善因SMR接受TEER治疗的患者的临床结果至关重要。GDMT的工作定义为BBs、RAS抑制剂和MRAs的三重神经激素抑制,可作为考虑TEER的最低阈值,并作为TEER后出院的优先考虑。两组患者的靶剂量率相对较低,这强调了实现靶剂量的难度,以及让心衰专家参与HFrEF患者管理的重要性。在MitraClip经皮治疗心力衰竭合并功能性二尖瓣反流(COAPT)试验的患者心血管结局评估中,8.65%随机分组至TEER和GDMT的患者开始新的BB或将当前BB剂量增加100%,而仅随机分组至GDMT的患者为3.8% (p=0.01),这与TEER增加收缩压并促进强化药物治疗的常见临床观察一致。 重要的是,考虑到TEER后随访中GDMT剂量没有显著变化,Tanaka研究再次证明了纵向护理的必要性,并持续不断地尝试寻找最大耐受剂量的GDMT。这些TEER发现反映了其他几个关于HFrEF患者GDMT利用不足的研究结果。2018年,改变心力衰竭患者的管理,CHAMPSHF登记收集了社区心脏病学和初级保健实践中的GDMT率,揭示了HFrEF患者适当治疗的利用率惊人不足(如前所述,不到25%的患者接受了三联治疗,只有1%的患者接受了目标剂量)。在2021年通过患者和医院参与心力衰竭临床试验的护理优化中,CONNECTHF研究再次证实了GDMT优化方面的持续差距,该研究显示,尽管医院和出院后质量得到了改善,但GDMT率仍未达到最佳水平。植入式心律转复除颤器(ICD)和心脏再同步装置研究发现,在植入ICD/心脏再同步装置之前和之后,心衰药物治疗都是按照规定进行的,在心律装置治疗后,最佳药物治疗的患者生存率提高,心衰住院率降低。最近的HFrEF指南将“改进型LVEF”一词编入了美国犹他州默里市山间医学中心心脏病科的既往HFrEF患者
With recent advancements in the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) including the addition of angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitor, sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and transcatheter edgetoedge mitral valve repair (TEER), the treatment of patients with cardiomyopathy and secondary mitral regurgitation (SMR) has become increasingly complex and can lead to suboptimal utilisation of indicated therapies. Tanaka and colleagues have provided a realworld analysis of guidelinedirected medical therapy (GDMT) among HFREF patients with SMR and managed with TEER. Their findings reinforce the importance of engaging focused heart failure (HF) cardiologists and allied teams to optimise medical therapy before and after TEER. Consistent with the 2021 European Society of Cardiology guideline on HF management, the authors define GDMT as modulation of the renin–angiotensin–aldosterone and sympathetic nervous systems with triple therapy including renin–angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors, betablockers (BBs) and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) noting that SGLT2is were approved after study completion. Their results demonstrated the clinical benefits of maintaining triple therapy neuromodulation following TEER. They have thus provided a pragmatic and simple threshold of GDMT that will undoubtedly improve the care of patients with SMR undergoing TEER. Tanaka et al retrospectively divided patients with SMR and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <50% who underwent TEER into GDMT and nonGDMT cohorts. Local heart teams optimised medical therapy and decided when to perform TEER. As such, this is a realworld population of patients with SMR managed with TEER. GDMT was defined as patients who received triple therapy at the time of discharge with RAS inhibitors, BBs and MRAs of any doses. Nevertheless, among the GDMT cohort, only 21% of patients received target doses of BBs, and only 12% received target doses of RAS inhibitors. NonGDMT patients were prescribed optimal medical therapy per the local heart team consensus including BBs in 84% (16% with target doses), and RAS inhibitors in 60% (12% at target doses). While all GDMT patients were prescribed MRAs, only 22% of nonGDMT patients were prescribed MRAs. Among patients without GDMT, 42% had factors related to ineligibility (ie, systolic blood pressure <100 mm Hg, heart rate <60 bpm or estimated glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min/m). This underscores the difference between relative ineligibility to a medication and the intolerance to this medication with the inherent complexity of providing detailed reasons for intolerance of GDMT, which were not recorded in this study. We are not sure if the lack of triple therapy in the nonGDMT cohort and the less than target doses of medications in both cohorts represents the absolute maximally tolerated medical therapy. Twoyear mortality was compared between groups after calculating propensity scores and performing an inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis. Patients discharged with tripletherapy GDMT (BBs, RAS inhibitors and MRAs) had markedly lower incidence of mortality compared with those discharged without GDMT (19.8% vs 31.1%, p=0.011). Patients with GDMT similarly had a higher rate of left ventricular reverse remodelling 1 year after TEER compared with those without GDMT. As pointed out by the authors, this study must be interpreted within the limitations of a retrospective, observational study. While the authors attempted to correct for selection bias by using an IPTWadjusted approach, confounders may have impacted the outcomes. The ability to tolerate tripletherapy GDMT may convey a favourable prognosis. Patients discharged with tripletherapy GDMT were younger and had better renal function with less haemodialysis. Nevertheless, the obvious conclusion as suggested by the authors is that optimisation of medical therapy with a combination of RAS inhibitors, BBs and MRAs is crucial to improve clinical outcomes in patients undergoing TEER for SMR. The working definition of GDMT of triple neurohormonal inhibition with BBs, RAS inhibitors and MRAs serves as a minimal threshold when TEER may be considered and as a priority for discharge following TEER. The relatively low rate of target doses in both groups emphasises the difficulty in achieving targeted doses and the importance of involving a HF expert in the management of patients with HFrEF. Among patients in the Cardiovascular Outcomes Assessment of the MitraClip Percutaneous Therapy for Heart Failure Patients with Functional Mitral Regurgitation (COAPT) Trial, 8.65% of those randomised to TEER and GDMT started a new BB or increased their current BB dose by 100% compared with 3.8% randomised to GDMT alone (p=0.01) consistent with the frequent clinical observation that TEER increases SBP and facilitates enhanced medical therapy. Importantly, given no significant change of GDMT doses on followup after TEER, the Tanaka study redemonstrates the need for longitudinal care with continued, ongoing attempts to find the maximally tolerated dose of GDMT. These TEER findings mirror the results from several other accounts of underutilization of GDMT in patients with HFrEF. In 2018, the Change the Management of Patients with Heart Failure, CHAMPSHF registry collected rates of GDMT across community cardiology and primary care practices revealing a shocking underutilization of appropriate therapies in patients with HFrEF (less than 25% were on triple therapy as previously mentioned and only 1% were on target doses). Continued gaps in GDMT optimisation were again confirmed in the 2021 Care Optimization Through Patient and Hospital Engagement Clinical Trial for Heart Failure, CONNECTHF study revealing suboptimal GDMT rates, despite hospital and postdischarge quality improvement efforts. The implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization device study that found HF medical therapy to be under prescribed before and after ICD/cardiac resynchronisation device implantation, and patients with optimal medical therapy after rhythm device therapy to have increased survival and fewer HF hospitalisations. The recent HFrEF guideline codifies the term Improved LVEF referring to patients with previous HFrEF who now Cardiology, Intermountain Medical Center, Murray, Utah, USA