CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Congestive Heart Failure

Abstract

Recommended Article

Prdm16 Deficiency Leads to Age-Dependent Cardiac Hypertrophy, Adverse Remodeling, Mitochondrial Dysfunction, and Heart Failure 2021 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure SGLT2 Inhibitors in Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Meta-Analysis of the EMPEROR-Reduced and DAPA-HF Trials Fluid Volume Overload and Congestion in Heart Failure: Time to Reconsider Pathophysiology and How Volume Is Assessed Association of Abnormal Left Ventricular Functional Reserve With Outcome in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction 2019 ACC Expert Consensus Decision Pathway on Risk Assessment, Management, and Clinical Trajectory of Patients Hospitalized With Heart Failure A Report of the American College of Cardiology Solution Set Oversight Committee Stage B heart failure: management of asymptomatic left ventricular systolic dysfunction Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: from mechanisms to therapies

Clinical Trial2019 Feb 7;380(6):539-548.

JOURNAL:N Engl J Med. Article Link

Angiotensin-Neprilysin Inhibition in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure

Velazquez EJ, Morrow DA, DeVore AD et al.

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND -  Acute decompensated heart failure accounts for more than 1 million hospitalizations in the United States annually. Whether the initiation of sacubitril-valsartan therapy is safe and effective among patients who are hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure is unknown.


METHODS - We enrolled patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction who were hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure at 129 sites in the United States. After hemodynamic stabilization, patients were randomly assigned to receive sacubitril-valsartan (target dose, 97 mg of sacubitril with 103 mg of valsartan twice daily) or enalapril (target dose, 10 mg twice daily). The primary efficacy outcome was the time-averaged proportional change in the N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) concentration from baseline through weeks 4 and 8. Key safety outcomes were the rates of worsening renal function, hyperkalemia, symptomatic hypotension, and angioedema.


RESULTS -  Of the 881 patients who underwent randomization, 440 were assigned to receive sacubitril-valsartan and 441 to receive enalapril. The time-averaged reduction in the NT-proBNP concentration was significantly greater in the sacubitril-valsartan group than in the enalapril group; the ratio of the geometric mean of values obtained at weeks 4 and 8 to the baseline value was 0.53 in the sacubitril-valsartan group as compared with 0.75 in the enalapril group (percent change, -46.7% vs. -25.3%; ratio of change with sacubitril-valsartan vs. enalapril, 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63 to 0.81; P<0.001). The greater reduction in the NT-proBNP concentration with sacubitril-valsartan than with enalapril was evident as early as week 1 (ratio of change, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.85). The rates of worsening renal function, hyperkalemia, symptomatic hypotension, and angioedema did not differ significantly between the two groups.


CONCLUSIONS -  Among patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction who were hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure, the initiation of sacubitril-valsartan therapy led to a greater reduction in the NT-proBNP concentration than enalapril therapy. Rates of worsening renal function, hyperkalemia, symptomatic hypotension, and angioedema did not differ significantly between the two groups. (Funded by Novartis; PIONEER-HF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02554890 .).