Modern heart failure treatment is superior to conventional treatment across the left ventricular ejection spectrum: real-life data from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry 2013-2020.

IF 3.8 2区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Clinical Research in Cardiology Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-26 DOI:10.1007/s00392-024-02498-z
Patric Karlström, Aldina Pivodic, Ulf Dahlström, Michael Fu
{"title":"Modern heart failure treatment is superior to conventional treatment across the left ventricular ejection spectrum: real-life data from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry 2013-2020.","authors":"Patric Karlström, Aldina Pivodic, Ulf Dahlström, Michael Fu","doi":"10.1007/s00392-024-02498-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study is aimed to compare the effectiveness of modern therapy including angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) with conventional heart failure treatment in the real world.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Since ARNI and SGLT2i were introduced to treat heart failure (HF), its therapeutic regimen has modernized from previous treatment with beta-blocker (BB) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi)/angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) with mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) as added-on in HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, a comparison between conventional and modern treatment strategies with drugs in combination has not been performed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This observational study (2013-2020), using the Swedish HF Registry, involved 20,849 HF patients. Patients received either conventional (BB, ACEi/ARB, with/without MRA, n = 20,140) or modern (BB, ACEi/ARB, MRA, SGLT2i or BB, ARNI, MRA with/without SGLT2i, n = 709) treatment at the index visit. The endpoints were all-cause and cardiovascular (CV) mortality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Modern HF therapy was associated with a significant 28% reduction in all-cause mortality (adjusted HR [aHR], 0.72 (0.54-0.96); p = 0.024) and a significant 62% reduction in CV mortality (aHR, 0.38 (0.21-0.68); p = 0.0013) compared to conventional HF treatment. Similar results emerged in a sensitivity analysis using propensity score matching. The interaction analyses did not reveal any trends for EF (< 40% and ≥ 40%), sex, age (< 70 and ≥ 70 years), eGFR (< 60 and ≥ 60 ml/min/1.73 m<sup>2</sup>), and etiology of HF subgroups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this nationwide study, modern HF therapy was associated with significantly reduced all-cause and CV mortality, regardless of EF, sex, age, eGFR, and etiology of HF.</p>","PeriodicalId":10474,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Research in Cardiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11371852/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Research in Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00392-024-02498-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: This study is aimed to compare the effectiveness of modern therapy including angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) with conventional heart failure treatment in the real world.

Background: Since ARNI and SGLT2i were introduced to treat heart failure (HF), its therapeutic regimen has modernized from previous treatment with beta-blocker (BB) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi)/angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) with mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) as added-on in HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, a comparison between conventional and modern treatment strategies with drugs in combination has not been performed.

Methods: This observational study (2013-2020), using the Swedish HF Registry, involved 20,849 HF patients. Patients received either conventional (BB, ACEi/ARB, with/without MRA, n = 20,140) or modern (BB, ACEi/ARB, MRA, SGLT2i or BB, ARNI, MRA with/without SGLT2i, n = 709) treatment at the index visit. The endpoints were all-cause and cardiovascular (CV) mortality.

Results: Modern HF therapy was associated with a significant 28% reduction in all-cause mortality (adjusted HR [aHR], 0.72 (0.54-0.96); p = 0.024) and a significant 62% reduction in CV mortality (aHR, 0.38 (0.21-0.68); p = 0.0013) compared to conventional HF treatment. Similar results emerged in a sensitivity analysis using propensity score matching. The interaction analyses did not reveal any trends for EF (< 40% and ≥ 40%), sex, age (< 70 and ≥ 70 years), eGFR (< 60 and ≥ 60 ml/min/1.73 m2), and etiology of HF subgroups.

Conclusion: In this nationwide study, modern HF therapy was associated with significantly reduced all-cause and CV mortality, regardless of EF, sex, age, eGFR, and etiology of HF.

Abstract Image

现代心力衰竭治疗在左心室射血频谱方面优于传统治疗:瑞典心力衰竭登记处 2013-2020 年的真实数据。
研究目的本研究旨在比较血管紧张素受体-去甲肾上腺素抑制剂(ARNI)和钠-葡萄糖共转运体2抑制剂(SGLT2i)等现代疗法与传统心衰治疗在现实世界中的有效性:背景:自从ARNI和SGLT2i被引入治疗心力衰竭(HF)以来,其治疗方案已从以前的β-受体阻滞剂(BB)和血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂(ACEi)/血管紧张素II受体阻滞剂(ARB),增加了矿物质皮质激素受体拮抗剂(MRA),用于射血分数降低的HF(HFrEF)。然而,传统治疗策略与现代联合用药治疗策略之间的比较尚未开展:这项观察性研究(2013-2020 年)通过瑞典心房颤动登记处进行,涉及 20849 名心房颤动患者。患者在首次就诊时接受了传统治疗(BB、ACEi/ARB,含/不含 MRA,n = 20140)或现代治疗(BB、ACEi/ARB、MRA、SGLT2i 或 BB、ARNI、MRA,含/不含 SGLT2i,n = 709)。终点是全因死亡率和心血管(CV)死亡率:与传统高血压治疗相比,现代高血压治疗可使全因死亡率显著降低28%(调整后HR [aHR],0.72 (0.54-0.96); p = 0.024),使心血管死亡率显著降低62%(aHR,0.38 (0.21-0.68); p = 0.0013)。使用倾向评分匹配进行的敏感性分析也得出了类似的结果。交互分析未发现EF(2)和HF亚组病因的任何趋势:在这项全国性研究中,现代心房颤动治疗与全因死亡率和心血管疾病死亡率的显著降低有关,与心房颤动的 EF 值、性别、年龄、eGFR 和病因无关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Clinical Research in Cardiology
Clinical Research in Cardiology 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
4.00%
发文量
140
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Research in Cardiology is an international journal for clinical cardiovascular research. It provides a forum for original and review articles as well as critical perspective articles. Articles are only accepted if they meet stringent scientific standards and have undergone peer review. The journal regularly receives articles from the field of clinical cardiology, angiology, as well as heart and vascular surgery. As the official journal of the German Cardiac Society, it gives a current and competent survey on the diagnosis and therapy of heart and vascular diseases.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信