Browsing by Author "Paulus, Walter J. (7201614091)"

The association between type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and heart failure (HF) has been firmly established; however, the entity of diabetic myocardial disorder (previously called diabetic cardiomyopathy) remains a matter of debate. Diabetic myocardial disorder was originally described as the occurrence of myocardial structural/functional abnormalities associated with T2DM in the absence of coronary heart disease, hypertension and/or obesity. However, supporting evidence has been derived from experimental and small clinical studies. Only a minority of T2DM patients are recognized as having this condition in the absence of contributing factors, thereby limiting its clinical utility. Therefore, this concept is increasingly being viewed along the evolving HF trajectory, where patients with T2DM and asymptomatic structural/functional cardiac abnormalities could be considered as having pre-HF. The importance of recognizing this stage has gained interest due to the potential for current treatments to halt or delay the progression to overt HF in some patients. This document is an expert consensus statement of the Heart Failure Association of the ESC and the ESC Working Group on Myocardial & Pericardial Diseases. It summarizes contemporary understanding of the association between T2DM and HF and discuses current knowledge and uncertainties about diabetic myocardial disorder that deserve future research. It also proposes a new definition, whereby diabetic myocardial disorder is defined as systolic and/or diastolic myocardial dysfunction in the presence of diabetes. Diabetes is rarely exclusively responsible for myocardial dysfunction, but usually acts in association with obesity, arterial hypertension, chronic kidney disease and/or coronary artery disease, causing additive myocardial impairment. © 2024 European Society of Cardiology.

[No abstract available]

Making a firm diagnosis of chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains a challenge. We recommend a new stepwise diagnostic process, the ‘HFA–PEFF diagnostic algorithm’. Step 1 (P=Pre-test assessment) is typically performed in the ambulatory setting and includes assessment for heart failure symptoms and signs, typical clinical demographics (obesity, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, elderly, atrial fibrillation), and diagnostic laboratory tests, electrocardiogram, and echocardiography. In the absence of overt non-cardiac causes of. breathlessness, HFpEF can be suspected if there is a normal left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction, no significant heart valve disease or cardiac ischaemia, and at least one typical risk factor. Elevated natriuretic peptides support, but normal levels do not exclude a diagnosis of HFpEF. The second step (E: Echocardiography and Natriuretic Peptide Score) requires comprehensive echocardiography and is typically performed by a cardiologist. Measures include mitral annular early diastolic velocity (e′), LV filling pressure estimated using E/e′, left atrial volume index, LV mass index, LV relative wall thickness, tricuspid regurgitation velocity, LV global longitudinal systolic strain, and serum natriuretic peptide levels. Major (2 points) and Minor (1 point) criteria were defined from these measures. A score ≥5 points implies definite HFpEF; ≤1 point makes HFpEF unlikely. An intermediate score (2–4 points) implies diagnostic uncertainty, in which case Step 3 (F1: Functional testing) is recommended with echocardiographic or invasive haemodynamic exercise stress tests. Step 4 (F2: Final aetiology) is recommended to establish a possible specific cause of HFpEF or alternative explanations. Further research is needed for a better classification of HFpEF. © 2020 European Society of Cardiology

The coexistence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and heart failure (HF), either with reduced (HFrEF) or preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), is frequent (30–40% of patients) and associated with a higher risk of HF hospitalization, all-cause and cardiovascular (CV) mortality. The most important causes of HF in T2DM are coronary artery disease, arterial hypertension and a direct detrimental effect of T2DM on the myocardium. T2DM is often unrecognized in HF patients, and vice versa, which emphasizes the importance of an active search for both disorders in the clinical practice. There are no specific limitations to HF treatment in T2DM. Subanalyses of trials addressing HF treatment in the general population have shown that all HF therapies are similarly effective regardless of T2DM. Concerning T2DM treatment in HF patients, most guidelines currently recommend metformin as the first-line choice. Sulphonylureas and insulin have been the traditional second- and third-line therapies although their safety in HF is equivocal. Neither glucagon-like preptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, nor dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibitors reduce the risk for HF hospitalization. Indeed, a DPP4 inhibitor, saxagliptin, has been associated with a higher risk of HF hospitalization. Thiazolidinediones (pioglitazone and rosiglitazone) are contraindicated in patients with (or at risk of) HF. In recent trials, sodium–glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, empagliflozin and canagliflozin, have both shown a significant reduction in HF hospitalization in patients with established CV disease or at risk of CV disease. Several ongoing trials should provide an insight into the effectiveness of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with HFrEF and HFpEF in the absence of T2DM. © 2018 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure © 2018 European Society of Cardiology