Browsing by Author "Ristic, Arsen D. (7003835406)"

This article updates the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) 2007 classification of advanced heart failure and describes new diagnostic and treatment options for these patients. Recognizing the patient with advanced heart failure is critical to facilitate timely referral to advanced heart failure centres. Unplanned visits for heart failure decompensation, malignant arrhythmias, co-morbidities, and the 2016 ESC guidelines criteria for the diagnosis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction are included in this updated definition. Standard treatment is, by definition, insufficient in these patients. Inotropic therapy may be used as a bridge strategy, but it is only a palliative measure when used on its own, because of the lack of outcomes data. Major progress has occurred with short-term mechanical circulatory support devices for immediate management of cardiogenic shock and long-term mechanical circulatory support for either a bridge to transplantation or as destination therapy. Heart transplantation remains the treatment of choice for patients without contraindications. Some patients will not be candidates for advanced heart failure therapies. For these patients, who are often elderly with multiple co-morbidities, management of advanced heart failure to reduce symptoms and improve quality of life should be emphasized. Robust evidence from prospective studies is lacking for most therapies for advanced heart failure. There is an urgent need to develop evidence-based treatment algorithms to prolong life when possible and in accordance with patient preferences, increase life quality, and reduce the burden of hospitalization in this vulnerable patient population. © 2018 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure © 2018 European Society of Cardiology

Aims Patients with heart failure (HF) have not been shown to benefit from statins. In a post hoc analysis, we evaluated outcomes in ODYSSEY OUTCOMES in patients with vs. without a history of HF randomized to the proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor alirocumab or placebo. Methods Among 18 924 patients with recent acute coronary syndrome (ACS) receiving intensive or maximum-tolerated sta- and results tin treatment, the primary outcome of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) was compared in patients with or without a history of HF. The pre-specified secondary outcome of hospitalization for HF was also analysed. Overall, 2815 (14.9%) patients had a history of HF. Alirocumab reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and lipoprotein(a) similarly in patients with or without HF. Overall, alirocumab reduced MACE compared with placebo [hazard ratio (HR): 0.85; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.78–0.93; P = 0.0001]. This effect was observed among patients without a history of HF (HR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.70–0.86; P < 0.0001), but not in those with a history of HF (HR: 1.17; 95% CI: 0.97–1.40; P = 0.10) (Pinteraction = 0.0001). Alirocumab did not reduce hospitalization for HF, overall or in patients with or without prior HF. Conclusion Alirocumab reduced MACE in patients without a history of HF but not in patients with a history of HF. Alirocumab did not reduce hospitalizations for HF in either group. Patients with a history of HF are a high-risk group that does not appear to benefit from PCSK9 inhibition after ACS. © 2022 Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.

Background: After acute coronary syndrome, diabetes conveys an excess risk of ischaemic cardiovascular events. A reduction in mean LDL cholesterol to 1·4–1·8 mmol/L with ezetimibe or statins reduces cardiovascular events in patients with an acute coronary syndrome and diabetes. However, the efficacy and safety of further reduction in LDL cholesterol with an inhibitor of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) after acute coronary syndrome is unknown. We aimed to explore this issue in a prespecified analysis of the ODYSSEY OUTCOMES trial of the PCSK9 inhibitor alirocumab, assessing its effects on cardiovascular outcomes by baseline glycaemic status, while also assessing its effects on glycaemic measures including risk of new-onset diabetes. Methods: ODYSSEY OUTCOMES was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, done at 1315 sites in 57 countries, that compared alirocumab with placebo in patients who had been admitted to hospital with an acute coronary syndrome (myocardial infarction or unstable angina) 1–12 months before randomisation and who had raised concentrations of atherogenic lipoproteins despite use of high-intensity statins. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive alirocumab or placebo every 2 weeks; randomisation was stratified by country and was done centrally with an interactive voice-response or web-response system. Alirocumab was titrated to target LDL cholesterol concentrations of 0·65–1·30 mmol/L. In this prespecified analysis, we investigated the effect of alirocumab on cardiovascular events by glycaemic status at baseline (diabetes, prediabetes, or normoglycaemia)—defined on the basis of patient history, review of medical records, or baseline HbA1c or fasting serum glucose—and risk of new-onset diabetes among those without diabetes at baseline. The primary endpoint was a composite of death from coronary heart disease, non-fatal myocardial infarction, fatal or non-fatal ischaemic stroke, or unstable angina requiring hospital admission. ODYSSEY OUTCOMES is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01663402. Findings: At study baseline, 5444 patients (28·8%) had diabetes, 8246 (43·6%) had prediabetes, and 5234 (27·7%) had normoglycaemia. There were no significant differences across glycaemic categories in median LDL cholesterol at baseline (2·20–2·28 mmol/L), after 4 months' treatment with alirocumab (0·80 mmol/L), or after 4 months' treatment with placebo (2·25–2·28 mmol/L). In the placebo group, the incidence of the primary endpoint over a median of 2·8 years was greater in patients with diabetes (16·4%) than in those with prediabetes (9·2%) or normoglycaemia (8·5%); hazard ratio (HR) for diabetes versus normoglycaemia 2·09 (95% CI 1·78–2·46, p<0·0001) and for diabetes versus prediabetes 1·90 (1·65–2·17, p<0·0001). Alirocumab resulted in similar relative reductions in the incidence of the primary endpoint in each glycaemic category, but a greater absolute reduction in the incidence of the primary endpoint in patients with diabetes (2·3%, 95% CI 0·4 to 4·2) than in those with prediabetes (1·2%, 0·0 to 2·4) or normoglycaemia (1·2%, −0·3 to 2·7; absolute risk reduction pinteraction=0·0019). Among patients without diabetes at baseline, 676 (10·1%) developed diabetes in the placebo group, compared with 648 (9·6%) in the alirocumab group; alirocumab did not increase the risk of new-onset diabetes (HR 1·00, 95% CI 0·89–1·11). HRs were 0·97 (95% CI 0·87–1·09) for patients with prediabetes and 1·30 (95% CI 0·93–1·81) for those with normoglycaemia (pinteraction=0·11). Interpretation: After a recent acute coronary syndrome, alirocumab treatment targeting an LDL cholesterol concentration of 0·65–1·30 mmol/L produced about twice the absolute reduction in cardiovascular events among patients with diabetes as in those without diabetes. Alirocumab treatment did not increase the risk of new-onset diabetes. Funding: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. © 2019 Elsevier Ltd

Background: After acute coronary syndrome, diabetes conveys an excess risk of ischaemic cardiovascular events. A reduction in mean LDL cholesterol to 1·4–1·8 mmol/L with ezetimibe or statins reduces cardiovascular events in patients with an acute coronary syndrome and diabetes. However, the efficacy and safety of further reduction in LDL cholesterol with an inhibitor of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) after acute coronary syndrome is unknown. We aimed to explore this issue in a prespecified analysis of the ODYSSEY OUTCOMES trial of the PCSK9 inhibitor alirocumab, assessing its effects on cardiovascular outcomes by baseline glycaemic status, while also assessing its effects on glycaemic measures including risk of new-onset diabetes. Methods: ODYSSEY OUTCOMES was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, done at 1315 sites in 57 countries, that compared alirocumab with placebo in patients who had been admitted to hospital with an acute coronary syndrome (myocardial infarction or unstable angina) 1–12 months before randomisation and who had raised concentrations of atherogenic lipoproteins despite use of high-intensity statins. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive alirocumab or placebo every 2 weeks; randomisation was stratified by country and was done centrally with an interactive voice-response or web-response system. Alirocumab was titrated to target LDL cholesterol concentrations of 0·65–1·30 mmol/L. In this prespecified analysis, we investigated the effect of alirocumab on cardiovascular events by glycaemic status at baseline (diabetes, prediabetes, or normoglycaemia)—defined on the basis of patient history, review of medical records, or baseline HbA1c or fasting serum glucose—and risk of new-onset diabetes among those without diabetes at baseline. The primary endpoint was a composite of death from coronary heart disease, non-fatal myocardial infarction, fatal or non-fatal ischaemic stroke, or unstable angina requiring hospital admission. ODYSSEY OUTCOMES is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01663402. Findings: At study baseline, 5444 patients (28·8%) had diabetes, 8246 (43·6%) had prediabetes, and 5234 (27·7%) had normoglycaemia. There were no significant differences across glycaemic categories in median LDL cholesterol at baseline (2·20–2·28 mmol/L), after 4 months' treatment with alirocumab (0·80 mmol/L), or after 4 months' treatment with placebo (2·25–2·28 mmol/L). In the placebo group, the incidence of the primary endpoint over a median of 2·8 years was greater in patients with diabetes (16·4%) than in those with prediabetes (9·2%) or normoglycaemia (8·5%); hazard ratio (HR) for diabetes versus normoglycaemia 2·09 (95% CI 1·78–2·46, p<0·0001) and for diabetes versus prediabetes 1·90 (1·65–2·17, p<0·0001). Alirocumab resulted in similar relative reductions in the incidence of the primary endpoint in each glycaemic category, but a greater absolute reduction in the incidence of the primary endpoint in patients with diabetes (2·3%, 95% CI 0·4 to 4·2) than in those with prediabetes (1·2%, 0·0 to 2·4) or normoglycaemia (1·2%, −0·3 to 2·7; absolute risk reduction pinteraction=0·0019). Among patients without diabetes at baseline, 676 (10·1%) developed diabetes in the placebo group, compared with 648 (9·6%) in the alirocumab group; alirocumab did not increase the risk of new-onset diabetes (HR 1·00, 95% CI 0·89–1·11). HRs were 0·97 (95% CI 0·87–1·09) for patients with prediabetes and 1·30 (95% CI 0·93–1·81) for those with normoglycaemia (pinteraction=0·11). Interpretation: After a recent acute coronary syndrome, alirocumab treatment targeting an LDL cholesterol concentration of 0·65–1·30 mmol/L produced about twice the absolute reduction in cardiovascular events among patients with diabetes as in those without diabetes. Alirocumab treatment did not increase the risk of new-onset diabetes. Funding: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. © 2019 Elsevier Ltd

The multiplicity of coexisting comorbidities affecting patients with heart failure (HF), together with the availability of multiple treatments improving prognosis in HF with reduced ejection fraction, has led to an increase in the number of prescribed medications to each patient. Polypharmacy is defined as the regular use of multiple medications, and over the last years has become an emerging aspect of HF care, particularly in older and frailer patients who are more frequently on multiple treatments, and are therefore more likely exposed to tolerability issues, drug–drug interactions and practical difficulties in management. Polypharmacy negatively affects adherence to treatment, and is associated with a higher risk of adverse drug reactions, impaired quality of life, more hospitalizations and worse prognosis. It is important to adopt and implement strategies for the management of polypharmacy from other medical disciplines, including medication reconciliation, therapeutic revision and treatment prioritization. It is also essential to develop new HF-specific strategies, with the primary goal of avoiding the use of redundant treatments, minimizing adverse drug reactions and interactions, and finally improving adherence. This clinical consensus statement document from the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology proposes a rationale, pragmatic and multidisciplinary approach to drug prescription in the current era of multimorbidity and ‘multi-medication’ in HF. © 2025 The Author(s). European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.

[No abstract available]

Background The efficacy and safety of colchicine for the primary prevention of the postpericardiotomy syndrome (PPS), postoperative effusions, and postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) remain uncertain. Although preliminary data from a single trial of colchicine given for 1 month postoperatively (COPPS trial) were promising, the results have not been confirmed in a large, multicenter trial. Moreover, in the COPPS trial, colchicine was given 3 days postoperatively. Methods The COPPS-2 study is a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial. Forty-eight to 72 hours before planned cardiac surgery, 360 patients, 180 in each treatment arm, will be randomized to receive placebo or colchicine without a loading dose (0.5 mg twice a day for 1 month in patients weighing ≥70 kg and 0.5 mg once for patients weighing <70 kg or intolerant to the highest dose). The primary efficacy end point is the incidence of PPS, postoperative effusions, and POAF at 3 months after surgery. Secondary end points are the incidence of cardiac tamponade or need for pericardiocentesis or thoracentesis, PPS recurrence, disease-related admissions, stroke, and overall mortality. Conclusions The COPPS-2 trial will evaluate the use of colchicine for the primary prevention of PPS, postoperative effusions, and POAF, potentially providing stronger evidence to support the use of preoperative colchicine without a loading dose to prevent several postoperative complications. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01552187. © 2013 Mosby, Inc.

Acute heart failure is a fatal syndrome. Emergency physicians, cardiologists, intensivists, nurses and other health care providers have to cooperate to provide optimal benefit. However, many treatment decisions are opinion-based and few are evidenced-based. This consensus paper provides guidance to practicing physicians and nurses to manage acute heart failure in the pre-hospital and hospital setting. Criteria of hospitalization and of discharge are described. Gaps in knowledge and perspectives in the management of acute heart failure are also detailed. This consensus paper on acute heart failure might help enable contiguous practice. © 2015 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure © 2015 European Society of Cardiology.

[No abstract available]

Aim: Patient-reported outcomes such as health-related quality of life (HRQoL) are main treatment goals for heart failure (HF) and therefore endpoints in multinational therapy trials. However, little is known about country-specific differences in HRQoL and in treatment-associated HRQoL improvement. The present work sought to examine those questions. Methods and results: We analysed data from the Cardiac Insufficiency Bisoprolol Study in Elderly (CIBIS-ELD) trial, in which patients from central and south-eastern Europe completed the HRQoL questionnaire SF-36 at baseline and the end of a 12-week beta-blocker up-titration (follow-up). 416 patients from Serbia (mean age 72.21 years, 69% NYHA-class I–II, 27.4% women) and 114 from Germany (mean age 73.64 years, 78.9% NYHA-class I–II, 47.4% women) were included. Controlling for clinical variables, the change in mental HRQoL from baseline to follow-up was modulated by Country: Serbian patients, Mbaseline = 37.85 vs. Mfollow−up = 40.99, t(526) = 5.34, p <.001, reported a stronger increase than Germans, Mbaseline = 37.66 vs. Mfollow−up = 38.23, t(526) = 0.68, ns. For physical HRQoL, we observed a main effect of Country, MSerbia = 39.28 vs. MGermany = 35.29, t(526) = 4.24, p <.001. Conclusion: We observed significant differences in HF patients from Germany and Serbia and country-specific differences between Serbian and German patients in mean physical HRQoL. Changes in mental HRQoL were modulated by country. Those results may reflect psychological, sociocultural, aetiological differences or regional differences in phenotype prevalence. More importantly, they suggest that future multinational trials should consider such aspects when designing a trial in order to avoid uncertainties aligned to data interpretation and to improve subsequent treatment optimisation. © 2017, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.

Introduction: Intrapericardial fibrinolysis has been proposed as a means of preventing complications of pericardial effusion such as cardiac tamponade, persistent and recurrent pericardial effusion, and pericardial constriction. There is a need to understand the efficacy and safety of this procedure because it shows promise. Methods and analysis: We aim to assess the effects of intrapericardial fibrinolysis in the treatment of pericardial effusion. We will search PubMed, the Cochrane Library, African Journals online, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Trip database, Clinical trials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for studies that evaluate the efficacy and/or safety of complete pericardial fluid drainage by intrapericardial fibrinolysis irrespective of study design, geographical location, language, age of participants, aetiology of pericarditis or types of fibrinolytics. Two authors will do the search independently, screen the search outputs for potentially eligible studies and assess whether the studies meet the inclusion criteria. Discrepancies between the two authors will be resolved through discussion and arbitration by a third author. Data from the selected studies shall be extracted using a standardised data collection form which will be piloted before use. The methodological quality of studies will be assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tools for assessing risk of bias for experimental studies and non-randomised studies, respectively. The primary meta-analysis will use random effects models due to expected interstudy heterogeneity. Dichotomous data will be analysed using relative risk and continuous with data mean differences, both with 95% CIs. Ethics and dissemination: Approval by an ethics committee is not required for this study as it is a protocol for a systematic review of published studies. The results will be disseminated through a conference presentation and peer-reviewed publication. Review registration number: PROSPERO, CRD42014015238.