https://doi.org/10.55788/369fa939
Guidelines recommend that GDMTs should be initiated swiftly after the initial diagnosis of HF [1]. The multinational, observational EVOLUTION-HF study aimed to objectify patterns in patients with newly initiated GDMT treatment after HF hospitalisation [2]. In total, 194,181 patients were included from Japan, Sweden, and the USA, who had initiated treatment with at least one GDMT within 12 months of discharge after HF hospitalisation. Prof. Gianluigi Savarese (Karolinska University Hospital, Sweden) presented the results of the study.
The initiation of treatment with SGLT2 and ARN inhibitors was delayed compared with the initiation of MRAs, BBs, and RAAS inhibitors in the year after HF hospitalisation. Additionally, SGLT2 or ARN inhibitors were mostly prescribed to patients who were already following other GDMTs: at least 78% and 64% of the patients who started on SGLT2 or ARN inhibitors were already using BBs or RAAS inhibitors, respectively.
Furthermore, the administration of the novel GDMTs, SGLT2 inhibitors, or ARN inhibitors tended to occur late after the initial HF diagnosis, especially in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) or diabetes (see Figure).
Figure: Median time from first HF diagnosis to GDMT initiation after HF hospitalisation, according to subgroup [2]
âThese results highlight the need for earlier use of the novel GDMTs in a large proportion of patients to reduce mortality and morbidity, as recommended by international guidelines,â concluded Prof. Savarese.
- McDonagh TA, et al. Eur J Heart Fail. 2022;24(1):4â131.
- Savarese G, et al. Delays in initiation of novel guideline-directed medical therapies following hospitalization for heart failure â insights from EVOLUTION HF, a multinational observational study. ePosters â focus on chronic heart failure 1, Heart Failure, 21â24 May, Madrid, Spain.
Copyright ©2022 Medicom Medical Publishers
Posted on
Previous Article
« Does systematic biopsy add value to the detection rate of prostate cancer? Next Article
Should ATTR-CM be added to the differential diagnosis of patients with HF? »
« Does systematic biopsy add value to the detection rate of prostate cancer? Next Article
Should ATTR-CM be added to the differential diagnosis of patients with HF? »
Table of Contents: HFA 2022
Featured articles
Phase 3 and 4 Trials
GALACTIC-HF: Omecamtiv mecarbil as option for HFrEF patients with low SBP
HELIOS-A: Vutrisiran meets exploratory endpoints
Patiromer helps HFrEF patients to optimise RAAS inhibitors without hyperkalaemia
FIDELITY: Cardiorenal benefits of finerenone, regardless of LVH status
DAPA-VO2: Rapid effect of dapagliflozin on peak VO2 in stable HFrEF
Phase 1/2 Trials
Significant improvement in BP from istaroxime, a novel non-adrenergic agent
SERENADE: Macitentan fails in HFpEF plus PAH
Combination of filgrastim and dutogliptin appears safe in STEMI
Therapeutic Devices
Cardiac contractility modulation therapy promising for patients with HFpEF
REBALANCE-HF: Encouraging observations for splanchnic nerve ablation in HFpEF
Updates on SGLT2 Inhibitors
DAPA-HF: Dapagliflozin is safe and efficacious in frail patients
EMPEROR-Preserved: Empagliflozin stable across age groups
EMPULSE: Empagliflozin delivers rapid and clinically meaningful decongestion
Dapagliflozin performs consistently across LVEF in HF
Miscellaneous Topics
Cardiac wasting relevant for clinical outcomes in cancer
Urocortin-2 a potential treatment target for HFpEF
Should ATTR-CM be added to the differential diagnosis of patients with HF?
Delayed initiation of novel GDMTs associated with adverse outcomes in HF patients
Related Articles
October 19, 2021
Omecamtiv mecarbil likely improves outcomes in severe heart failure
© 2024 Medicom Medical Publishers. All rights reserved. Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy
HEAD OFFICE
Laarderhoogtweg 25
1101 EB Amsterdam
The Netherlands
T: +31 85 4012 560
E: publishers@medicom-publishers.com