No abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of Sacubitril/Valsartan (S/V) on clinical, laboratory and echocardiographic parameters and outcomes in a real-world population with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). This was a prospective observational study enrolling patients with HFrEF undergoing treatment with S/V. The primary outcome was the composite of cardiac death and HF rehospitalization at 12 months follow-up; secondary outcomes were all-cause death, cardiac death and the occurrence of rehospitalization for worsening HF. The clinical outcome was compared with a retrospective cohort of 90 HFrEF patients treated with standard medical therapy. The study included 90 patients (66.1 ± 11.7 years) treated with S/V. The adjusted regression analysis showed a significantly lower risk for the primary outcome (HR:0.31; 95%CI, 0.11-0.83; p = 0.019) and for HF rehospitalization (HR:0.27; 95%CI, 0.08-0.94; p = 0.039) in S/V patients as compared to the control group. A significant improvement in NYHA class, left ventricular ejection fraction, left ventricular end systolic volume and systolic pulmonary arterial pressure was observed up to 6 months. S/V did not affect negatively renal function and was associated with a significantly lower dose of furosemide dose prescribed at 6-and 12-month follow-up. In this study, S/V reduced the risk of HF rehospitalization and cardiac death at 1 year in patients with HFrEF. S/V improved NYHA class, echocardiographic parameters and need of furosemide, and preserved renal function.Despite the improvements in clinical management and medical therapy of heart failure (HF), the outcome of patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) remains poor 1 . If compared to the other HF entities, this category shows distinct demographic characteristics, comorbidities, response to therapy, and a substantially higher risk of mortality secondary to sudden cardiac death (SCD) and rehospitalization for worsening HF 2 . Many HFrEF patients are still undertreated and several drugs, such as beta-blockers and ACE inhibitors (ACEi), are under-dosed. This issue is also related to the incorrect risk evaluation by clinicians, who are likely to consider the absence or paucity of symptoms as an indicator of HF stability 3 . In fact, HFrEF is a progressive disorder that, despite the improvement of patient's clinical status achieved with conventional medications, may be associated with a high risk of adverse events at short and long-term follow-up 4 .Current European guidelines 5 recommend the use Sacubitril/Valsartan (S/V), an angiotensin receptorneprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), in replacement of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibition in ambulatory HFrEF patients still symptomatic despite optimal medical therapy (OMT). This recommendation comes from a single randomized study named PARADIGM-HF trial 6 , which showed the superiority of S/V compared to Enalapril in reducing the incidence of cardiovascular death or hospitalizations for HF. Few studies have so far investigat...

ABSTRACT:Aortic dissection (AD) is the most common life-threatening disease involving the aorta. It is rarely associated with systemic disorders such as Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease (ADPKD), a genetic syndrome characterized by cystic degeneration of kidneys, possible presence of cysts in other organs and extra-renal manifestations, including cardiovascular disorders. We performed a systematic literature search focused on the occurrence of AD associated with ADPKD (25 cases identified), and reported two cases from our experience. We selected data on sex, age, family history of ADPKD and/or AD, habitus, hypertension, renal function, presence of hepatic/pancreatic/splenic cysts, clinical presentation of AD, AD type according to the Stanford classification, treatment and outcome. Furthermore we compared this dataset with the data of the overall population with AD from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD). Stanford A type AD was documented in 62% of patients. As expected, the initial manifestation of AD was most commonly chest and back pain (80%). The mean age of AD occurrence appears significantly reduced in ADPKD patients compared to the general population with AD (49 ± 12 vs 62 ± 14, P < 0.001). Of note, our analysis shows a remarkably higher frequency of hypertension (90%) compared to the overall AD population (75%), although not significantly (P = 0.133). AD should be always ruled out in ADPKD subjects with chest and back pain symptoms, despite them being young and at lower risk. A careful preventive monitoring as well as an optimal blood pressure control may reduce the risk of AD and improve the outcome of these patients.

We can conclude that a careful preoperative selection is mandatory for a good postoperative course and long-term survival and that early-staged CABG can, however, be performed using bridge therapy, also after STEMI.

Several forms of cardiovascular involvement have been described in patients with Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19): myocardial injury, acute coronary syndrome, acute heart failure, myocarditis, pericardial diseases, arrhythmias, takotsubo syndrome, and arterial and venous atherothrombotic and thromboembolic events. Data on long-term outcome of these patients are still sparse, and the type and real incidence of cardiovascular sequelae are poorly known. It is plausible that myocardial injury may be the initiator of an inflammatory cascade, edema, and subsequent fibrosis, but also a consequence of systemic inflammation. The extent and distribution of ongoing inflammation may be the basis for ventricular dysfunction and malignant arrhythmias. Indeed, preliminary observational findings seem to emphasize the importance of close monitoring of COVID-19 patients with myocardial injury after discharge. Residual subclinical disease may be effectively investigated by using second-level imaging modalities such as cardiac magnetic resonance, which allows better characterization of the type and extension of myocardial damage, as well as of the ongoing inflammation after the acute phase. In patients with venous thromboembolism, a very common complication of COVID-19, the type and the duration of anticoagulation therapy after the acute phase should be tailored to the patient and based on the estimation of the individual thromboembolic and hemorrhagic risk. Large randomized clinical trials are ongoing to address this clinical question. Whether the severity of cardiovascular involvement, the type of treatments adopted during the acute phase, and the hemodynamic response, may influence the long-term outcome of patients recovered from COVID-19 is unknown. An etiological diagnosis of myocardial injury during the hospitalization is the first step for an appropriate follow-up in these patients. After discharge, the screening for residual left and right ventricular dysfunction, arrhythmias, residual thrombosis, and myocardial scar should be considered on a case-by-case basis, whereas an active clinical surveillance is mandatory in any patient.

Background:Right ventricular (RV) dysfunction is frequently observed in patients with aortic stenosis (AS). Nevertheless, assessment of regional RV deformation is yet not performed. The aim of the study was to analyze the impact of moderate and severe AS on global and regional RV function by a multisegmental approach using tissue Doppler imaging (TDI).Methods:In 50 patients (Group I – AS [n = 25] and Group II – normal controls [n = 25]), additional echocardiographic views of the RV were prospectively performed. The TDI sample volume was placed in the basal myocardial region of the anterior (RV-anterior), inferior (RV-inferior), and free RV wall (RV-free wall) to assess the following parameters: S'RV, E'RV, and A'RV waves; IVCTRV; IVRTRV; and myocardial performance index (MPIRV).Results:In AS patients, left ventricular (LV) mass index, left atrial (LA) volume index, and LV end-diastolic pressure were significantly increased. Moreover, AS patients had higher systolic pulmonary artery pressure (sPAP) and lower values for PV AccT (P < 0.0001), but TAPSE was not different between the two groups (P = 0.062). In AS patients, IVRTRV-anterior, IVRTRV-inferior, and IVRTRV-free wall and MPIRV were statistically increased (P < 0.0001). A significant correlation between IVRTRV (evaluated at all three regions) and the parameters including sPAP, PV AccT, and ELV/e'LV ratio was observed in AS. A strong correlation was observed between IVRTRV-free wall/inferior and AS severity by evaluation of velocities, gradient, and aortic valve area (P < 0.0001).Conclusions:The present study reports a correlation between the severity of AS and the increase of IVRTRV and MPIRV. Thus, a distinct analysis of RV performance is important for echocardiographic evaluation of patients with AS.

No abstract

Heart Failure (HF) is a syndrome, which implies the existence of different phenotypes. The new categorization includes patients with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), mid-range EF (HFmrEF), and reduced EF (HFrEF) but the molecular mechanisms involved in these HF phenotypes have not yet been exhaustively investigated. Sirt1 plays a crucial role in biological processes strongly related to HF. This study aimed to evaluate whether Sirt1 activity was correlated with EF and other parameters in HFpEF, HFmrEF, and HFrEF. Seventy patients, HFpEF (n = 23), HFmrEF (n = 23) and HFrEF (n = 24), were enrolled at the Cardiology Unit of the University Hospital of Salerno. Sirt1 activity was measured in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs). Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2 (ACE2) activity, Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha (TNF-α) and Brain Natriuretic Peptide (BNP) levels were quantified in plasma. HFpEF showed lower Sirt1 and ACE2 activities than both HFmrEF and HFrEF (p < 0.0001), without difference compared to No HF controls. In HFmrEF and HFrEF a very strong correlation was found between Sirt1 activity and EF (r2 = 0.899 and r2 = 0.909, respectively), and between ACE2 activity and Sirt1 (r2 = 0.801 and r2 = 0.802, respectively). HFrEF showed the highest TNF-α levels without reaching statistical significance. Significant differences in BNP were found among the groups, with the highest levels in the HFrEF. Determining Sirt1 activity in PBMCs is useful to distinguish the HF patients’ phenotypes from each other, especially HFmrEF/HFrEF from HFpEF.