Heart failure in type 2 diabetes: current perspectives on screening, diagnosis and management.

Type 2 diabetes is one of the most relevant risk factors for heart failure, the prevalence of which is increasing worldwide. The aim of the review is to highlight the current perspectives of the pathophysiology of heart failure as it pertains to type 2 diabetes. This review summarizes the proposed mechanistic bases, explaining the myocardial damage induced by diabetes-related stressors and other risk factors, i.e., cardiomyopathy in type 2 diabetes. We highlight the complex pathology of individuals with type 2 diabetes, including the relationship with chronic kidney disease, metabolic alterations, and heart failure. We also discuss the current criteria used for heart failure diagnosis and the gold standard screening tools for individuals with type 2 diabetes. Currently approved pharmacological therapies with primary use in type 2 diabetes and heart failure, and the treatment-guiding role of NT-proBNP are also presented. Finally, the influence of the presence of type 2 diabetes as well as heart failure on COVID-19 severity is briefly discussed.

Effect of Treatment With Sacubitril/Valsartan in Patients With Advanced Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The use of sacubitril/valsartan is not endorsed by practice guidelines for use in patients with New York Heart Association class IV heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction because of limited clinical experience in this population. Objective: To compare treatment with sacubitril/valsartan treatment with valsartan in patients with advanced heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction and recent New York Heart Association class IV symptoms. Design, Setting, and Participants: A double-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted; a total of 335 patients with advanced heart failure were included. The trial began on March 2, 2017, and was stopped early on March 23, 2020, owing to COVID-19 risk. Intervention: Patients were randomized to receive sacubitril/valsartan (target dose, 200 mg twice daily) or valsartan (target dose, 160 mg twice daily) in addition to recommended therapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The area under the curve (AUC) for the ratio of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) compared with baseline measured through 24 weeks of therapy. Results: Of the 335 patients included in the analysis, 245 were men (73%); mean (SD) age was 59.4 (13.5) years. Seventy-two eligible patients (18%) were not able to tolerate sacubitril/valsartan, 100 mg/d, during the short run-in period, and 49 patients (29%) discontinued sacubitril/valsartan during the 24 weeks of the trial. The median NT-proBNP AUC for the valsartan treatment arm (n = 168) was 1.19 (IQR, 0.91-1.64), whereas the AUC for the sacubitril/valsartan treatment arm (n = 167) was 1.08 (IQR, 0.75-1.60). The estimated ratio of change in the NT-proBNP AUC was 0.95 (95% CI 0.84-1.08; P = .45). Compared with valsartan, treatment with sacubitril/valsartan did not improve the clinical composite of number of days alive, out of hospital, and free from heart failure events. Aside from a statistically significant increase in non-life-threatening hyperkalemia in the sacubitril/valsartan arm (28 [17%] vs 15 [9%]; P = .04), there were no observed safety concerns. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this trial showed that, in patients with chronic advanced heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction, there was no statistically significant difference between sacubitril/valsartan and valsartan with respect to reducing NT-proBNP levels. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02816736.

Prognostic value of D-dimer/fibrinogen ratio on in-hospital outcomes of patients with heart failure and COVID-19.

Aim: In the present study, the relationship between D-dimer/fibrinogen ratio (DFR) and in-hospital outcomes was evaluated in patients with COVID-19 and a diagnosis of heart failure (HF). Materials & methods: In-hospital outcomes were compared in patients with high and low DFR values. Results: With regard to in-hospital outcomes, patients in the third tertile of DFR had a higher rate of mechanical ventilation, cardiogenic shock and death (p < 0.001). The length of ICU stay was longer in the third tertile group (p < 0.001). When evaluated together with infection markers, DFR was found to be an independent predictor of outcomes. Conclusion: DFR can be used as a prognostic marker in patients with COVID-19 with a diagnosis of HF, and perhaps more valuable than other infection markers.

History of heart failure in patients with coronavirus disease 2019: Insights from a French registry.

BACKGROUND: Although cardiovascular comorbidities seem to be strongly associated with worse outcomes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), data regarding patients with preexisting heart failure are limited. AIMS: To investigate the incidence, characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19 with a history of heart failure with preserved or reduced ejection fraction. METHODS: We performed an observational multicentre study including all patients hospitalized for COVID-19 across 24 centres in France from 26 February to 20 April 2020. The primary endpoint was a composite of in-hospital death or need for orotracheal intubation. RESULTS: Overall, 2809 patients (mean age 66.4±16.9years) were included. Three hundred and seventeen patients (11.2%) had a history of heart failure; among them, 49.2% had heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and 50.8% had heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. COVID-19 severity at admission, defined by a quick sequential organ failure assessment score>1, was similar in patients with versus without a history of heart failure. Before and after adjustment for age, male sex, cardiovascular comorbidities and quick sequential organ failure assessment score, history of heart failure was associated with the primary endpoint (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.41, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.06-1.90; P=0.02). This result seemed to be mainly driven by a history of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HR: 1.61, 95% CI: 1.13-2.27; P=0.01) rather than heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HR: 1.19, 95% CI: 0.79-1.81; P=0.41). CONCLUSIONS: History of heart failure in patients with COVID-19 was associated with a higher risk of in-hospital death or orotracheal intubation. These findings suggest that patients with a history of heart failure, particularly heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, should be considered at high risk of clinical deterioration.

Acute pulmonary hypertension and short-term outcomes in severe Covid-19 patients needing intensive care.

INTRODUCTION: Critically ill Covid-19 pneumonia patients are likely to develop the sequence of acute pulmonary hypertension, right ventricular (RV) strain, and eventually RV failure due to known pathophysiology (endothelial inflammation plus thrombo-embolism) that promotes increased pulmonary vascular resistance and pulmonary artery pressure. This study aimed to investigate the occurrence of acute pulmonary hypertension (aPH) as per established trans-thoracic echocardiography (TTE) criteria in Covid-19 patients receiving intensive care and to explore whether short-term outcomes are affected by the presence of aPH. METHODS: Medical records were reviewed for patients treated in the intensive care units at a tertiary university hospital over a month. The presence of aPH on the TTE was noted, and plasma NTproBNP and troponin were measured as markers of cardiac failure and myocardial injury, respectively. Follow-up data were collected 21 d after the performance of TTE. RESULTS: In total, 26 of 67 patients (39%) had an assessed systolic pulmonary artery pressure of > 35 mmHg (group aPH), meeting the TTE definition of aPH. NTproBNP levels (median [range]: 1430 [102-30 300] vs. 470 [45-29 600] ng L-1 ; P = .0007), troponin T levels (63 [22-352] vs. 15 [5-407] ng L-1 ; P = .0002), and the 21-d mortality rate (46% vs. 7%; P < .001) were substantially higher in patients with aPH compared to patients not meeting aPH criteria. CONCLUSION: TTE-defined acute pulmonary hypertension was frequently observed in severely ill Covid-19 patients. Furthermore, aPH was linked to biomarker-defined myocardial injury and cardiac failure, as well as an almost sevenfold increase in 21-d mortality.

Containment measures established during the COVID-19 outbreak and its impact on lipid profile and neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio.

OBJECTIVE: Almost all countries announced social restrictions and distancing measures which could unintentionally lead to a decline in admissions to hospital for acute disorders other than signs of pneumonia. We aimed to evaluate lipid profile, neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and cardiovascular admissions to the coronary care unit (CCU) of a tertiary center in Turkey during the COVID-19 era and to compare these results with admissions in the same time interval of the previous year. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed CCU admissions due to new-onset atrial fibrillation, ST-elevation myocardial infarction, non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS) and acute heart failure during the COVID-19 outbreak and the same time interval of the past year. Laboratory measurements including lipid profile and NLR values were retrieved from the institutional digital database. RESULTS: Compared to the same time interval of 2019 (March-April, 2019), the number of patients admitted to the CCU with acute cardiovascular disorders (atrial fibrillation, STEMI, NSTEACS and acute heart failure) were lower in the COVID-19 period. The levels of NLR, total cholesterol, and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol were significantly higher and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol was significantly lower in subjects admitted to the CCU during March-April 2020 compared to subjects admitted in March-April 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that subjects admitted to the CCU in the COVID-19 era have an unfavorable lipid profile and elevated NLR compared to those admitted in 2019. These patients appear to be at high risk for future cardiovascular events.

Association between cardiac troponin I and mortality in patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Severe pneumonia is pathological manifestation of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), however complications have been reported in COVID-19 patients with a worst prognosis. Aim of this study was to evaluate the role of high sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hs-TnI) in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: we retrospectively analysed hs-TnI values measured in 523 patients (median age 64 years, 68% men) admitted to a university hospital in Milan, Italy, and diagnosed COVID-19. RESULTS: A significant difference in hs-TnI concentrations was found between deceased patients (98 patients) vs discharged (425 patients) [36.05 ng/L IQR 16.5-94.9 vs 6.3 ng/L IQR 2.6-13.9, p < 0.001 respectively]. Hs-TnI measurements were independent predictors of mortality at multivariate analysis adjusted for confounding parameters such as age (HR 1.004 for each 10 point of troponin, 95% CI 1.002-1.006, p < 0.001). The survival rate, after one week, in patients with hs-TnI values under 6 ng/L was 97.94%, between 6 ng/L and the normal value was 90.87%, between the normal value and 40 ng/L was 86.98, and 59.27% over 40 ng/L. CONCLUSION: Increase of hs-TnI associated with elevated mortality in patients with COVID-19. Troponin shows to be a useful biomarker of disease progression and worse prognosis in COVID-19 patients.

[Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management of heart failure outpatient clinics. Lessons during the lockdown restrictions]. / Le ricadute della pandemia COVID-19 sulla gestione dell'Ambulatorio Scompenso. Esperienze e considerazioni operative dopo il lockdown.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, non-urgent outpatient activities were temporarily suspended. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of this measure on the management of the heart failure outpatient clinic at our institution. METHODS: We analyzed the clinical outcome of 110 chronic heart failure patients (mean age 73 ± 9 years) whose follow-up visit had been delayed. RESULTS: At their last visit before the lockdown, 80.9% was in NYHA class II, had an ejection fraction of 37 ± 7%, and B-type natriuretic peptide level was moderately elevated (266 ± 138 pg/ml). All patients received loop diuretics, 97.2% beta-blockers, 64.9% an aldosterone antagonist, 60.9% sacubitril/valsartan (S/V), and 72.2% of the remaining patients were on angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or valsartan therapy. Patients were contacted by phone during and at the end of the lockdown period to fix a new appointment and underwent a structured interview to assess their clinical conditions and ongoing therapy and to verify whether they had contracted SARS-CoV-2 infection. Twelve patients (13.2%) contracted COVID-19. None was hospitalized for worsening heart failure or reported defibrillator shocks and none changed autonomously the prescribed therapy. Overall, 75% of patients reported stable or improved general well-being from the last in-person visit, while 25% described subjective worsening due to the social effect of the pandemic. Unchanged body weight and blood pressure values were reported by 86% and 78.4% of patients, respectively. Lower blood pressure values compared to baseline were recorded in 15.2% of patients on conventional renin-angiotensin system inhibition vs 21% of those on S/V, one of whom had to down-titrate S/V for persistent but asymptomatic hypotension; 4 patients up-titrated S/V to 200 mg/day following phone indications. CONCLUSIONS: Cancellation of scheduled follow-up visits during 3 months did not have significant negative effects in a cohort of stable patients with chronic heart failure on optimized medical therapy. Telephone support was effective in keeping connections with the patients during the lockdown, allowing appropriate management and implementation of drug therapy. In particular, patients who received S/V were not affected by delays in scheduled visits, confirming the tolerability and safety of this novel therapy in terms of both clinical and biohumoral parameters.

Circulating plasma concentrations of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 in men and women with heart failure and effects of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone inhibitors.

AIMS: The current pandemic coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 infects a wide age group but predominantly elderly individuals, especially men and those with cardiovascular disease. Recent reports suggest an association with use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors. Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) is a functional receptor for coronaviruses. Higher ACE2 concentrations might lead to increased vulnerability to SARS-CoV-2 in patients on RAAS inhibitors. METHODS AND RESULTS: We measured ACE2 concentrations in 1485 men and 537 women with heart failure (index cohort). Results were validated in 1123 men and 575 women (validation cohort).The median age was 69 years for men and 75 years for women. The strongest predictor of elevated concentrations of ACE2 in both cohorts was male sex (estimate = 0.26, P < 0.001; and 0.19, P < 0.001, respectively). In the index cohort, use of ACE inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), or mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) was not an independent predictor of plasma ACE2. In the validation cohort, ACE inhibitor (estimate = -0.17, P = 0.002) and ARB use (estimate = -0.15, P = 0.03) were independent predictors of lower plasma ACE2, while use of an MRA (estimate = 0.11, P = 0.04) was an independent predictor of higher plasma ACE2 concentrations. CONCLUSION: In two independent cohorts of patients with heart failure, plasma concentrations of ACE2 were higher in men than in women, but use of neither an ACE inhibitor nor an ARB was associated with higher plasma ACE2 concentrations. These data might explain the higher incidence and fatality rate of COVID-19 in men, but do not support previous reports suggesting that ACE inhibitors or ARBs increase the vulnerability for COVID-19 through increased plasma ACE2 concentrations.

Factors associated with death outcome in patients with severe coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19): a case-control study.

Rationale: Up to date, the exploration of clinical features in severe COVID-19 patients were mostly from the same center in Wuhan, China. The clinical data in other centers is limited. This study aims to explore the feasible parameters which could be used in clinical practice to predict the prognosis in hospitalized patients with severe coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19). Methods: In this case-control study, patients with severe COVID-19 in this newly established isolation center on admission between 27 January 2020 to 19 March 2020 were divided to discharge group and death event group. Clinical information was collected and analyzed for the following objectives: 1. Comparisons of basic characteristics between two groups; 2. Risk factors for death on admission using logistic regression; 3. Dynamic changes of radiographic and laboratory parameters between two groups in the course. Results: 124 patients with severe COVID-19 on admission were included and divided into discharge group (n=35) and death event group (n=89). Sex, SpO2, breath rate, diastolic pressure, neutrophil, lymphocyte, C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin (PCT), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and D-dimer were significantly correlated with death events identified using bivariate logistic regression. Further multivariate logistic regression demonstrated a significant model fitting with C-index of 0.845 (p<0.001), in which SpO2≤89%, lymphocyte≤0.64×109/L, CRP>77.35mg/L, PCT>0.20µg/L, and LDH>481U/L were the independent risk factors with the ORs of 2.959, 4.015, 2.852, 3.554, and 3.185, respectively (p<0.04). In the course, persistently lower lymphocyte with higher levels of CRP, PCT, IL-6, neutrophil, LDH, D-dimer, cardiac troponin I (cTnI), brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), and increased CD4+/CD8+ T-lymphocyte ratio and were observed in death events group, while these parameters stayed stable or improved in discharge group. Conclusions: On admission, the levels of SpO2, lymphocyte, CRP, PCT, and LDH could predict the prognosis of severe COVID-19 patients. Systematic inflammation with induced cardiac dysfunction was likely a primary reason for death events in severe COVID-19 except for acute respiratory distress syndrome.