* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Nessun titolo diapositiva
Saturated fat and cardiovascular disease wikipedia , lookup
Remote ischemic conditioning wikipedia , lookup
Cardiovascular disease wikipedia , lookup
Electrocardiography wikipedia , lookup
Cardiac contractility modulation wikipedia , lookup
Jatene procedure wikipedia , lookup
Management of acute coronary syndrome wikipedia , lookup
Coronary artery disease wikipedia , lookup
Heart failure wikipedia , lookup
Cardiac surgery wikipedia , lookup
Dextro-Transposition of the great arteries wikipedia , lookup
IX International Symposium HEART FAILURE & Co. Milano, 18 Aprile 2009 “Re-thinking acute heart failure approach” Acute Heart Failure Management between Current Guidelines and Patient Needs Susanna Sciomer - Francesco Fedele Dept. of Cardiovascular, Respiratory and Morphological Sciences “Sapienza” University of Rome, Italy + ESC guidelines 2005 Acute heart failure: a rapid onset or change in the signs and symptoms of HF, resulting in the need for urgent therapy. AHF may be either new HF or worsening of pre-existing chronic HF. Multiple cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular morbidities may precipitate AHF. STROKE VOLUME? General clinical classification Gheorghiade M, Pang PS. JACC 2009; 53:557 Acute Exacerbations Contribute to the Progression of the Disease With each event, myocardial injury may contribute to progressive LV dysfunction Worsening signs and symptoms, Neurohormonal and renal abnormalities Occurr soon after discharge CHF Functional ability CHF AHF High post-discharge event AHF Time Gheorghiade M et al. Am J Cardiol. 2005; 96 (6A) ESC guidelines 2008 AHF between Current Guidelines and Patient Needs… GUIDELINES Currently available assessment modalities combined with recent advances in cardiovascular therapies provide present-day opportunities to improve post-discharge outcomes. HF (as a diagnosis at hospital discharge) has tripled over the last 3 decades. This trend will likely continue due to:aging population, improved survival after myocardial infarction, better prevention of sudden cardiac death. Management of AHF and diagnostic problems Gheorghiade M, Pang PS. JACC 2009; 53:557 Diagnosis is more likely in the presence of multiple typical symptoms and signs (ex. dyspnoea, fatigue, third heart sound, oedema, raised jugular venous pressure.....) True typical symptoms? The presence of several signs has a good specificity but a low sensibility Need of instrumental objective data to assess the diagnosis Need to exclude other pathologies Two-Minute Assessment of Haemodynamic Profile Evidence for Congestion (elevated filling pressures) Normal Pulmonary Edema Hypovolemic Shock Cardiogenic Shock 2.2 l/mq Cardiac Index Forrester’s diagram Orthopnea High Jugular Venous Pressure Increasing S3 Loud P2 Edema Ascites Rales (uncommon) Abdominojugular Reflux 18 mmHg Evidence for Low Perfusion Narrow Pulse Pressure Pulsus Alterations May be Sleepy, Obtunded ACE-inhibitor-Related Symptomatic Hypotension Declining Serum Sodium Level Worsening Renal Function Low Perfusion at Rest? Wedge pressure Congestion at Rest? No Yes No Warm and Dry Yes Cold and Dry Warm and Wet Cold and Wet Nohria, JAMA 2002; 287: 628 Diagnosis and initial treatment algorithm of AHF ESC guidelines 2008 Non-invasive haemodynamic evaluation (EF, SV, CI, PAPs…) Gheorghiade M, Pang PS. JACC 2009; 53:557 AHF treatment strategy according to systolic blood pressure ESC guidelines 2008 Preload = Contractility Afterload Systemic Peripheral Resistance LV end-Diastolic Volume Stroke Volume LV end-Systolic Volume Heart Rate Systemic Pressure Cardiac Output LV end-diastolic volume - LV end-systolic volume= STROKE VOLUME ??? Inotropic agents Inotropes with vasodilator properties should be reserved for those pts with low-output state (low BP with organ hypoperfusion), who don’t respond to other therapies. •Improves cardiac contractility by binding to Troponin C in cardiomyocytes •Significant vasodilation through ATP-sensitive potassium channels •Mild PDE inhibitory action CO and SV PCWP Inotropic agents Dobutamine: cl IIa, Level Evidence B PDEIs: cl IIb, Level Evidence B Dopamine: cl IIb, Level Evidence C Levosimendan: cl IIa, Level Evidence B Digoxin iv : cl IIb, Level Evidence C ESC Guidelines 2008 Several inotropic agents are currently available for AHFS; most of them do not appear to be safe and effective; despite significant improvement in the hemodynamic profile, they have potential deleterious effects on: Myocardium (increased myocardial oxygen demand) Blood Pressure (hypotension) Renal Function (impairment) •Increasing cardiac output •Reduction of filling pressure •Slow ventricular rate in rapid AF AHF between Current Guidelines and Patient Needs… GUIDELINES AHF Considerations In elderly people comorbidities are the rule. An overlapping is frequent between comorbidities and precipitating factors. NY Heart Failure Consortium, JACC 2004 Comorbidities and precipitating factors of AHF ESC guidelines 2008 The Cardio-Renal Syndrome ESC guidelines 2008 Gheorghiade M, Pang PS. JACC 2009; 53:557 HEART FAILURE & RENAL FAILURE Terapheutical Approach Evaluation of anaemia and electrolytes Drug monitoring Ultrafiltration: -No responsiveness to conventional therapy (moderate-severe RF with creatinine > 2,5- 3 mg/dl) -Emergency treatment in severe acute HF with fluid overload -Long-term treatment in pts who can’t undergo heart transplant Clinical effects Reabsorption of systemic and pulmonary oedema Haemodynamic stability Hyponatremia correction Increase of diuresis, natriuresis and responsiveness to diuretics hormons (NA, PRA, Aldosterone) Removal of toxins and mediators (citokins, TNF) that impaired myocardial and renal function (?) Costanzo MR, Maya E. et al. JACC 2007 Haemodynamic effects L/min/m2 mmHg b/min 3 120 Cardiac Index * 2,5 * 100 2 Heart rate MAP 80 1,5 Before UF After UF 60 Baseline End UF 24 h after mmHg Baseline End UF 24 h after mmHg 40 25 35 20 Right Atrial Pressure Wedge Pressure 30 15 25 10 20 5 15 0 10 Baseline End UF 24 h after Courtesy of “CCM” Baseline End UF 24 h after Overcoming the spatial competition between heart and lungs Ultrafiltration vs. Furosemide in Moderate Heart Failure Body Weight kg Plasma Renin Activity % 3 160 2 * 120 1 * p<0.01 vs. day 0 80 0 * -1 * 40 0 -2 -3 0 * * * 1 2 3 * * * 4 UF (n=8; 1710 ml) Furosemide (n=8; 248 mg i.v.) 30 90 day * * * * 1 2 3 * * 4 90 -40 0 day Agostoni et al. Am J Med 1994 HEART FAILURE AND COPD HEART FAILURE PATIENT CHRONIC PULMONARY DISEASES Clinical classification of AHF ESC guidelines 2008 EVALUATION of SYSTOLIC RV PERFORMANCE TAPSE Tricuspid Annular Plane Systolic Excursion The level of excursion of the tricuspid valvular plane during systole (TAPSE) corresponds with RV ejection fraction (5 mm ~ 20% RVEF, 10 mm ~ 30% RVEF, 15 mm ~ 40% RVEF, and 20 mm ~ 50% RVEF). Bleeker GB, Heart 2006 RV is fully involved in HF and its function is an important prognostic marker. Evaluation of PAP and RV function can provide some indipendent predictors of mortality in HF. Evaluation of Pts with HF Functional evaluation of RV = Fundamental ! Goals of treatment in AHF Goals of treatment in CHF •To reduce mortality •To reduce morbidity •Prevention ESC guidelines 2008 Improving post-discharge outcomes is the most important goal in AHFS The right drug at the right time + apropriate management of comorbidities!!! ESC guidelines 2008 Thank you REVIVE II: Primary Endpoint (n=600) 60 Placebo Levosimendan % Patients 30 20 10 P=.015 0 Improved Unchanged Worse Packer M, et al. Presented at AHA Scientific Sessions 2005 SURVIVE JAMA, May 2, 2007 – Vol. 297 REVIVE Conclusions • • • • • Previous ADHF studies focused on single measurements of symptoms or hemodynamic improvement REVIVE was a positive trial with a Clinical Composite Endpoint that assessed benefit over 5 days Patient & Physician Global Assessments and Patient Assessment of Dyspnea all support the outcome of the primary endpoint The safety and mortality profile of levosimendan can be explained in terms of the baseline characteristics (ie, blood pressure) of patients and the mechanism of the drug The higher Mortality Risk was observed in the Levosimendan low baseline blood pressure cohort SURVIVE Conclusions • The SURVIVE trial demonstrated no survival difference between Levosimendan and • • Dobutamine during long-term follow-up despite evidence for an early reduction of plasma BNP level for Levosimendan. These findings may be related to: - the short duration of treatment in the trial; - a selective effect of Levosimendan in specific subgroups; - the lack of a true difference between the two drugs. Further studies are needed to distinguish between these possibilities.