Aims To evaluate whether the addition of hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) to intravenous furosemide is a safe and effective strategy for improving diuretic response in acute heart failure (AHF). Methods and results A prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, including patients with AHF randomized to receive HCTZ or placebo in addition to an intravenous furosemide regimen. The coprimary endpoints were changes in body weight and patient-reported dyspnoea 72 h after randomization. Secondary outcomes included metrics of diuretic response and mortality/rehospitalizations at 30 and 90 days. Safety outcomes (changes in renal function and/or electrolytes) were also assessed. Two hundred and thirty patients (48% women, 83 years) were randomized. Patients assigned to HCTZ were more likely to lose weight at 72 h than those assigned to placebo [−2.3 vs. −1.5 kg; adjusted estimated difference (notionally 95% confidence interval) −1.14 (−1.84 to −0.42); P = 0.002], but there were no significant differences in patient-reported dyspnoea (area under the curve for visual analogue scale: 960 vs. 720; P = 0.497). These results were similar 96 h after randomization. Patients allocated to HCTZ showed greater 24 h diuresis (1775 vs. 1400 mL; P = 0.05) and weight loss for each 40 mg of furosemide (at 72 and at 96 h) (P < 0.001). Patients assigned to HCTZ more frequently presented impaired renal function (increase in creatinine >26.5 μmoL/L or decrease in eGFR >50%; 46.5 vs. 17.2%; P < 0.001), but hypokalaemia and hypokalaemia were similar between groups. There were no differences in mortality or rehospitalizations. Conclusion The addition of HCTZ to loop diuretic therapy improved diuretic response in patients with AHF.

HF is a comorbid condition. ChI is a simple and feasible tool for estimating the burden of comorbidities in such population. We believe that a holistic approach to HF would improve prognosis and the relief the pressure exerted on public health services.

Aims To assess the proportion of patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) who are eligible for sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) based on the European Medicines Agency/Food and Drug Administration (EMA/FDA) label, the PARADIGM‐HF trial and the 2016 ESC guidelines, and the association between eligibility and outcomes. Methods and results Outpatients with HFrEF in the ESC‐EORP‐HFA Long‐Term Heart Failure (HF‐LT) Registry between March 2011 and November 2013 were considered. Criteria for LCZ696 based on EMA/FDA label, PARADIGM‐HF and ESC guidelines were applied. Of 5443 patients, 2197 and 2373 had complete information for trial and guideline eligibility assessment, and 84%, 12% and 12% met EMA/FDA label, PARADIGM‐HF and guideline criteria, respectively. Absent PARADIGM‐HF criteria were low natriuretic peptides (21%), hyperkalemia (4%), hypotension (7%) and sub‐optimal pharmacotherapy (74%); absent Guidelines criteria were LVEF>35% (23%), insufficient NP levels (30%) and sub‐optimal pharmacotherapy (82%); absent label criteria were absence of symptoms (New York Heart Association class I). When a daily requirement of ACEi/ARB ≥ 10 mg enalapril (instead of ≥ 20 mg) was used, eligibility rose from 12% to 28% based on both PARADIGM‐HF and guidelines. One‐year heart failure hospitalization was higher (12% and 17% vs. 12%) and all‐cause mortality lower (5.3% and 6.5% vs. 7.7%) in registry eligible patients compared to the enalapril arm of PARADIGM‐HF. Conclusions Among outpatients with HFrEF in the ESC‐EORP‐HFA HF‐LT Registry, 84% met label criteria, while only 12% and 28% met PARADIGM‐HF and guideline criteria for LCZ696 if requiring ≥ 20 mg and ≥ 10 mg enalapril, respectively. Registry patients eligible for LCZ696 had greater heart failure hospitalization but lower mortality rates than the PARADIGM‐HF enalapril group.