Impact of sacubitril/valsartan and gliflozins on cardiac resynchronization therapy response in ischemic and non-ischemic heart failure patients

Fonderico, Celeste; Pergola, Valerio; Faccenda, Daniele; Salucci, Alfonsomaria; Comparone, Gianluigi; Marrese, Aldo; Ammirati, Giuseppe; Cocchiara, Luigi; Varriale, Alfonso; Esposito, Giovanni; Rapacciuolo, Antonio; Strisciuglio, Teresa

doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2023.131391

Cited by 3 publications

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Longitudinal comparison of dyssynchrony correction and ‘strain’ improvement by conduction system pacing: LEVEL-AT trial secondary findings

Pujol-López,

Jiménez-Arjona,

Garcia-Ribas

et al. 2024

European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Longitudinal dyssynchrony correction and strain improvement by comparable cardiac resynchronization therapy techniques is unreported. Aims Our purpose was to compare echocardiographic dyssynchrony correction and strain improvement by conduction system pacing (CSP) vs. biventricular pacing (BiVP) as a marker of contractility improvement during one-year follow-up. Methods and Results A treatment-received analysis was performed in patients included in the LEVEL-AT trial (NCT04054895), randomized to CSP or BiVP, and evaluated at baseline (ON and OFF programming) and at 6 and 12 months (n = 69, 32% women). Analysis included intraventricular (septal flash), interventricular (difference between left and right ventricular outflow times), and atrioventricular (diastolic filling time) dyssynchrony and strain parameters (septal bounce, global longitudinal strain [GLS], left bundle branch block pattern and mechanical dispersion). Baseline left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was 27.5 ± 7% and left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) was 138 ± 77 ml, without differences between groups. Longitudinal analysis showed LVEF and LVESV improvement (p < 0.001), without between-group differences. At 12-month follow-up, adjusted mean LVEF was 46% with CSP (95%CI 42.2%, 49.3%) vs. 43% with BiVP (95%CI 39.6%, 45.8%) (p = 0.31) and LVESV was 80 ml (95%CI 55.3 ml, 104.5 ml) vs. 100 ml (95%CI 78.7 ml, 121.6 ml), respectively (p = 0.66). Longitudinal analysis showed a significative improvement of all dyssynchrony parameters and GLS over time (p < 0.001), without differences between groups. Baseline GLS significantly correlated with LVEF and LVESV at 12-month follow-up. Conclusion CSP and BiVP provided similar dyssynchrony and strain correction over time. Baseline global longitudinal strain correction predicted ventricular remodeling at 12-month follow-up.

show abstract

Longitudinal comparison of dyssynchrony correction and ‘strain’ improvement by conduction system pacing: LEVEL-AT trial secondary findings

Pujol-López,

Jiménez-Arjona,

Garcia-Ribas

et al. 2024

European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Benefits of sacubitril/valsartan administration and physical training in cardiac rehabilitation: current trends and bibliometric analysis of the years 2015-2024

Iovanovici,

Dogaru,

Nistor – Cseppento

et al. 2024

Balneo and PRM Research Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction. Heart failure, with its economic and social burden and increasing incidence in the general population, is a global problem. Since 2015, a new class of drugs with angiotensin and neprilysin re-ceptor inhibitory action, namely the combination of sacubitril and valsartan (S/V), has been introduced in the treatment of HF. The study aimed to perform a bibliometric analysis of the available knowledge and assess research trends through quantitative analysis of the literature related to the use of S/V and physical training in HF. Methods. In the study, we used the Web of Science database, period 2015-January 2024. The data obtained was processed with Vos viewer and Microsoft Excel. The results obtained and their interpretation provided an overview of the most relevant and prolific journals, countries, authors, and organizations. Conclusion. After marketing approval, the publication trend was upward until 2023, when the number of publica-tions decreased significantly. Our study shows that although the number of publications de-creased, updates of treatment guidelines were published, and a significant number of articles supporting the benefits of S/V treatment in chronic HF (with reduced or preserved ejection frac-tion) but also in acute forms were published. Although the number of articles on cardiac rehabilitation is low, this is highlighted in treatment guidelines and studies have emerged assessing the reasons why patients do not follow a cardiac rehabilitation programme. Cardiac rehabilitation is important for its physiological benefits: improving VO2max, myocardial blood flow and endothelial function. Health policies should be put in place to raise awareness of the importance of cardiac rehabilitation, including distances to a rehabilitation centre. Keywords: sacubitril/valsartan; heart failure; cardiac rehabilitation; bibliometric analysis

show abstract

Angiotensin Receptor/Neprilysin Inhibitor in Patients with an Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Fong,

Tan,

Wong

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Impact of sacubitril/valsartan and gliflozins on cardiac resynchronization therapy response in ischemic and non-ischemic heart failure patients

Cited by 3 publications

References 29 publications

Longitudinal comparison of dyssynchrony correction and ‘strain’ improvement by conduction system pacing: LEVEL-AT trial secondary findings

Longitudinal comparison of dyssynchrony correction and ‘strain’ improvement by conduction system pacing: LEVEL-AT trial secondary findings

Benefits of sacubitril/valsartan administration and physical training in cardiac rehabilitation: current trends and bibliometric analysis of the years 2015-2024

Angiotensin Receptor/Neprilysin Inhibitor in Patients with an Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About