Hypotension at heart failure discharge: Should it be a limiting factor for drug titration?☆
Graphical abstract
Introduction
Heart Failure (HF) is a major global health problem with significant morbidity and mortality. HF prevalence is 2.6% of individuals aged 45 or older and HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF, EF ≤ 40% [1]) represent 52.4% of this figure [2]. HFrEF is a complex syndrome in which 4 drugs are the basis of the foundational therapy to modify/improve its long-term prognosis [1,3,4]: 1) Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi), Angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB), or preferably angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitors (ARNi), 2) Beta-blockers (BB), 3) Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA), and 4) Sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i).
Hypotension and hyperkalemia are the most frequent reasons for treatment discontinuation or up-titration failure [5,6] and low blood pressure is the most common reason for discharge on lower dose or no ACEi/ARB/BB, [[7], [8], [9], [10]] although suboptimal target doses have been also reported among patients with normal blood pressure (BP) [11]. While high BP increase cardiovascular events in the follow-up [12,13], low BP has also been related with tissue hypoperfusion and worse prognosis [[14], [15], [16]]. In fact, low blood pressure at hospital admission is a strong predictor of in-hospital mortality in HF [11,[17], [18], [19]]. Whether current practice guidelines recommend drug initiation and titration without cutoffs for blood pressure, thus suggesting it should be adapted to each patient considering their tolerance to blood pressure levels, the evidence of this based on pivotal trials is scarce, as patients with SBP under 90 mmHg or (more commonly) under 100 mmHg were excluded [20,21].
For this reason, it could be considered that the current recommendations for up-titrating HF medicines and the management of low BP in HF patients are weak [6,22]. Those toolkits require defining more precisely algorithms based on evidence medicine, since HF specialists need to know whether the aggressive up-titration management must be handled despite excessive BP control [23].
Our objective was to determine if high intensity medical treatment decreases hospitalizations due to HF and mortality even when patients are discharged with low blood pressure.
Section snippets
Patient population
Retrospective observational cohort study which included all consecutive patients with a diagnosis of HFrEF, discharged from the specialized heart failure unit of the Cardiology Department of the Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Vigo (Vigo, Spain) between January 2010 and December 2020 (CardioCHUVI-IC registry).
Follow-up
The ascertainment of HF related events and death during follow-up was carried out until December 2021. Due to the assumption that therapy at discharge may be modified later in the
Patient characteristics
907 patients with HFrEF were found. After removal of missing and incomplete records, 713 patients were followed-up during a median-time of 3.58 years (interquartile range 1.60–6.21 years). Most of the patients were male with a mean age of 69 years-old, being 45.3% of them older than 75 years-old. LVEF was low, with a mean of 30 ± 5%, and they had CKD in 16.5% of cases. Mean SBP at discharge was 112.4 ± 16.5 mmHg (21.7% with SBP < 100 mmHg), and 50.6% were discharged on triple therapy: 81.9% on
Discussion
The present study is intended to analyze whether highly intensive treatment despite low SBP after the acute phase of HF is superior to a more conservative approach with less aggressive dosing titration of neurohormonal blockade.
In this real life cohort of patients with HFrEF, followed by HF specialists, our main findings were as follows: (1) Increasing NHB was clearly related to a reduction of 31% in the main composite outcome (death of all cause or HF readmission) in the whole cohort, even in
Ethics
This study complies with the Declaration of Helsinki. Hospital Alvaro Cunqueiro ethics committee has approved the research protocol (CardioCHUVI-IC). Finally, informed consent has been obtained from the subjects or their guardians.
Funding
No funding.
Disclosures
No relevant relationships with industry.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
None.
References (35)
- et al.
2021 update to the 2017 ACC expert consensus decision pathway for optimization of heart failure treatment: answers to 10 pivotal issues about heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: a report of the American College of Cardiology Solution set Oversight Committee
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.
(2021) - et al.
Treatment of HF in an era of multiple therapies: statement from the HF Collaboratory
JACC Heart Fail.
(2021) - et al.
Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, blood pressure, and outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction
JACC Heart Fail.
(2020) - et al.
Initiation, continuation, switching, and withdrawal of heart failure medical therapies during hospitalization
JACC Heart Fail.
(2019) - et al.
Target doses of heart failure medical therapy and blood pressure: insights from the CHAMP-HF registry
JACC Heart Fail.
(2019) - et al.
Systolic blood pressure and outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.
(2019) - et al.
The association between blood pressure and mortality in patients with heart failure
Am. Heart J.
(2006) - et al.
Optimization of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction prognosis-modifying drugs: a 2021 heart failure expert consensus paper
Rev. Port. Cardiol.
(2021) - et al.
Safety, tolerability and efficacy of up-titration of guideline-directed medical therapies for acute heart failure (STRONG-HF): a multinational, open-label, randomised, trial
Lancet.
(2022) - et al.
Sacubitril/valsartan in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction patients: real world experience on advanced chronic kidney disease, hypotension, and dose escalation
J. Cardiol.
(2019)
2021 ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failureDeveloped by the task force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) with the special contribution of the heart failure association (HFA) of the ESC
Eur. Heart J.
Estimated population prevalence of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in Spain, according to DAPA-HF study criteria
J. Clin. Med.
Heart failure patients with low blood pressure
Circ. Heart Fail.
Management of low blood pressure in ambulatory heart failure with reduced ejection fraction patients
Eur. J. Heart Fail.
Reasons for guideline nonadherence at heart failure discharge
J. Am. Heart Assoc.: Cardiovasc. Cerebrovasc. Dis.
Physicians’ adherence to guideline-recommended medications in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: data from the QUALIFY global survey
Eur. J. Heart Fail.
Association of Office and Ambulatory Blood Pressure with Mortality and cardiovascular outcomes
JAMA.
Cited by (2)
Hypotension and optimization of heart failure therapy after a recent hospitalization for heart failure: When the going gets tough, the tough get going
2023, International Journal of CardiologyAdvantage of uptitration of foundational heart failure drugs in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and low blood pressure
2024, European Journal of Heart Failure
- ☆
Authors take responsibility for all aspects of the reliability and freedom from bias of the data presented and their discussed interpretation.