1 / 21

E. Gronda, MD, FESC Cardiology Division Cardiovascular Department

Eleventh International Symposium Heart Failure & Co. Reggia di Caserta 29-30 April 2011. Session V APPROACHES to the PREVENTION of SUDDEN DEATH. “Can Neurohormonal Antagonists Help?”. E. Gronda, MD, FESC Cardiology Division Cardiovascular Department

zinna
Télécharger la présentation

E. Gronda, MD, FESC Cardiology Division Cardiovascular Department

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Eleventh International Symposium Heart Failure & Co. Reggia di Caserta 29-30 April 2011 Session V APPROACHES to the PREVENTION of SUDDEN DEATH “Can Neurohormonal Antagonists Help?” E. Gronda, MD, FESC Cardiology Division Cardiovascular Department IRCCS, H S. Giuseppe, MultiMedica, Group S.S. Giovanni - Milano

  2. SCD istheleadingcauseof CV death(mortalitybycause in controlgroupsof 39 selected HF trials) Other CV death SuddenCardiacDeath 44% HF progression38% P. Kress, PhD Medtronic 2004

  3. Why Left Ventricular Remodelling is an Independent Predictor of Malignant Ventricular Arrhythmia? Activation of SNS Activation of the RAAS • LV Dilation • Myocardial • stretch AldosteroneSynthesis in the Myocardium • Ionic Channels Function Mutations: • Na+ = prolonged depolarization, K+ = QT dispersion, Ca++ ,Mg++= Increased Authomaticity • Impact on ACTION Potential • Decreased refractoriness time, Increased vulnerable time Disruption of Myocytes Syncitial Integrity Fibrosis Pathologic Remodeling = Electrical Remodeling

  4. Electrical Instability in the Failing Heart QT interval dispersion Pye M Br Heart J 1994;71:511-514 Zaidi M European Heart Journal (1997) 18, 1129-1134

  5. ACE Inhibition Prevents Remodelling:SOLVD – EchocardiographicSubstudy P = 0. 025 P = 0.019 220 160 0.40 155 210 0.30 150 End-diastolic Volume (cc) End-systolic Volume (cc) Ejection Fraction 200 0.20 145 140 190 0.10 0 0 4 12 0 4 12 0 4 12 Month Month Month Placebo n = 130 130 142 Enalapril n = 128 127 137 Greenberg B et al. Circulation 1995

  6. IN SAVE STUDY LV DILATATION IN DIASTOLE (LEFT) AND SYSTOLE (RIGHT) INCREASED SIGNIFICANTLY FROM 1 TO 2 YEARS AFTER MI A CLEAR RELATION WAS PRESENT BETWEEN LV SIZE AND VT Sutton St J Circulation. 1997;96:3294-3299

  7. ACE-Ireduce mortality due to SCD by 13% P. Kress, PhD Medtronic 2004

  8. b-blockers ACEIs  12 month mortality by 17%  mortality by 32% (cumulative  by 44%) The Biomechanical Model of Heart Failure:Therapy that favorably affects the natural history of CHF prevents or partially reverses either of the two DCM pathophysiological processes Remodeling/ Pathological HTY Systolic Dysfunction < > Adapted from Mann DL, Bristow MR Circulation, 2005

  9. Pharmacogenetic Interaction Between the ACE Deletion Polymorphism and Beta-blocker Therapy in CHF Patients not on beta-blockers (n=208) Patients on beta-blockers (n=120) 1,00 1,00 0,80 0,80 0,60 0,60 Transplant-free survival 0,40 0,40 P=0.073 P=0.005 0,20 0,20 ACE II ACE ID ACE DD ACE II ACE ID ACE DD 0,00 0,00 0 6 12 18 24 30 0 6 12 18 24 30 Months of follow up Months of follow up McNamara et al., Circulation 2001; 103:1644

  10. Biological/Physiological Responses Mediated by Postjunctional Adrenergic Receptors in the Human Heart BiologicalResponseAdrenergicReceptor Beneficialeffects     Positive inotropicresponse ß1, ß2 >>1C     Positive chronotropicresponse ß1, ß2 Vasodilation ß1 (epicardial), ß2 (small vessel) Harmfuleffects Cardiacmyocytegrowth ß1> ß2 >>1C Fibroblasthyperplasia ß2 Myocytedamage/myopathy ß1> ß2, 1C Fetal gene induction ß1 Myocyteapoptosis ß1 Proarrhythmia ß1, ß2, 1C Vasoconstrictionß1C Mann, Bristow Circulation 2005;111;2837-2849

  11. MYOCARDIAL GENE EXPRESSION IN DILATED CARDIOMYOPATHY TREATED WITH BETA-BLOCKING AGENTS , Adult Phenotype Fetal Phenotype BRIAN D.Let al. N Engl J Med 2002;346:1357-65 (modified)

  12. 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Effect of Carvedilol on LVEF MOCHA* † P<.001 † † LVEF (EF units) Placebo (n=81) 12.5 mg bid 25 mg bid 6.25 mg bid Carvedilol (n=261) Patients receiving diuretics, ACE inhibitors, ± digoxin; follow-up 6 months *Multicenter Oral Carvedilol Heart Failure Assessment. Adapted from Bristow et al. Circulation. 1996;94:2807-2816.

  13. Carvedilol trials: MOCHA Six-month crude mortality deaths/randomized pt X 100 16 - 14 - 12 - 10 - 8 - 6 - 4 - 2 - 0 - * p <.05 ** p <.07 *** p <.001 15.5 ** % * 6.7 6.0 *** 1.1 Placebo 6.25 mg 12.5 mg 25 mg bid bid bid Bristow et al. Carvedilol produces dose-related improvements in left ventricular function and survival in subjects with chronic heart failure. Circulation 1996;94:2807-2816

  14. Influence of Ejection Fraction on Cardiovascular Outcomesin a Broad Spectrum of Heart Failure Patients Salomon SD Circulation 2005;112:3738-3744

  15. Benefit on SCD of Beta - Adrenergic Blocking Agents MERIT-HF 37 % SCD - Treated pts MERIT-HF 3.6% CIBIS II 4% US Carvedilol 1.7% MOCHA 2.3% LV EF 28 % • AVERAGE SD decrease 33% Lancet 1999; 353: 2001-7

  16. Neurohormonal Interventions in Heart Failure 1 Pacifico A, Henry P. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol, Vol. 14, pp. 764-775, July 2003. 11% on βBlocker Total Death RiskReduction52%

  17. EPHESUS: New subgroup analysis N = 6632 with post-MI LVSD, mean follow-up 16 months P 0.001 0.002 0.022 0.127 0.03 0.641 0.012 0.001 0.01 Eplerenone better Placebo better History of hypertension All-cause mortality CV mortality/hospitalization Sudden cardiac death History of diabetes All-cause mortality CV mortality/hospitalization Sudden cardiac death LVEF ≤30% All-cause mortality CV mortality/hospitalization Sudden cardiac death 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 Odds ratio (95% Cl) Eplerenone Post-Acute Myocardial Infarction Heart Failure Efficacy and Survival Study Pitt B et al. Am J Cardiol. 2006;97(suppl):26F-33F.

  18. EPHESUS Study N Eng J Med 2003; 348:1309-1321 ACE I / ARB and Beta Blockers • None • ACE I /ARB or Beta Blockers p-value for treatment interaction • Boths P=0.04 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 Eplerenone better Hazard ratio placebo better

  19. Ivabradine in heart failure: no paradigm SHIFT…yet NYHA Class III 95%: bisoprolol 304 (95%) pcb 305 (95%) mean age 68 y, IHD 56%, Mean LVEF% 25 17.3% of pts received 1.25 mg/d, 29.5% received 2.5 mg, 2% received 3.75 mg, and 51% received 5 mg NYHA Class II 52%: ivabradine 1605 (50%) pcb 1618 (50%), mean age 60 y, IHD 67% Mean LVEF% 29 More than 70% of pts were not in optimaizedβ – blockertherapy Teerlink JR. Lancet August 29, 2010 DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61314-1

  20. “… the dose of a β-blocker should be individualized in clinical practice.” “ in MERIT II study.. there were no significant predictors differentiating the high-dose and low dose groups. …. …An uptitration schedule for β-blocker dosing is therefore essential, as tolerated, to achieve the positive β-blocker mortality benefits observed in the completed mortality trials in patients with HF.” Bristow MR et al Journal of Cardiac Failure Vol. 9 No. 6 2003

  21. Mortality in the placebo arm of Val-HeFT by treatment group: 23-month mean follow-up Courtesy Prof. JN Cohn

More Related