Circulation. 2002;105:2223-2228
doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000014771.38666.22
(Circulation. 2002;105:2223.)
© 2002 American Heart Association, Inc.
Clinical Cardiology: New Frontiers |
New Therapeutic Options in Congestive Heart Failure
Part II
John McMurray, MD, FRCP, FESC;
Marc A. Pfeffer, MD, PhD
From the Clinical Research Initiative in Heart Failure, University of Glasgow, Scotland (J.M.), and the Cardiovascular Division, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Mass (M.A.P.).
Correspondence to Dr John J.V. McMurray, Clinical Research Initiative in Heart Failure, University of Glasgow, Wolfson Building, Glasgow G12 8QQ, Scotland. E-mail J.McMurray{at}bio.gla.ac.uk
Key Words: diastole • heart failure • pharmacology • trials • molecular biology
 |
Introduction
|
|---|
The second part of this review deals with newer, nonneurohumoral,
pharmacological approaches to congestive heart failure (CHF)
and nonpharmacological interventions in heart failure patients
with low left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) as well as
potential treatments for CHF with preserved LV systolic function.
An algorithm summarizing current, evidence-based therapy is
also provided.
|
Anticytokine and Immunomodulating Therapy
|
|---|
Cytokines, such as tumor necrosis factor, are produced in increased
amounts in a variety of tissues in patients with CHF.
1 Higher
plasma cytokine concentrations are associated with a worse prognosis.
1 Experimentally, cytokines depress myocardial contractility,
cause myocyte death, and induce heart failure.
1 There is some
evidence that anticytokine interventions improve ventricular
function and clinical status in CHF.
2,3 Two parallel trials
(Randomized Etanercept North American Strategy to Study Antagonism
of Cytokines [RENAISSANCE] and Research into Etanercept Cytokine
Antagonism in Ventricular Dysfunction Trial [RECOVER], pooled
as the Randomized Etanercept Worldwide Evaluation [RENEWAL]
program) examining the effect of the anti–tumor necrosis
factor agent etanercept on morbidity and mortality in CHF, however,
were recently discontinued because of futility (
Table). Even
more recently, a placebo-controlled phase II trial with an alternative
anti–tumor necrosis factor chimeric monoclonal antibody,
infliximab, was stopped early because of higher rates of mortality
and hospitalization in the active-therapy group. Whether this
means that the cytokine hypothesis is invalid, that etanercept
and infliximab were the wrong drugs to use (or were used incorrectly),
that inappropriate patients were chosen, or that the study designs
were flawed is unknown.
|
Matrix Metalloproteinase Inhibitors
|
|---|
The constitution of the cardiac extracellular matrix depends
on the balance in activity of matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs)
and tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinases.
4,5 End-stage heart
failure is associated with increased collagenase activity (increased
expression of MMP-1 and MMP-9) and reduced expression of tissue
inhibitors of metalloproteinases.
5 Experimentally, MMP inhibition
reduces ventricular dilatation, although theoretical concerns
remain about this therapeutic approach in patients.
5
|
Antithrombotic Therapy
|
|---|
At present, there is no indication for warfarin in patients
with CHF in sinus rhythm, although there are obvious theoretical
reasons why antithrombotic therapy might be of benefit. The
place of aspirin in patients with coronary heart disease and
CHF has been challenged because of a possible interaction with
ACE inhibitors (whereby aspirin attenuates the effects of ACE
inhibitors).
6 Unfortunately, the only outcome data available
to address this issue come from retrospective analyses of the
large ACE inhibitor trials. By far the largest such analysis,
pooling the 3 long-term postinfarction trials with the 2 Studies
of Left Ventricular Dysfunction (SOLVD) trials, did not identify
any significant treatment interaction between aspirin and ACE
inhibitors.
6 Clopidogrel has an antiplatelet effect comparable
to that of aspirin but does not interact with ACE inhibitors.
To attempt to clarify the optimum antithrombotic strategy in
patients with CHF, the Warfarin and Antiplatelet Therapy in
Chronic Heart Failure (WATCH) trial is comparing open-label
warfarin (target INR 2.5 to 3.0) with double-blind aspirin (162
mg QD) or clopidogrel (75 mg QD) in
4500 patients with NYHA
class II to IV CHF and an LVEF
0.35. The primary end point is
a composite of death, nonfatal MI, and nonfatal stroke. Until
the results of WATCH are available, low-dose aspirin remains
the antiplatelet agent of choice in patients with CHF and atherosclerotic
disease and should usually be coprescribed with an ACE inhibitor.
|
Metabolic Interventions
|
|---|
The concept of CHF as a state of myocardial "energy starvation"
has been advocated by Katz.
7 Ranolazine is a partial fatty acid
oxidation inhibitor that has demonstrated efficacy in patients
with angina pectoris.
8 A morbidity/mortality trial with ranolazine
is being considered in CHF.
|
Inotropic Therapy
|
|---|
Previous experience with orally administered inotropic agents
was unfavorable. Mortality was increased by drugs with ß-agonist
(xamoterol) and phosphodiesterase (PDE) inhibiting activity
(including milrinone, enoximone, vesnarinone, and flosequinan).
The precise mechanism underlying this increased hazard is unknown
but may reflect a proarrhythmic effect of agents of this type.
There has, however, been some renewed interest in the use of
PDE inhibitors at lower doses and in combination with ß-blockers.
9 PDE inhibition may facilitate the introduction of ß-blockade,
and ß-blockade may protect against the proarrhythmic
effect of PDE inhibition. New phase III morbidity/mortality
trials with enoximone are beginning. Similarly, levosimendan,
a calcium-sensitizing agent, has shown promise in acute heart
failure, and further trials are planned.
10
|
Anemia as a Treatment Target?
|
|---|
There has been much recent interest in the finding that a high
proportion of patients with CHF are anemic and that correction
of this anemia with iron supplementation and erythropoietin
may improve symptoms and morbidity.
11 Larger-scale clinical
trails are being considered.
|
Adenosine Agonists
|
|---|
Selective A
1 adenosine receptor blockade may induce diuresis
and natriuresis in CHF without reducing glomerular filtration
rate.
12 As such, this therapeutic approach could be of great
value in CHF patients with azotemia, a problem group growing
in size.
|
Targeting Pharmacological Therapy?
|
|---|
Patients with CHF may currently be prescribed many different
antifailure therapies (diuretics, ACE inhibitors, ß-blockers,
spironolactone, digoxin) and potentially several more in the
future. They may also take multiple treatments for concomitant
problems. This polypharmacy is a cause of concern, not least
from the adherence point of view. There is growing interest
in the notion of targeting therapy either on the basis of biological
mechanisms or genetic makeup.
13–15 Differential ethnic
or racial responses to therapy may reflect either or both of
these factors. This subject has been the focus of much recent
interest and the source of considerable controversy, with suggestions
that African Americans may respond less well to ACE inhibitor
therapy and better to hydralazine and isosorbide dinitrate combination
therapy.
16,17 There is conflicting evidence about racial or
ethnic background and response to ß-blocker therapy.
18–20 The African American Heart Failure Trial (A-HeFT) will randomize
600 black men and women with NYHA class III to IV CHF to placebo
or hydralazine and isosorbide dinitrate and evaluate clinical
status and ventricular function.
|
Tailoring Pharmacological Therapy?
|
|---|
In addition to knowing which therapies to give to patients,
we also need to understand better how to decide how much treatment
patients require. Trials to date have usually had "target" doses
of treatment, and these are the doses also recommended in clinical
practice. It has recently been suggested that plasma natriuretic
peptide concentrations might provide a simple biochemical means
of tailoring therapy.
21 Intensification of treatment, aimed
at normalizing natriuretic peptide concentrations, might improve
outcome. The recent availability of simple, rapid assays for
natriuretic peptides and near-patient testing kits make such
an approach a realistic one in ordinary clinical practice. Further
exploration of this therapeutic strategy is undoubtedly needed.
|
Frameworks for Implementation of Pharmacological Therapy
|
|---|
A consistent finding across many countries is that evidence-based
therapy for CHF (and other conditions) is frequently underused.
22,23 Even when therapy is prescribed, patients may be nonadherent,
probably in part because they are poorly educated about their
condition and its treatment. For these and other reasons, better
approaches to the organized and systematic care of patients
with CHF have been sought.
22,23 A number of randomized trials
have shown that nurse- or pharmacist-led, multidisciplinary
intervention can improve medium-term outcomes in CHF (mainly
by reducing hospital admissions).
22,23 Although to date, the
greatest effect seems to be seen with home-based interventions,
a number of questions remain unanswered about these new approaches.
What is the optimal timing, intensity, and duration of such
interventions? Do these interventions have long-term benefits?
Are they cost-effective? What are the exact mechanisms of their
beneficial effects? Are programs of this type associated with
improved survival?
|
Treatments Targeted at Coronary Artery Disease and Its Consequences in CHF
|
|---|
Many, if not the majority, of patients with CHF have underlying
coronary artery disease, and as alluded to above, existing,
successful therapies may exert some of their beneficial effects
by preventing new acute coronary events (see Part I). There
is also much interest in specifically addressing recurrent ischemia
and hibernation as therapeutic targets in CHF. Pharmacological
and interventional strategies are under investigation.
Pharmacological Reversal of Myocardial Hiberation
A surprisingly high proportion of patients with CHF and coronary artery disease have substantial areas of hibernating myocardium.24–26 The Carvedilol Hibernation Reversible ISchaemia Trial: MArker of Success (CHRISTMAS) study is attempting to determine whether the presence or absence of hibernating myocardium predicts improvement in LVEF in patients treated with carvedilol, ie, comparing the changes in LVEF in the randomized nonhibernating versus hibernating groups.26
Percutaneous and Surgical "Revascularization" in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease and CHF
The safety and efficacy of myocardial revascularization, especially surgical revascularization, is uncertain in CHF.25 A number of small and uncontrolled series have suggested that patients with large areas of viable myocardium may have a low interventional risk and a large potential benefit from revascularization.25 Consequently, 2 clinical trials are currently planned to address the impact of mechanical revascularization on outcome in such patients. One is the Heart Failure Revascularization Trial–United Kingdom (HEART-UK) study, comparing percutaneous or surgical revascularization with optimal medical therapy, which will recruit 800 patients and have a minimum follow-up of 5 years and a primary end point of all-cause mortality.25 A planned US trial, Surgical Treatment for IsChemic Heart failure (STICH), intends to address 2 hypotheses, one being the revascularization hypothesis and the other an "LV reconstruction hypothesis."27 The latter concerns the possibility that surgical remodeling to achieve optimum LV shape and size will also reduce morbidity and mortality in these patients.
|
Nonpharmacological Therapy for Low-LVEF CHF: Exercise Training, Devices, and Surgery
|
|---|
Exercise Training
The short-term benefits of exercise training on functional capacity,
symptoms, neurohumoral activity, muscle performance, and baroreceptor
function are well recognized. To date, however, a definitive
randomized trial studying the effect of exercise prescription
on morbidity and mortality is awaited.
28
Biventricular (Multisite) Pacing
Patients with CHF often have abnormal electrical activation of the myocardium, reflected as a prolonged PR interval and/or QRS duration of the surface ECG. This electromechanical dyssynchrony may lead to suboptimal atrioventricular coupling, uncoordinated ventricular contraction, and presystolic mitral regurgitation. Biventricular or multisite pacing may "resynchronize" cardiac contraction and reduce these abnormalities.29
Two relatively small, short-term trials, the MUltisite STImulation in Cardiomyopathy (MUSTIC) and Multicenter InSync Randomized Clinical Evaluation (MIRACLE) studies, have suggested that biventricular pacing can improve symptoms and exercise capacity in patients with prolonged QRS duration.30,31 Biventricular pacing may also lead to LV reverse remodeling and a reduction in mitral regurgitation. Long-term morbidity/mortality trials are either planned or under way, including the Comparison Of Medical therapy and Pacing ANd DefibrillatION in Chronic Heart Failure (COMPANION) and CArdiac REsynchronisation in Heart Failure (CARE-HF) trials.29
Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators
The Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) and Multicentre Automatic Defibrillator Implant Trial (MADIT) demonstrated that implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) reduce mortality in patients with a low LVEF and spontaneous or inducible ventricular arrhythmias. Post hoc analysis of both trials suggested that the greatest benefit was obtained in patients with the lowest LVEF.32,33 Other primary and secondary prevention studies with ICDs are in general agreement with these findings, including the MADIT-II trial, which was recently stopped prematurely because of overwhelming evidence of a survival benefit in the ICD group. Consequently, there is interest in the role of ICDs in patients with CHF. One large study, the Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Trial (SCD-HeFT), is comparing ICD therapy with amiodarone treatment in 2500 patients with NYHA class II to III CHF and an LVEF 0.35. The primary end point is all-cause mortality.32,33 COMPANION (see above) is a 3-way comparison of medical therapy; medical therapy plus biventricular pacing; and medical therapy, biventricular pacing, and an ICD.29
Ventricular Assist Devices, Pumps, and Total Artificial Hearts
There is renewed interest in mechanical support for, or replacement of, the failing heart as a stand-alone therapy, rather than as a bridge to transplantation. A detailed review of this topic is beyond the scope of this review. The Randomized Evaluation of Mechanical Assistance for Treatment of Chronic Heart failure (REMATCH), however, showed that implantation of an LV assist device can improve survival in transplant-ineligible patients with end-stage CHF, but at the expense of frequent infective and hemorrhagic complications.34 Recently, the first implantations of a newly configured total artificial heart have taken place, using the device not as a bridge to transplantation but rather as a mechanical replacement for otherwise terminal CHF.
|
Molecular Approaches to Treatment: Cell and Gene Therapy for CHF
|
|---|
Multiple recent reports suggest that there is an exciting potential
for gene therapy and cell therapy both in preventing and in
treating CHF.
35–38 Similarly, new molecular pathways,
such as those that cause programmed cell death (apoptosis) may
also be important future treatment targets.
38–40 At present,
however, these remain at an exploratory stage and cannot be
detailed here. They do, however, offer the possibility of revolutionizing
therapy for CHF, for example, by allowing fibrotic scar tissue
to be replaced by new myocytes.
|
Current Recommendations for the Treatment of Low-LVEF CHF
|
|---|
The
Figure summarizes the current treatment of patients with
low-LVEF CHF, emphasizing the key role of ACE inhibitors and
ß-blockers and highlighting some of the concomitant
problems that either reflect the cause of CHF (eg, coronary
heart disease) or arise as a complication of CHF (eg, atrial
and ventricular arrhythmias). This algorithm also maps the focus
of many of the investigational approaches summarized in the
preceding text.
View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Treatment algorithm for patients with low-LVEF CHF. This treatment algorithm represents a summary of the main options available, and the reader is referred to more extensive guidelines published elsewhere.51–53 Most patients will benefit from structured multidisciplinary care. Lifestyle measures, such as smoking cessation, moderation of alcohol consumption, restriction of salt intake, healthy eating, and regular exercise, are also of benefit. BVP indicates biventricular pacing; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; and LVAD, LV assist device. (1) Diuretics are also indicated to control sodium and water retention. Combination therapy with a loop and a thiazide diuretic (or metolazone) may be particularly effective in resistant cases. Patient self-adjustment of diuretic therapy should be taught and encouraged. (2) An angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonist or blocker (ARB) can be used as an alternative to an ACE inhibitor if there is documented ACE inhibitor intolerance. (3) Some guidelines advocate the use of digoxin at an earlier stage. The Val-HeFT trial suggests that the addition of an ARB may also be considered at this stage or an earlier stage in a patient intolerant of either an ACE inhibitor or a ß-blocker. An ARB should not be combined with a ß-blocker and an ACE inhibitor. (4) Other measures advocated by some include (a) combination diuretic therapy [see (1)], (b) hemofiltration, (c) intravenous inotropic therapy, and (d) vasodilator therapy tailored according to invasive hemodynamic measurements. (5) If there is intolerance, antiplatelet therapy should be given. (6) Amiodarone may be used as an alternative to digoxin. (7) On the basis of the use of this agent in V-HeFT I and II and other studies. (8) On the basis of the apparent safety of this agent in PRAISE I and II. (9) Some advocate revascularization only when there is a substantial area of reversible myocardial ischemia. Some also advocate revascularization of symptomless ischemia when a substantial area of hibernating myocardium can be demonstrated. Standard secondary preventive measures should be used in patients with coronary artery disease (smoking cessation, antiplatelet therapy, cholesterol lowering therapy, etc). (10) Nitrates are not of benefit in heart failure per se.
|
|
|
Treatments for Preserved-LVEF CHF
|
|---|
As mentioned above, a substantial minority of patients with
the clinical syndrome of CHF appear to have "preserved" LV systolic
function (or at least a relatively normal LVEF).
41,42 Sometimes
these patients are considered to have diastolic dysfunction,
although there is no agreed-upon definition of this, and the
precise cardiac problem in these patients is variable and frequently
undefined.
43–46 Because many of these patients have underlying
atherosclerotic arterial disease, hypertension, diabetes mellitus,
LV hypertrophy, and atrial fibrillation, however, it is hoped
that inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system
and sympathetic nervous system might be of benefit. Three morbidity/mortality
trials enrolling patients with normal LVEF CHF are under way,
and one is planned. One arm of the CHARM program (CHARM Preserved)
has fully recruited 3025 patients with an LVEF of >0.40,
randomized to placebo or candesartan.
47 Another trial, I-PRESERVE,
is also planning to compare placebo with an angiotensin-receptor
antagonist (irbesartan) in patients with CHF despite preserved
LV systolic function. The Perindopril for Elderly People with
Chronic Heart Failure (PEP-CHF) study intends to enroll
1000
patients >70 years of age with CHF and no major LV systolic
dysfunction (LVEF <0.40 or wall motion index <1.4).
48 Patients will receive double-blind treatment with placebo or
perindopril. The Study of the Effects of Nebivolol Intervention
on Outcomes and Rehospitalisation in Seniors (SENIORS) trial
is randomizing patients
70 years of age with CHF, many of whom
will have a normal LVEF, to treatment with either placebo or
nebivolol. There will undoubtedly be more trials in this previously
neglected minority of patients with CHF.
|
Challenges Ahead
|
|---|
Many other important questions cannot be discussed here in detail.
We still do not understand some of the most basic aspects of
drug development and trial design. Selecting a dose, or range
of doses, to test remains a relatively arbitrary process and
may have resulted in problems with a number of the therapies
discussed above. There is also the clinically pressing problem
of adding yet more treatments to a patient’s existing
therapy. Targeting therapy has been mentioned earlier, but will
the sponsors of large trials, the pharmaceutical industry, encourage
this? Can we ethically find ways of comparing proven therapies
with new ones (even though that may mean that patients do not
receive the former during the trial)? The Carvedilol ACE inhibitor
Remodelling Mild heart failure EvaluatioN (CARMEN) study, comparing
the effect of carvedilol alone, enalapril alone, and the combination
of both agents on LV function in 450 patients with an LVEF <0.39
is one of few studies addressing this challenge.
49 What other
moral and ethical problems will molecular and genetic advances
bring (embryonic stem cell research has already been contentious)?
Will conventional clinical trials with a mortality end point
become enormously large and prohibitively expensive as more
effective therapies are added to existing ones? We may need
to think of not only new approaches to trial design but also
new end points for trials, perhaps refocusing on patient well-being
rather than just adverse clinical events.
50
Conclusions
The past 20 years have seen enormous progress in our understanding of the pathophysiology of CHF and its treatment. Pathophysiological progress has suggested therapeutic approaches, and the successes and failures of clinical trials have refined pathophysiological concepts as well as the science of trial design and conduct. The next 2 decades will present at least as many challenges as the past 2 and perhaps less prospect of the same enormous breakthroughs with pharmacological agents. Nevertheless, our patients with CHF can still expect further improvement in their quantity and quality of life.
Note Added in Proof
Both OVERTURE and ENABLE have recently completed and reported. There was no significant difference in mortality between the omapatrilat and enalapril groups in OVERTURE. Bosentan was not superior to placebo in ENABLE. Both of these trials were presented at the "late-breaking trials hot-line" at the American College of Cardiology Meeting in March 2002 (Atlanta, Ga).
|
Footnotes
|
|---|
This is Part II of a 2-part article. Part I appeared in the
April 30, 2002, issue of the journal (
Circulation. 2002;105:2099–2106).
Both authors have received research support for clinical trials and honoraria for advisory boards, lectures, and other activities related to a number of the pharmacological agents mentioned in this review.
|
References
|
|---|
-
Seta Y, Shan K, Bozkurt B, et al. Basic mechanisms in heart failure: the cytokine hypothesis. J Card Fail. 1996; 3: 243–249.
-
Skudicky D, Bergemann A, Sliwa K, et al. Beneficial effects of pentoxifylline in patients with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy treated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and carvedilol. Circulation. 2001; 103: 1083–1088.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Gullestad L, Aass H, Fjeld JG, et al. Immunomodulating therapy with intravenous immunoglobulin in patients with chronic heart failure. Circulation. 2001; 103: 220–225.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Cohn JN, Ferrari R, Sharpe N, on behalf of an International Forum on Cardiac Remodeling. Cardiac remodeling: concepts and clinical implications: a consensus paper from an international forum on cardiac remodeling. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000; 35: 569–582.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Feldman AM, Li YY, McTiernan CF. Matrix metalloproteinases in pathophysiology and treatment of heart failure. Lancet. 2001; 357: 654–655.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Latini R, Tognoni G, Maggioni AP, et al. Clinical effects of early angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor treatment for acute myocardial infarction are similar in the presence and absence of aspirin: systematic overview of individual data from 96,712 randomized patients. Angiotensin-converting Enzyme Inhibitor Myocardial Infarction Collaborative Group. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000; 35: 1801–1807.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Katz AM. Heart failure in 2001: a prophesy revisited. Am J Cardiol. 2001; 87: 1383–1386.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Pepine CJ, Wolff AA. A controlled trial with a novel anti-ischemic agent, ranolazine, in chronic stable angina pectoris that is responsive to conventional antianginal agents. Ranolazine Study Group. Am J Cardiol. 1999; 84: 46–50.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Shakar SF, Bristow MR. Low-level inotropic stimulation with type III phosphodiesterase inhibitors in patients with advanced symptomatic chronic heart failure receiving beta-blocking agents. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2001; 3: 224–231.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Slawsky MT, Colucci WS, Gottlieb SS. Acute hemodynamic and clinical effects of levosimendan in patients with severe heart failure. Circulation. 2000; 102: 2222–2227.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Silverberg DS, Wexler D, Sheps D, et al. The effect of correction of mild anemia in severe, resistant congestive heart failure using subcutaneous erythropoietin and intravenous iron: a randomised controlled study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001; 37: 1775–1780.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Gottlieb SS, Brater DC, Thomas I, et al. BG9719 (CVT-124), an A1 adenosine receptor antagonist, protects against the decline in renal function observed with diuretic therapy. Circulation. 2002; 105: 1348–1353.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Charron P, Komajda M. Are we ready for pharmacogenomics in heart failure? Eur J Pharmacol. 2001; 417: 1–9.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Wood AJ. Racial differences in the response to drugs: pointers to genetic differences. N Engl J Med. 2001; 344: 1394–1396.
-
Schwartz RS. Racial profiling in medical research. N Engl J Med. 2001; 344: 1392–1393.[Free Full Text]
-
Carson P, Ziesche S, Johnson G, et al. Racial differences in response to therapy for heart failure: analysis of the vasodilator-heart failure trials. Vasodilator-Heart Failure Trial Study Group. J Card Fail. 1999; 5: 178–187.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Exper DV, Dries DL, Domanski MJ, et al. Lesser response to angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor therapy in black as compared with white patients with left ventricular dysfunction. N Engl J Med. 2001; 344: 1351–1357.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Packer M, Coats AJ, Fowler MB, et al. Effect of carvedilol on survival in severe chronic heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2001; 344: 1651–1658.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Eichhorn E, Domanski M, Krause-Steinrauf H. A trial of the beta-blocker bucindolol in patients with advanced chronic heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2001; 344: 1659–1667.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Yancy CW, Fowler MB, Colucci WS, et al. Race and the response to adrenergic blockade with carvedilol in patients with chronic heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2001; 344: 1358–1365.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Troughton RW, Frampton CM, Yandle TG, et al. Treatment of heart failure guided by plasma aminoterminal brain natriuretic peptide (N-BNP) concentrations. Lancet. 2000; 355: 1126–1130.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
McAlister FA, Lawson FM, Teo KK, et al. A systematic review of randomized trials of disease management programs in heart failure. Am J Med. 2001; 110: 378–384.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Grady KL, Dracup K, Kennedy G, et al. Team management of patients with heart failure: a statement for healthcare professionals from the Cardiovascular Nursing Council of the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2000; 102: 2443–2456.[Free Full Text]
-
Rahimtoola SH. Chronic myocardia hibernation. Circulation. 1994; 89: 1907–1908.[Free Full Text]
-
Cleland JGF, Alamgir F, Nikitin NP. What is the optimal medical management of ischaemic heart failure? Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2001; 43: 433–455.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Cleland JG, Pennel D, Ray S, et al. The carvedilol hibernation reversible ischaemia trial: marker of success (CHRISTMAS). The CHRISTMAS Study Steering Committee and Investigators. Eur J Heart Fail. 1999; 2: 191–196.
-
Jones RH. Is it time for a randomized trial of surgi
Top
Introduction
Anticytokine and...