Haissam Haddad

Canadian Cardiovascular Society consensus conference recommendations on heart failure 2006: Diagnosis and management

Heart failure remains a common diagnosis, especially in older individuals. It continues to be associated with significant morbidity and mortality, but major advances in both diagnosis and management have occurred and will continue to improve symptoms and other outcomes in patients. The Canadian Cardiovascular Society published its first consensus conference recommendations on the diagnosis and management of heart failure in 1994, followed by two brief updates, and reconvened this consensus conference to provide a comprehensive review of current knowledge and management strategies. New clinical trial evidence and meta-analyses were critically reviewed by a multidisciplinary primary panel who developed both recommendations and practical tips, which were reviewed by a secondary panel. The resulting document is intended to provide practical advice for specialists, family physicians, nurses, pharmacists and others who are involved in the care of heart failure patients. Management of heart failure begins with an accurate diagnosis, and requires rational combination drug therapy, individualization of care for each patient (based on their symptoms, clinical presentation and disease severity), appropriate mechanical interventions including revascularization and devices, collaborative efforts among health care professionals, and education and cooperation of the patient and their immediate caregivers. The goal is to translate best evidence-based therapies into clinical practice with a measureable impact on the health of heart failure patients in Canada.

The 2012 Canadian Cardiovascular Society heart failure management guidelines update: focus on acute and chronic heart failure.

The 2012 Canadian Cardiovascular Society Heart Failure (HF) Guidelines Update provides management recommendations for acute and chronic HF. In 2006, the Canadian Cardiovascular Society HF Guidelines committee first published an overview of HF management. Since then, significant additions to and changes in many of these recommendations have become apparent. With this in mind and in response to stakeholder feedback, the Guidelines Committee in 2012 has updated the overview of both acute and chronic heart failure diagnosis and management. The 2012 Update also includes recommendations, values and preferences, and practical tips to assist the medical practitioner manage their patients with HF.

Canadian Cardiovascular Society Consensus Conference recommendations on heart failure update 2007: Prevention, management during intercurrent illness or acute decompensation, and use of biomarkers

Heart failure is common, yet it is difficult to treat. It presents in many different guises and circumstances in which therapy needs to be individualized. The Canadian Cardiovascular Society published a comprehensive set of recommendations in January 2006 on the diagnosis and management of heart failure, and the present update builds on those core recommendations. Based on feedback obtained through a national program of heart failure workshops during 2006, several topics were identified as priorities because of the challenges they pose to health care professionals. New evidence-based recommendations were developed using the structured approach for the review and assessment of evidence adopted and previously described by the Society. Specific recommendations and practical tips were written for the prevention of heart failure, the management of heart failure during intercurrent illness, the treatment of acute heart failure, and the current and future roles of biomarkers in heart failure care. Specific clinical questions that are addressed include: which patients should be identified as being at high risk of developing heart failure and which interventions should be used? What complications can occur in heart failure patients during an intercurrent illness, how should these patients be monitored and which medications may require a dose adjustment or discontinuation? What are the best therapeutic, both drug and nondrug, strategies for patients with acute heart failure? How can new biomarkers help in the treatment of heart failure, and when and how should BNP be measured in heart failure patients? The goals of the present update are to translate best evidence into practice, to apply clinical wisdom where evidence for specific strategies is weaker, and to aid physicians and other health care providers to optimally treat heart failure patients to result in a measurable impact on patient health and clinical outcomes in Canada.

The 2011 Canadian Cardiovascular Society heart failure management guidelines update: focus on sleep apnea, renal dysfunction, mechanical circulatory support, and palliative care.

The 2011 Canadian Cardiovascular Society Heart Failure (HF) Guidelines Focused Update reviews the recently published clinical trials that will potentially impact on management. Also reviewed is the less studied but clinically important area of sleep apnea. Finally, patients with advanced HF represent a group of patients who pose major difficulties to clinicians. Advanced HF therefore is examined from the perspectives of HF complicated by renal failure, the role of palliative care, and the role of mechanical circulatory support (MCS). All of these topics are reviewed from a perspective of practical applications. Important new studies have demonstrated in less symptomatic HF patients that cardiac resynchronization therapy will be of benefit. As well, aldosterone receptor antagonists can be used with benefit in less symptomatic HF patients. The important role of palliative care and the need to address end-of-life issues in advanced HF are emphasized. Physicians need to be aware of the possibility of sleep apnea complicating the course of HF and the role of a sleep study for the proper assessment and management of the conditon. Patients with either acute severe or chronic advanced HF with otherwise good life expectancy should be referred to a cardiac centre capable of providing MCS. Furthermore, patients awaiting heart transplantation who deteriorate or are otherwise not likely to survive until a donor organ is found should be referred for MCS.

Canadian Cardiovascular Society Consensus Conference guidelines on heart failure - 2008 update: Best practices for the transition of care of heart failure patients, and the recognition, investigation and treatment of cardiomyopathies

Heart failure is a clinical syndrome that normally requires health care to be provided by both specialists and nonspecialists. This is advantageous because patients benefit from complementary skill sets and experience, but can present challenges in the development of a common, shared treatment plan. The Canadian Cardiovascular Society published a comprehensive set of recommendations on the diagnosis and management of heart failure in January 2006, and on the prevention, management during intercurrent illness or acute decompensation, and use of biomarkers in January 2007. The present update builds on those core recommendations. Based on feedback obtained through a national program of heart failure workshops during 2006 and 2007, several topics were identified as priorities because of the challenges they pose to health care professionals. New evidence-based recommendations were developed using the structured approach for the review and assessment of evidence that was adopted and previously described by the Society. Specific recommendations and practical tips were written for best practices during the transition of care of heart failure patients, and the recognition, investigation and treatment of some specific cardiomyopathies. Specific clinical questions that are addressed include: What information should a referring physician provide for a specialist consultation? What instructions should a consultant provide to the referring physician? What processes should be in place to ensure that the expectations and needs of each physician are met? When a cardiomyopathy is suspected, how can it be recognized, how should it be investigated and diagnosed, how should it be treated, when should the patient be referred, and what special tests are available to assist in the diagnosis and treatment? The goals of the present update are to translate best evidence into practice, apply clinical wisdom where evidence for specific strategies is weaker, and aid physicians and other health care providers to optimally treat heart failure patients, resulting in a measurable impact on patient health and clinical outcomes in Canada.

The 2010 Canadian Cardiovascular Society guidelines for the diagnosis and management of heart failure update: Heart failure in ethnic minority populations, heart failure and pregnancy, disease management, and quality improvement/assurance programs

Since 2006, the Canadian Cardiovascular Society heart failure (HF) guidelines have published annual focused updates for cardiovascular care providers. The 2010 Canadian Cardiovascular Society HF guidelines update focuses on an increasing issue in the western world - HF in ethnic minorities - and in an uncommon but important setting - the pregnant patient. Additionally, due to increasing attention recently given to the assessment of how care is delivered and measured, two critically important topics - disease management programs in HF and quality assurance - have been included. Both of these topics were written from a clinical perspective. It is hoped that the present update will become a useful tool for health care providers and planners in the ongoing evolution of care for HF patients in Canada.

18F-FDG PET Imaging of Myocardial Viability in an Experienced Center with Access to 18F-FDG and Integration with Clinical Management Teams: The Ottawa-FIVE Substudy of the PARR 2 Trial

18F-FDG PET may assist decision making in ischemic cardiomyopathy. The PET and Recovery Following Revascularization (PARR 2) trial demonstrated a trend toward beneficial outcomes with PET-assisted management. The substudy of PARR 2 that we call Ottawa-FIVE, described here, was a post hoc analysis to determine the benefit of PET in a center with experience, ready access to 18F-FDG, and integration with clinical teams. Methods: Included were patients with left ventricular dysfunction and suspected coronary artery disease being considered for revascularization. The patients had been randomized in PARR 2 to PET-assisted management (group 1) or standard care (group 2) and had been enrolled in Ottawa after August 1, 2002 (the date that on-site 18F-FDG was initiated) (n = 111). The primary outcome was the composite endpoint of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or cardiac rehospitalization within 1 y. Data were compared with the rest of PARR 2 (PET-assisted management [group 3] or standard care [group 4]). Results: In the Ottawa-FIVE subgroup of PARR 2, the cumulative proportion of patients experiencing the composite event was 19% (group 1), versus 41% (group 2). Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression showed a benefit for the PET-assisted strategy (hazard ratio, 0.34; 95% confidence interval, 0.16–0.72; P = 0.005). Compared with other patients in PARR 2, Ottawa-FIVE patients had a lower ejection fraction (25% ± 7% vs. 27% ± 8%, P = 0.04), were more often female (24% vs. 13%, P = 0.006), tended to be older (64 ± 10 y vs. 62 ± 10 y, P = 0.07), and had less previous coronary artery bypass grafting (13% vs. 21%, P = 0.07). For patients in the rest of PARR 2, there was no significant difference in events between groups 3 and 4. The observed effect of 18F-FDG PET–assisted management in the 4 groups in the context of adjusted survival curves demonstrated a significant interaction (P = 0.016). Comparisons of the 2 arms in Ottawa-FIVE to the 2 arms in the rest of PARR 2 demonstrated a trend toward significance (standard care, P = 0.145; PET-assisted management, P = 0.057). Conclusion: In this post hoc group analysis, a significant reduction in cardiac events was observed in patients with 18F-FDG PET–assisted management, compared with patients who received standard care. The results suggest that outcome may be benefited using 18F-FDG PET in an experienced center with ready access to 18F-FDG and integration with imaging, heart failure, and revascularization teams.

Canadian Cardiovascular Society Consensus Conference guidelines on heart failure, update 2009: Diagnosis and management of right-sided heart failure, myocarditis, device therapy and recent important clinical trials

The Canadian Cardiovascular Society published a comprehensive set of recommendations on the diagnosis and management of heart failure in January 2006. Based on feedback obtained through a national program of heart failure workshops and through active solicitation of stakeholders, several topics were identified because of their importance to the practicing clinician. Topics chosen for the present update include best practices for the diagnosis and management of right-sided heart failure, myocarditis and device therapy, and a review of recent important or landmark clinical trials. These recommendations were developed using the structured approach for the review and assessment of evidence adopted and previously described by the Society. The present update has been written from a clinical perspective to provide a user-friendly and practical approach. Specific clinical questions that are addressed include: What is right-sided heart failure and how should one approach the diagnostic work-up? What other clinical entities may masquerade as this nebulous condition and how can we tell them apart? When should we be concerned about the presence of myocarditis and how quickly should patients with this condition be referred to an experienced centre? Among the myriad of recently published landmark clinical trials, which ones will impact our standards of clinical care? The goals are to aid physicians and other health care providers to optimally treat heart failure patients, resulting in a measurable impact on patient health and clinical outcomes in Canada.

The 2014 Canadian Cardiovascular Society Heart Failure Management Guidelines Focus Update: Anemia, Biomarkers, and Recent Therapeutic Trial Implications

The 2014 Canadian Cardiovascular Society Heart Failure Management Guidelines Update provides discussion on the management recommendations on 3 focused areas: (1) anemia; (2) biomarkers, especially natriuretic peptides; and (3) clinical trials that might change practice in the management of patients with heart failure. First, all patients with heart failure and anemia should be investigated for reversible causes of anemia. Second, patients with chronic stable heart failure should undergo natriuretic peptide testing. Third, considerations should be given to treat selected patients with heart failure and preserved systolic function with a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist and to treat patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction with an angiotensin receptor/neprilysin inhibitor, when the drug is approved. As with updates in previous years, the topics were chosen in response to stakeholder feedback. The 2014 Update includes recommendations, values and preferences, and practical tips to assist the clinicians and health care workers to best manage patients with heart failure.

Effects of Xanthine Oxidase Inhibition in Hyperuricemic Heart Failure Patients: The Xanthine Oxidase Inhibition for Hyperuricemic Heart Failure Patients (exact-hf) Study

Background— Oxidative stress may contribute to heart failure (HF) progression. Inhibiting xanthine oxidase in hyperuricemic HF patients may improve outcomes. Methods and Results— We randomly assigned 253 patients with symptomatic HF, left ventricular ejection fraction ⩽40%, and serum uric acid levels ≥9.5 mg/dL to receive allopurinol (target dose, 600 mg daily) or placebo in a double-blind, multicenter trial. The primary composite end point at 24 weeks was based on survival, worsening HF, and patient global assessment. Secondary end points included change in quality of life, submaximal exercise capacity, and left ventricular ejection fraction. Uric acid levels were significantly reduced with allopurinol in comparison with placebo (treatment difference, –4.2 [–4.9, –3.5] mg/dL and –3.5 [–4.2, –2.7] mg/dL at 12 and 24 weeks, respectively, both P<0.0001). At 24 weeks, there was no significant difference in clinical status between the allopurinol- and placebo-treated patients (worsened 45% versus 46%, unchanged 42% versus 34%, improved 13% versus 19%, respectively; P=0.68). At 12 and 24 weeks, there was no significant difference in change in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores or 6-minute walk distances between the 2 groups. At 24 weeks, left ventricular ejection fraction did not change in either group or between groups. Rash occurred more frequently with allopurinol (10% versus 2%, P=0.01), but there was no difference in serious adverse event rates between the groups (20% versus 15%, P=0.36). Conclusions— In high-risk HF patients with reduced ejection fraction and elevated uric acid levels, xanthine oxidase inhibition with allopurinol failed to improve clinical status, exercise capacity, quality of life, or left ventricular ejection fraction at 24 weeks. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00987415.Despite guideline-recommended therapy for patients with heart failure (HF), morbidity and mortality rates remain unacceptably high.1 Given the public health burden of HF, there is a clear need for improved therapies. A growing body of evidence suggests that increased oxidative stress contributes to ventricular and vascular remodeling and disease progression in HF.2 Xanthine oxidase (XO) is a potential source of oxidative stress, and may be an important target for therapy.3 During purine metabolism, increased XO activity leads to the production of superoxide and uric acid (UA). Significant hyperuricemia is present in about 25% of patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction,4, 5 and is associated with worsening symptoms, exercise intolerance and reduced survival.6–8 Serum UA levels are included in HF risk scores,8, 9 and may help to select high-risk patients for XO inhibition. Allopurinol is a potent inhibitor of XO that may reverse several pathophysiological processes in HF, including decreased calcium sensitivity, mechanoenergetic uncoupling, increased anaerobic metabolism, and energy depletion.10 Studies in animals and humans with HF have shown that allopurinol can increase myocardial efficiency and reduce oxygen consumption.11, 12 Magnetic resonance spectroscopy has demonstrated that allopurinol increases myocardial high-energy phosphates and adenosine triphosphate flux, thereby improving mechanoenergetic coupling.13 Impaired endothelial function improves in a dose-dependent fashion with chronic XO inhibition in HF,14, 15 and observational studies in HF patients with gout suggest that treatment with allopurinol is associated with improved survival.16–18 Notably, allopurinol use is treated as a marker of improved survival in the Seattle Heart Failure Model.8 Hare et al.19 randomized 405 patients with moderate to severe HF and reduced ejection fraction to 6 months of treatment with oxypurinol (the active metabolite of allopurinol) or placebo. Although oxypurinol had no clinical benefit in the overall study population, a sub-group of patients with hyperuricemia (UA level ≥9.5 mg/dL) responded favorably with improved clinical status and trends towards decreased all-cause and cardiovascular death. Based on these findings, we hypothesized that in patients with symptomatic HF and reduced LVEF, who have elevated serum UA levels, treatment with high-dose allopurinol for 24 weeks would improve a composite clinical outcome of survival, worsening HF and patient global assessment.