4.1 Article

Aiming at harmony. Comparing and contrasting International HFrEF Guidelines

期刊

EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL SUPPLEMENTS
卷 24, 期 -, 页码 L20-L28

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/eurheartjsupp/suac124

关键词

Heart failure; HFrEF; ESC; ACC; AHA; HFSA; Guidelines; Comparison

资金

  1. Novartis Pharma AG

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Large randomized controlled trials have led to significant changes in the treatment of heart failure patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF). The recent guidelines issued by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Heart Failure Society of America (ACC/AHA/HFSA) recommend the use of four classes of drugs to reduce cardiovascular death and HF hospitalizations. There are minor differences but many consistent recommendations between the two guidelines.
Large randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have led to major changes in the treatment of patients with heart failure and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF) and these advances are included in the recent European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Heart Failure Society of America (ACC/AHA/HFSA) guidelines issued in 2021 and 2022, respectively. According to both guidelines, treatment of patients with HFrEF is based on the administration of four classes of drugs that reduce the primary endpoint of cardiovascular death and HF hospitalizations in RCTs: angiotensin-converting enzyme or angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors, beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors. Specific sequences of treatment are not recommended but emphasis is given to reaching treatment with all four drugs as early as possible. Further treatments are considered in selected patients including ivabradine, hydralazine nitrates, digoxin, and the new agent vericiguat. Specific treatments, mostly new, for cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular comorbidities are also given. The aim of this article is to compare the two recent guidelines issued by the ESC and ACC/AHA/HFSA and show the few differences and the many consistent recommendations, now more numerous given the evidence available for many new treatments.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据