Key result
Residual congestion in AHF strongly predicts future CV events, necessitating phenotype-targeted therapies.
Why the study?
Recognizing the mechanisms responsible for congestion in acute heart failure is critical for tailoring decongestive therapy, yet achieving complete decongestion is frequently hampered, resulting in residual congestion and poor outcomes.
This review emphasizes the critical role of identifying and managing congestion phenotypes in acute heart failure to improve patient outcomes.
Residual congestion phenotyping may refine acute HF management; leaves open optimal interventions pending prospective trials.
Congestion is not only considered a cardinal sign of heart failure but also the main mechanism responsible for heart failure decompensation episodes. It is now accepted that congestion determines the phenotype of heart failure presentation in the acute setting either by volume overload, volume maldistribution or both. Recognizing the mechanism responsible for congestion is paramount, as it implies that different therapeutic strategies are required to achieve decongestion. Although achieving complete decongestion is considered the target, in most cases of acute heart failure episodes, this is hampered by various factors that lead up to residual congestion which is considered one of the strongest predictors of future cardiovascular events and poor outcomes. In this review, by immerging into the pathophysiology mechanisms of congestion, unraveling its phenotypes and discussing new diagnostic tools for targeting therapy, we are trying to acknowledge the importance of “the congestion phenomenon” and its scale among heart failure patients which is of pandemic proportions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mocan et al. (2024) conducted a review in Acute heart failure. Residual congestion in acute heart failure remains a strong predictor of future cardiovascular events and poor outcomes, necessitating targeted therapeutic strategies based on congestion phenotypes.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: