Why the study?
Heart failure treatment has predominantly been guided by symptoms, leading to undertreatment despite guideline therapies improving survival and quality of life.
Should heart failure management be guided by objective parameters rather than solely by symptoms to improve outcomes?
Should heart failure management be guided by objective parameters rather than solely by symptoms to improve outcomes?
Heart failure management should transition from a symptom-based approach to an objective, disease-modifying strategy across all stages to reduce undertreatment and improve outcomes.
Heart failure (HF) has emerged as a global epidemic and it affects about 6 million adults in the US. HF medical treatment, as recommended in guidelines, significantly improves survival and quality of life; however, the mortality burden of HF remains high. For decades, treatment has been guided, mainly by symptoms, leading to undertreatment in a range of settings. Current evidence emphasises the unfavourable outcomes of HF even in early stages or in patients who achieve reverse remodeling and remission or recovery under optimised treatment. This should stimulate efforts towards a more objective, rigorous management, covering the entire spectrum of mild, moderate and severe HF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Papadimitriou et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: