Key result
Pharmacotherapy for comorbidities in chronic heart failure currently lacks large-scale outcome data, as most therapies have only been studied in relatively small cohorts using surrogate endpoints.
This review highlights the need for larger clinical trials to evaluate whether treating common comorbidities like diabetes, anemia, and hyperkalemia improves hard clinical outcomes in chronic heart failure.
Evidence too sparse to guide comorbidity pharmacotherapy in HF; leaves open whether larger outcome trials will demonstrate benefit.
INTRODUCTION: Chronic heart failure (HF) is frequently accompanied by one or more comorbidities. The presence of comorbidities in chronic HF is strongly correlated to HF severity and impaired outcome. AREAS COVERED: This review will address several comorbidities with high prevalence and/or high impact in patients with chronic HF, including diabetes, anemia, hematinic deficiencies, and hyperkalemia. The background and subsequent pharmacotherapeutic options of these comorbidities will be discussed. For this review, a MEDLINE search was performed. EXPERT OPINION: Heart failure is increasingly considered a multimorbid syndrome, including metabolic derangements and chronic inflammation. Persistent metabolic derangements and low-grade inflammation might lead to progression of HF and the development of comorbidities. Although several comorbidity-specific drugs became available in the past decade, most of these therapies are studied in relatively small cohorts using surrogate end-points. Therefore, larger studies are needed to address whether treating these comorbidities will improve patient outcome in chronic HF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wal et al. (2016) conducted a review in Chronic heart failure. Pharmacotherapy for comorbidities was evaluated. Pharmacotherapy for comorbidities in chronic heart failure currently lacks large-scale outcome data, as most therapies have only been studied in relatively small cohorts using surrogate endpoints.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: