Captured external expert commentary on this paper, strongest first. Original sources are linked where available.
“The 2016 ESC guidelines are extraordinarily clear, very practical, and very concise. They are very usable, and provide a fantastic algorithm for managing patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.”
“The guidelines from the ESC are articulated very well; they made their recommendations very clear. But a lot is consensus driven, without new data. The ESC guidelines make clear all the things that need to happen to patients. I hope it will result in better patient care. We are clearly not doing a good job in heart failure. We not only don't have evidence-based treatments, but people often don't do a good job [caring for heart failure patients] and they die in the hospital all the time.”
“The issue of how to include LCZ696 in the treatment algorithm generated a lot of discussion. We recommend that the drug should replace ACEIs in patients who fit the PARADIGM-HF criteria. The Task Force agreed that more data is needed before it can be recommended in a broader group of patients.”
May inform current HF management decisions; leaves open need for prospective validation in new cohorts.
of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A 2016 study studied this question. The 2016 European Society of Cardiology guidelines provide updated, peer-reviewed recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: