Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Design
Review
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Addresses gaps in chronic HF guidelines with expert insights; leaves open the need for prospective validation.
Heart failure (HF) is a progressive disorder associated with impaired quality of life, high morbidity, mortality and frequent hospitalization and affects millions of people from all around the world. Despite further improvements in HF therapy, mortality and morbidity remains to be very high. The life-long treatment, frequent hospitalization, and sophisticated and very expensive device therapies for HF also leads a substantial economic burden on the health care system. Therefore, implementation of evidence-based guideline-recommended therapy is very important to overcome its worse clinical outcomes. However, HF therapy is a long process that has many drawbacks and sometimes HF guidelines cannot answers to every question which rises in everyday clinical practice. In this paper, commonly encountered questions, overlooked points, controversial issues, management strategies in grey zone and problems arising during follow up of a HF patient in real life clinical practice have been addressed in the form of expert opinions based on the available data in the literature.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Çavuşoğlu et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: