Key result
Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists significantly decreased E/e' (SMD -0.21; 95% CI -0.33 to -0.10; p=0.00) and blood pressure in HFpEF patients, but did not improve functional capacity.
Why the study?
Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists improve outcomes in HFrEF, but their role in HFpEF remains controversial regarding diastolic function, functional capacity, and quality of life.
Do mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists improve diastolic function, functional capacity, and quality of life in adult patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction?
Meta-Analysis
Do mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists improve diastolic function, functional capacity, and quality of life in adult patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction?
Standardized Mean Difference: -0.21 (95% CI -0.33–-0.1)
p-value: p=0.00
In patients with HFpEF, MRAs improve echocardiographic parameters of diastolic function and blood pressure control, but these benefits do not translate into improved functional capacity or quality of life.
Background/Objectives: Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a complex clinical syndrome with limited therapeutic options. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) have been shown to improve clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), but their use in patients with HFpEF remains controversial. The aim of this review is to evaluate whether the use of MRAs improves diastolic function, functional capacity, and quality of life in patients with HFpEF. Methods: A systematic literature search of scientific databases was performed to identify studies comparing the use of MRAs to placebo or no treatment in adult patients with HFpEF (2000–2024; English; PROSPERO registration CRD42022300783). Data were meta-analysed using a random-effects model for overall effect size measured as the standardised mean difference. Results: Pooled data revealed a significant benefit of MRA use compared to the control in decreasing E/e’ (SMD −0.21; 95% CI: −0.33 to −0.10, p = 0.00), with greater improvement seen with longer duration of treatment. A substantial reduction in systolic blood pressure (SMD −0.27; 95% CI: −0.53 to −0.02, p = 0.03) and diastolic blood pressure (SMD −0.18; 95% CI: −0.32 to −0.04, p = 0.01) was also noted. There was no significant difference in the 6 min walk distance, peak exercise capacity, or quality-of-life measures. Adverse events such as hyperkalaemia and worsening renal function were frequently reported in the MRA group. Conclusions: MRAs improve echocardiographic parameters of diastolic function and BP control; however, this did not translate into clinical outcomes of improved functional capacity or quality of life.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zaheen et al. (2025) conducted a meta-analysis in Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists (MRAs) vs. Placebo or no treatment was evaluated on E/e' (SMD -0.21, 95% CI -0.33 to -0.10, p=0.00). Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists significantly decreased E/e' (SMD -0.21; 95% CI -0.33 to -0.10; p=0.00) and blood pressure in HFpEF patients, but did not improve functional capacity.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: