Highest pulse pressure increased the risk of HF hospitalizations and CV death (HR 1.39; 95% CI 1.14-1.69), while sacubitril/valsartan significantly lowered pulse pressure compared with valsartan.
RCT (n=4,796)
Does baseline pulse pressure predict cardiovascular events, and does sacubitril/valsartan reduce pulse pressure compared to valsartan in patients with HFpEF?
In patients with HFpEF, higher pulse pressure is an independent predictor of adverse cardiovascular events, and treatment with sacubitril/valsartan significantly lowers pulse pressure compared to valsartan.
Effect estimate: adjusted HR 1.39 (95% CI 1.14-1.69)
p-value: p=0.001
Arterial stiffness is increased with increasing age, and pulse pressure (PP), a marker of arterial stiffness, is a predictor of incident cardiovascular disease and mortality. However, the prognostic relevance of PP in heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction has not been fully understood. We studied 4796 patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction from the PARAGON-HF trial. All patients underwent sequential run-in phases of valsartan and sacubitril/valsartan before randomization. We categorized patients by PP quartile and evaluated the influence of baseline PP on the PARAGON-HF primary end point (total HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular death). At screening, the median PP was 58 mm Hg (interquartile range, 50–69 mm Hg). There was a nonlinear, J-shaped association between PP and outcomes. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models showed that patients in the highest PP quartile had a higher risk of the primary end point (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.39 95% CI, 1.14–1.69; P =0.001), total HF hospitalizations (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.43 95% CI, 1.15–1.79; P =0.001), and myocardial infarction (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.54 95% CI, 1.06–2.23; P =0.022) compared with those in the second (lowest risk) PP quartile. Reductions in PP during sacubitril/valsartan run-in were associated with a decreased risk of the primary end point and total HF hospitalizations. One year after randomization, PP was significantly lower in the sacubitril/valsartan group compared with the valsartan group (3.0 mm Hg decrease 95% CI, 2.4–3.5; P <0.001). In conclusion, PP was an independent predictor of cardiovascular events in patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction enrolled in PARAGON-HF. Sacubitril/valsartan lowered PP compared with valsartan.
Suzuki et al. (Mon,) conducted a rct in Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (n=4,796). Sacubitril/valsartan vs. Valsartan was evaluated on Total HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular death (adjusted HR 1.39, 95% CI 1.14-1.69, p=0.001). Highest pulse pressure increased the risk of HF hospitalizations and CV death (HR 1.39; 95% CI 1.14-1.69), while sacubitril/valsartan significantly lowered pulse pressure compared with valsartan.