Episodes Archives - Cardionerds

The following question refers to Section 7.3 of the 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure. 

The question is asked by Palisades Medical Center medicine resident & CardioNerds Intern Dr. Maryam Barkhordarian, answered first by MedStar Washington Hospital Center cardiology hospitalist & CardioNerds Academy Graduate Dr. Luis Calderon, and then by expert faculty Dr. Gregg Fonarow.

Dr. Fonarow is the Professor of Medicine and Interim Chief of UCLA’s Division of Cardiology, Director of the Ahmanson-UCLA Cardiomyopathy Center, and Co-director of UCLA’s Preventative Cardiology Program.

The Decipher the Guidelines: 2022 AHA / ACC / HFSA Guideline for The Management of Heart Failure series was developed by the CardioNerds and created in collaboration with the American Heart Association and the Heart Failure Society of America. It was created by 30 trainees spanning college through advanced fellowship under the leadership of CardioNerds Cofounders Dr. Amit Goyal and Dr. Dan Ambinder, with mentorship from Dr. Anu Lala, Dr. Robert Mentz, and Dr. Nancy Sweitzer. We thank Dr. Judy Bezanson and Dr. Elliott Antman for tremendous guidance.

Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values.

Ms. Flo Zinn is a 60-year-old woman seen in cardiology clinic for follow up of her chronic HFrEF management. She has a history of stable coronary artery disease, hypertension, hypothyroidism, and recurrent urinary tract infections. She does not have a history of diabetes and recent hemoglobin A1c is 5.0%. Her current medications include carvedilol, sacubitril-valsartan, eplerenone, and atorvastatin. Her friend was recently placed on an SGLT2 inhibitor and asks if she should be considered for one as well. Which of the following is the most important consideration when deciding to start this patient on an SGLT2 inhibitor?

A

The patient does not have a history of type 2 diabetes and so does not qualify for SGLT2 inhibitor therapy

B

While SGLT2 inhibitors improve hospitalization rates for HFrEF, there is no evidence that they improve cardiovascular mortality

C

Patients taking SGLT2 inhibitors tend to suffer a more rapid decline in renal function than patients not taking SGLT2 inhibitor therapy

D

Patients may be at a higher risk for genitourinary infections if an SGLT2 inhibitor is started

Explanation

The correct answer is D – SGLT2 inhibitors have been associated with increased risk of genitourinary infections.

Sodium-glucose co-transporter protein 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have gathered a lot of press recently as the new kid on the block with respect to heart failure management. While they were initially developed as antihyperglycemic medications for treating diabetes, early cardiovascular outcomes trials showed reduced rates of heart failure hospitalization amongst study participants independent of glucose-lowering effects and irrespective of baseline heart failure status – only 10-14% of patients carried a heart failure diagnosis at baseline. This prompted trials to study the effects of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with symptomatic chronic HFrEF who were already on guideline directed medical therapy irrespective of the presence of type 2 diabetes mellitus. The DAPA-HF and EMPEROR-Reduced trials showed that dapagliflozin and empagliflozin, respectively, both conferred statistically significant improvements in a composite of heart failure hospitalizations and cardiovascular death (Option B). Most interestingly, these effects were seen irrespective of diabetes history. In light of these findings, the 2022 HF guidelines recommend SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with chronic, symptomatic HFrEF with or without diabetes to reduce hospitalization for HF and cardiovascular mortality (Class I, LOE A).

The benefits of SGLT2 inhibitors extend beyond cardiovascular health. Analyses of the DAPA-HF and EMPEROR-Reduced trials showed that patients receiving SGLT2 inhibitor therapy had fewer serious renal outcomes and slower rates of decline in eGFR than patients in the control groups.

As with all medications, though, SGLT2 inhibitors must be used with an awareness of some potentially serious side effects. SGLT2 inhibitors have been associated with higher rates of genitourinary infections, potentially related to the increased glycosuria associated with sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibition. Trials have shown a 2 to 4-fold increased risk of vulvovaginal candidiasis for patients on SGLT2is compared to placebo. SGLT2 inhibitor use has also been associated with bacterial urinary tract infections, Fournier’s gangrene, and euglycemic ketoacidosis.

Main Takeaway

SGLT2 inhibitors are now a class I recommendation for patients with chronic symptomatic HFrEF regardless of whether or not they have diabetes. Although SGLT2i increased risk for genital infections, they were otherwise well tolerated in the trials.

Guideline Loc.

Section 7.3.4

Decipher the Guidelines: 2022 Heart Failure Guidelines Page
CardioNerds Episode Page
CardioNerds Academy
Cardionerds Healy Honor Roll

CardioNerds Journal Club
Subscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!
Check out CardioNerds SWAG!
Become a CardioNerds Patron!

The following question refers to Section 7.3.1 of the 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure. 

The question is asked by Palisades Medical Center medicine resident & CardioNerds Intern Dr. Maryam Barkhordarian, answered first by MedStar Washington Hospital Center cardiology hospitalist & CardioNerds Academy Graduate Dr. Luis Calderon, and then by expert faculty Dr. Robert Mentz. 

Dr. Mentz is associate professor of medicine and section chief for Heart Failure at Duke University, a clinical researcher at the Duke Clinical Research Institute, and editor-in-chief of the Journal of Cardiac Failure. Dr. Mentz is a mentor for the CardioNerds Clinical Trials Network as lead principal investigator for PARAGLIDE-HF and is a series mentor for this very 2022 heart failure Decipher the Guidelines Series. For these reasons and many more, he was awarded the Master CardioNerd Award during ACC22. Welcome Dr. Mentz! 

The Decipher the Guidelines: 2022 AHA / ACC / HFSA Guideline for The Management of Heart Failure series was developed by the CardioNerds and created in collaboration with the American Heart Association and the Heart Failure Society of America. It was created by 30 trainees spanning college through advanced fellowship under the leadership of CardioNerds Cofounders Dr. Amit Goyal and Dr. Dan Ambinder, with mentorship from Dr. Anu Lala, Dr. Robert Mentz, and Dr. Nancy Sweitzer. We thank Dr. Judy Bezanson and Dr. Elliott Antman for tremendous guidance.

Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values.

Ms. Valarie Sartan is a 55-year-old woman with a history of HFrEF (EF 35%) and well controlled, non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus who presents to heart failure clinic for routine follow up. She is currently being treated with metoprolol succinate 200mg daily, lisinopril 10mg daily, empagliflozin 10mg daily, and spironolactone 50mg daily. She notes stable dyspnea with moderate exertion, making it difficult to do her yardwork. On exam she is well appearing, and blood pressure is 115/70 mmHg with normal jugular venous pulsations and trace bilateral lower extremity edema. On labs, her potassium is 4.0 mmol/L and creatinine is 0.7 mg/dL with an eGFR > 60 mL/min/1.73m2. Which of the following options would be the most appropriate next step in heart failure therapy? 

A 

Increase lisinopril to 40mg daily 

B 

Increase spironolactone to 100mg daily 

C 

Add sacubitril-valsartan to her regimen 

D 

Discontinue lisinopril and start sacubitril-valsartan in 36 hours 

E 

No change 

Explanation  

The correct answer is D – transitioning from an ACEi to an ARNi is the most appropriate next step in management.  

The renin-angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) is upregulated in patients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Blockade of the RAAS system with ACE inhibitors (ACEi), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), or angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ARNi) have proven mortality benefit in these patients.  

The PARADIGM-HF trial compared sacubitril-valsartan (an ARNi) with enalapril in symptomatic patients with HFrEF. Patients receiving ARNi incurred a 20% relative risk reduction in the composite primary endpoint of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization. Based on these results, the 2022 heart failure guidelines recommend replacing an ACEi or ARB for an ARNi in patients with chronic symptomatic HFrEF with NYHA class II or III symptoms to further reduce morbidity and mortality (Option D). This is a class I recommendation with level of evidence of B-R and is also of high economic value. Making no changes at this time would be inappropriate (Option E). 

While it would be reasonable to increase the dose of lisinopril to 40mg (Option A), this should be pursued only if ARNi therapy is not tolerated.  

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) have a class I (LOE A) recommendation in patients with HFrEF and NYHA class II to IV to reduce morbidity and mortality, provided that eGFR is >30 mL/min/1.73 m2 and serum potassium is <5.0 mEq/L, and there is careful monitoring of potassium, renal function, and diuretic dosing. However, the starting dose of spironolactone (or eplerenone) is 25 mg orally daily, increased to 50 mg daily orally after a month. Higher doses may be appropriate for other indications but are not advocated for HFrEF as the sole indication and so option B is incorrect.  

Guidance on starting an ARNi 

While switching from an ACEi to an ARNi, note that ARNi should not be administered concomitantly with ACEi or within 36 hours of the last dose of an ACEi (Class 3 for Harm, LOE B-R). This recommendation comes largely from studies of omapatrilat—a combination ACEi/neprilysin inhibitor. Patients receiving omapatrilat suffered significantly increased risk of angioedema thought secondary to dual suppression of both ACE and neprilysin leading to high concentrations of bradykinin. The current guidelines therefore recommend a washout period of at least 36 hours between the last ACEi dose and the first ARNi dose. If this patient were being transitioned from an ARB such as valsartan, then the first dose of ARNi could simply be given in lieu of the next anticipated dose of ARB.  

When initiating sacubitril-valsartan, it is important to monitor for signs of hypotension. With this patient’s blood pressure of 115/70 mmHg in clinic, she should have enough blood pressure room to tolerate the new medication; both PARADIGM-HF (ARNi vs ACEi in stable chronic HFrEF) and PIONEER-HF (ARNi vs ACEi in hospitalized patients with ADHF) excluded patients with SBP < 100 mmHg. That said, every patient responds differently, and anticipatory guidance should be given to anybody starting a new drug. In particular, Ms. H.F. should be counseled on symptoms that could reflect low blood pressure, such as lightheadedness or orthostatic syncope, asked to call her provider should she experience anything concerning. Laboratory follow-up should include renal function and potassium levels. ARNis should not be initiated on any patient with a history of angioedema (Class III for Harm, LOE C-LD). While this patient likely does not have this history since she is tolerating and ACEi, it is an important part of any CardioNerd’s checklist when reaching for RAAS inhibitors.  

Main Takeaway 

Patients with symptomatic HFrEF who are tolerating ACEi or ARB therapy should be transitioned to ARNi therapy to further reduce morbidity and mortality. 

Expert Suggestions 

Guideline Loc. 

Section 7.3.1  

Decipher the Guidelines: 2022 Heart Failure Guidelines Page
CardioNerds Episode Page
CardioNerds Academy
Cardionerds Healy Honor Roll

CardioNerds Journal Club
Subscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!
Check out CardioNerds SWAG!
Become a CardioNerds Patron!

CardioNerds co-founder Daniel Ambinder joins Cleveland Clinic cardiology fellows, Dr. Essa Hariri, Dr. Anna Scandinaro, and Dr. Beka Bekhdatze, Clinical pharmacist at Cleveland Clinic, Dr. Ashley Kasper, and Dr. Craig Parris from Ohio State University Medical Center for a walk at Edgewater Park in Cleveland, Ohio. Dr. Andrew Higgins (Crtitical Care Cardiology and Advanced HF / Transplant Cardiology at Cleveland Clinic) provides the ECPR for this episode. They discuss the following case involving a rare cause of non-ischemic cardiomyopathy. A young African American male was admitted for cardiogenic shock following an admission a month earlier for treatment resistant psychosis. He was diagnosed with medication-induced non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, which resolved with a remarkable recovery of his systolic function after discontinuation of the culprit medication, Clozapine. Episode notes were drafted by Dr. Essa Hariri. Audio editing by CardioNerds Academy Intern, student doctor Shivani Reddy.

Enjoy this case report co-published in US Cardiology Review: Clozapine-induced Cardiomyopathy: A Case Report

CardioNerds is collaborating with Radcliffe Cardiology and US Cardiology Review journal (USC) for a ‘call for cases’, with the intention to co-publish high impact cardiovascular case reports, subject to double-blind peer review. Case Reports that are accepted in USC journal and published as the version of record (VOR), will also be indexed in Scopus and the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ).

Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values.

CardioNerds Case Reports Page
CardioNerds Episode Page
CardioNerds Academy
Cardionerds Healy Honor Roll

CardioNerds Journal Club
Subscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!
Check out CardioNerds SWAG!
Become a CardioNerds Patron!

We treated a case of clozapine-associated cardiomyopathy presenting in cardiogenic shock. Drug-induced cardiomyopathy is a common yet under-recognized etiology of non-ischemic cardiomyopathy. Clozapine is an FDA-approved atypical antipsychotic medication frequently prescribed for treatment-resistant schizophrenia and the only antipsychotic agent that has been proven to significantly reduce suicide among this patient population.

However, Clozapine is reported to be associated with several forms of cardiotoxicity, including myocarditis (most common), subclinical clozapine associated cardiotoxicity, and least commonly, drug-induced cardiomyopathy. Clozapine-associated cardiomyopathy should be considered as a differential diagnosis in schizophrenic patients presenting with signs of acute heart failure. 

Rapid titration of clozapine is a risk factor for clozapine-associated cardiomyopathy and clozapine-associated myocarditis. To date, there is no evidence or consensus supporting preemptive screening. According to the American Psychiatric Association, whenever clozapine-induced myocarditis or cardiomyopathy is suspected, a cardiology consult is warranted. Experts recommend, when initiating clozapine, to obtain baseline troponin, CRP, and echocardiography upon drug initiation. This is followed by daily symptom assessment and a hemodynamic assessment on every other day. A biochemical assessment of CRP and troponin levels is warranted every 7 days. The authors recommend clozapine caseation if troponin rises above twice the upper normal limit or if CRP levels exceeds 100 mg/L. Because clozapine is a highly effective medication in treating schizophrenia, close monitoring and vigilance is critical to prevent deleterious complications associated with drug cardiotoxicity. Several mechanisms have been proposed to explain the cardiotoxicities reported with clozapine. Most patients with clozapine-associated cardiotoxicity remain asymptomatic, while others may present with typical acute congestive heart failure. The most common presenting symptom was shortness of breath (60%) followed by palpitations (36%), and the main echocardiographic finding in all patients with this disease is systolic dysfunction with reduced ejection fraction.

The management of clozapine-associated cardiomyopathy includes clozapine cessation and heart failure guideline-directed medical therapy. Clozapine suspension along with conventional heart failure management have led to a significant improvement in left ventricular function. Decisions regarding resuming clozapine therapy are highly individualized and should consider weighing in the risks and benefits of treatment. Whenever clozapine is rechallenged, very close monitoring and frequent echocardiography may be warranted to prevent subsequent cardiotoxicity.

1.        Tsao CW, Aday AW, Almarzooq ZI, et al. Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2022 Update: A Report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2022;145(8). doi:10.1161/CIR.0000000000001052

2.        Heidenreich PA, Albert NM, Allen LA, et al. Forecasting the impact of heart failure in the united states a policy statement from the american heart association. Circ Heart Fail. 2013;6(3). doi:10.1161/HHF.0b013e318291329a

3.        VanDyck TJ, Pinsky MR. Hemodynamic monitoring in cardiogenic shock. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2021;27(4). doi:10.1097/MCC.0000000000000838

4.        Keepers GA, Fochtmann LJ, Anzia JM, et al. The American psychiatric association practice guideline for the treatment of patients with schizophrenia. American Journal of Psychiatry. 2020;177(9). doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2020.177901

5.        Hennen J, Baldessarini RJ. Suicidal risk during treatment with clozapine: A meta-analysis. Schizophr Res. 2005;73(2-3). doi:10.1016/j.schres.2004.05.015

6.        Taipale H, Tanskanen A, Mehtälä J, Vattulainen P, Correll CU, Tiihonen J. 20-year follow-up study of physical morbidity and mortality in relationship to antipsychotic treatment in a nationwide cohort of 62,250 patients with schizophrenia (FIN20). World Psychiatry. 2020;19(1):61-68. doi:10.1002/wps.20699

7.        Citrome L, McEvoy JP, Saklad SR. A guide to the management of clozapine-related tolerability and safety concerns. Clin Schizophr Relat Psychoses. 2016;10(3). doi:10.3371/1935-1232.10.3.163

8.        Knoph KN, Morgan RJ, Palmer BA, et al. Clozapine-induced cardiomyopathy and myocarditis monitoring: A systematic review. Schizophr Res. 2018;199. doi:10.1016/j.schres.2018.03.006

9.        Kanniah G, Kumar S. Clozapine associated cardiotoxicity: Issues, challenges and way forward. Asian J Psychiatr. 2020;50. doi:10.1016/j.ajp.2020.101950

10.      Curto M, Girardi N, Lionetto L, Ciavarella GM, Ferracuti S, Baldessarini RJ. Systematic Review of Clozapine Cardiotoxicity. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2016;18(7). doi:10.1007/s11920-016-0704-3

11.      Baran DA, Grines CL, Bailey S, et al. SCAI clinical expert consensus statement on the classification of cardiogenic shock: This document was endorsed by the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM), and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) in April 2019. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions. 2019;94(1). doi:10.1002/ccd.28329

12.      Alawami M, Wasywich C, Cicovic A, Kenedi C. A systematic review of clozapine induced cardiomyopathy. Int J Cardiol. 2014;176(2). doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2014.07.103

13.      Arzuk E, Karakuş F, Orhan H. Bioactivation of clozapine by mitochondria of the murine heart: Possible cause of cardiotoxicity. Toxicology. 2021;447. doi:10.1016/j.tox.2020.152628

14.      Vaddadi KS, Soosai E, Vaddadi G. Low blood selenium concentrations in schizophrenic patients on clozapine. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2003;55(3). doi:10.1046/j.1365-2125.2003.01773.x

15.      Yost BL, Gleich GJ, Fryer AD. Ozone-induced hyperresponsiveness and blockade of M2 muscarinic receptors by eosinophil major basic protein. J Appl Physiol. 1999;87(4). doi:10.1152/jappl.1999.87.4.1272

16.      Yuen JWY, Kim DD, Procyshyn RM, White RF, Honer WG, Barr AM. Clozapine-induced cardiovascular side effects and autonomic dysfunction: A systematic review. Front Neurosci. 2018;12(APR). doi:10.3389/fnins.2018.00203

17.      Ronaldson KJ, Taylor AJ, Fitzgerald PB, Topliss DJ, Elsik M, McNeil JJ. Diagnostic characteristics of clozapine-induced myocarditis identified by an analysis of 38 cases and 47 controls. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry. 2010;71(8). doi:10.4088/JCP.09m05024yel

18.      de Leon J, Tang YL, Baptista T, Cohen D, Schulte PFJ. Titrating clozapine amidst recommendations proposing high myocarditis risk and rapid titrations. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2015;132(4). doi:10.1111/acps.12421

19.      Ronaldson KJ, Fitzgerald PB, Taylor AJ, Topliss DJ, Wolfe R, McNeil JJ. Rapid clozapine dose titration and concomitant sodium valproate increase the risk of myocarditis with clozapine: A case-control study. Schizophr Res. 2012;141(2-3). doi:10.1016/j.schres.2012.08.018

20.      Ronaldson KJ, Fitzgerald PB, Taylor AJ, Topliss DJ, McNeil JJ. A new monitoring protocol for clozapine-induced myocarditis based on an analysis of 75 cases and 94 controls. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry. 2011;45(6). doi:10.3109/00048674.2011.572852

21.      Patel RK, Moore AM, Piper S, et al. Clozapine and cardiotoxicity – A guide for psychiatrists written by cardiologists. Psychiatry Res. 2019;282. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2019.112491

22.      Cook SC, Ferguson BA, Cotes RO, Heinrich TW, Schwartz AC. Clozapine-Induced Myocarditis: Prevention and Considerations in Rechallenge. Psychosomatics. 2015;56(6). doi:10.1016/j.psym.2015.07.002

23.      de Leon J, Schoretsanitis G, Smith RL, et al. An International Adult Guideline for Making Clozapine Titration Safer by Using Six Ancestry-Based Personalized Dosing Titrations, CRP, and Clozapine Levels [published correction appears in Pharmacopsychiatry. 2022 Jan 20;:]. Pharmacopsychiatry. 2022;55(2):73-86. doi:10.1055/a-1625-6388

Renal replacement therapy (RRT) is routinely utilized in the CICU. Series co-chairs Dr. Eunice Dugan and Dr Karan Desai along with CardioNerds Co-founder Dr. Daniel Ambinder were joined by FIT lead and CardioNerds Ambassador from University of Washington, Dr. Tomio Tran. Our episode expert is world-renowned nephrologist Dr. Joel Topf. Dr. Topf is Medical Director of Research at St. Clair Nephrology, and editor of the Handbook of Critical Care Nephrology. In this episode, we describe a case of cardiogenic shock due to acute myocardial infarction resulting in renal failure, ultimately requiring continuous RRT (CRRT). We discuss the most common causes of AKI within the cardiac ICU, indications for initiating RRT, evidence on the timing of RRT, different modes of RRT, basic management of the RRT circuit, and how to transition patients off of RRT during renal recovery. Episode notes were drafted by Dr. Tomio Tran. Audio editing by CardioNerds Academy Intern, Dr. Maryam Barkhordarian.

The CardioNerds Cardiac Critical Care Series is a multi-institutional collaboration made possible by contributions of stellar fellow leads and expert faculty from several programs, led by series co-chairs, Dr. Mark Belkin, Dr. Eunice Dugan, Dr. Karan Desai, and Dr. Yoav Karpenshif.

Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values.

This episode is made possible with support from Glass.Health – The first digital notebook designed for doctors. Follow @GlassHealthHQ for the latest product updates!

Pearls • Notes • References • Production Team

CardioNerds Cardiac Critical Care Page
CardioNerds Episode Page
CardioNerds Academy
Cardionerds Healy Honor Roll

CardioNerds Journal Club
Subscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!
Check out CardioNerds SWAG!
Become a CardioNerds Patron!

What are the risk factors and differential for AKI in the CICU?

What is the approach to timing of renal replacement therapy initiation?

For the non-nephrologists, what are options for RRT acutely and how do they work?

What should non-nephrologists understand about daily management of patients on CVVH?

How does the CICU team monitor for native renal recovery and initiate cardiovascular GDMT?

Join CardioNerds to learn about patent ducts arteriosus and Eisenmenger syndrome! Dr. Dan Ambinder (CardioNerds co-founder), ACHD series co-chair Dr. Dan Clark,  Dr. Tony Pastor (ACHD fellow, Harvard Medical School), and Dr. Kate Wilcox, Medicine/Pediatrics Resident, Medical College of Wisconsin join Dr. Candice Silversides (Editor-in-chief #JACCAdvances) for this terrific discussion. Notes were drafted by Dr. Kate Wilcox. .Audio editing by CardioNerds Academy Intern, Dr. Maryam Barkhordarian.

Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values.

The CardioNerds Adult Congenital Heart Disease (ACHD) series provides a comprehensive curriculum to dive deep into the labyrinthine world of congenital heart disease with the aim of empowering every CardioNerd to help improve the lives of people living with congenital heart disease. This series is multi-institutional collaborative project made possible by contributions of stellar fellow leads and expert faculty from several programs, led by series co-chairs, Dr. Josh Saef, Dr. Agnes Koczo, and Dr. Dan Clark.

The CardioNerds Adult Congenital Heart Disease Series is developed in collaboration with the Adult Congenital Heart Association, The CHiP Network, and Heart University. See more

Disclosures: None

CardioNerds Adult Congenital Heart Disease Page
CardioNerds Episode Page
CardioNerds Academy
Cardionerds Healy Honor Roll

CardioNerds Journal Club
Subscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!
Check out CardioNerds SWAG!
Become a CardioNerds Patron!

Adult Congenital Heart Association
Founded in 1998, the Adult Congenital Heart Association is an organization begun by and dedicated to supporting individuals and families living with congenital heart disease and advancing the care and treatment available to our community. Our mission is to empower the congenital heart disease community by advancing access to resources and specialized care that improve patient-centered outcomes. Visit their website (https://www.achaheart.org/) for information on their patient advocacy efforts, educational material, and membership for patients and providers

CHiP Network

The CHiP network is a non-profit organization aiming to connect congenital heart professionals around the world. Visit their website (thechipnetwork.org) and become a member to access free high-quality educational material, upcoming news and events, and the fantastic monthly Journal Watch, keeping you up to date with congenital scientific releases. Visit their website (https://thechipnetwork.org/) for more information.

Heart University
Heart University aims to be “the go-to online resource” for e-learning in CHD and paediatric-acquired heart disease. It is a carefully curated open access library of educational material for all providers of care to children and adults with CHD or children with acquired heart disease, whether a trainee or a practicing provider. The site provides free content to a global audience in two broad domains: 1. A comprehensive curriculum of training modules and associated testing for trainees. 2. A curated library of conference and grand rounds recordings for continuing medical education. Learn more at www.heartuniversity.org/

The Cardiorenal Syndrome is commonly encountered, and frequently misunderstood. Join the CardioNerds team as we discuss the complex interplay between the heart and kidneys with Dr. Elliott Miller (Assistant Professor of Medicine at Yale University School of Medicine and Associate Medical Director of the Cardiac Intensive Care Unit of Yale New Haven Hospital), and Dr. Nayan Arora (Clinical Assistant Professor of Medicine and Nephrologist at the University of Washington Medical Center). We are hosted by FIT lead Dr. Matthew Delfiner (Cardiology Fellow at Temple University), Cardiac Critical Care Series Co-Chairs Dr. Mark Belkin (AHFTC faculty at University of Chicago) and Dr. Karan Desai (Cardiologist at Johns Hopkins Hospital), and CardioNerds Co-Found Dr. Dan Ambinder. In this episode we discuss the definition and pathophysiology of the cardiorenal syndrome, explore strategies for initial diuresis and diuretic resistance, and management of the common heart failure medications in this setting. Show notes were developed by Dr. Matthew Delfiner. Audio editing by CardioNerds Academy Intern, student doctor Akiva Rosenzveig.

The CardioNerds Cardiac Critical Care Series is a multi-institutional collaboration made possible by contributions of stellar fellow leads and expert faculty from several programs, led by series co-chairs, Dr. Mark Belkin, Dr. Eunice Dugan, Dr. Karan Desai, and Dr. Yoav Karpenshif.

Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values.

Pearls • Notes • References • Production Team

CardioNerds Cardiac Critical Care Page
CardioNerds Episode Page
CardioNerds Academy
Cardionerds Healy Honor Roll

CardioNerds Journal Club
Subscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!
Check out CardioNerds SWAG!
Become a CardioNerds Patron!

1. Cardiorenal syndrome (CRS) is a collection of signs/symptoms that indicate injury to both the heart and kidneys. Organ dysfunction in one can drive dysfunction in the other. Cardiorenal syndrome can be categorized as:

These categories can be helpful for education, discussion, and research purposes, but they do not usually enter clinical practice on a regular basis since different categories of cardiorenal syndrome are not necessarily treated differently.

2. CRS is caused by either reduced renal perfusion, elevated renal congestion, or a combination of the two. When dealing with CRS, note that:

3. Renal decongestion is achieved primarily through diuresis.

4. It is okay if creatinine rises with diuresis, to a degree.

5. There are multiple ways to manage diuretic resistance.

6. Decisions regarding cessation versus continuation of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors in the setting of CRS should be made on a case-by-case basis.

Dr. Filip Ionescu (hematology-oncology fellow at Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, FL), Dr. Teodora Donisan (cardiology fellow at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN and CardioNerds House Thomas chief), Dr. Sarah Waliany (internal medicine chief resident at Stanford University in Palo Alto, CA), Dr. Dinu Balanescu (internal medicine chief resident at Beaumont Hospital in Royal Oak, MI) and Dr. Amit Goyal (structural interventional cardiology fellow at the Cleveland Clinic, in Cleveland, OH and CardioNerds Co-Founder), discuss the cardiotoxicities of common cancer treatments with Dr. Susan Dent, a medical oncologist and one of the founders of the field of Cardio-Oncology. Using the recently published ESC Guidelines on cardio-oncology, they cover cardiovascular risk stratification in oncology patients, pretreatment testing, as well as prevention and management of established cardiotoxicity resulting from anthracyclines, trastuzumab, and fluoropyrimidines. They touch on the unique aspects of cardio-oncology encountered in patients with breast cancer, rectal cancer, and lung cancer, who are frequently the recipients of multiple cardiotoxic treatments. Audio editing by CardioNerds Academy Intern, student doctor Chelsea Amo Tweneboah.

Access the CardioNerds Cardiac Amyloidosis Series for a deep dive into this important topic.

This episode is supported by a grant from Pfizer Inc.

This CardioNerds Cardio-Oncology series is a multi-institutional collaboration made possible by contributions of stellar fellow leads and expert faculty from several programs, led by series co-chairs, Dr. Giselle Suero Abreu, Dr. Dinu Balanescu, and Dr. Teodora Donisan. 

Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values.

Pearls • Notes • References • Production Team

CardioNerds Cardio-Oncology Page
CardioNerds Episode Page
CardioNerds Academy
Cardionerds Healy Honor Roll

CardioNerds Journal Club
Subscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!
Check out CardioNerds SWAG!
Become a CardioNerds Patron!

Awareness and management of the cardiovascular toxicity of oncology treatments are of paramount importance to be able to deliver treatment safely and to achieve maximal efficacy guided by an expert multidisciplinary team. Thanks to Dr. Dent and her colleagues’ work, this year we have seen the publication of the first Cardio-Oncology guideline (1). Perhaps the most important recommendation is that cancer patients about to start a cardiotoxic regimen should undergo formal cardiovascular risk stratification by considering both the adverse profile of the planned treatment and patient-related factors (e.g., preexisting heart disease, hypertension, smoking). High-risk patients may be referred early to a cardio-oncologist who can anticipate and mitigate toxicities. In addition to risk stratification, specific treatment modalities may require additional imaging and biochemical testing as outlined next. 

Anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity generally manifests as a permanent decrease in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) caused by direct toxic effect of the cytotoxic chemotherapy on the cardiomyocytes. The risk factors for developing anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity are cumulative anthracycline dose, advanced age, pretreatment low-normal LVEF, prior cardiovascular disease, as well as other established cardiovascular risk factors (e.g., hypertension, diabetes, obesity, smoking).  

All patients who are about to received anthracyclines require a baseline echocardiogram, ideally with global longitudinal strain, and an electrocardiogram. For patients who are at moderate-to-high risk of developing cardiomyopathy, B-type natriuretic peptide and Troponin can also be helpful for monitoring.  

When a decrease in LVEF below 50% is detected, management usually involves holding the anthracycline and repeating imaging. At this point, discussion with a cardio-oncologist about the initiation of ACC/AHA guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) is warranted. If there is improvement in the LVEF with this approach, the decision to rechallenge is nuanced and often part of a multidisciplinary and shared decision-making process with the patient.  

In the case of a rechallenge, two ways to mitigate the risk of cardiac damage are using liposomal doxorubicin, which is a less cardiotoxic anthracycline formulation, and co-administration of dexrazoxane, which is the only FDA-approved cardioprotectant for use in this setting. 

Trastuzumab is a monoclonal antibody directed against the HER2 receptor molecule expressed on breast cancer cells. The actual mechanism of trastuzumab-associated cardiotoxicity is not clear, but it appears to be more akin to myocardial stunning and is generally reversible. If it occurs, a decrease in LVEF appears early and for most patients withholding the drug is effective in reversing the effect.  

For those patients with a nadir LVEF < 50%, there is evidence to support the efficacy of GDMT. For those with an LVEF decrease in the 40-49% range, trastuzumab can be continued concomitantly with GDMT and close monitoring of LVEF. In cases with severe LVEF decrease <40%, the decision to continue or rechallenge becomes more complicated and always should involve a multidisciplinary discussion of the risks and benefits of either approach. Depending on the goal of treatment (curative in the adjuvant setting or palliative in the metastatic setting), the actual predicted benefit and whether the cardiac function recovers with GDMT, trastuzumab could potentially be restarted.  

In recent years we have seen the advent of antibody drug conjugates (T-DM1, T-DXd) which in addition the antibody directed against HER2 (trastuzumab) also carry a cytotoxic payload (2). While the experience with these newer agents is still limited, early data suggest these are no more cardiotoxic than trastuzumab. However, the impact of long-term, sequential exposure to these agents on cardiovascular outcomes is unknown. 

Fluoropyrimidines are analogs of nucleic acid bases which inhibit synthesis of DNA and RNA. These are some of the most widely use anticancer drugs and examples include 5-fluorouracil (5FU) and capecitabine (an oral prodrug of 5FU). Fluoropyrimidine-associated cardiotoxicity presents primarily with cardiac ischemia caused by coronary vasospasm or endothelial damage, although these are not the only mechanisms by which these drugs can damage the cardiovascular system (3). This is a phenomenon which typically occurs early in therapy after 1-2 cycles and its incidence varies greatly with the mode of administration, occurring in >10% of patients treated with a 5FU infusion (or continuous capecitabine) versus in 3-5% of those who receive the 5FU as a bolus.  

Rechallenge is possible in select patients who take active part in the decision-making process and who are deemed to derive substantially larger benefits than risks from continuing. When done, rechallenges usually take place in an inpatient setting with close monitoring and co-administration of calcium channel blockers and nitrates. 

Generally, presentations are clinically apparent with symptoms of ischemia and management necessarily includes holding the drug and performing an ischemic work-up which may require invasive testing such as coronary angiography. If there is a clear temporal association with fluoropyrimidine use and ischemic symptoms, a multidisciplinary discussion on whether treatment should be continued is warranted.  

Lung cancer patients are the perfect storm for cardiotoxicity. The prevalence of smoking is very high in this particular cohort which correlates with preexisting cardiovascular disease. Furthermore, radiation to the chest, tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) targeting EGFR or ALK, and immune checkpoint inhibitors are frequently part of the treatment schema and have defined cardiovascular toxicities (4). As such, these patients are very likely to benefit from cardiology consultation and optimization of cardiovascular risk factors prior to initiating cancer therapy. 

These systemic treatments were initially developed for metastatic disease but are now making their way into the adjuvant setting. These drugs can maintain efficacy for a long time which translates into prolonged exposure and cardiovascular side effects such as hypertension and QT prolongation.  

Immune checkpoint inhibitors can cause hyperactivation of the immune system resulting in immune attack of normal structures, such as the myocardium. While immune-mediated myocarditis is uncommon (1-2%), it can be very severe with mortality rates approaching 50%, underlining the importance of early recognition and treatment. 

1. Lyon AR, López-Fernández T, Couch LS, et al. 2022 ESC Guidelines on cardio-oncology developed in collaboration with the European Hematology Association (EHA), the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ESTRO) and the International Cardio-Oncology Society (IC-OS): Developed by the task force on cardio-oncology of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). European Heart Journal. Published online August 26, 2022:ehac244. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehac244 

2. Dent SF, Morse A, Burnette S, Guha A, Moore H. Cardiovascular Toxicity of Novel HER2-Targeted Therapies in the Treatment of Breast Cancer. Current Oncology Reports. 2021;23(11). doi:10.1007/s11912-021-01114-x 

3. Sara JD, Kaur J, Khodadadi R, et al. 5-fluorouracil and cardiotoxicity: a review. Ther Adv Med Oncol. 2018;10:1758835918780140. doi:10.1177/1758835918780140 

4. Kunimasa K, Kamada R, Oka T, et al. Cardiac Adverse Events in EGFR-Mutated Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Treated With Osimertinib. JACC: CardioOncology. 2020;2(1):1-10. doi:10.1016/j.jaccao.2020.02.003 

International Cardio-Oncology Society ( IC-OS). IC-OS exits to advance cardiovascular care of cancer patients and survivors by promoting collaboration among researchers, educators and clinicians around the world. Learn more at https://ic-os.org/.

CardioNerds Cofounder Dr. Amit Goyal join Dr. Usman Hasnie and Dr. Will Morgan from University of Alabama at Birmingham for a hike up Red Mountain. They discuss the following case: A 75-year-old woman with prior mitral valve ring annuloplasty presented with subacute, intermittent, self-limiting neurologic deficits. Brain MRI revealed multiple subacute embolic events consistent with cardioembolic phenomena. Transesophageal echochardiogram discovered a mobile mass on the mitral valve as the likely cause for cardioembolic stroke. She was taken for surgical repair of the mitral valve. Tissue biopsy confirmed that the mass was an IgG4-related pseudotumor. Expert commentary is provided by Dr. Neal Miller (Assistant Professor of Cardiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham). Audio editing by CardioNerds Academy Intern, student doctor Adriana Mares

Check out this published case report here: IgG4-Related Disease Masquerading as Culture-Negative Endocarditis!

Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values.

This episode is made possible with support from Glass.Health – The first digital notebook designed for doctors. Follow @GlassHealthHQ for the latest product updates!

CardioNerds Case Reports Page
CardioNerds Episode Page
CardioNerds Academy
Cardionerds Healy Honor Roll

CardioNerds Journal Club
Subscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!
Check out CardioNerds SWAG!
Become a CardioNerds Patron!

Notes were drafted by Dr. Hasnie and Dr. Morgan

1. Kamisawa T, Funata N, Hayashi Y, et al. A new clinicopathological entity of IgG4- related autoimmune disease. J Gastroenterol 2003;38:982-4.

 
2. Deshpande V, Zen Y, Chan JK, et al. Consensus statement on the pathology of IgG4-related disease. Mod Pathol. 2012;25(9):1181-1192. doi:10.1038/modpathol.2012.72

 
3. Dahlgren M, Khosroshahi A, Nielsen GP, Deshpande V, Stone JH. Riedel’s thyroiditis and multifocal fibrosclerosis are part of the IgG4-related systemic disease spectrum. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2010;62:1312-8.

 
4. Stone JH, Khosroshahi A, Hilgenberg A, Spooner A, Isselbacher EM, Stone JR. IgG4 related systemic disease and lymphoplasmacytic aortitis. Arthritis Rheum 2009;60:313945.

 
5. Saeki T, Saito A, Hiura T, et al. Lymphoplasmacytic infiltration of multiple organs with immunoreactivity for IgG4: IgG4-related systemic disease. Intern Med 2006;45:163-7.

 
6. Kamisawa T, Takuma K, Egawa N, Tsuruta K, Sasaki T. Autoimmune pancreatitis and IgG4-related sclerosing disease. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010;7:401-9.

 
7. Shakir A, Wheeler Y, Krishnaswamy G. The enigmatic immunoglobulin G4-related disease and its varied cardiovascular manifestations. Heart. 2021;107(10):790-798. doi:10.1136/heartjnl-2020-318041

 
8. Tyebally S, Chen D, Bhattacharyya S, Mughrabi A, Hussain Z, Manisty C, et al. Cardiac tumors: JACC cardio oncology state-of-the-art review. J Am Coll Cardiol CardioOnc. 2020;2:293–311

 
9. Selkane C, Amahzoune B, Chavanis N, et al. Changing management of cardiac myxoma based on a series of 40 cases with long-term follow-up. Ann Thorac Surg. 2003;76(6):1935-1938. doi:10.1016/s0003-4975(03)01245-1

 
10. Sun JP, Asher CR, Yang XS, et al. Clinical and echocardiographic characteristics of papillary fibroelastomas: a retrospective and prospective study in 162 patients. Circulation. 2001;103(22):2687-2693. doi:10.1161/01.cir.103.22.

11. Stone JH, Zen Y, Deshpande V. IgG4-related disease. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(6):539-551. doi:10.1056/NEJMra1104650

12. Hasnie UA, Herrera LN, Morgan WS, Rodriguez JM, Litovsky S, Chatham WW, Winokur T, Muzny CA. IgG4-Related Disease Masquerading As Culture-Negative Endocarditis. AIM Clinical Cases. 2022;1. doi: 10.7326/aimcc.2022.0075

13. 2016 ASE Guideline: https://www.asecho.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/2016_Cardiac-Source-of-Embolism.pdf

14.  Shakir A, Wheeler Y, Krishnaswamy G. The enigmatic immunoglobulin G4-related disease and its varied cardiovascular manifestations Heart 2021;107:790-798.

15. Karadeniz H, Vaglio A. IgG4-related disease: a contemporary review. Turk J Med Sci. 2020 Nov 3;50(SI-2):1616-1631. doi: 10.3906/sag-2006-375. PMID: 32777900; PMCID: PMC7672352.

The following question refers to Section 7.4 of the 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure. The question is asked by New York Medical College medical student and CardioNerds Intern Akiva Rosenzveig, answered first by Cornell cardiology fellow and CardioNerds Ambassador Dr. Jaya Kanduri, and then by expert faculty Dr. Randall Starling.

Dr. Starling is Professor of Medicine and an advanced heart failure and transplant cardiologist at the Cleveland Clinic where he was formerly the Section Head of Heart Failure, Vice Chairman of Cardiovascular Medicine, and member of the Cleveland Clinic Board of Governors. Dr. Starling is also Past President of the Heart Failure Society of America in 2018-2019. Dr. Staring was among the earliest CardioNerds faculty guests and has since been a valuable source of mentorship and inspiration. Dr. Starling’s sponsorship and support was instrumental in the origins of the CardioNerds Clinical Trials Program.

The Decipher the Guidelines: 2022 AHA / ACC / HFSA Guideline for The Management of Heart Failure series was developed by the CardioNerds and created in collaboration with the American Heart Association and the Heart Failure Society of America. It was created by 30 trainees spanning college through advanced fellowship under the leadership of CardioNerds Cofounders Dr. Amit Goyal and Dr. Dan Ambinder, with mentorship from Dr. Anu Lala, Dr. Robert Mentz, and Dr. Nancy Sweitzer. We thank Dr. Judy Bezanson and Dr. Elliott Antman for tremendous guidance.

Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values.

Mr. D is a 50-year-old man who presented two months ago with palpations and new onset bilateral lower extremity swelling. Review of systems was negative for prior syncope. On transthoracic echocardiogram, he had an LVEF of 40% with moderate RV dilation and dysfunction. EKG showed inverted T-waves and low-amplitude signals just after the QRS in leads V1-V3. Ambulatory monitor revealed several episodes non-sustained ventricular tachycardia with a LBBB morphology.

He was initiated on GDMT and underwent genetic testing that revealed 2 desmosomal gene variants associated with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC).

Is the following statement true or false?

“ICD implantation is inappropriate at this time because his LVEF is >35%”

True

False

Explanation

This statement is False. ICD implantation is reasonable to decrease sudden death in patients with genetic arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy with high-risk features of sudden death who have an LVEF ≤45% (Class 2a, LOE B-NR).

While the HF guidelines do not define high-risk features of sudden death, the 2019 HRS expert consensus statement on evaluation, risk stratification, and management of arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy identify major and minor risk factors for ventricular arrhythmias as follows:

According to the HRS statement, high risk is defined as having either three major, two major and two minor, or one major and four minor risk factors for a class 2a recommendation for primary prevention ICD in this population (LOE B-NR).

Based on these criteria, our patient has 2 major risk factors (NSVT & LVEF ≤ 49%), and 3 minor risk factors (male sex, RV dysfunction, and 2 desmosomal variants) for ventricular arrhythmias. Therefore, ICD implantation for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death is reasonable.

Decisions around ICD implantation for primary prevention remain challenging and depend on estimated risk for SCD, co-morbidities, and patient preferences, and so should be guided by shared decision making weighing the possible benefits against the risks, especially in younger patients.

Main Takeaway

In patients with genetic arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy with high-risk features of sudden death with LVEF ≤ 45%, implantation of ICD is reasonable.

Guideline Loc.

Section 7.4

Also: Section 3.10 from “Towbin, J. A., McKenna, W. J., Abrams, D. J., Ackerman, M. J., Calkins, H., Darrieux, F. C. C., Daubert, J. P., de Chillou, C., DePasquale, E. C., Desai, M. Y., Estes, N. A. M., Hua, W., Indik, J. H., Ingles, J., James, C. A., John, R. M., Judge, D. P., Keegan, R., Krahn, A. D., … Zareba, W. (2019). 2019 HRS expert consensus statement on evaluation, risk stratification, and management of arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy. Heart Rhythm, 16(11), e301–e372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2019.05.007”

Decipher the Guidelines: 2022 Heart Failure Guidelines Page
CardioNerds Episode Page
CardioNerds Academy
Cardionerds Healy Honor Roll

CardioNerds Journal Club
Subscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!
Check out CardioNerds SWAG!
Become a CardioNerds Patron!

The following question refers to Section 7.1 of the 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure. The question is asked by New York Medical College medical student and CardioNerds Intern Akiva Rosenzveig, answered first by Cornell cardiology fellow and CardioNerds Ambassador Dr. Jaya Kanduri, and then by expert faculty Dr. Clyde Yancy.

Dr. Yancy is Professor of Medicine and Medical Social Sciences, Chief of Cardiology, and Vice Dean for Diversity and Inclusion at Northwestern University, and a member of the AHA/ACC/HFSA Heart Failure Guideline Writing Committee.

The Decipher the Guidelines: 2022 AHA / ACC / HFSA Guideline for The Management of Heart Failure series was developed by the CardioNerds and created in collaboration with the American Heart Association and the Heart Failure Society of America. It was created by 30 trainees spanning college through advanced fellowship under the leadership of CardioNerds Cofounders Dr. Amit Goyal and Dr. Dan Ambinder, with mentorship from Dr. Anu Lala, Dr. Robert Mentz, and Dr. Nancy Sweitzer. We thank Dr. Judy Bezanson and Dr. Elliott Antman for tremendous guidance.

Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values.

Ms. L is a 65-year-old woman with nonischemic cardiomyopathy with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 35%, hypertension, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. She has been admitted to the hospital with decompensated heart failure (HF) twice in the last six months and admits that she struggles to understand how to take her medications and adjust her sodium intake to prevent this.  Which of the following interventions has the potential to decrease the risk of rehospitalization and/or improve mortality?

A

Access to a multidisciplinary team (physicians, nurses, pharmacists, social workers, care managers, etc) to assist with management of her HF

B

Engaging in a mobile app aimed at improving HF self-care

C

Vaccination against respiratory illnesses

D

A & C

The correct answer is D – both A (access to a multidisciplinary team) and C (vaccination against respiratory illness).

Choice A is correct. Multidisciplinary teams involving physicians, nurses, pharmacists, social workers, care managers, dieticians, and others, have been shown in multiple RCTs, metanalyses, and Cochrane reviews to both reduce hospital admissions and all-cause mortality. As such, it is a class I recommendation (LOE A) that patients with HF should receive care from multidisciplinary teams to facilitate the implementation of GDMT, address potential barriers to self-care, reduce the risk of subsequent rehospitalization for HF, and improve survival.

Choice B is incorrect.  Self-care in HF comprises treatment adherence and health maintenance behaviors. Patients with HF should learn to take medications as prescribed, restrict sodium intake, stay physically active, and get vaccinations. They also should understand how to monitor for signs and symptoms of worsening HF, and what to do in response to symptoms when they occur. Interventions focused on improving the self-care of HF patients significantly reduce hospitalizations and all-cause mortality as well as improve quality of life. Therefore, patients with HF should receive specific education and support to facilitate HF self-care in a multidisciplinary manner (Class I, LOE B-R). However, the method of delivery and education matters. Reinforcement with structured telephone support has been shown to be effective. In contrast the efficacy of mobile health-delivered educational interventions in improve self-care in patients with HF remains uncertain.

Choice C is correct. In patients with HF, vaccinating against respiratory illnesses is reasonable to reduce mortality (Class 2a, LOE B-NR). For example, administration of the influenza vaccine in HF patients has been shown to reduce all-cause mortality and hospitalizations.

Main Takeaway

Implementation of multidisciplinary care teams has been proven to reduce rehospitalization and mortality in HF patients. While education on self-care of HF patients is important, not all delivery methods have been shown to be effective.

Guideline Loc.

Section 7.1

Decipher the Guidelines: 2022 Heart Failure Guidelines Page
CardioNerds Episode Page
CardioNerds Academy
Cardionerds Healy Honor Roll

CardioNerds Journal Club
Subscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!
Check out CardioNerds SWAG!
Become a CardioNerds Patron!