Heart Views

CLINICAL UPDATE
Year
: 2003  |  Volume : 4  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 4-

The Management of Systolic Heart Failure


Niranjan Seshadri1, Roger M Mills1, Stanley Nattel2,  
1 Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, The Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
2 Montreal Heart Institute Research Center, 5000 Belanger, St. East Montreal, Quebec H1T 1C8, Canada

Correspondence Address:
Roger M Mills
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Desk F15 The Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Avenue Cleveland, Ohio 44195
USA




How to cite this article:
Seshadri N, Mills RM, Nattel S. The Management of Systolic Heart Failure.Heart Views 2003;4:4-4


How to cite this URL:
Seshadri N, Mills RM, Nattel S. The Management of Systolic Heart Failure. Heart Views [serial online] 2003 [cited 2021 Jun 13 ];4:4-4
Available from: https://www.heartviews.org/text.asp?2003/4/1/4/64483


Full Text

 Introduction



Systolic heart failure is a syndrome characterized by a perturbation in the neurohormonal system resulting in clinical manifestations such as dyspnea, orthopnea or paroxysmal nocturnal dyspnea. In the United States, about 5 million people carry a diagnosis of heart failure. Furthermore, about 400, 000 to 700, 000 new cases of congestive heart failure are diagnosed each year in the U.S. [1] .

In recent years, the therapeutic armamentarium for the management of acute decompensation of heart failure has expanded considerably through the availability of several new agents, such as natriuretic peptides [2] . In the management of chronic congestive heart failure, there have been major advances in drug therapy such as the use of beta-blockers [3],[4] . Several interventional approaches for the treatment of chronic congestive heart failure such as cardiac resynchronization by pacing the left ventricle [5],[6],[7],[8] , implantable-cardioverterdefibrillators [9] ,stem-cell transplantation [10] and left-ventricular assist devices as destination (i.e., not a bridge to transplantation)therapy [11] arealsonow available.

Recently, there have been changes in the organization of care such as the setting up of dedicated heart failure clinics and natriuretic peptide guided treatment [12] . Tailored outpatient therapy of heart failure using natriuretic peptide is emerging as a potentially new adjunct in the management of these patients.

This review will provide an overview of the currently available treatment options and the future management strategies for the care of patients with systolic heart failure.

 Etiology and Pathophysiology of Heart Failure



The most common causes of heart failure in the developed world are coronary artery disease and hypertension [13] . The prevalence of coronary artery disease in patients with heart failure is 50-70% [13] . In the developing world, infectious agents such as Chagas disease and rheumatic valvular heart disease account for a majority of cases. Other etiologies include infections with human immunodeficiency virus. Potentially reversible factors contributing to heart failure include arrhythmias. Atrial fibrillation, particularly if untreated for a prolonged duration, may result in tachycardia-induced cardiomyopathy. Other reversible factors such as heavy alcohol consumption,obesity,anemia,thyroid abnormalities may also result in heart failure and should be borne in mind when managing patients with this condition [13] .

Regardless of the etiology, the common denominator in the pathogenesis of the heart failure syndrome is left ventricular dysfunction. Injury to the cardiac myocyte or abnormalities in the myocardial reparative processes results in decreased ability of the heart to maintain normal function at a given loading condition. Several compensatory mechanisms may help to maintain myocardial performance early in the course of disease. The initial adaptation to ventricular dysfunction is an increased chamber size, which helps maintain an adequate stroke volume by increasing preload, based on the Frank-Starling mechanism. Following this, further remodeling of the heart occurs. The heart becomes more spherical, and this process results in a decrease in left ventricular ejection fraction. Ultimately, it leads to a dilated and thinned out left ventricle [14] .

Anotherinitially"adaptive"mechanism is activation of the neurohormonal cascade. This includes activation of the sympathetic nervous system, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system and release of a variety of neurohormonal agents including plasma norepinephrine, plasma renin and arginine vasopressin. However, these neurohormones ultimately perpetuate heart failure by altering cardiac loading conditions with increased peripheral resistance adding to afterload and fluid retention increasing preload. These loading changes also lead to a more spherical shape, worsening mitral regurgitation, and increased wall tension. Activation of the neurohormonal cascade may also cause structural changes such as fibrosis of the myocytes and the vasculature [14] .

In response to increased ventricular filling pressures, the heart releases natriuretic peptides. With the availability of a clinical assay for B-type brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), a polypeptide produced predominantly in the ventricles, it is now possible to assess the intensity of neurohormonal activation in patients with heart failure [12] . BNP correlates well with the left ventricular end-diastolic pressure. Since the fluid retention which elevates left ventricular end-diastolic pressure reflects renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system activity, BNP measurement may be used to diagnose and follow patients with congestive heart failure [12]. In one small study, BNP-driven management was superior to clinical management [12] .

 Management of Acute Episodes of Heart Failure



Besides atherosclerotic coronary artery disease, which is the most common cause of heart failure, a host of other entities such as valvular abnormalities, hypertension, cardiac arrhythmias, pericardial diseases, acute myocarditis and inadequate pharmacological management may result in acute decompensation.The management of acute heart failure consists of rapid recognition and early institution of treatment. Therapeutic options include vasodilators such as nitroglycerin, nitroprusside or nesiritide; positive inotropic therapy, either dobutamine or milrinone; diuretics; and endothelin antagonists [15] .

Vasodilators

Vasodilators are effective in the immediate managementofacuteheartfailure decompensation. The mechanism whereby vasodilators benefit patients with heart failure is either afterload reduction (mainly sodium nitroprusside) or decreased preload (nitroglycerin and nesiritide) See [Table 1] and [Figure 1]. The hemodynamics of the vasodilator response is shown in [Table 2]. There is evidence that afterload reduction therapy can significantly improve precapillary pulmonary hypertension [16],[17],[18] . With the institution of vasodilator therapy, left and right atrial pressures decline, which is accompanied by an increase in forward cardiac output with little or no change in stroke volume. The mechanism for this response is redistribution of mitral regurgitant flow in response to systemic vasodilation [17],[18] .

Nitroglycerin is an immediate acting venodilator that can be used to rapidly decrease pulmonary congestion. It reduces filling pressures manifested by a lower pulmonary capillary wedge pressure. Prolonged infusions may be associated with tachyphylaxis, necessitating higher doses to achieve the desired hemodynamic goals. Sodium nitroprusside is a potent direct acting vasodilator. It is used in conjunction with invasive hemodynamic monitoring to rapidly lower filling pressures. Cyanide toxicity, although reported to occur with prolonged administration, is rarely seen. The most common side effect is hypotension [15] .

Nesiritide, a recently approved drug, is a recombinant form of naturally occurring B-type natriuretic peptide [2],[19] . It acts mainly as a vasodilator and is used in conjunction with a diuretic. It is an arterial and venous vasodilator that reduces preload and afterload without significant inotropic effects. Moreover it is a relatively safe drug with no proarrhythmic effects [20] . It may be used with or without invasive hemodynamic monitoring in intensive care units, stepdown units or even in the emergency room [2],[19] . In the Vasodilator in the Management of Acute Congestive Heart Failure (VMAC) trial, a randomized control trial of 489 inpatients with decompensated congestive heart failure, use of nesiritide was associated with improved hemodynamics compared to nitroglycerin or placebo [21] .

Positive Inotropes

Positive inotropic agents such as dobutamine and milrinone are useful for patients presenting with pulmonary congestion and a systemic low-output state. Their use is associated with a higher risk of tachyarrhythmias [20],[22] . Hypotension from time to time occurs with the use of milrinone [22] ; in these cases, dobutamine may be a preferred agent. However, the use of dobutamine in the treatment of decompensated heart failure may be associated with a higher incidence of sustained ventricular arrhythmias, and dobutamine is not useful in beta-blocked patients [20] . New information suggests that routine use of inotropes such as milrinone to treat exacerbations of heart failure may, in fact, be detrimental [23] . The Outcomes of a Prospective Trial of Intravenous Milrinone for Exacerbations of Chronic heart Failure (OPTIME-CHF) trial, evaluated the short-term use of milrinone in patients hospitalized with NYHA class III-IV heart failure [22] . Although the end point of death or readmission within 60 days was similar in the groups receiving either milrinone or placebo, the milrinone group had a higher incidence of sustained hypotension and new atrial arrhythmias [22] .

The current ACC/AHA heart failure guidelines discourage routine use of positive inotropic agents in acute decompensation or for chronic management of heart failure [24] However, these agents may be used for palliation of refractory heart failure and as a bridge to more definitive treatment options, such as bypass surgery or heart transplantation.

Diuretics

Diuretics may be used as primary or adjunctive therapy for acute decompensation. Careful studies of patients receiving diuretics as primary therapy all confirm that diuretics alone decrease cardiac output and increase renin [15] . We feel that diuretic treatment should be adjunctive, tailored to needs, and doses reduced as early as possible. Previous studies have shown an increased mortality with the use of diuretics [25] .

Endothelin antagonists

The endothelin system consists of peptides that have very potent vasoconstrictor properties. Plasma levels of endothelin-1 are increased in heart failure and are a predictor of worse outcomes [15],[26] . Several endothelin receptor antagonists have been studied in experimental models of heart failure and in clinical settings. These include bosentan, an orally active, non-selective endothelin receptor antagonist that has been shown to be useful in pulmonary hypertension [27] . In the Endothelin Antagonist Bosentan for Lowering Cardiac Events in Heart Failure (ENABLE) study, 1,613 patients with severe heart failure were randomized to receive either bosentan (125 mg twice a day) or placebo. Bosentan use, however, was associated with an increased risk of heart failure requiring hospitalization, mainly related to excess fluid retention [26] .

Other studies using endothelin receptor antagonists have not shown positive results. In the Randomized Intravenous Tezosentan (RITZ) I trial, 669 patients hospitalized with heart failure were randomized to either tezosentan (a parenteral endothelin receptor ETA/ ETB antagonist) or placebo (26). In this study, tezosentan was not effective in improving symptoms compared to placebo. Moreover, the study medication caused hypotension [26] . In another study using a nonselective endothelin receptor antagonist, enrasentan, there was worse outcome in the group of patients receiving enrasentan compared to placebo [26] . Further studies using more selective endothelin receptor antagonists are underway in experimental settings.

 Indications for Invasive Hemodynamic Monitoring



Invasive hemodynamic monitoring of left ventricular filling pressures is essential in patients who do not improve quickly with treatment. The goal of acute management of heart failure is relief of symptoms, which requires reduction of elevated left ventricular filling pressures, reflected by the pulmonary capillary wedge pressure. Apart from improvement in symptoms, there is evidence that lowering filling pressures is associated with a decrease in neurohormonal activation. Pulmonary capillary wedge pressure is a good surrogate end-point for outcomes in patients with heart failure [15] .

 Chronic Out-Patient Management of Heart Failure



In recent years, the major breakthrough in the drug-treatment of chronic heart failure has been the use of beta-blockers for heart failure [3],[4] . Despite the availability of other medical treatment options including angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers, aldosterone antagonists, diuretics and digoxin, there is still a dearth of effective medical therapy leading to sustained clinical improvement in most patients. On the other hand, there have been several advances in the non-pharmacological arena, resulting in the availability of a plethora of devices, including bi-ventricular pacers and left ventricular assist devices among others [28] .

Drugs

Beta-blocker therapy reduces morbidity and mortality in patients with congestive heart failure [3],[4] . The use of beta-blockers has been studied in randomized controlled trials involving over 10,000 patients with congestive heart failure varying in severity from mild to severe [3],[4] . The beneficial effect of this class of medications is thought to be due to its effects in blunting the activation of the sympathetic nervous system that occurs as a compensatory mechanism in patients with congestive heart failure. Long-term activation of the adrenergic nervous system leads to cardiac remodeling and ultimately cardiac fibrosis and necrosis. Beta-blockers reverse this process of remodeling and may also have a beneficial effect in decreasing cardiac arrhythmias [4] . The beta-blockers shown to have a beneficial effect on mortality include metoprolol [29],[30],[31],[32] , bisoprolol [33],[34] , carvedilol [35] and bucindolol [36] .

Metoprolol was studied in the Metoprolol in Dilated Cardiomyopathy (MDC) [31],[32] and the Metoprolol CR/XL Randomized Intervention Trial in Heart Failure (MERIT-HF) [29],[30] studies. The MDC trial enrolled 383 subjects with mild to moderate heart failure and an ejection fraction of [31],[32] . The MERIT-HF trial was a larger trial (3991 patients), which showed an equally impressive benefit of metoprolol in patients with NYHA class II to IV heart failure. There was a 34% decrease in all-cause mortality and a 38% decrease in cardiovascular mortality [29],[30] .

The Cardiac Insufficiency Bisoprolol Studies (CIBIS I and II) showed that use of bisoprolol in the treatment of heart failure was associated with an improvement of functional class and a decrease in hospitalizations and mortality [33],[34] . Recently, carvedilol, a non-selective beta-blocker that blocks both the beta-1, beta-2 and alpha-1 receptors, was shown to decrease mortality in patients with mild, moderate or severe heart failure and an ejection fraction of [35] . In the Carvedilol Prospective Randomized Cumulative Survival Trial (COPERNICUS), use of carvedilol was associated with a 35% decrease in all-cause mortality in patients with NYHA class III-IV heart failure [35] . The CAPRICORN study evaluated carvedilol in post-myocardial infarction patients with left ventricular dysfunction [37] . In this study, there was a decrease in all-cause mortality in patients receiving carvedilol [37] . Based on these studies, beta-blockers have now become the standard of care in the treatment of patients with heart failure.

Digoxin

In contrast to beta-blocker therapy, digoxin has not been shown to reduce mortality [38] . The DIG trial did not show a mortality benefit, however, there was a modest reduction in hospitalization overall and for heart failure in patients receiving digoxin [38] . More recently, digoxin use was shown to increase mortality in women and in men with serum levels of digoxin > 0.8 ng/ml [39] .

Devices

In the management of chronic congestive heart failure, several interventional techniques are currently being employed. These include implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, bi-ventricular pacemakers and left ventricular assist devices.

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators

Sudden cardiac death due to ventricular arrhythmias remains a major contributor to the increased mortality in patients with a depressed left ventricular ejection fraction. Earlier studies have shown that implantable cardioverter-defibrillators confer a significant survival advantage in patients with a low ejection fraction and spontaneous or inducible ventricular arrhythmias. In the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial (MADIT), patients with an ejection fraction 35%, documented asymptomatic nonsustained ventricular tachycardia, and inducible ventricular arrhythmias at electrophysiological study were randomized to receive either a defibrillator or conventional medical therapy. In this study, patients who received prophylactic defibrillator implantation had improved survival compared with medical therapy [9] . Similar results in favor of implantable defibrillators were noted in other studies such as the Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) [40] .

More recently, similar results were found the MADIT-II trial, in which 1,232 patients with a history of a prior myocardial infarction and an ejection fraction 30% were randomized to either a prophylactic defibrillator or conventional medical therapy [41] . Invasive electrophysiological testing was not required. This trial was stopped prematurely due to a significant survival benefit in the defibrillator arm [41] . In patients requiring a defibrillator, a single chamber device is probably sufficient. In the Dual Chamber and VVI Implantable Defibrillator (DAVID) trial, patients requiring a defibrillator and no indication for antibradycardia pacing were randomized to receive either back-up ventricular pacing or dual-chamber pacing [42] . The 1-year survival rate was higher in patients who were randomized to back-up ventricular pacing [42] . Other trials of defibrillators are currently underway in patients with heart failure. These include the Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Trial (SCD-HeFT), which is comparing defibrillator therapy versus amiodarone in patients with NYHA class II-III heart failure, and an ejection fraction of 35% [9],[43] .

Cardiac resynchronization therapy with bi- ventricular pacing

QRS prolongation (>120 ms) on the surface electrocardiogram provides a clue to ventricular dyssynchrony in many patients with heart failure. Re-establishing ventricular synchrony by biventricular pacing may lead to better atrioventricular synchrony and improve ventricular performance [8] . Recent trials have shown that biventricular pacing may improve symptoms and increase exercise tolerance.

In the Multicenter InSync Randomized Clinical Evaluation (MIRACLE), biventricular pacing was associated with an improvement in the 6-minute walking distance, patients had an improvement in the NYHA class and the left ventricular ejection fraction improved by almost 5% [5] . Similarly in the MUltisite STImulation in Cardiomyopathy (MUSTIC) study, there was improvement in exercise tolerance and symptoms with cardiac resynchronization therapy [7] . More recently, the InSync ICD trial (not published) also showed improvement in quality of life and NYHA heart failure class in patients who met criteria for a defibrillator and also had a prolonged QRS complex on the surface electrocardiogram . Other long-term mortality and morbidity trials are currently underway. These include the Comparison Of Medical therapy and Pacing ANd DefibrillatION in Chronic Heart Failure (COMPANION) and the CArdiac REsynchronization in Heart Failure (CARE-HF) trials [44] .

Implantable hemodynamic monitors

Continuous invasive hemodynamic monitoring in ambulatory patients is now possible with implantable hemodynamic monitors. This device is similar to a single right ventricular lead permanent pacemaker. In a recent study, long-term ambulatory hemodynamic measurements with an implantable monitor was shown to be helpful in day-today management of patients with congestive heart failure [45] .

Left-ventricular assist devices

Patients with end-stage heart failure have a very limited prognosis with drug therapy. Currently, heart transplantation is the only long-term treatmentoptionforthesepatients. Transplantation, however, cannot impact the huge numbers of patients with end-stage heart failure. Efforts are underway to explore and develop other definitive therapeutic options such as left ventricular assist devices for this subgroup of heart failure patients [46],[47] . Until recently, left ventricular assist devices were used only as a short term bridge to heart transplantation.

The Randomized Evaluation of Mechanical Assistance for the Treatment of Congestive Heart Failure (REMATCH) Study evaluated the use of left ventricular assist devices as long term "destination" therapy in patients with NYHA class IV heart failure ineligible for heart transplantation [11] . In this study, 129 patients were randomized to receive either a left ventricular assist device (n=68) or conventional medical therapy (n=61). At the end of 2 years, 25% of patients who received left ventricular assist devices were alive compared to only 8% in the group receiving conventional medical therapy. However, the device group had a higher incidence of serious complications such as infection, bleeding and device malfunction. Overall, the quality of life indicators were better in the device group [9],[11] . With the availability of newer, more sophisticated assist devices than the one used in the REMATCH study, LVAD support may potentially be an acceptable long-term option for end-stage heart failure [46],[47] .

 Experimental Approaches



Gene therapy for heart failure is currently experimental. Preliminary data holds promise for this new novel, therapeutic approach. The major components for the success of this approach include an appropriate vector system for gene delivery, effectively getting the vector to the area of interest and finally selection and identification of a gene to be expressed. An ideal vector system is one that is highly efficient in enabling transgene expression in cardiac myocytes. Recombinant adenovirus, adeno-associated virus and lentivirus are some of the currently available vectors that can achieve this. Once an appropriate vector is identified, there are several options for delivery to the cardiac tissues. These include catheter-based techniques such as intracoronary injection, direct intramyocardial injection by epicardial approach and inoculation of the pericardial space.

Another recent technique that has shown promise in animal models is a catheter based delivery system through the apex of the left ventricle while cross clamping the aorta and the pulmonary artery. This technique enables transduction of myocytes throughout the heart in a homogenous fashion. Further investigation is mandated before this technique is even considered for human investigation [10],[48] .

Investigations on gene therapy for heart failure target several candidate molecular pathways in the myocytes of failing hearts. These include: 1) the calcium ATPase pump within the sarcoplasmic reticulum which enhances the process of excitation-contraction coupling and is involved in calcium homeostasis; 2) the beta-adrenergic signaling pathways; and 3) the pathways involved in programmed cell death or apoptosis [10],[48] .

Gene therapy for heart failure is a promising new area, albeit still in the experimental stage. Preliminary animal work will need to be further refined and the safety and efficacy of clinically applicable vectors and systems of delivery needs further study.

 Changes in Health Care Delivery



Recently, the availability of assays for B-type brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) has provided an opportunity for diagnosing and following patients with heart failure with a simple blood test [12] . BNP is predominantly produced in the ventricles in response to elevated left ventricular end-diastolic pressure. BNP can now be used as a point of care assay in emergency rooms for the diagnosis of congestive heart failure [12] .

BNP levels may help titrating medical therapy in the outpatient setting. BNP-guided treatment may reduce incidence of cardiovascular death and hospital readmission for new episodes of congestive heart failure compared to symptom guided therapy [12] . A study using BNP-guided titration of beta-blockers demonstrated that BNP levels predicted success or failure of the use of carvedilol [49] . In another outpatient study, BNP-assisted titration of ACE-inhibitors resulted in better inhibition of the rennin-angiotensin-aldosterone system [50] . The FUSION trial (Follow-Up Serial Infusions Of Natrecor) will evaluate the utility of short, intermittent infusions of two doses of nesiritide in outpatients who are at high risk for being readmitted for congestive heart failure.

 Summary



In the last 2 decades, we have seen dramatic improvements in the approach to the treatment of both acute and chronic congestive heart failure. Advances in drug therapy include beta-blockers and nesiritide. New device therapies for heart failure include defibrillators, biventricular pacemakers, and left ventricular assist devices. Diagnostic insights from BNP measurements have also changed the approach to the treatment of heart failure. The challenge facing health care providers who care for patients with congestive heart failure is to bring these new therapies to their patients. The dedicated heart failure clinic, integrating the best of technology, patient education, and clinical care offers the best hope we have for effectively managing our patients [51], [52] .

References

1Gomberg-Maitland M, Baran DA, Fuster V. Treatment of congestive heart failure: guidelines for the primary care physician and the heart failure specialist. Arch Intern Med 2001;161:342-52.
2Mills RM, LeJemtel TH, Horton DP, et al. Sustained hemodynamic effects of an infusion of nesiritide (human b-type natriuretic peptide) in heart failure: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Natrecor Study Group. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999;34:155-62.
3Kukin ML. Beta-blockers in chronic heart failure: considerations for selecting an agent. Mayo Clin Proc 2002;77:1199-206.
4Foody JM, Farrell MH, Krumholz HM. Beta-Blocker therapy in heart failure: scientific review. JAMA 2002;287:883-9.
5Abraham WT, Fisher WG, Smith AL, et al. Cardiac resynchronization in chronic heart failure. N Engl J Med 2002;346:1845-53.
6Abraham WT. Cardiac resynchronization therapy for heart failure: biventricular pacing and beyond. Curr Opin Cardiol 2002;17:346-52.
7Cazeau S, Leclercq C, Lavergne T, et al. Effects of multisite biventricular pacing in patients with heart failure and intraventricular conduction delay. N Engl J Med 2001;344:873-80.
8Gerber TC, Nishimura RA, Holmes DR, Jr., et al. Left ventricular and biventricular pacing in congestive heart failure. Mayo Clin Proc 2001;76:803-12.
9Glikson M, Friedman PA. The implantable cardioverter defibrillator. Lancet 2001;357:1107-17.
10Isner JM. Myocardial gene therapy. Nature 2002;415:234- 9.
11Rose EA, Gelijns AC, Moskowitz AJ, et al. Long-term mechanical left ventricular assistance for end-stage heart failure. N Engl J Med 2001;345:1435-43.
12Maisel A. B-type natriuretic peptide in the diagnosis and management of congestive heart failure. Cardiol Clin 2001;19:557-71.
13Lip GY, Gibbs CR, Beevers DG. ABC of heart failure: aetiology. BMJ 2000;320:104-7.
14Francis GS. Pathophysiology of the heart failure clinical syndrome. In: Topol EJ, ed. Textbook of Cardiovascular Medicine. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkinns, 2002:1785-1806.
15Haas GJ, Young JB. Acute heart failure management. In: Topol EJ, ed. Textbook of Cardiovascular Medicine. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, 2002:1845- 1865.
16Mills RM, Cunningham MS. Long-term hemodynamic responses to vasodilator therapy in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction. Am J Cardiol 1999;84:939- 41, A7.
17Weiland DS, Konstam MA, Salem DN, et al. Contribution of reduced mitral regurgitant volume to vasodilator effect in severe left ventricular failure secondary to coronary artery disease or idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy. Am J Cardiol 1986;58:1046-50.
18Stevenson LW, Brunken RC, Belil D, et al. Afterload reduction with vasodilators and diuretics decreases mitral regurgitation during upright exercise in advanced heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol 1990;15:174-80.
19Mills RM, Hobbs RE. How to use nesiritide in treating decompensated heart failure. Cleve Clin J Med 2002;69:252-6.
20Burger AJ, Elkayam U, Neibaur MT, et al. Comparison of the occurrence of ventricular arrhythmias in patients with acutely decompensated congestive heart failure receiving dobutamine versus nesiritide therapy. Am J Cardiol 2001;88:35-9.
21Intravenous nesiritide vs nitroglycerin for treatment of decompensated congestive heart failure: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2002;287:1531-40.
22Cuffe MS, Califf RM, Adams KF, Jr., et al. Short-term intravenous milrinone for acute exacerbation of chronic heart failure: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2002;287:1541-7.
23Felker GM, O'Connor CM. Inotropic therapy for heart failure: an evidence-based approach. Am Heart J 2001;142:393-401.
24Hunt SA, Baker DW, Chin MH, et al. ACC/AHA guidelines for the evaluation and management of chronic heart failure in the adult: executive summary. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee to revise the 1995 Guidelines for the Evaluation and Management of Heart Failure). J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;38:2101-13.
25Cooper HA, Dries DL, Davis CE, Shen YL, Domanski MJ. Diuretics and risk of arrhythmic death in patients with left ventricular dysfunction. Circulation 1999;100:1311- 5.
26Burger AJ, Burger MR, Aronson D. New therapies for the treatment of congestive heart failure. Drugs Today (Barc) 2002;38:31-48.
27Rubin LJ, Badesch DB, Barst RJ, et al. Bosentan therapy for pulmonary arterial hypertension. N Engl J Med 2002;346:896-903.
28Young JB. Chronic heart failure management. In: Topol EJ, ed. Textbook of Cardiovascular Medicine. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, 2002:1867- 1897.
29Rationale, design, and organization of the Metoprolol CR/ XL Randomized Intervention Trial in Heart Failure (MERIT-HF). The International Steering Committee. Am J Cardiol 1997;80:54J-58J.
30Goldstein S, Hjalmarson A. The mortality effect of metoprolol CR/XL in patients with heart failure: results of the MERIT-HF Trial. Clin Cardiol 1999;22 Suppl 5:V30- 5.
31Waagstein F, Bristow MR, Swedberg K, et al. Beneficial effects of metoprolol in idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy. Metoprolol in Dilated Cardiomyopathy (MDC) Trial Study Group. Lancet 1993;342:1441-6.
32Wiklund I, Waagstein F, Swedberg K, Hjalmarsson A. Quality of life on treatment with metoprolol in dilated cardiomyopathy: results from the MDC trial. Metoprolol in Dilated Cardiomyopathy trial. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther 1996;10:361-8.
33The Cardiac Insufficiency Bisoprolol Study II (CIBIS-II): a randomised trial. Lancet 1999;353:9-13.
34A randomized trial of beta-blockade in heart failure. The Cardiac Insufficiency Bisoprolol Study (CIBIS). CIBIS Investigators and Committees. Circulation 1994;90:1765- 73.
35Packer M, Coats AJ, Fowler MB, et al. Effect of carvedilol on survival in severe chronic heart failure. N Engl J Med 2001;344:1651-8.
36A trial of the beta-blocker bucindolol in patients with advanced chronic heart failure. N Engl J Med 2001;344:1659-67.
37Dargie HJ. Effect of carvedilol on outcome after myocardial infarction in patients with left-ventricular dysfunction: the CAPRICORN randomised trial. Lancet 2001;357:1385-90.
38The effect of digoxin on mortality and morbidity in patients with heart failure. The Digitalis Investigation Group. N Engl J Med 1997;336:525-33.
39Rathore SS, Curtis JP, Wang Y, Bristow MR, Krumholz HM. Association of serum digoxin concentration and outcomes in patients with heart failure. JAMA 2003;289:871-8.
40A comparison of antiarrhythmic-drug therapy with implantable defibrillators in patients resuscitated from near-fatal ventricular arrhythmias. The Antiarrhythmics versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) Investigators. N Engl J Med 1997;337:1576-83.
41Moss AJ, Zareba W, Hall WJ, et al. Prophylactic implantation of a defibrillator in patients with myocardial infarction and reduced ejection fraction. N Engl J Med 2002;346:877-83.
42Wilkoff BL, Cook JR, Epstein AE, et al. Dual-chamber pacing or ventricular backup pacing in patients with an implantable defibrillator: the Dual Chamber and VVI Implantable Defibrillator (DAVID) Trial. JAMA 2002;288:3115-23.
43Klein H, Auricchio A, Reek S, Geller C. New primary prevention trials of sudden cardiac death in patients with left ventricular dysfunction: SCD-HEFT and MADIT-II. Am J Cardiol 1999;83:91D-97D.
44Varma C, Camm AJ. Pacing for heart failure. Lancet 2001;357:1277-83.
45Adamson PB, Magalski A, Braunschweig F, et al. Ongoing right ventricular hemodynamics in heart failure. clinical value of measurements derived from an implantable monitoring system. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;41:565-71.
46Nemeh HW, Smedira NG. Mechanical treatment of heart failure: The growing role of LVADs and artificial hearts. Cleve Clin J Med 2003;70:223-33.
47Mills RM. Mechanical cardiac support: Is the bridge a destination when you are stuck on it? Cleve Clin J Med 2003;70:177-78.
48Hajjar RJ, del Monte F, Matsui T, Rosenzweig A. Prospects for gene therapy for heart failure. Circ Res 2000;86:616-21.
49Richards AM, Doughty R, Nicholls MG, et al. Neurohumoral prediction of benefit from carvedilol in ischemic left ventricular dysfunction. Australia-New Zealand Heart Failure Group. Circulation 1999;99:786- 92.
50Murdoch DR, McDonagh TA, Byrne J, et al. Titration of vasodilator therapy in chronic heart failure according to plasma brain natriuretic peptide concentration: randomized comparison of the hemodynamic and neuroendocrine effects of tailored versus empirical therapy. Am Heart J 1999;138:1126-32.
51Fonarow GC, Stevenson LW, Walden JA, et al. Impact of a comprehensive heart failure management program on hospital readmission and functional status of patients with advanced heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997;30:725-32.
52Young JB, Mills RM. Treatment of decompensated or refractory heart failure. Clinical Management of Heart Failure. West Islip: Professional Communications, Inc., 2001:209-232.