ESC Heart Failure (Dec 2023)

Long‐term impact of angiotensin receptor‐neprilysin inhibitor based on short‐term treatment response in heart failure

  • Hyuk Kyoon Park,
  • Jong Sung Park,
  • Myeong Seop Kim,
  • Eunkyu Lee,
  • Hyohun Choi,
  • Yoon Jung Park,
  • Bo Eun Park,
  • Hong Nyun Kim,
  • Namkyun Kim,
  • Myung Hwan Bae,
  • Jang Hoon Lee,
  • Hun Sik Park,
  • Yongkeun Cho,
  • Se Yong Jang,
  • Dong Heon Yang

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/ehf2.14505
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 10, no. 6
pp. 3430 – 3437

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Aims The long‐term effect of angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) remains uncertain in patients who have experienced improvements in left ventricular (LV) systolic function or significant LV reverse remodelling following a certain period of treatment. It is also unclear how ARNI performs in patients who have not shown these improvements. This study aimed to assess the impact of prolonged ARNI use compared with angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in patients with and without significant treatment response after 1 year of heart failure (HF) treatment. Methods and results The present study enrolled patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) who were treated with either ARNI or ACEIs/ARBs within 1 year of undergoing index echocardiography. After 1 year of treatment, patients were reclassified into the following groups: (i) patients with HF with improved ejection fraction and persistent HFrEF and (ii) patients with and without LV reverse remodelling based on the follow‐up echocardiography. The effect of ARNI versus that of ACEIs/ARBs in each group was assessed from the time of categorizing into new groups using the composite event of all‐cause mortality and HF hospitalization. A total of 671 patients with HFrEF (age, 66.4 ± 14.1 years; males, 66.8%) were included, and 133 (19.8%) composite events of death and rehospitalization for HF were observed during the follow‐up (median follow‐up, 44 [interquartile range, 34–51] months). ARNI had a significantly lower event rate than ACEIs/ARBs in patients with HF with improved ejection fraction (7.0% vs. 30.4%, P = 0.020) and those with persistent HFrEF (17.6% vs. 49.7%, P < 0.001). Irrespective of whether patients exhibited LV reverse remodelling (15.8% vs. 31.1%, P = 0.001) or not (15.0% vs. 54.9%, P < 0.001), ARNIs were associated with a significantly lower event rate than ACEIs/ARBs. Conclusions Regardless of significant treatment response measured by either LVEF or LV reverse remodelling after 1 year of treatment, the extended utilization of ARNI demonstrated a more favourable prognosis than that of ACEIs/ARBs in patients with HFrEF.

Keywords