Elsevier

Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases

Volume 63, Issue 5, September–October 2020, Pages 570-584
Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases

Review Article
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction diagnosis and treatment: An updated review of the evidence

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pcad.2020.04.011Get rights and content

Abstract

Over the last several decades, clinicians and clinical scientists have had growing interest in heart failure (HF) diagnosis and treatment. While HF with reduced ejection fraction (EF) is a well-known clinical entity with several therapeutic strategies proven to be successful, HF with preserved ejection fraction is a more heterogenous syndrome with a prevalence that has increased in the last two decades, without effective therapeutic strategies. Great strides have been made in the detection of predisposing risk factors and pathological mechanisms; however, pharmacological therapies have shown to be ineffective in reducing cardiovascular mortality in the HF with preserved EF (HFpEF) population, opening the way to the necessity of developing new precision medicine based approaches. On the other hand, novel therapies and device interventions still require refinements with the ultimate goal of offering new clinically treatments for the HFpEF population. The aim of the present review is to provide insights into the HFpEF pathophysiology, diagnostic pathways and the latest updates on treatment strategies and their potential future application in routine clinical practice.

Introduction

Heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (EF; HFpEF) is a clinical entity characterized by symptoms of HF despite a “preserved” (i.e. 50%) left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (LVEF) with evidence of cardiac dysfunction as a primary cause of symptoms (eg, abnormal LV filling and elevated filling pressures). Currently, HFpEF affects approximately 4.9% of the general population aged ≥60 years and accounts for approximately half of total HF hospitalizations.1 Initial retrospective and observational studies including mostly hospitalized patients classified on LVEF alone, the rates of hospitalization and death in patients with HFpEF were similar to those of patients diagnosed with HF with reduced EF (HFrEF).2 In prospective and randomized studies in which the diagnosis of HFpEF was made using stricter criteria and other causes of HF (eg, valvular heart diseases, restrictive/infiltrative cardiomyopathies, pericardial diseases) were excluded, however, the cardiovascular (CV) mortality observed was lower in HFpEF compared to those with HFrEF.3,4

To date, several randomized controlled trials have failed to identify effective pharmacological therapies on clinical outcomes in HFpEF, perhaps due to the unfavorable one-size-fits-all approach for its management5. The scientific community of clinicians and clinical scientists has a growing interest in understanding the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms and phenotypic heterogeneity of HFpEF, with hopes to develop new therapeutic strategies.6 The aim of the present review is to provide an overview on HFpEF pathophysiology and diagnostic pathways, with a focus on the latest developments of treatment strategies and their potential future applications in routine clinical practice.

Section snippets

HFpEF pathophysiology

HFrEF is characterized by the presence of definitive cardiac abnormalities central to which is depressed LV systolic function, while HFpEF has traditionally been diagnosed as a clinical syndrome of HF in the setting of normal EF.7 Diastolic dysfunction has emerged as fundamental to the HFpEF syndrome and there is compelling evidence for failure of the Frank-Starling mechanism, defined as the ability to translate an increase in LV filling pressure to an increase in cardiac output or only doing

HFpEF definition and diagnostic algorithm

According to the latest European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines, HFpEF diagnosis requires the presence of compatible signs and symptoms, a ‘preserved’ EF (defined as LVEF ≥50%), elevated levels of natriuretic peptides (brain natriuretic peptide [BNP] > 35 pg/mL and/or N-terminal-pro hormone BNP [NT-proBNP] > 125 pg/mL) and objective evidence of cardiac functional and structural alterations consistent with HF.17 Moreover, stress testing or invasive measures of elevated LV filling

Pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments of HFpEF

To date, no treatment has been shown to reduce clinical events including CV and all-cause mortality in HFpEF. For such reason, guidelines merely recommend diuretics for fluid removal and symptoms relief (eg, edema),25 and management of associated comorbidities (eg, hypertension, obesity, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease).17 Beta-blockers (BBs), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) and

Phenotyping treatment for HFpEF

Therapeutic futility in HFpEF may be, at least in part, explained by the phenotypic diversity within the HFpEF population (Fig. 3). The potential benefit of some interventions could have been diluted in an “unselected” HFpEF population or offset by conjunctive non-effective strategies. In the last years, many attempts in phenotyping HFpEF have been made by stratifying HFpEF patients on the basis of associated comorbidities (e.g. obesity, diabetes, coronary artery disease, AF, arterial

Controversies and future directions

To date, pharmacological therapies have shown to be ineffective in reducing CV mortality in HFpEF patients, as well as exercise capacity. On the other hand, nonpharmacologic strategies such as exercise training, caloric restriction-induced weight loss and improvement in quality of diet may offer new prospective treatment and hopes for HFpEF.

Far from being only a primitive heart disease, HFpEF has to be considered a heterogenous systemic condition involving the heart with different comorbidity

Conclusions

In conclusion, although HFpEF pathophysiological mechanisms are becoming clearer over the years, there is still no effective treatment. Numerous trials are underway for future successful therapies; in the meantime, we should not forget the importance of preventive strategies and to aggressively address associated comorbidities. To finish with the words of Samuel Beckett: “Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better.”

Funding

None.

Statement of conflict of interest

Salvatore Carbone is supported by a Career Development Award 19CDA34660318 from the American Heart Association.

Acknowledgments

None.

References (118)

  • E. Braunwald

    Heart failure

    JACC Hear Fail

    (2013)
  • B.A. Borlaug

    The pathophysiology of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

    Nat Rev Cardiol

    (2014)
  • A. Abbate et al.

    Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: refocusing on diastole

    Int J Cardiol

    (2015)
  • B.A. Borlaug et al.

    Mechanisms of diastolic dysfunction in heart failure

    Trends Cardiovasc Med

    (2006)
  • N.E. Houstis et al.

    Exercise intolerance in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosing and ranking its causes using personalized O 2 pathway analysis

    Circulation

    (2018)
  • M.G. Del Buono et al.

    Exercise intolerance in patients with heart failure: JACC state-of-the-art review

    J Am Coll Cardiol

    (2019)
  • M.M. Abudiab et al.

    Cardiac output response to exercise in relation to metabolic demand in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

    Eur J Heart Fail

    (2013)
  • B.A. Borlaug et al.

    Global cardiovascular reserve dysfunction in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

    J Am Coll Cardiol

    (2010)
  • F. Crea et al.

    The parallel tales of microvascular angina and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a paradigmshift

    Eur Heart J

    (2017)
  • M.A. Pfeffer et al.

    Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in perspective

    Circ Res

    (2019)
  • P. Ponikowski et al.

    2016 ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure

    Eur Heart J

    (2016)
  • B.A. Borlaug et al.

    Exercise hemodynamics enhance diagnosis of early heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

    Circ Hear Fail

    (2010)
  • M. Obokata et al.

    Role of diastolic stress testing in the evaluation for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a simultaneous invasive-echocardiographic study

    Circulation

    (2017)
  • Y.N.V. Reddy et al.

    A simple, evidence-based approach to help guide diagnosis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

    Circulation

    (2018)
  • M.G. Del Buono et al.

    Letter by Del Buono et al regarding article, “a simple, evidence-based approach to help guide diagnosis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.”

    Circulation

    (2019)
  • B. Pieske et al.

    How to diagnose heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: the HFA-PEFF diagnostic algorithm: a consensus recommendation from the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC)

    Eur Heart J

    (2019)
  • L.F. Buckley et al.

    Low NT-proBNP levels in overweight and obese patients do not rule out a diagnosis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

    ESC Hear Fail

    (2018)
  • M. Obokata et al.

    Evidence supporting the existence of a distinct obese phenotype of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

    Circulation

    (2017)
  • P.B. Adamson et al.

    Wireless pulmonary artery pressure monitoring guides management to reduce decompensation in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

    Circ Hear Fail

    (2014)
  • M.D. Flather et al.

    FASTTRACK randomized trial to determine the effect of nebivolol on mortality and cardiovascular hospital admission in elderly patients with heart failure (SENIORS)

    Eur Heart J

    (2005)
  • V.M. Conraads et al.

    Effects of the long-term administration of nebivolol on the clinical symptoms, exercise capacity, and left ventricular function of patients with diastolic dysfunction: results of the ELANDD study

    Eur J Heart Fail

    (2012)
  • K. Yamamoto et al.

    Effects of carvedilol on heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: the Japanese Diastolic Heart Failure Study (J-DHF)

    Eur J Heart Fail

    (2013)
  • J.G.F. Cleland et al.

    Beta-blockers for heart failure with reduced, mid-range, and preserved ejection fraction: an individual patient-level analysis of double-blind randomized trials

    Eur Heart J

    (2018)
  • S. Yusuf et al.

    Effects of candesartan in patients with chronic heart failure and preserved left-ventricular ejection fraction: the CHARM-preserved trial

    Lancet

    (2003)
  • J.G.F. Cleland et al.

    The perindopril in elderly people with chronic heart failure (PEP-CHF) study

    Eur Heart J

    (2006)
  • B.M. Massie et al.

    Irbesartan in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction

    N Engl J Med

    (2008)
  • B. Pitt et al.

    The effect of spironolactone on morbidity and mortality in patients with severe heart failure. Randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study Investigators

    N Engl J Med

    (1999)
  • F. Zannad et al.

    Eplerenone in patients with systolic heart failure and mild symptoms

    N Engl J Med

    (2011)
  • F. Edelmann et al.

    Effect of spironolactone on diastolic function and exercise capacity in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: the Aldo-DHF randomized controlled trial

    JAMA-J Am Med Assoc

    (2013)
  • B. Pitt et al.

    Spironolactone for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

    N Engl J Med

    (2014)
  • W. Kosmala et al.

    Effect of aldosterone antagonism on exercise tolerance in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

    J Am Coll Cardiol

    (2016)
  • J.J.V. McMurray et al.

    Angiotensin-neprilysin inhibition versus enalapril in heart failure

    N Engl J Med

    (2014)
  • S.D. Solomon et al.

    Angiotensin–neprilysin inhibition in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

    N Engl J Med

    (2019)
  • S.D. Solomon et al.

    The angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor LCZ696 in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a phase 2 double-blind randomised controlled trial

    Lancet

    (2012)
  • C.M. O’Connor et al.

    PARAgON-HF—why we do randomized, controlled clinical trials

    N Engl J Med

    (2019)
  • M.G. Del Buono et al.

    Sacubitril-valsartan for the treatment of heart failure: time for a Paragon?

    J Cardiovasc Pharmacol

    (2020)
  • A. Ahmed et al.

    Effects of digoxin on morbidity and mortality in diastolic heart failure: the ancillary digitalis investigation group trial

    Circulation

    (2006)
  • K. Swedberg et al.

    Ivabradine and outcomes in chronic heart failure (SHIFT): a randomised placebo-controlled study

    Lancet

    (2010)
  • M. Komajda et al.

    Effect of ivabradine in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: the EDIFY randomized placebo-controlled trial

    Eur J Heart Fail

    (2017)
  • S.J. Greene et al.

    The cGMP signaling pathway as a therapeutic target in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

    J Am Heart Assoc

    (2013)
  • Cited by (0)

    Statement of conflict of interest: see page XX.

    View full text