Background: Sudden cardiac death is a major healthcare issue in reduced ejection fraction heart failure (HFrEF) patients. Recently, the new association of sacubitril/valsartan showed a reduction of both ventricular arrhythmias (VA) and mortality even at low dose compared to enalapril in HF patients. The purpose of our study was to assess whether the highest dose of sacubitril/valsartan compared to lower doses may improve the rate of death and VA in a population of patients with HFrEF and with an implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD).
Methods: 104 HF patients with reduced EF under sacubitril/valsartan with an ICD were divided in 2 groups: the first one with the lower doses of sacubitril/valsartan (24/26 mg or 49 mg/51 mg twice daily) and the second with the maximal dose (97mg/103mg twice daily). The primary outcome was a composite of death or appropriate ICD therapy for VA.
Results: After a median follow-up of 14 months, 39 patients were treated with lower doses and 65 patients with the highest dose. Patients from the lower doses group were older (70 [60-80] vs. 66 [60-70]; p = 0,03), more symptomatic at initiation (NYHA 3: 44% vs. 19%; p < 0,01) and more often in atrial fibrillation (31% vs. 12%; p = 0,04). The primary composite endpoint occurred in 14 patients (36%) in the low doses group versus 7 patients (11%) in high dose group (p < 0,01). This difference was particularly observed in the subgroup of patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. In a multivariable analysis, the higher dose was independently associated with the primary outcome with an HR = 2,934 [IC 95% 1,147 – 7,504]; p = 0,03. Kaplan-Meier curve showed an early effect of the highest dose of sacubitril/valsartan association.
Conclusion: Patients with HFrEF under the highest dose of sacubitril/valsartan showed better clinical outcomes with a decrease of both mortality or appropriated ICD therapies related to ventricular arrhythmias.
The service is nice and the time of processing the application is fast.
Department of Neurosurgery, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Hong Kong
Long Ching
I think that Heighpubs very good. You are very helpful. Thank you for everything.
Ana Ribeiro
During the process your positive communication, prompt feedback and professional approach is very highly appreciated.
We would like to thank you very much for your support.
Can Vuran
Journal of Pulmonary and Respiratory Research is good journal for respiratory research purposes. It takes 2-3 weeks maximum for review of the manuscript to get published and any corrections to be made in the manuscript. It needs good articles and studies to get publish in the respiratory medicine. I am really glad that this journal editors helped me to get my case report published.
Divya Khanduja
The Clinical Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology is an open access journal focused on scientific knowledge publication with emphasis laid on the fields of Gynecology and Obstetrics. Their services toward us have been encouraging through their kindness and respect. Great consideration has been given to us as young budding researchers and we are very grateful for this.
Carole Assontsa
The editorial process was quickly done. The galley proof was sent within a week after being accepted for publication.
The editorial team was very helpful and responded promptly.
India
Rohit Kulshrestha
Publishing an article is a long process, but working with your publication department made things go smoothly, even though the process took exactly 5 months from the time of submitting the article till the time I have favourable response, the missing part is the peer review details, which is essential in self auditing and future improvement, overall experience was excellent giving your understanding of the situation of lack of financial institution support.
Anas Diab
The Journal Clinical Nephrology provides a good opportunity for readers to stay updated in the field of clinical nephrology. Additionally - it provides a good opportunity for authors to publish their work.
1. Publication of the accepted manuscripts is sufficiently rapid.
2. The trust factor between the journal and me, as an author, is very important and well preserved.
3. Peer review process very rapid and effective.
Assaf Harofeh Medical Center, Israel
Leonid Feldman
In 2017, I submitted a manuscript to the journal Archives of Biotechnology and Biomedicine belonging to Heighten Science Publications Corporation. Within one week I already received the response from the editor. All processing steps were really fast so in terms of a speedy publication I can particularly recommend the journal Archives of Biotechnology and Biomedicine. The responsible contact person of the journal was always available, which gives a trustworthy impression to the author. Also the peer review process was clear and constructive. So from my experience with Heighten Science Publications Corporation I can recommend publishing there.
University of Tubingen, Germany
Yvonne Mast
I wanna to thank Clinical Journal of Nursing Care and Practice for its effort to review and publish my manuscript. This is reputable journal. Thank you!
If you are already a member of our network and need to keep track of any developments regarding a question you have already submitted, click "take me to my Query."