- Original investigation
- Open Access
Heart failure therapy in diabetic patients-comparison with the recent ESC/EASD guideline
- Frank Edelmann†1Email author,
- Rolf Wachter†1,
- Hans-Dirk Düngen2,
- Stefan Störk3,
- Annette Richter4,
- Raoul Stahrenberg1,
- Till Neumann5,
- Claus Lüers1,
- Christiane E Angermann3,
- Felix Mehrhof2,
- Götz Gelbrich6,
- Burkert Pieske1, 7 and
- the German "Competence Network Heart Failure"
© Edelmann et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2011
- Received: 13 December 2010
- Accepted: 8 February 2011
- Published: 8 February 2011
To assess heart failure therapies in diabetic patients with preserved as compared to impaired systolic ventricular function.
3304 patients with heart failure from 9 different studies were included (mean age 63 ± 14 years); out of these, 711 subjects had preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (≥ 50%) and 994 patients in the whole cohort suffered from diabetes.
The majority (>90%) of heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction (SHF) and diabetes were treated with an ACE inhibitor (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) or with beta-blockers. By contrast, patients with diabetes and preserved ejection fraction (HFNEF) were less likely to receive these substance classes (p < 0.001) and had a worse blood pressure control (p < 0.001). In comparison to patients without diabetes, the probability to receive these therapies was increased in diabetic HFNEF patients (p < 0.001), but not in diabetic SHF patients. Aldosterone receptor blockers were given more often to diabetic patients with reduced ejection fraction (p < 0.001), and the presence and severity of diabetes decreased the probability to receive this substance class, irrespective of renal function.
Diabetic patients with HFNEF received less heart failure medication and showed a poorer control of blood pressure as compared to diabetic patients with SHF. SHF patients with diabetes were less likely to receive aldosterone receptor blocker therapy, irrespective of renal function.
- Heart Failure
- Diastolic Dysfunction
- Blood Pressure Control
- Heart Failure Patient
- Angiotensin Receptor Blocker
Heart failure is a major public health burden and the lifetime risk of developing heart failure in a 40 year old is around 20% . About 50% of patients presenting with heart failure have normal ejection fraction (HFNEF) [2, 3]. Recent research revealed that mortality of hospitalized patients with HFNEF is comparable to patients with systolic heart failure (SHF). However, in most heart failure trials, HFNEF patients were largely underrepresented.
Diabetes is a growing epidemiological burden and a major contributor to cardiovascular disease. In male patients with diabetes, the risk to develop heart failure is doubled in comparison to non-diabetic patients, but it is five times the risk of non-diabetic patients in women . Moreover, diabetes is an independent predictor of poor outcome once SHF or HFNEF have developed [5, 6]. Current treatment guidelines provide evidence for pharmacotherapy in diabetic patients with heart failure and adherence to guidelines is associated with improved outcome in both types of heart failure [7, 8]. Of note, the fore-mentioned guideline does not specifically address patients with HFNEF .
The aim of the present study was to compare heart failure therapy in diabetic patients with SHF and HFNEF.
All subjects recruited within the German Heart Failure Network are characterized by an extensive standardizes baseline data set including information on socio-demographics, physical examination, heart failure aetiology and classification, cardiovascular risk factors, comorbidities, medication, ECG, echocardiography, coronary angiography, routine laboratory, and quality of life . In all studies, a uniform baseline data set was obtained. All diagnostic procedures were performed in accordance with pre-specified Standard Operating Procedures. All individual studies were approved by local ethics committees.
For the current analysis, all patients from prospective follow-up studies with a diagnosis of heart failure were eligible.
In all patients echocardiography was performed according to guidelines of the American Society of Echocardiography (ASE) current at the time of data collection, including targeted M-Mode and Doppler techniques. All examinations were performed by physicians experienced in the technique and a pre-specified standard operation procedure regarding echocardiography was given. Preferable, the left ventricular ejection fraction was determined using the Simpson's model of discs. If patient's constitution did not allow sufficient appliance of the Simpson's method, visual estimation of LVEF was permitted too. Patients were classified as having SHF or HFNEF by echocardiographically determined left ventricular ejection fraction using a cut-off of 50%. Glomerular filtration rate was calculated by MDRD formula .
Data are presented as mean+/-SD or percentages. Estimates of percent of patients receiving a certain substance class are provided with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
Data were analysed by analysis of variance (quantitative) and logistic regression (frequencies), both including interaction terms for diabetes and left ventricular function. A two-tailed p < 0.05 was considered statistical significant. SPSS 15 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL) was used for analysis.
All individual studies were approved by local ethics committees. The authors had full access to and take full responsibility for the integrity of the data.
3304 patients with heart failure from nine different sub-studies were included into this analysis. In the total sample, 711 patients (22%, 353 women) had preserved ejection fraction and 2593 patients (78%, 653 women) had SHF. 2310 patients (70%) were free of diabetes, 622 (19%) had mild diabetes (treated by diet or oral anti-hyperglycemic drugs) and 372 (11%) had severe diabetes (insulin-dependent treatment). Baseline characteristics of the study cohort are also displayed in table 1, showing significant differences for most variables according to presence of diabetes or SHF. Except for the SF-36 score, no significant interaction of effects of diabetes and ejection fraction was seen on all baseline variables.
No Diabetes (n = 2310)
Diabetes (n = 994)
P value for respective effect
EF <50% (n = 1769)
EF ≥ 50% (n = 541)
EF <50% (n = 824)
EF ≥ 50% (n = 170)
61.1 ± 14.3
63.1 ± 14.0
67.2 ± 10.3
69.4 ± 7.6
Body mass index (kg/m2)
26.9 ± 4.5
28.5 ± 5.1
29.1 ± 5.5
30.3 ± 5.3
Heart rate (bpm)
73.0 ± 13.5
69.7 ± 12.7
74.2 ± 12.5
72.4 ± 14.4
Systolic blood pressure (mmHg)
121 ± 19
138 ± 23
125 ± 19
140 ± 21
Diastolic blood pressure (mmHg)
73 ± 11
79 ± 12
73 ± 11
77 ± 13
Glomerular filtration rate (mL/min)
72 ± 24
75 ± 22
64 ± 26
68 ± 24
8.7 ± 1.1
8.7 ± 1.0
8.4 ± 1.2
8.3 ± 1.1
52 ± 28
59 ± 28
44 ± 28
44 ± 27
As shown in figure 1, in HFNEF fewer patients received ACEi/ARB therapy than in SHF (p < 0.001). However, in contrast to SHF, both presence and the severity of diabetes were associated with a higher intake frequency of these substance classes (p < 0.001). A similar pattern was seen for beta-blockers (figure 1): The intake in HFNEF was reduced, but increased with the presence and severity of diabetes (p = 0.014). The presence of CAD was associated with a higher intake frequency of beta-blockers in HFNEF, but not in SHF. Comparable to SHF, diuretic therapy (figure 2) increased with the presence and severity of diabetes (p < 0.001). As also shown in figure 2, aldosterone receptor blockers were administered with lower frequency in HFNEF (p < 0.001); this association was unaffected by the presence and severity of diabetes (p = 0.198).
Role of comorbidities
In the whole sample, the intake of ACEi/ARB was independently associated with the presence of diabetes, hypertension and renal dysfunction. In contrast, the intake of beta-blockers was associated with the presence of coronary artery disease and hypertension.
This is the first study to evaluate the most recent ESC/EASD recommendations for heart failure therapy in a large contemporary cohort of patients with heart failure. Moreover, no previous paper has studied a comparably high number of diabetic patients with heart failure and normal ejection fraction (HFNEF).
Around 90% of diabetic patients with SHF are treated with ACEi/ARB and beta-blockers. This therapy pattern is not different from patients without diabetes.
In contrast, diabetic patients with HFNEF are less likely to receive ACEi/ARB and beta-blockers. However, as compared to non-diabetic patients, they are more likely to receive these therapies. Blood pressure control in diabetic HFNEF patients is poorer than in diabetic SHF patients.
Irrespective of renal function, diabetic SHF patients are less likely to receive aldosterone antagonists.
Heart failure therapy in surveys
The percentage of patients with SHF receiving ACEi/ARB and betablockers was close to 90% and, hence, much higher than reported in previous surveys (e. g., the EuroHeart Survey) . The large proportion of university centres and the exclusive recruitment in cardiology clinics may be an explanation . An additional possibility is that slowly but steadily we reach a better implementation of guidelines in Germany.
Heart failure therapy in patients with diabetes
There are very few, if any, clinical trials on heart failure treatment available that specifically address heart failure with the comorbidity diabetes. Therefore, recent recommendations carry a low level of evidence (level C) and are derived from subgroup analyses of patients suffering from diabetes in large heart failure trials . In patients with SHF, the use of ACEi/ARB, beta-blockers and aldosterone antagonists have been shown to reduce morbidity and mortality (for review, see ). Aldosterone antagonists reduce mortality in heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction and are of benefit in patients with systolic heart failure and recent myocardial infarction, with or without concomitant diabetes [14–16].
For HFNEF, there is yet no evidence-based drug-specific mortality reducing therapy available. Three trials investigated the use of ACEi and ARBs in HFNEF patients and failed to show a reduction in mortality [17–19]. Other treatment strategies, e.g. aldosterone receptor blockade, are currently investigated in clinical trials. Tight blood pressure control is the only recommendation supported by evidence in HFNEF, thus one would expect that this only recommendation would be strictly followed. However, our study shows that blood pressure control in HFNEF was inferior to SHF, the difference of about 15 mmHg in systolic blood pressure is partly explained by less pharmacotherapy.
The lack of evidence for heart failure treatment in HFNEF might explain the lower use of ACEi/ARBs, beta-blockers and aldosterone receptor blockers in patients with HFNEF. In contrast, data from the CHARM trial which was the largest trial to include patients with both SHF and HFNEF, showed that the presence of diabetes was of greater harm in HFNEF than in SHF patients . It is unknown whether a more aggressive antihypertensive therapy develops benefit in patients with HFNEF, but it has been shown that diastolic dysfunction, a relevant pathophysiology in HFNEF, is improved by lowering blood pressure . We were recently able to show that diastolic dysfunction is impaired along the whole diabetic continuum . Furthermore, diastolic dysfunction, which is believed to be the responsible mechanism for the development of heart failure in the majority of patients with HFNEF, is known to be found more frequent in diabetic patients . This increase in frequency of diastolic dysfunction in diabetes mellitus is thereby independent of renal function and can also be found under effective glycaemic control [24, 25]. Given the proposed association of diabetes mellitus and blood pressure control with diastolic dysfunction, we argue for an improvement of antihypertensive therapy and of glycaemic control in patients with HFNEF. However, the hypothesis that strict blood pressure and glycaemic control is beneficial in diabetic HFNEF patients should be tested in a prospective randomised trial.
Role of comorbidities
The use of ACEi/ARB or spironolactone may cause hyperkalemia, especially in patients with impaired renal function. A large population-based study from Ontario showed an increased incidence of hyperkalemia and subsequent mortality after the publication of the RALES trial and the rate of hyperkalemia in real-world is thought to be much higher than in clinical trials for various reasons (e. g. less frequent assessment of electrolytes and renal function, higher dosage of medication) [11, 26, 27]. In heart failure patients, diabetes has been shown to be an independent risk factor for the development of hyperkalemia and severe hyperkalemia (associated with hospitalization or death) [28, 29]. Even with impaired renal function, however, heart failure patients with diabetes will benefit from ARB therapy and aldosterone receptor blockade, similarly to patients without diabetes [28, 29]. Our data from a clinical practice setting suggest that the presence of the heart failure comorbidity diabetes restrains doctors from prescribing evidence-based therapy in heart failure patients - possibly in fear of side-effects, although these side-effects can be easily monitored by simple blood tests. As a consequence, we suggest that diabetic heart failure patients should receive appropriate doses of ACEi/ARB and/or aldosterone receptor blockers under a tight control of potassium and renal function markers, rather than withholding these potentially life-saving drugs. Moreover, future heart failure trials should focus on common comorbidities in heart failure populations (diabetes, impaired renal function, high age).
This is a cross-sectional observational study and although we included a high number of diabetic patients with HFNEF, the majority of included diabetic patients had SHF. In some of the studies, only patients with SHF were included. Thus, a stricter guideline-adherence for SHF in these SHF only studies may be an alternative explanation for the observed differences to HFNEF therapy. LVEF was not measured using a uniform methodology and intra- and inter-observer variability was not investigated and compared between the several medical centres. Although in most of all included patients LVEF was calculated according to Simpson's method, this may have biased our results.
Although we controlled for estimated glomerular filtration rate, we cannot rule out that more patients with diabetes had a history of acute renal failure and this could partly explain the lower frequency of aldosterone receptor intake in these patients.
Despite significant improvements in the pharmacotherapy of heart failure, there is still a considerable undertreatment in diabetic heart failure patients with HFNEF. Diabetic SHF patients are less likely to receive aldosterone receptor blockade, irrespective of renal function and potassium levels.
This work was supported by grants from the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (German Competence Network Heart Failure, TP 7 (FKZ 01GI0205), clinical trial program Aldo-DHF (FKZ 01KG0506)) and the German Diabetes Foundation.
- Lloyd-Jones DM, Larson MG, Leip EP, Beiser A, D'Agostino RB, Kannel WB, Murabito JM, Vasan RS, Benjamin EJ, Levy D, Framingham Heart Study: Lifetime risk for developing congestive heart failure: The Framingham Heart Study. Circulation. 2002, 106: 3068-3072. 10.1161/01.CIR.0000039105.49749.6F.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Owan TE, Hodge DO, Herges RM, Jacobsen SJ, Roger VL, Redfield MM: Trends in prevalence and outcome of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. N Engl J Med. 2006, 355: 251-9. 10.1056/NEJMoa052256.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Bhatia RS, Tu JV, Lee DS, Austin PC, Fang J, Haouzi A, Gong Y, Liu PP: Outcome of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in a population-based study. N Engl J Med. 2006, 355: 260-9. 10.1056/NEJMoa051530.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kannel WB, Hjortland M, Castelli WP: Role of diabetes in congestive heart failure: the Framingham study. Am J Cardiol. 1974, 34: 29-34. 10.1016/0002-9149(74)90089-7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Pocock SJ, Wang D, Pfeffer MA, Yusuf S, McMurray JJ, Swedberg KB, Ostergren J, Michelson EL, Pieper KS, Granger CB: Predictors of mortality and morbidity in patients with chronic heart failure. Eur Heart J. 2006, 27: 65-75. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehi555.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Tribouilloy C, Rusinaru D, Mahjoub H, Tartiere JM, Kesri-Tartiere L, Godard S, Peltier M: Prognostic impact of diabetes mellitus in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction. A prospective 5-year study. Heart. 2008, 94: 1450-5. 10.1136/hrt.2007.128769.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Ryden L, Standl E, Bartnik M, van den Berghe G, Betteridge J, de Boer MJ, Cosentino F, Jönsson B, Laakso M, Malmberg K, Priori S, Östergren J, Tuomilehto J, Thrainsdottir I: Guidelines on diabetes, pre-diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases. Eur Heart J. 2007, 28: 88-136. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehm124.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Störk S, Hense HW, Zentgraf C, Uebelacker I, Jahns R, Ertl G, Angermann CE: Pharmacotherapy according to treatment guidelines is associated with lower mortality in a community-based sample of patients with chronic heart failure. A prospective cohort study. Eur J Heart Fail. 2008, 10: 1236-45.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Mehrhof F, Löffler M, Gelbrich G, Özcelik C, Posch M, Hense HW, Keil U, Scheffold T, Schunkert H, Angermann C, Ertl G, Jahns R, Pieske B, Wachter R, Edelmann F, Wollert K, Maisch B, Pankuweit S, Erbel R, Neumann T, Herzog W, Katus H, Müller-Tasch T, Zugck C, Düngen HD, Regitz-Zagrosek V, Lehmkuhl E, Störk S, Siebert U, Wasem J, Neumann A, Göhler A, Anker SD, Köhler F, Möckel M, Osterziel KJ, Dietz R, Rauchhaus M, on behalf of the Competence Network Heart Failure: A network against failing hearts - introducing the German "Competence Network Heart Failure". Int J Cardiol. 2010, 145: 135-8. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2009.06.061.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- National Kidney Foundation: K/DOQI clinical practice guidelines for chronic kidney disease: evaluation, classification, and stratification. Am J Kidney Dis. 2002, 39: S1-266. 10.1016/S0272-6386(02)70081-4.Google Scholar
- Juurlink DN, Mamdani MM, Lee DS, Kopp A, Austin PC, Laupacis A, Redelmeier DA: Rates of hyperkalemia after publication of the randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study. N Engl J Med. 2004, 351: 543-551. 10.1056/NEJMoa040135.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Komajda M, Follath F, Swedberg K, Cleland J, Aguilar JC, Cohen-Solal A, Dietz R, Gavazzi A, van Gilst WH, Hobbs R, Korewicki J, Madeira HC, Moiseyev VS, Preda I, Widimsky J, Freemantle N, Eastaugh J, Mason J, the study group of diagnosis of the working group on heart failure of the European Society of Cardiology: EuroHeart Failure Survey programme - a survey on the quality of care among patients with heart failure in Europe. Part 2: treatment. Eur Heart J. 2003, 24: 464-474. 10.1016/S0195-668X(02)00700-5.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Taubert G, Bergmeier C, Andresen H, Senges J, Potratz J: Clinical profile and management of heart failure: rural community hospital vs. metropolitan heart center. Eur J Heart Fail. 2001, 3: 611-617. 10.1016/S1388-9842(01)00142-8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Pitt B, Zannad F, Remme WJ, Cody R, Castaigne A, Perez A, Palensky J, Wittes J, Randomized Aldosterone Evaluation Study Investigators: The effect of spironolactone on morbidity and mortality in patients with severe heart failure. N Engl J Med. 1999, 341: 709-717. 10.1056/NEJM199909023411001.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Pitt B, Remme W, Zannad F, Neaton J, Martinez F, Roniker B, Bittman R, Hurley S, Kleiman J, Gatlin M, Eplerenone post-acute myocardial infarction heart failure efficacy and survival study investigators: Eplerenone, a selective aldosterone receptor blocker, in patients with left ventricular dysfunction after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2003, 348: 1309-1321. 10.1056/NEJMoa030207.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- O'Keefe JH, Abuissa H, Pitt B: Eplerenone improves prognosis in postmyocardial infarction diabetic patients with heart failure: results from EPHESUS. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2008, 10: 492-497.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Cleland JG, Tendera M, Adamus J, Freemantle N, Polonski L, Taylor J, PEP-CHF Investigators: The perindopril in elderly people with chronic heart failure (PEP-CHF) study. Eur Heart J. 2006, 27: 2338-2345. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehl250.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Yusuf S, Pfeffer MA, Swedberg K, Granger CB, Held P, McMurray JJ, Michelson EL, Olofsson B, Ostergren J, CHARM Investigators and Committees: Effects of candesartan in patients with chronic heart failure and preserved left-ventricular ejection fraction: the CHARM-Preserved trial. Lancet. 2003, 362: 777-781. 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14285-7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Massie BM, Carson PE, McMurray JJ, Komajda M, McKelvie R, Zile MR, Anderson S, Donovan M, Iverson E, Staiger C, Ptaszynska A, the I-PRESERVE Investigators: Irbesartan in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction. N Engl J Med. 2008, 359: 2456-67. 10.1056/NEJMoa0805450.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- MacDonald MR, Petrie MC, Varyani F, Ostergren J, Michelson EL, Young JB, Solomon SD, Granger CB, Swedberg K, Yusuf S, Pfeffer MA, McMurray JJ, CHARM Investigators: Impact of diabetes on outcomes in patients with low and preserved ejection fraction heart failure: an analysis of the Candesartan in Heart failure: Assessment of reduction in mortality and morbidity (CHARM) programme. Eur Heart J. 2008, 29: 1377-1385. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehn153.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Solomon SD, Janardhanan R, Verma A, Bourgoun M, Daley WL, Purkayastha D, Lacourcière Y, Hippler SE, Fields H, Naqvi TZ, Mulvagh SL, Arnold JM, Thomas JD, Zile MR, Aurigemma GP, Valsartan In Diastolic Dysfunction (VALIDD) Investigators: Effect of angiotensin receptor blockade and antihypertensive drugs on diastolic function in patients with hypertension and diastolic dysfunction: a randomised trial. Lancet. 2007, 369: 2079-2087. 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60980-5.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Stahrenberg R, Edelmann F, Mende M, Kockskämper A, Düngen HD, Scherer M, Kochen MM, Binder L, Herrmann-Lingen C, Gbiorczyk J, Gelbrich G, Hasenfuß G, Pieske B, Wachter R: Association of glucose metabolism with diastolic function along the diabetic continuum. Diabetologia. 2010, 53: 1331-40. 10.1007/s00125-010-1718-8.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Romano S, Di Mauro M, Fratini S, Guarracini L, Guarracini F, Poccia G, Penco M: Early diagnosis of left ventricular diastolic dysfunction in diabetic patients: a possible role for natriuretic peptides. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2010, 9: 89-10.1186/1475-2840-9-89.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Nardi E, Palermo A, Mulè G, Cusimano P, Cottone S, Cerasola G: Impact of type 2 diabetes on left ventricular geometry and diastolic function in hypertensive patients with chronic kidney disease. J Hum Hypertens. 2010.Google Scholar
- Poantă L, Fodor D, Albu A: Left ventricular function in patients with uncomplicated well-controlled diabetes mellitus. Med Ultrason. 2010, 12: 184-7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Bozkurt B, Agoston I, Knowlton AA: Complications of inappropriate use of spironolactone in heart failure: when an old medicine spirals out of new guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003, 41: 211-214. 10.1016/S0735-1097(02)02694-3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Vanpee D, Swine CH: Elderly heart failure patients with drug-induced serious hyperkalemia. Aging (Milano). 2000, 12: 315-319.Google Scholar
- Pitt B, Bakris G, Ruilope LM, DiCarlo L, Mukherjee R, EPHESUS Investigators: Serum potassium and clinical outcomes in the Eplerenone Post-Acute Myocardial Infarction Heart Failure Efficacy and Survival Study (EPHESUS). Circulation. 2008, 118: 1643-1650. 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.778811.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Desai AS, Swedberg K, McMurray JJ, Granger CB, Yusuf S, Young JB, Dunlap ME, Solomon SD, Hainer JW, Olofsson B, Michelson EL, Pfeffer MA, CHARM Program Investigators: Incidence and predictors of hyperkalemia in patients with heart failure: an analysis of the CHARM Program. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007, 50: 1959-1966. 10.1016/j.jacc.2007.07.067.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar