Chronic Chagas cardiomyopathy (CCC) has unique pathogenic and clinical features with worse prognosis than other causes of heart failure (HF), despite the fact that patients with CCC are often younger and have fewer comorbidities. Patients with CCC were not adequately represented in any of the landmark HF studies that support current treatment guidelines. PARACHUTE-HF (Prevention And Reduction of Adverse outcomes in Chagasic Heart failUre Trial Evaluation) is an active-controlled, randomized, phase IV trial designed to evaluate the effect of sacubitril/valsartan 200 mg twice daily vs enalapril 10 mg twice daily added to standard of care treatment for HF. The study aims to enroll approximately 900 patients with CCC and reduced ejection fraction at around 100 sites in Latin America. The primary outcome is a hierarchical composite of time from randomization to cardiovascular death, first HF hospitalization, or relative change from baseline to week 12 in NT-proBNP levels. PARACHUTE-HF will provide new data on the treatment of this high-risk population. (Efficacy and Safety of Sacubitril/Valsartan Compared With Enalapril on Morbidity, Mortality, and NT-proBNP Change in Patients With CCC [PARACHUTE-HF]; NCT04023227).

Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors, including angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), are commonly used in the management of hypertension. High blood pressure is a vital risk factor for cardiovascular disease. This study aims to establish any significant difference in using ACEIs and ARBs in managing hypertension. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to conduct this systematic review. We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, and ScienceDirect for articles published in the last 20 years (2003 to 2023). Our search was last done on the 27th of June, 2023. Following the initial search, 8,313 articles were found on PubMed. After screening the articles selected from the databases, 10 articles examining 1,621,445 patients were selected for the final study. Three articles were identified that compared ACEI and ARB in their capacity to lower blood pressure. Six articles compared both medications\' capacity to reduce cardiovascular events and mortality. Five articles were identified that compared both classes of drugs for adverse effects. This study was made to determine whether or not there is a difference between the use of ACEIs and ARBs in the treatment of hypertension. The study showed that both ACEIs and ARBs are similar in their efficacy in lowering blood pressure. However, ACEI was revealed to be superior to ARB in reducing cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality. ARB was shown to be better tolerated by patients than ACEI.

BACKGROUND: While folic acid (FA) is widely used to treat elevated total homocysteine (tHcy), promoting vascular health by reducing vascular oxidative stress and modulating endothelial nitric oxide synthase, the optimal daily dose and individual variation by MTHFR C677T genotypes have not been well studied. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the efficacy of eight different FA dosages on tHcy lowering in the overall sample and by MTHFR C677T genotypes.
METHODS: This multicentered, randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial included 2697 eligible hypertensive adults with elevated tHcy (≥ 10 mmol/L) and without history of stroke and cardiovascular disease. Participants were randomized into eight dose groups of FA combined with 10 mg enalapril maleate, taken daily for 8 weeks of treatment.
RESULTS: The intent to treat analysis included 2163 participants. In the overall sample, increasing FA dosage led to steady tHcy reduction within the FA dosing range of 0-1.2 mg. However, a plateau in tHcy lowering was observed in FA dose range of 1.2-1.6 mg, indicating a ceiling effect. In contrast, FA doses were positively and linearly associated with serum folate levels without signs of plateau. Among MTHFR genotype subgroups, participants with the TT genotype showed greater efficacy of FA in tHcy lowering.
CONCLUSIONS: This randomized trial lent further support to the efficacy of FA in lowering tHcy; more importantly, it provided critically needed evidence to inform optimal FA dosage. We found that the efficacy of FA in lowering tHcy reaches a plateau if the daily dosage exceeds 1.2 mg, and only has a small gain by increasing the dosage from 0.8 to 1.2 mg.
RESULTS:
UNASSIGNED: NCT03472508 (Registration Date: March 21, 2018).

BACKGROUND: Myxomatous mitral valve degeneration is the most common canine heart disease. Several clinical trials have investigated various treatments. The latest recommendations are published in the ACVIM consensus guidelines (2019). Our study aimed to investigate how closely veterinary practitioners apply the treatment recommendations of these guidelines and the latest clinical trials.
METHODS: An online survey was sent to Dutch and Belgian veterinary practices via digital channels.
RESULTS: The data from 363 fully completed surveys were analyzed. For stage B1 disease, 93% recommended, correctly, no treatment. For stage B2 disease, 67% of the respondents recommended starting pimobendan as monotherapy. For chronic treatment of stage C disease, 16 different drug combinations were mentioned, but nobody recommended surgery. Only 48% of the respondents recommended the only evidence-based drug combination: a loop diuretic with pimobendan. A concerning finding was the simultaneous prescription of two loop diuretics, by 19% of the respondents.
CONCLUSIONS: Treatment recommendations showed an increasing variation with more advanced disease stages from B1 through B2 to C. This reflects the increasing disagreement among the panelists who prepared the ACVIM consensus guidelines. Practitioners of our study seem to practice more evidence-based medicine than veterinary cardiologists, as it was reported in a recent survey-based study.

Enalapril is an orally administered angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor which is widely prescribed to treat hypertension, chronic kidney disease, and heart failure. It is an ester prodrug that needs to be activated by carboxylesterase 1 (CES1). CES1 is a hepatic hydrolase that in vivo biotransforms enalapril to its active form enalaprilat in order to produce its desired pharmacological impact. Several single nucleotide polymorphisms in CES1 gene are reported to alter the catalytic activity of CES1 enzyme and influence enalapril metabolism. G143E, L40T, G142E, G147C, Y170D, and R171C can completely block the enalapril metabolism. Some polymorphisms like Q169P, E220G, and D269fs do not completely block the CES1 function; however, they reduce the catalytic activity of CES1 enzyme. The prevalence of these polymorphisms is not the same among all populations which necessitate to consider the genetic panel of respective population before prescribing enalapril. These genetic variations are also responsible for interindividual variability of CES1 enzyme activity which ultimately affects the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of enalapril. The current review summarizes the CES1 polymorphisms which influence the enalapril metabolism and efficacy. The structure of CES1 catalytic domain and important amino acids impacting the catalytic activity of CES1 enzyme are also discussed. This review also highlights the importance of pharmacogenomics in personalized medicine.

BACKGROUND: Lower systolic blood pressure (SBP) is known to be associated with poor prognosis in heart failure (HF). We evaluated the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan according to baseline SBP tertiles in Japanese patients from the PARALLEL-HF study.Methods and Results: In all, 223 patients were stratified into tertiles according to baseline SBP (≤114 mmHg: n=75; >114 and ≤130 mmHg: n=76; and >130 mmHg: n=72). Patients with lower SBP (≤114 mmHg) had the highest median N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) concentrations at baseline (P=0.0184). No significant difference was observed between sacubitril/valsartan and enalapril for the composite outcome of cardiovascular death and HF hospitalization across SBP tertiles (P-interaction=0.2682). Although the P-interaction value was not significant (0.2106), a greater reduction in NT-proBNP with sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril was observed in patients with SBP >130 mmHg (P=0.0076). The incidence of hypotension-related events and reduction or discontinuation of treatment due to hypotension-related events was higher in the lower SBP subgroup, and these events were more frequent in the sacubitril/valsartan than enalapril group.
CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril was consistent across baseline SBP tertiles in Japanese patients from the PARALLEL-HF study. Hypotension-related events were more common in patients treated with sacubitril/valsartan with lower SBP.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes Mellitus (DM) is a prominent health care issue worldwide. One of the most prevalent comorbidities of DM is cardiovascular disease (CVD). The objective of this study was to assess the utilization patterns of cardiovascular medications in patients with DM in Iran from 2013 to 2017.
METHODS: This retrospective cross-sectional study was undertaken using prescription claims data from 2013 to 2017 in Iran. Epidemiological data elements used in this study were obtained from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2019 study. In addition, data on total medication sales were obtained from the national regulatory authority database. The data on medication utilization were analyzed according to the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical Classification (ATC) /Defined Daily Doses (DDD) international system.
RESULTS: Based on the findings, Acetylsalicylic acid was the mainstay of treatment with a utilization rate of 191.7 DDD/ patient/ year in 2017, followed by Atorvastatin with 170.0 and Losartan with 115.1. Although there was an increasing trend in the utilization rate of the medications, the rate of Atenolol and Enalapril was constantly declining during the 2013-17 period. On the other hand, Valsartan and Metoprolol were attracting attention. Almost all medication utilization rates increased from the 30-39 age group up to the 80 + age group. Females had a higher utilization rate in each age group during the whole study period.
CONCLUSIONS: The present study reflects that medication utilization patterns were rational, according to the standard treatment guidelines. Utilization patterns of medications that are recommended for both prevention and treatment of CVD in diabetes were observed to be the highest. Implementation of further policies is needed to minimize cardiovascular complications of diabetes.

Postpartum hypertension is a common medical complication of pregnancy and is associated with increased healthcare use, including unplanned interactions with the medical system and readmission, which can add significant stress to both a newly postpartum patient and the medical care delivery system. We currently do not know what the best antihypertensive treatment for postpartum hypertension is and tend to use antihypertensives commonly used during pregnancy. However, the mechanism of action of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors may be well suited for the pathophysiology of hypertension in the postpartum period and may help to provide better control of hypertension and, in turn, decrease healthcare use.
This study aimed to determine if enalapril is superior to nifedipine in preventing prolonged hospitalizations, unplanned medical visits, and/or readmission among women with postpartum hypertension.
We performed an open-label, randomized controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov registered: NCT04236258) in which patients ≥18 years with chronic hypertension, gestational hypertension, or preeclampsia were recruited to receive either 10 mg enalapril daily or 30 mg extended-release nifedipine daily as an initial antihypertensive agent in the period from delivery to 6 weeks postpartum. Recruitment occurred at a tertiary academic hospital from January 2020 to February 2021. Exclusion criteria included being on an antihypertensive when pregnancy started or requiring ≥2 daily antihypertensives during pregnancy. The antihypertensive regimen was managed by the participants\' obstetrical provider after the initial randomization. The primary outcome was a composite of prolonged hospitalization, unplanned clinic visits, triage visits, and/or readmission. A total of 40 patients in each arm were needed to detect a decrease in the primary outcome rate from 70% to 40% (α=0.05; power 0.80). Analyses were performed based on the intention-to-treat principal, and each arm was oversampled because of the risk for participant dropout.
A total of 47 patients were randomized to each arm. Aside from the mode of delivery and twin gestation, the maternal demographics were similar between the 2 groups. The primary outcome occurred in 31 of 47 patients (66%) randomized to the nifedipine group and in 30 of 47 (64%) randomized to the enalapril group (P=.83). There was no significant difference in the primary outcome after controlling for mode of delivery and twin gestation. More patients in the enalapril arm had a second antihypertensive added during their primary hospitalization (16 vs 6) and more patients in the nifedipine arm were still on their antihypertensive at 2 weeks postpartum (42 vs 36). There were no adverse events in either group.
Enalapril was not superior to nifedipine when used as an initial antihypertensive in the immediate postpartum period in terms of decreasing healthcare use.

BACKGROUND: The PARALLEL-HF study assessed the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril in Japanese patients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). This open-label extension (OLE) assessed long-term safety with sacubitril/valsartan.Methods and Results: This study enrolled 150 patients who received sacubitril/valsartan 50 or 100 mg, b.i.d., in addition to optimal background heart failure (HF) therapy. A dose level of sacubitril/valsartan 200 mg, b.i.d., was targeted by Week 8. At OLE baseline, higher concentrations of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and urine cGMP, and lower concentrations of N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), were observed in the sacubitril/valsartan core group (patients who received sacubitril/valsartan in both the core and extension study) than in the enalapril core group (patients who received enalapril in the core study and were then transitioned to sacubitril/valsartan). The mean exposure to study drug was 98.9%. There was no trend of worsening of HF at Month 12. No obvious changes in cardiac biomarkers were observed, whereas BNP and urine cGMP increased and NT-proBNP decreased in the enalapril core group, which was evident at Weeks 2-4 and sustained to Month 12.
CONCLUSIONS: Long-term sacubitril/valsartan at doses up to 200 mg, b.i.d., has a positive risk-benefit profile; it was safe and well tolerated in Japanese patients with chronic HFrEF.

BACKGROUND: When heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) co-exist, Renin angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASi) are often underutilized for the fear of worsening renal function (WRF). Telmisartan is a RAASi characteristic for a favorable renal profile, although data on its utility in HFrEF is limited. This study aimed to compare efficacy and tolerability of Telmisartan versus Enalapril in patients with HFrEF and CKD.
RESULTS: This study randomized 107 patients with HFrEF and CKD to either Telmisartan (10-80 mg) or Enalapril (5-40 mg) daily. The achieved RAASi dose, dose reductions (DR) or dis-continuation (DC), death/Heart failure rehospitalization (HFH), NYHA class and 6MWT were compared at 3- and 6-months. At 3- and 6-months, 93.5% versus 68.6% and 95.2% versus 72.9% were maintaining ≥ 50% of the target dose in the Telmisartan- versus Enalapril-group, respectively. Despite the higher achieved dose by 3- and 6-months, Telmisartan versus Enalapril was associated with less WRF (6.4% vs. 22.9%, p = 0.022 and 7.3% vs. 13.6%, p = 0.28) and fewer episodes of DR-DC (31.9% vs. 55.1%, p = 0.018 and 35.7% vs. 56.5%, p = 0.041), respectively. By the end of the study, there were 5 deaths in each group, yet, HFH occurred in 34.1% versus 55.3%, p = 0.035, and NYHA class changed by - 1 [- 2, 0] versus 0 [- 1, 1], p = 0.017 in Telmisartan- versus Enalapril patients, respectively. Within-group results showed improvement in 6MWT in Telmisartan-, and increase in diuretic requirements in Enalapril-group.
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with HFrEF and CKD, Telmisartan was better tolerated to uptitrate, caused less WRF, less HFH and showed better functional improvement compared to Enalapril. Clinical trial registration This study was prospectively registered on clinicaltrials.gov, with registration number (NCT04736329).