Heart failure & cardiomyopathiesResearch article
Heart Failure Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy Scoring Systems: A Scoping Review
- scoping review
Authors' conclusion
Multiple, disparate scores have been developed to quantify heart failure with reduced ejection fraction GDMT optimization, undermining the original intent. Key gaps in scores include heterogeneous weighting of drug classes and doses, minimal incorporation of intolerance to identify maximum-tolerated therapy, and heterogeneous incorporation of therapies beyond quadruple therapy. Future studies should focus on clear reporting and justification of the selected GDMT score, and the use of existing scores that incorporate relevant contemporary agents.
Study context
- Population
- Published studies of heart failure guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) scores (heart failure with reduced ejection fraction)patients across 26 included studies (from 544 records) · cohorts 19 · randomized trials 7
- Participants
- 354,281 participants
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Studies that utilized different scores
25 (96%)
Adaptations of the Optimal Medical Therapy score
13
Further findings
Drug classes counted in scores
- Separated sacubitril-valsartan from other RASi
- 18
- Incorporated sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors
- 15
- Captured additional drug classes
- 8
- Scores adjusted for contraindications or intolerance
- 2
- All counted RASi, beta-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists
Use of GDMT scores across studies
- descriptor
- N=14
- covariate
- N=11
- predictor of future outcomes
- N=12
- end point for GDMT optimization interventions
- N=8
Original publication
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it