Sacubitril/valsartan ameliorates cardiac hypertrophy and preserves diastolic function in cardiac pressure overload

Abstract Aims Sacubitril/valsartan (sac/val) has shown superior effect compared with blockade of the renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. We aimed to investigate effects of sac/val compared with valsartan in a pressure overload model of heart failure...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Einar Sjaastad Nordén, Bård Andre Bendiksen, Henriette Andresen, Kaja Knudsen Bergo, Emil Knut Espe, Almira Hasic, Ida Marie Hauge‐Iversen, Ioanni Veras, Rizwan I. Hussain, Ivar Sjaastad, Geir Christensen, Alessandro Cataliotti
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2021-04-01
Series:ESC Heart Failure
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1002/ehf2.13177
Description
Summary:Abstract Aims Sacubitril/valsartan (sac/val) has shown superior effect compared with blockade of the renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. We aimed to investigate effects of sac/val compared with valsartan in a pressure overload model of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Methods and results Sprague–Dawley rats underwent aortic banding or sham (n = 16) surgery and were randomized to sac/val (n = 28), valsartan (n = 29), or vehicle (n = 26) treatment for 8 weeks. Sac/val reduced left ventricular weight by 11% compared with vehicle (P = 0.01) and 9% compared with valsartan alone (P = 0.04). Only valsartan reduced blood pressure compared with sham (P = 0.02). Longitudinal early diastolic strain rate was preserved in sac/val compared with sham, while it was reduced by 23% in vehicle (P = 0.03) and 24% in valsartan (P = 0.02). Diastolic dysfunction, measured by E/e'SR, increased by 68% in vehicle (P < 0.01) and 80% in valsartan alone (P < 0.001), while sac/val showed no increase. Neither sac/val nor valsartan prevented interstitial fibrosis. Although ejection fraction was preserved, we observed mild systolic dysfunction, with vehicle showing a 28% decrease in longitudinal strain (P < 0.01). Neither sac/val nor valsartan treatment improved this dysfunction. Conclusions In a model of HFpEF induced by cardiac pressure overload, sac/val reduced hypertrophy compared with valsartan alone and ameliorated diastolic dysfunction. These effects were independent of blood pressure. Early systolic dysfunction was not affected, supporting the notion that sac/val has the largest potential in conditions characterized by reduced ejection fraction. Observed anti‐hypertrophic effects in preserved ejection fraction implicate potential benefit of sac/val in the clinical setting of hypertrophic remodelling and impaired diastolic function.
ISSN:2055-5822