Evidence Hub

Abstract 17157: The SGLT2 Inhibitor Empagliflozin Ameliorates Interstitial Myocardial Fibrosis and Aortic Stiffness in Non-Diabetic Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Secondary Analysis of the EMPATROPISM Trial

C. Santos-Gallego, J. A. Requena-Ibáñez, A. Vargas, Á. García-Ropero, Anderly Rodriguez-Cordero, Donna M. Mancini, S. Pinney, A. Lala et al.

2020

84 participants

Abstract

Background:

SGLT2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) improve prognosis in HFrEF patients. We recently demonstrated in a porcine model of non-diabetic HFrEF that empagliflozin (EMPA) ameliorates adverse cardiac remodeling and improves LV systolic function. However, the effect of EMPA on interstitial myocardial fibrosis (IMF) and aortic stiffness has not yet been studied

Hypothesis:

Empagliflozin ameliorates IMF and aortic stiffness in non-diabetic HFrEF patients

Methods:

The EMPATROPISM clinical trial (NCT 03485222) investigated the efficacy and safety of EMPA in non-diabetic HFrEF patients. 84 patients were randomized to EMPA 10mg daily for 6 months or placebo on top of optimal medical treatment, and were evaluated with cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). IMF was assessed by CMR using extracellular volume (ECV) by T1 mapping. Aortic stiffness was quantified by pulse wave velocity (PWV) by CMR. The primary endpoint was change in LVEDV. Prespecified secondary endpoints were changes in ECV (ΔECV) and PWV (ΔPWV) at 6 months between both arms

Results:

80 patients completed the follow up period. There were no differences at baseline in LVEDV (220±75 vs 209±68mL for EMPA vs placebo, p=0.5) or LVEF (36±8 vs 37±8%, p=0.7). There were no differences at baseline in both groups in either ECV or PWV (Table). In the primary endpoint, EMPA-treated patients showed decrease in LVEDV and increase in LVEF (ΔLVEDV -25±25 vs -1±25mL, p<0.001; and ΔLVEF 6±4 vs 0±4%, p<0.001 for EMPA vs placebo). EMPA-treated…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 84 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free