Effect of Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitor in Patients With Heart Failure: A Real-World Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: This study evaluated the cardioprotective effects of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) therapy in patients with heart failure (HF), focusing on blood pressure (BP) and cardiac or renal function. Methods: A total of 46 patients who started ARNI therapy between December 2020 and March 2023 were included. Blood tests, echocardiography, and assessments of BP and cardiac function including N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) in blood were performed before and 6 months after they started ARNI therapy. The patients were divided into two groups: heart failure with reduced left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (HFrEF) and non-HFrEF. Results: in all patients. After 6 months of ARNI therapy, NT-proBNP levels significantly decreased to 462 pg/mL (P < 0.01), LVEF improved to 52% (P < 0.01), and BP showed a slight reduction, particularly in patients with high baseline BP. eGFR remained stable (P = 0.53). The results showed that ARNI treatment led to a reduction in NT-proBNP and improvements in cardiac function, with more pronounced effects in patients with HFrEF. BP changes correlated with baseline levels, stabilizing at around 125/70 mm Hg, and there were no significant differences in changes in renal function between HFrEF and non-HFrEF patients. Conclusions: ARNI therapy significantly reduced NT-proBNP levels and improved cardiac function, with mild antihypertensive effects and no major impact on renal function. These results highlight the importance of predicting the degree of BP reduction by BP at baseline before starting ARNI in HF patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".