|
| Study (authors and name of trial where applicable) | Study design | Number of participants | Baseline HF status | Diabetes status of participants | Follow-up period | Study endpoints | Outcomes |
|
| Lee et al. Sugar-DM-HF | RCT (empagliflozin versus placebo) | 105 | EF ≤ 40% | DM prediabetes | 9 months | Primary: difference in change of LVESVi & GLS
Secondary: difference in change of LVEF, LVEDVi, NT-proBNP, 6MWT, KCCQ-TSS (all imaging parameters assessed by CMR) | Significant improvement in LVESVi, LVEDVi, NT-proBNP in the empagliflozin group compared to placebo. No difference in GLS, LVEF, 6MWT, and KCCQ-TSS between the groups. |
|
| Jensen et al. Empire-HF | RCT (empagliflozin versus placebo) | 190 | EF ≤ 40% | DM Non-DM | 3 months | Primary: difference in change of NT-proBNP
Secondary: daily activity level, KCCQ-OSS | No differences noted between the groups in the change of NT-proBNP, daily activity level or KCCQ-OSS |
|
| Santos-Gallego et al. Empa-tropism | RCT (empagliflozin versus placebo) | 84 | EF < 50% | Non-DM | 6 months | Primary: difference in change of LVEDV and LVESV
Secondary: difference in change in peak VO2 (assessed by CPET), LVM, LVEF, 6MWT, and KCCQ-12 (all imaging parameters assessed by CMR) | Significant improvement of all the study endpoints (primary and secondary) in the empagliflozin group |
|
| Singh et al. REFORM | RCT (dapagliflozin versus placebo) | 56 | EF < 45% | DM | 12 months | Primary: difference in change of LVESV
Secondary: LVEDV, LVMi, and LVEF (all imaging parameters assessed by CMR) | No differences between the groups in the change of LVESV, LVEDV, LVMi, and LVEF |
|
| Tanaka et al. | Prospective multicentre study (dapagliflozin) | 53 | HFpEF and HFrEF (majority HFpEF) | DM | 6 months | Primary: diastolic function (E/e’), GLS
Secondary: LVEDV, LVESV, LVEF, LVMi, LAVi, and BNP (all imaging parameters assessed by 2D echocardiography) | Dapagliflozin was associated with improvement in diastolic function (E/e’) and GLS as well as LAVi. No significant changes in the rest of the parameters studied in the 6-month follow-up period |
|
| Seo et al. | Retrospective study (empagliflozin, canagliflozin, dapagliflozin) | 12 | Advanced/drug-refractory HF | DM | 6 months | NYHA class, BNP, LVEDV, LVEF, E/e’, TRPG (all imaging parameters assessed by 2D echocardiography) | Improvement was noted in NYHA class, LVEDV, TRPG, and BNP levels 6 months after initiation of the SGLT2. No changes in the rest of the parameters studied in the 6-month follow-up period |
|
| Sezai et al. Canossa | Prospective controlled trial (canagliflozin) | 35 | HFpEF and HFrEF (majority HFpEF) | DM | 12 months | Primary: changes of subcutaneous, visceral, and total fat areas (determined by computed tomography)
Secondary: ANP, BNP, LVEF, LVMi, diastolic function (E/e’) (amongst others) (all imaging parameters assessed by 2D echocardiography) | All fat areas significantly decreased after 12 months treatment with SGLT2. ANP, BNP, LVEF, LVMi, and E/e’ also significantly improved |
|
