Objective To explore the difference in clinical efficacy of sacubitril valsartan(SV)and enalapril in the treatment of elderly patients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection frac-tion(HFrEF).Methods A total of 126 elderly patients with chronic HFrEF admitted in our de-partment between January 2020 and January 2023 were prospectively recruited and randomly di-vided into control group(enalapril treatment,63 cases)and observation group(SV treatment,63 cases).After 3 months of treatment,the improvement rate of NYHA cardiac function grade,and changes in cardiac function indicators[6-minute walking distance(6MWD),NT-proBNP,LVEDD,LVEF],and echocardiographic indicators[left ventricular myocardial work(Tei)index,stroke volume,cardiac output(CO)]before and after treatment,adverse reactions during treat-ment and prognosis were compared between the two groups.Results The improvement rate of NYHA grade was significantly higher in the observation group than the control group(80.95％vs 65.08％,P＜0.05).The results of 6MWD,LVEF,stroke volume and CO were obviously higher in both groups after treatment than before treatment(P＜0.05).The results of 6MWD,LVEF,stroke volume and CO were notably higher in the observation group than the control group(P＜0.01).The SBP,DBP,NT-proBNP,heart rate,LVEDD and LV Tei index were decreased after treatment in both groups,and those in the observation group were even lower than those in the control group(P＜0.05,P＜0.01).As of April 2024,the readmission rates due to HF was re-markably lower in the observation group than the control group(7.94％vs 20.63％,P＜0.05),but no statistical difference was seen in the mortality or the incidence of adverse reactions be-tween them(P＞0.05).Conclusion SV is superior to enalapril in improving the efficacy,cardiac function and cardiac load of elderly HFrEF patients,with advantages of reducing the incidence of readmission but not increasing adverse reactions.

Objective To explore the difference in clinical efficacy of sacubitril valsartan(SV)and enalapril in the treatment of elderly patients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection frac-tion(HFrEF).Methods A total of 126 elderly patients with chronic HFrEF admitted in our de-partment between January 2020 and January 2023 were prospectively recruited and randomly di-vided into control group(enalapril treatment,63 cases)and observation group(SV treatment,63 cases).After 3 months of treatment,the improvement rate of NYHA cardiac function grade,and changes in cardiac function indicators[6-minute walking distance(6MWD),NT-proBNP,LVEDD,LVEF],and echocardiographic indicators[left ventricular myocardial work(Tei)index,stroke volume,cardiac output(CO)]before and after treatment,adverse reactions during treat-ment and prognosis were compared between the two groups.Results The improvement rate of NYHA grade was significantly higher in the observation group than the control group(80.95％vs 65.08％,P＜0.05).The results of 6MWD,LVEF,stroke volume and CO were obviously higher in both groups after treatment than before treatment(P＜0.05).The results of 6MWD,LVEF,stroke volume and CO were notably higher in the observation group than the control group(P＜0.01).The SBP,DBP,NT-proBNP,heart rate,LVEDD and LV Tei index were decreased after treatment in both groups,and those in the observation group were even lower than those in the control group(P＜0.05,P＜0.01).As of April 2024,the readmission rates due to HF was re-markably lower in the observation group than the control group(7.94％vs 20.63％,P＜0.05),but no statistical difference was seen in the mortality or the incidence of adverse reactions be-tween them(P＞0.05).Conclusion SV is superior to enalapril in improving the efficacy,cardiac function and cardiac load of elderly HFrEF patients,with advantages of reducing the incidence of readmission but not increasing adverse reactions.

Objective To investigate the therapeutic effects of vericiguat in combination with recombinant human brain natriuretic peptide in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Methods Seventy patients with HFrEF were enrolled and randomly divided into study group (n=35) and control group (n=35). The control group received conventional treatment for HFrEF, while the study group was treated with vericiguat and recombinant human brain natriuretic peptide in addition to the conventional treatment. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular end-systolic diameter (LVESD), left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD), amino-terminal brain natriuretic peptide precursor (NT-proBNP), 6-min walking distance as well as resting heart rate, systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure were compared between the two groups before and after treatment. Adverse reactions during treatment were also compared between the two groups. Results After treatment, LVEF in two groups was significantly higher than before treatment, and the study group was significantly higher than that in the control group (P < 0.05). After treatment, the LVESD, LVEDD, NT-proBNP as well as resting heart rate, systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure in the two groups were significantly lower than before treatment, and the study group was significantly lower than the control group (P < 0.05). After treatment, the 6 min walking test distance of two groups was significantly longer than that before treatment, and the study group was significantly longer than the control group (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the occurrence of adverse reactions between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusion Vericiguat combined with recombinant human natriuretic peptide can effectively improve cardiac function in HFrEF patients with few adverse reactions.