Pulmonary Artery Pressure Falls After ARNI and MRA Initiation, but Not SGLT2 Inhibitors, in Hemodynamically Monitored Heart Failure: Insights From GUIDE-HF

Section Structure

1. Highlights

2. Clinical Background

3. Study Design and Methods

4. Key Results

5. Clinical Interpretation

6. Strengths and Limitations

7. Practice Implications and Future Research

8. Conclusion

9. Funding, Registration, and Citation

10. References

Highlights

Among patients with heart failure enrolled in GUIDE-HF and monitored with an implantable pulmonary artery pressure sensor, initiation of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist therapy was associated with modest but measurable reductions in diastolic pulmonary artery pressure over the subsequent month.

New sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor initiation was not associated with a detectable short-term change in pulmonary artery pressure in this analysis, despite the well-established outcome benefits of this drug class in heart failure.

After β-blocker initiation, pulmonary artery pressure trended upward, although the change was not statistically significant, a finding that aligns with the known potential for transient hemodynamic worsening during early β-blocker up-titration.

The study provides a practical hemodynamic perspective on guideline-directed medical therapy and may help clinicians prioritize drug initiation when elevated filling pressures are driving management decisions.

Clinical Background

Guideline-directed medical therapy has transformed the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and has increasingly influenced the management of heart failure across the ejection fraction spectrum. The major foundational drug classes now include angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs), β-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), and sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors. These therapies improve survival, reduce hospitalization, and in some cases improve symptoms and reverse ventricular remodeling. Yet the timing and nature of their acute hemodynamic effects are less well defined.

This is a clinically important gap. In routine care, clinicians often make medication decisions in patients who remain congested, have elevated filling pressures, or have frequent decompensation despite standard therapy. Symptoms and body weight are imperfect surrogates for intracardiac pressure. Implantable pulmonary artery pressure monitoring, particularly with the CardioMEMS platform, offers a more direct way to assess how medication changes influence filling pressures in ambulatory patients.

The GUIDE-HF program has already highlighted the broader concept of hemodynamic-guided heart failure management. The present analysis addresses a narrower but highly practical question: when core heart failure drugs are newly started, which agents are associated with an early reduction in pulmonary artery pressure, independent of loop diuretic changes and other background medication adjustments?

Study Design and Methods

This report is an analysis from GUIDE-HF (Hemodynamic-Guided Management of Heart Failure), a study of patients with implanted wireless pulmonary artery pressure sensors. The investigators examined pressure changes around the initiation of four core heart failure therapies: ARNIs, MRAs, SGLT2 inhibitors, and β-blockers.

The analytic strategy was designed to isolate the hemodynamic effect of a single newly initiated therapy. Pulmonary artery pressure values during the 7 days before drug initiation were compared with values from the 7-day period after 30 days of continued treatment. Patients were included only if the newly started medication had been initiated at least 30 days after sensor implantation and was continued for at least 30 days. To reduce confounding, patients were excluded if loop diuretic therapy or any other core heart failure therapy changed during the 30-day interval.

From 2358 patients in the overall study, the final analysis included 50 patients with new ARNI initiation, 97 with new SGLT2 inhibitor initiation, 112 with new MRA initiation, and 33 with new β-blocker initiation. The principal hemodynamic measure reported in the abstract was diastolic pulmonary artery pressure, a commonly used surrogate for left-sided filling pressure in remote monitoring programs.

This was not a randomized comparison of drug classes. Rather, it was an observational within-patient before-and-after analysis intended to detect short-term pressure trajectories after treatment initiation.

Key Results

ARNI initiation

Among patients newly started on an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, diastolic pulmonary artery pressure decreased by -1.56 mm Hg, with a 95% confidence interval of -3.54 to -0.40 mm Hg. Even though the absolute reduction was modest, the direction and statistical confidence support a genuine early hemodynamic effect.

This finding is biologically plausible. Sacubitril/valsartan combines renin-angiotensin system blockade with neprilysin inhibition, augmenting endogenous natriuretic peptides and promoting vasodilation, natriuresis, and reduced cardiac wall stress. The observed decline in pulmonary artery pressure may therefore reflect a combination of lower preload, lower afterload, and improved ventricular filling dynamics.

MRA initiation

New mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist initiation was likewise associated with a fall in diastolic pulmonary artery pressure: -1.15 mm Hg, with a 95% confidence interval of -1.82 to -0.47 mm Hg. Compared with the ARNI estimate, the magnitude was slightly smaller but still clinically credible and statistically supported.

This result also fits known physiology. MRAs antagonize aldosterone-mediated sodium retention and adverse cardiovascular remodeling. Even without formal diuretic escalation, these agents may modestly improve volume status and ventricular compliance over time. The signal in this analysis suggests that the hemodynamic benefit may begin relatively early after treatment initiation.

SGLT2 inhibitor initiation

By contrast, no detectable change in pulmonary artery pressure was observed after initiation of an SGLT2 inhibitor. This is a notable result because SGLT2 inhibitors consistently reduce heart failure hospitalization and cardiovascular death in broad heart failure populations. The lack of an early pulmonary artery pressure signal in this analysis should therefore not be interpreted as lack of therapeutic benefit.

Several explanations are possible. First, the mechanisms underlying SGLT2 inhibitor benefit may extend beyond immediate filling pressure reduction, involving renal-hemodynamic effects, improved myocardial energetics, altered interstitial fluid handling, and favorable neurohormonal or metabolic changes. Second, the study may have been underpowered to detect a small effect. Third, the assessment window may not have captured the most relevant hemodynamic phenotype or timing of response.

β-blocker initiation

After β-blocker initiation, pulmonary artery pressure trended higher, but the differences were not statistically significant. This is clinically intuitive. β-blockers improve long-term outcomes in heart failure, yet early initiation or up-titration can transiently worsen congestion or reduce forward output in susceptible patients before benefits emerge. The nonsignificant upward trend in pulmonary artery pressure provides a hemodynamic counterpart to this familiar bedside observation.

Clinical meaning of the effect size

The pressure changes reported here are small in absolute terms, but small shifts in ambulatory filling pressure may still be meaningful, particularly in remotely monitored patients whose management is driven by trend interpretation rather than one-time measurements. In pulmonary artery pressure-guided care, even modest sustained decreases may signal improving congestion and could help reduce the need for reactive diuretic escalation.

Clinical Interpretation

This analysis speaks to a practical question in contemporary heart failure management: when a patient has persistently elevated pulmonary artery pressures, which foundational therapy might be expected to lower pressures in the near term? The answer from GUIDE-HF appears to favor ARNIs and MRAs over SGLT2 inhibitors, at least in the first month and under the narrow conditions studied.

That does not mean clinicians should sequence therapy solely on the basis of short-term pulmonary artery pressure response. Modern guidelines recommend rapid implementation of all four foundational therapies in eligible patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction because each class improves major clinical outcomes through partly distinct mechanisms. Hemodynamic response is only one dimension of treatment value.

Still, the findings may be useful in patients managed with invasive hemodynamic monitoring, especially when congestion is a dominant problem. If pulmonary artery pressures are elevated and the clinician seeks an agent likely to produce an early pressure reduction without changing loop diuretics, ARNI or MRA initiation may be particularly attractive, assuming no contraindication such as hypotension, renal dysfunction, hyperkalemia, or intolerance.

The neutral short-term pulmonary artery pressure finding with SGLT2 inhibitors deserves careful framing. These drugs should not be deprioritized on that basis. Their benefits are among the most consistent in contemporary heart failure therapeutics and occur across a broad range of ejection fractions and diabetic status. The current study simply suggests that early decongestion, as assessed by pulmonary artery pressure alone, may not be the primary detectable mechanism in this setting.

The β-blocker signal also has practical value. A transient rise in filling pressure after initiation may help explain why some patients report early symptoms or show worsening hemodynamics during titration. For patients with remote pulmonary artery pressure monitoring, this may support closer surveillance during β-blocker initiation, particularly if congestion is borderline at baseline.

Strengths and Limitations

The principal strength of this analysis is its use of continuous ambulatory hemodynamic monitoring, which offers much greater physiologic resolution than clinic weight, symptom scores, or intermittent natriuretic peptide testing. The investigators also attempted to isolate drug-specific effects by excluding patients with changes in loop diuretics or other core heart failure medications during the assessment period.

However, several limitations are important. First, the analysis is observational and nonrandomized, so residual confounding remains likely. Patients selected for one therapy rather than another may have differed in blood pressure, renal function, baseline congestion, ejection fraction, or clinician intent. Second, the subgroup sizes were modest, especially for ARNI and β-blocker initiation, which limits precision. Third, the abstract does not provide granular baseline characteristics, making it difficult to judge comparability across drug groups.

Fourth, the outcome was a surrogate hemodynamic measure rather than clinical events, quality of life, renal outcomes, or biomarker change. Fifth, the assessment window focused on short-term response. Some therapies may have delayed or multidimensional benefits not captured by a 30-day pressure analysis. Finally, the cohort consisted of patients with implanted CardioMEMS devices, a selected population under specialized management, which may limit generalizability to broader heart failure practice.

Practice Implications and Future Research

For clinicians using pulmonary artery pressure-guided management, these results offer a useful hemodynamic framework. In a patient with elevated filling pressures and room to optimize therapy, ARNI or MRA initiation may be expected to modestly lower pulmonary artery pressure within weeks. SGLT2 inhibitors remain essential for outcome improvement, but their early benefit may not be readily visible through pressure reduction alone. β-blockers should continue to be used for their proven long-term mortality benefit, with awareness that some patients may require careful congestion monitoring during initiation.

Future studies should examine whether the short-term pressure changes seen here translate into differences in symptom relief, diuretic requirements, hospitalization risk, or successful implementation of multi-drug therapy. It would also be valuable to assess whether pressure response varies by ejection fraction, renal function, baseline pulmonary artery pressure, natriuretic peptide level, or background therapy intensity.

A particularly important unanswered question is whether remote hemodynamic data can be used not just to monitor decompensation, but to personalize sequencing and titration of foundational therapies. If so, implantable pressure monitoring could evolve from a surveillance tool into a platform for precision pharmacotherapy in heart failure.

Conclusion

This GUIDE-HF analysis adds a clinically useful layer to the evidence base for guideline-directed medical therapy in heart failure. In patients with implantable pulmonary artery pressure monitoring and no concurrent changes in loop diuretics or other foundational therapies, initiation of an ARNI or an MRA was associated with modest reductions in diastolic pulmonary artery pressure over the subsequent month. SGLT2 inhibitor initiation showed no detectable short-term pressure change, and β-blocker initiation was associated with a nonsignificant trend toward higher pressure.

The findings should be interpreted as complementary to, not competitive with, the established outcome benefits of all foundational heart failure therapies. Their main contribution is translational: they show how different drug classes may look through the lens of invasive ambulatory hemodynamics, and they may help clinicians make more informed treatment decisions when congestion and filling pressure are immediate management priorities.

Funding, Registration, and Citation

ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT03387813.

The provided abstract identifies the study as part of GUIDE-HF and notes use of the CardioMEMS pulmonary artery pressure sensor (Abbott). The abstract text provided does not include a detailed funding statement.

Citation: Desai AS, Zile MR, Ducharme A, Mehra MR, Maisel A, Sears SF, Costanzo MR, Smart FW, Chien CV, Jonsson O, Hall S, Nie H, Lee FS, Lindenfeld J. Changes in Pulmonary Artery Pressure Following Initiation of Guideline-Directed Medical Therapies in Patients With Heart Failure: Insights From GUIDE-HF. Circulation. Heart failure. 2026-05-28:e013877. PMID: 42206402. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42206402/

References

1. Desai AS, Zile MR, Ducharme A, Mehra MR, Maisel A, Sears SF, Costanzo MR, Smart FW, Chien CV, Jonsson O, Hall S, Nie H, Lee FS, Lindenfeld J. Changes in Pulmonary Artery Pressure Following Initiation of Guideline-Directed Medical Therapies in Patients With Heart Failure: Insights From GUIDE-HF. Circulation. Heart failure. 2026-05-28:e013877. PMID: 42206402.

2. Heidenreich PA, Bozkurt B, Aguilar D, Allen LA, Byun JJ, Colvin MM, Deswal A, Drazner MH, Dunlay SM, Evers LR, Fang JC, Fedson SE, Fonarow GC, Hayek SS, Hernandez AF, Khazanie P, Kittleson MM, Lee CS, Link MS, et al. 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure. Circulation. 2022;145:e895-e1032.

3. Lindenfeld J, Zile MR, Desai AS, Bhatt K, Ducharme A, Horstmanshof D, Krim SR, Maisel A, Mehra MR, Paul S, Sears SF, Smart FW, Stevenson LW, Costanzo MR. Haemodynamic-guided management of heart failure (GUIDE-HF): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2021;398:991-1001.

4. Abraham WT, Adamson PB, Bourge RC, Aaron MF, Costanzo MR, Stevenson LW, Strickland W, Neelagaru S, Raval N, Krueger S, Weiner S, Shavelle D, Jeffries B, Yadav JS; CHAMPION Trial Study Group. Wireless pulmonary artery haemodynamic monitoring in chronic heart failure: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2011;377:658-666.