# Patterns in Prescribing and Predictors of SGLT2 Inhibitor Administration in Patients with Heart Failure and Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Real-World Retrospective Cohort Study

## TL;DR

This study examines how often SGLT2 inhibitors are prescribed to heart attack patients and finds significant gaps in treatment, especially for those with preserved heart function.

## Contribution

The study provides real-world evidence on SGLT2 inhibitor prescribing patterns and predictors in acute myocardial infarction patients.

## Key findings

- SGLT2 inhibitors were prescribed to 65% of eligible AMI patients, with significant underuse in HFpEF patients.
- Male sex and clinical severity markers were associated with higher SGLT2 inhibitor prescription rates.
- No serious adverse events were reported among patients receiving SGLT2 inhibitors.

## Abstract

Background/Objectives: Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors provide well-established cardiovascular and renal benefits in heart failure (HF), type 2 diabetes (T2DM), and chronic kidney disease (CKD). Although emerging trials suggest potential value after acute myocardial infarction (AMI), SGLT2 inhibitors currently have no formal indication for AMI, and real-world prescribing patterns in this setting remain uncharacterized. This study aimed to evaluate in-hospital and post-discharge prescribing patterns and clinical predictors of SGLT2 inhibitor initiation among AMI patients eligible for therapy based on guideline-supported indications. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study including 244 consecutive AMI patients hospitalized between January 2023 and July 2024. A total of 180 (73.7%) met guideline-based eligibility criteria for SGLT2 inhibitors. Four multivariable logistic regression models were developed to identify independent predictors of SGLT2 inhibitor prescription. Results: A total of 117 patients (65%) received SGLT2 inhibitors and 63 (35%) remained untreated. Receivers were more frequently male (81% vs. 65%) and exhibited lower left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (38.2 ± 6.7% vs. 42.4 ± 8.3%), larger ventricular volumes, and higher Killip class at presentation. HF patients with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) were markedly undertreated (25.9%) compared with mid-range (HFmrEF) (69.8%) or reduced (HFrEF) (73.7%). Across all models, HFpEF was a strong negative predictor of prescribing (OR 0.071–0.081, p < 0.001), while male sex and markers of clinical severity were associated with higher likelihood of initiation. Many untreated patients had T2DM or CKD despite guideline-based eligibility. No serious adverse events attributable to SGLT2 inhibitors were reported. Conclusions: In this real-world AMI cohort, SGLT2 inhibitors were prescribed primarily in relation to established indications for HF, T2DM, and CKD, yet their use remained highly variable in the absence of a dedicated recommendation for AMI. Significant therapeutic gaps were observed in HFpEF and high-risk cardiometabolic profiles, underscoring the need for clearer guidance and standardized pathways to support consistent initiation in eligible patients after MI.