6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Ivabradine: Heart Rate and Left Ventricular Function

      review-article

      *

      Cardiology

      S. Karger AG

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Ivabradine for patients with stable coronary artery disease and left-ventricular systolic dysfunction (BEAUTIFUL): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

          Ivabradine specifically inhibits the I(f) current in the sinoatrial node to lower heart rate, without affecting other aspects of cardiac function. We aimed to test whether lowering the heart rate with ivabradine reduces cardiovascular death and morbidity in patients with coronary artery disease and left-ventricular systolic dysfunction. Between December, 2004, and December, 2006, we screened 12 473 patients at 781 centres in 33 countries. We enrolled 10 917 eligible patients who had coronary artery disease and a left-ventricular ejection fraction of less than 40% in a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial. 5479 patients received 5 mg ivabradine, with the intention of increasing to the target dose of 7.5 mg twice a day, and 5438 received matched placebo in addition to appropriate cardiovascular medication. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular death, admission to hospital for acute myocardial infarction, and admission to hospital for new onset or worsening heart failure. We analysed patients by intention to treat. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00143507. Mean heart rate at baseline was 71.6 (SD 9.9) beats per minute (bpm). Median follow-up was 19 months (IQR 16-24). Ivabradine reduced heart rate by 6 bpm (SE 0.2) at 12 months, corrected for placebo. Most (87%) patients were receiving beta blockers in addition to study drugs, and no safety concerns were identified. Ivabradine did not affect the primary composite endpoint (hazard ratio 1.00, 95% CI 0.91-1.1, p=0.94). 1233 (22.5%) patients in the ivabradine group had serious adverse events, compared with 1239 (22.8%) controls (p=0.70). In a prespecified subgroup of patients with heart rate of 70 bpm or greater, ivabradine treatment did not affect the primary composite outcome (hazard ratio 0.91, 95% CI 0.81-1.04, p=0.17), cardiovascular death, or admission to hospital for new-onset or worsening heart failure. However, it did reduce secondary endpoints: admission to hospital for fatal and non-fatal myocardial infarction (0.64, 95% CI 0.49-0.84, p=0.001) and coronary revascularisation (0.70, 95% CI 0.52-0.93, p=0.016). Reduction in heart rate with ivabradine does not improve cardiac outcomes in all patients with stable coronary artery disease and left-ventricular systolic dysfunction, but could be used to reduce the incidence of coronary artery disease outcomes in a subgroup of patients who have heart rates of 70 bpm or greater.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Efficacy of the If current inhibitor ivabradine in patients with chronic stable angina receiving beta-blocker therapy: a 4-month, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

            Aims To evaluate the anti-anginal and anti-ischaemic efficacy of the selective I f current inhibitor ivabradine in patients with chronic stable angina pectoris receiving beta-blocker therapy. Methods and results In this double-blinded trial, 889 patients with stable angina receiving atenolol 50 mg/day were randomized to receive ivabradine 5 mg b.i.d. for 2 months, increased to 7.5 mg b.i.d. for a further 2 months, or placebo. Patients underwent treadmill exercise tests at the trough of drug activity using the standard Bruce protocol for randomization and at 2 and 4 months. Total exercise duration at 4 months increased by 24.3 ± 65.3 s in the ivabradine group, compared with 7.7 ± 63.8 s with placebo (P < 0.001). Ivabradine was superior to placebo for all exercise test criteria at 4 months (P < 0.001 for all) and 2 months (P-values between <0.001 and 0.018). Ivabradine in combination with atenolol was well tolerated. Only 1.1% of patients withdrew owing to sinus bradycardia in the ivabradine group. Conclusion The combination of ivabradine 7.5 mg b.i.d. and atenolol at the commonly used dosage in clinical practice in patients with chronic stable angina pectoris produced additional efficacy with no untoward effect on safety or tolerability.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Effects of selective heart rate reduction with ivabradine on left ventricular remodelling and function: results from the SHIFT echocardiography substudy

              Aims The SHIFT echocardiographic substudy evaluated the effects of ivabradine on left ventricular (LV) remodelling in heart failure (HF). Methods and results Eligible patients had chronic HF and systolic dysfunction [LV ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35%], were in sinus rhythm, and had resting heart rate ≥70 bpm. Patients were randomly allocated to ivabradine or placebo, superimposed on background therapy for HF. Complete echocardiographic data at baseline and 8 months were available for 411 patients (ivabradine 208, placebo 203). Treatment with ivabradine reduced LVESVI (primary substudy endpoint) vs. placebo [−7.0 ± 16.3 vs. −0.9 ± 17.1 mL/m2; difference (SE), −5.8 (1.6), 95% CI −8.8 to −2.7, P< 0.001]. The reduction in LVESVI was independent of beta-blocker use, HF aetiology, and baseline LVEF. Ivabradine also improved LV end-diastolic volume index (−7.9 ± 18.9 vs. −1.8 ± 19.0 mL/m2, P= 0.002) and LVEF (+2.4 ± 7.7 vs. −0.1 ± 8.0%, P< 0.001). The incidence of the SHIFT primary composite outcome (cardiovascular mortality or hospitalization for worsening HF) was higher in patients with LVESVI above the median (59 mL/m2) at baseline (HR 1.62, 95% CI 1.03–2.56, P= 0.04). Patients with the largest relative reductions in LVESVI had the lowest event rates. Conclusion Ivabradine reverses cardiac remodelling in patients with HF and LV systolic dysfunction.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                CRD
                Cardiology
                10.1159/issn.0008-6312
                Cardiology
                S. Karger AG
                0008-6312
                1421-9751
                2014
                May 2014
                24 April 2014
                : 128
                : 2
                : 226-230
                Affiliations
                Department of Cardiology and LTTA Center, University Hospital of Ferrara and Maria Cecilia Hospital, GVM Care and Research, E.S. Health Science Foundation, Cotignola, Italy
                Author notes
                *Roberto Ferrari, MD, PhD, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Ferrara, Ospedale di Cona, Via Aldo Moro 8, IT-44124 Cona-Ferrara (Italy), E-Mail fri@unife.it
                Article
                362086 Cardiology 2014;128:226-230
                10.1159/000362086
                24776521
                3bd7193f-d963-48a2-b0c9-37f79d571107
                © 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                Page count
                Figures: 2, Pages: 5
                Categories
                Citation Classics

                General medicine, Neurology, Cardiovascular Medicine, Internal medicine, Nephrology

                Comments

                Comment on this article