Cardiovascular Therapeutics · 2017 · 17 citations · 14 references
MedicineCardiologyPharmacologyCardiovascular PharmacotherapyClinical PharmacologyInterventional CardiologyAntiarrhythmic TherapyArrhythmia PharmacotherapyCardiac MedicationsCardiac PharmacotherapyCardiovascular Drug SafetyCardiovascular PharmacologyAdverse Cardiovascular Drug EventsInferior Wall IschemiaIvabradine TherapyMyocardial Infarction PharmacotherapyPost-myocardial Infarction PharmacotherapySecond-degree Atrioventricular Block
BACKGROUND: Atrioventricular (AV) blocks are of concern with the use of beta blockers in inferior wall myocardial infarction (MI). Ivabradine lowers heart rate with a lesser risk of AV blocks. OBJECTIVES: To compare ivabradine with metoprolol in acute inferior wall MI in terms of feasibility, tolerability, and efficacy. METHODS: It was a prospective double-blind single-center randomized controlled study. Of 1032 patients with acute inferior wall MI, 468 eligible patients were randomized in 1:1 manner to ivabradine (group A) and metoprolol (group B). Intention to treat analysis of 426 patients (group A-232 and group B-232) was performed. The primary endpoint was 30-day incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events including death, reinfarction, complete heart block (CHB), and heart failure. Secondary endpoints included 30 days incidence of recurrent angina, readmission, first- or second-degree AV block, and tachyarrhythmias. RESULTS: Both the drugs decreased the mean heart rate to 62.22±2.95 (group A) vs 62.53±3.59 (group B) beats per minute (P=0.33). Ejection fraction improved in both the groups (5.15±1.93% in group A vs 5.52±2.18% in group B, P=0.065). The two groups did not differ significantly in their primary endpoints in terms of death (group A=1.72% vs group B=1.72%, OR=1.00, 95% CI=0.25-4.05, P=1.00), reinfarction (group A=0.86% vs group B=0.86%, OR=1.00, 95% CI=0.14-7.16, P=1.00), heart failure (group A=4.31% vs group B=2.59%, OR=1.70, 95% CI=0.61-4.75, P=0.31), or CHB (0% vs 2.59%, OR=0.07, 95% CI=0.00-1.34, P=0.08). There were no significant differences in the secondary endpoints of recurrent angina, readmission, and tachyarrhythmias except for more first- and second-degree AV blocks with metoprolol (12.93% vs 2.59%, OR=5.59, 95% CI=2.28-13.72, P=0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: Ivabradine is well tolerated and equally effective as metoprolol in acute inferior wall ST elevation myocardial infarction patients for lowering the heart rate with lesser risk of AV blocks.
14
2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction
Patrick T. O’Gara, Frederick G. Kushner, Deborah D. Ascheim et al. · Circulation · 2012 · 4.7K citations
Ivabradine and outcomes in chronic heart failure (SHIFT): a randomised placebo-controlled study
Karl Swedberg, Michel Komajda, Michael Böhm et al. · The Lancet · 2010 · 2.6K citations · Full text
Medicine, Cardiology, Pharmacology +11