TY - JOUR
T1 - Ivabradine vs metoprolol in patients with acute inferior wall myocardial infarction—“Expanding arena for ivabradine”
AU - Priti, Kumari
AU - Ranwa, Bhanwar L.
AU - Gokhroo, Rajendra K.
AU - Kishore, Kamal
AU - Bisht, Devendra Singh
AU - Gupta, Sajal
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
PY - 2017/8
Y1 - 2017/8
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
KW - Atrioventicular blocks
KW - Inferior wall myocardial infarction
KW - Ivabradine
KW - Metoprolol
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85023612425&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/1755-5922.12266
DO - 10.1111/1755-5922.12266
M3 - Article
C2 - 28423233
AN - SCOPUS:85023612425
SN - 1755-5914
VL - 35
JO - Cardiovascular Therapeutics
JF - Cardiovascular Therapeutics
IS - 4
M1 - e12266
ER -