Ivabradine vs metoprolol in patients with acute inferior wall myocardial infarction—“Expanding arena for ivabradine”

Kumari Priti, Bhanwar L. Ranwa, Rajendra K. Gokhroo, Kamal Kishore, Devendra Singh Bisht, Sajal Gupta

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

5 Scopus citations

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere12266
JournalCardiovascular Therapeutics
Volume35
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2017
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Atrioventicular blocks
  • Inferior wall myocardial infarction
  • Ivabradine
  • Metoprolol

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Ivabradine vs metoprolol in patients with acute inferior wall myocardial infarction—“Expanding arena for ivabradine”'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this