Effect of heart rate reduction by ivabradine on left ventricular remodeling in the echocardiographic substudy of BEAUTIFUL

The efficacy and safety of ivabradine hydrochloride in hemodialysis patients with chronic heart failure

INTRODUCTION

There is little evidence for ivabradine hydrochloride in patients undergoing hemodialysis.

METHODS

In this open-label prospective interventional trial of hemodialysis patients with chronic heart failure, during 12 weeks of treatment, changes in Heart rate (HR), frequency of dialysis-related hypotension were examined, and we investigated health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) and adverse effects.

RESULTS

18 patients from 6 facilities were enrolled in the study. HR significantly decreased over time, from 87 ± 12.61/min at baseline to 75.85 ± 8.91/min (p = 0.0003), and systolic blood pressure also increased significantly (p < 0.0001). The frequency of dialysis-related hypotension was markedly reduced (p = 0.0001). The HR-QOL survey showed significant improvements in Social Functioning among others (p = 0.0178). No specific adverse events occurred.

CONCLUSION

Ivabradine hydrochloride improved dialysis-related hypotension. Furthermore, the HR-QOL improvement effect were suggested. These results demonstrated the safety and effectiveness of ivabradine hydrochloride.

A 20-year population study of peripartum cardiomyopathy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The epidemiology of peripartum cardiomyopathy (PPCM) in Europe is poorly understood and data on long-term outcomes are lacking. A retrospective, observational, population-level study of validated cases of PPCM in Scotland from 1998 to 2017 was conducted.

METHODS

Women hospitalized with presumed de novo left ventricular systolic dysfunction around the time of pregnancy and no clear alternative cause were included. Each case was matched to 10 controls. Incidence and risk factors were identified. Morbidity and mortality were examined in mothers and children.

RESULTS

The incidence of PPCM was 1 in 4950 deliveries. Among 225 women with PPCM, obesity, gestational hypertensive disorders, and multi-gestation were found to be associated with having the condition. Over a median of 8.3 years (9.7 years for echocardiographic outcomes), 8% of women with PPCM died and 75% were rehospitalized for any cause at least once. Mortality and rehospitalization rates in women with PPCM were ∼12- and ∼3-times that of controls, respectively. The composite of all-cause death, mechanical circulatory support, or cardiac transplantation occurred in 14%. LV recovery occurred in 76% and, of those who recovered, 13% went on to have a decline in LV systolic function despite initial recovery. The mortality rate for children born to women with PPCM was ∼5-times that of children born to controls and they had an ∼3-times greater incidence of cardiovascular disease over a median of 8.8 years.

CONCLUSIONS

PPCM affected 1 in 4950 women around the time of pregnancy. The condition is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality for the mother and child. There should be a low threshold for investigating at-risk women. Long term follow-up, despite apparent recovery, should be considered.

New Therapeutics for Heart Failure: Focusing on cGMP Signaling

Current drugs for treating heart failure (HF), for example, angiotensin II receptor blockers and β-blockers, possess specific target molecules involved in the regulation of the cardiac circulatory system. However, most clinically approved drugs are effective in the treatment of HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Novel drug classes, including angiotensin receptor blocker/neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor, hyperpolarization-activated cyclic nucleotide-gated (HCN) channel blocker, soluble guanylyl cyclase (sGC) stimulator/activator, and cardiac myosin activator, have recently been introduced for HF intervention based on their proposed novel mechanisms. SGLT2 inhibitors have been shown to be effective not only for HFrEF but also for HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). In the myocardium, excess cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) stimulation has detrimental effects on HFrEF, whereas cyclic guanosine monophosphate (cGMP) signaling inhibits cAMP-mediated responses. Thus, molecules participating in cGMP signaling are promising targets of novel drugs for HF. In this review, we summarize molecular pathways of cGMP signaling and clinical trials of emerging drug classes targeting cGMP signaling in the treatment of HF.

Medical Therapy for Functional Mitral Regurgitation

Functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) can be broadly categorized into 2 main groups: ventricular and atrial, which often coexist. The former is secondary to left ventricular remodeling usually in the setting of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction or less frequently due to ischemic papillary muscle remodeling. Atrial FMR develops due to atrial and annular dilatation related to atrial fibrillation/flutter or from increased atrial pressures in the setting of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Guideline-directed medical therapy is the first step and prevails as the mainstay in the treatment of FMR. In this review, we address the medical therapeutic options for FMR management and highlight a targeted approach for each FMR category. We further address important clinical and echocardiographic characteristics to aid in determining when medical therapy is expected to have a low yield and an appropriate window for effective interventional approaches exists.

Sustained-Release Ivabradine Hemisulfate in Patients With Systolic Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

Ivabradine has potent actions in reducing heart rate and improving clinical outcomes of chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). At present, only the short-acting formulation of ivabradine is available that needs to be administered twice daily.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to evaluate the role of ivabradine hemisulfate sustained release (SR), a novel long-acting formulation of ivabradine dosed once daily, in stable patients with HFrEF.

METHODS

Patients with stabilized HFrEF in New York Heart Association functional class II-IV were enrolled and randomized to receive placebo or ivabradine SR in addition to standard medications. The primary endpoint was the change of left ventricular (LV) end-systolic volume index from baseline to week 32.

RESULTS

We randomly assigned 181 patients to placebo and 179 patients to ivabradine SR. After 32 weeks, a significant improvement of LV end-systolic volume index from baseline was observed in both arms with a greater effect in the ivabradine SR arm. Ivabradine SR therapy also exhibited superiority in improving LV end-diastolic volume index, LV ejection fraction, resting heart rate, the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score, and hospital admission for heart failure worsening and cardiovascular disease in comparison to placebo. Overall adverse events showed no difference between the treatment arms. There were fewer occurrences of worsening heart failure in the ivabradine SR arm.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study demonstrates that ivabradine SR once daily in addition to optimum standard therapy improved heart function in patients with HFrEF. (Clinical Trial of Systolic Heart Failure Treatment of IvabRadine Hemisulfate Sustained-release Tablets [FIRST]; NCT02188082).

Effect of Neprilysin Inhibition on Left Ventricular Remodeling in Patients With Asymptomatic Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction Late After Myocardial Infarction

BACKGROUND

Patients with left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction after myocardial infarction are at a high risk of developing heart failure. The addition of neprilysin inhibition to renin angiotensin system inhibition may result in greater attenuation of adverse LV remodeling as a result of increased levels of substrates for neprilysin with vasodilatory, antihypertrophic, antifibrotic, and sympatholytic effects.

METHODS

We performed a prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-comparator trial comparing sacubitril/valsartan 97/103 mg twice daily with valsartan 160 mg twice daily in patients ≥3 months after myocardial infarction with a LV ejection fraction ≤40% who were taking a renin angiotensin system inhibitor (equivalent dose of ramipril ≥2.5 mg twice daily) and a β-blocker unless contraindicated or intolerant. Patients in New York Heart Association class ≥II or with signs and symptoms of heart failure were excluded. The primary outcome was change from baseline to 52 weeks in LV end-systolic volume index measured using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Secondary outcomes included other magnetic resonance imaging measurements of LV remodeling, change in NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide) and high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I, and a patient global assessment of change questionnaire.

RESULTS

From July 2018 to June 2019, we randomized 93 patients with the following characteristics: mean age, 60.7±10.4 years; median time from myocardial infarction, 3.6 years (interquartile range, 1.2-7.2); mean LV ejection fraction, 36.8%±7.1%; and median NT-proBNP, 230 pg/mL (interquartile range, 124-404). Sacubitril/valsartan, compared with valsartan, did not significantly reduce LV end-systolic volume index; adjusted between-group difference, -1.9 mL/m² (95% CI, -4.9 to 1.0); P=0.19. There were no significant between-group differences in NT-proBNP, high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I, LV end-diastolic volume index, left atrial volume index, LV ejection fraction, LV mass index, or patient global assessment of change.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with asymptomatic LV systolic dysfunction late after myocardial infarction, treatment with sacubitril/valsartan did not have a significant reverse remodeling effect compared with valsartan. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03552575.

Combination of ivabradine and sacubitril/valsartan in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction

Aims

Ivabradine and sacubitril/valsartan are second‐line therapies for patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) based on guideline recommendations. We aimed to evaluate the synergistic effects of these two medications.

Methods and results

Patients' data were extracted from a multicentre database between 2016 and 2018. Patients were classified into (1) Simultaneous group: simultaneous prescription of ivabradine and sacubitril/valsartan within 6 weeks; (2A) Sequential group, ivabradine‐first: ivabradine was prescribed first, followed by sacubitril/valsartan; and (2B) Sequential group, sacubitril/valsartan‐first: sacubitril/valsartan was prescribed first, followed by ivabradine. A total of 464 patients with HFrEF were enrolled. Cardiovascular death and/or unplanned re‐hospitalizations for HF were less frequent (28.6% vs. 44.8%, P = 0.01), and the improvement of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was significantly greater in patients from the Simultaneous group than those from the Sequential group (∆LVEF 12.8 ± 12.9% vs. 9.3 ± 12.6%, P = 0.007). Among Sequential subgroups, the ivabradine‐first treatment decreased heart rate and increased systolic blood pressure (SBP) compared with sacubitril/valsartan‐first treatment (∆heart rate −9.1 ± 12.9 b.p.m. vs. 2.6 ± 16.0 b.p.m., P < 0.001; ∆SBP 4.6 ± 16.5 mmHg vs. −4.8 ± 17.2 mmHg, P < 0.001), whereas sacubitril/valsartan‐first treatment showed a higher degree of LVEF improvement (∆LVEF 3.6 ± 7.8% vs. 0.7 ± 7.7%, P = 0.002) than ivabradine‐first treatment. At the end of follow‐up, SBP, LVEF, and left ventricular volume were comparable between two Sequential subgroups.

Conclusions

Among patients with HFrEF, simultaneous rather than sequential treatment with sacubitril/valsartan and ivabradine was a better strategy to reduce adverse events and achieve left ventricular reverse remodelling. Ivabradine treatment had a more significant benefit on improving haemodynamic stability, whereas sacubitril/valsartan treatment showed a more significant effect on improving LVEF.

Effects of Ivabradine on Cardiac Remodeling in Patients With Stable Symptomatic Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Ivabradine reduces heart rate (HR) in patients with heart failure (HF). However, its effect on cardiac remodeling is not obvious. The goal of this study was to explore the extra effect of ivabradine on cardiac remodeling in patients with HF.

METHODS

We searched PubMed from database inception to January 31, 2020, Cochrane and Embase from database inception to February 2, 2020, and Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov from database inception to February 3, 2020, for randomized controlled trials on ivabradine treatments in patients with stable symptomatic HF, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 45%, and resting HR ≥ 60 beats/min in sinus rhythm. We pooled the mean differences (MDs) or standardized mean differences and their 95% CIs. An inverse variance was used to combine data. Fixed- or random-effects models were used to outline the outcomes based on heterogeneity levels. We assessed the heterogeneity among studies according to the I² statistic. A sensitivity analysis for select results was performed to assess the robustness of the outcomes.

FINDINGS

Of 2277 trials, 9 trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria. A total of 1523 patients were enrolled in 9 studies. There were 796 participants in the ivabradine group and 727 participants in the control group. The duration of follow-up ranged from 6 weeks to 19.6 months. The mean (SD) age of the participants was 59.7 (11.2) years, and 1187 participants (77.9%) were men. Therapy with ivabradine was related to reversing cardiac remodeling with a significant increase in LVEF (MD = 3.04%; 95% CI, 2.07%-4.00%; p < 0.001), decrease in the left ventricular end-systolic volume index (LVESVI) (MD = -7.30 mL/m²; 95% CI, -12.94 to -1.66 mL/m²; p = 0.01), and reduction in the left ventricular end-diastolic volume index (LVEDVI) (MD = -7.27 mL/m²; 95% CI, -14.04 to -0.50 mL/m²; p = 0.04). In the subgroup of enrolled patients with a resting HR of ≥70 beats/min, greater progress in LVEF was detected in the ivabradine group (MD = 3.60%; 95% CI, 2.40%-4.81%; p < 0.001), and a higher improvement in LVESVI was identified in the ivabradine group (MD = -11.06 mL/m²; 95% CI, -21.15 to -0.98 mL/m²; p = 0.03).

IMPLICATIONS

In patients with stable symptomatic HF, LVEF <45%, and resting HR ≥ 60 beats/min in sinus rhythm, ivabradine use was associated with reversing cardiac remodeling with a significant increase in LVEF, a decrease in LVESVI, and a reduction in LVEDVI.

Different left ventricular remodeling patterns and clinical outcomes between non-ischemic and ischemic etiologies in heart failure patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan treatment

AIMS

Although the beneficial effect of sacubitril/valsartan (SAC/VAL) compared to enalapril was consistent across ischaemic (ICM) and non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) groups, the PARADIGM-HF study did not analyze the effect of ventricular remodelling on patients with different etiologies, which may affect clinical treatment outcomes. This study aimed to compare left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) following SAC/VAL treatment and its association with clinical outcomes.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 1,576 patients were analyzed. Patients were grouped by LVEF changes following SAC/VAL treatment for 8-month period. LVEF improvement ≥15% was defined as "significant improvement", and <5% or worse was classified as "lack of improvement". The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death and unplanned hospitalization for heart failure.Patients with NICM had lower baseline LVEF but improvement was significantly greater comparing to those with ICM (baseline 28.0 ± 7.7% vs. 30.1 ± 7.1%, p < 0.001, LVEF increase of 11.1 ± 12.6% vs. 6.7 ± 10.2%, p < 0.001). The effect of functional improvement of SAC/VAL on NICM patients showed bimodal distribution. Primary endpoints were inversely associated with LVEF changes in NICM patients: adjusted hazard ratio was 0.42 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.31-0.58, p < 0.001) for NICM patients with significant improvement, and was 1.73 (95% CI 1.38-2.16, p < 0.001) for NICM patients but lack of improvement. Primary endpoints of ICM patients did not demonstrate an association with LVEF changes.

CONCLUSION

Patients with NICM had higher degree of LVEF improvement than those with ICM following SAC/VAL treatment, and significant improvement of LVEF in NICM patients indicates favorable outcome.

Pharmacological interventions for heart failure in people with chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Approximately half of people with heart failure have chronic kidney disease (CKD). Pharmacological interventions for heart failure in people with CKD have the potential to reduce death (any cause) or hospitalisations for decompensated heart failure. However, these interventions are of uncertain benefit and may increase the risk of harm, such as hypotension and electrolyte abnormalities, in those with CKD.

OBJECTIVES

This review aims to look at the benefits and harms of pharmacological interventions for HF (i.e., antihypertensive agents, inotropes, and agents that may improve the heart performance indirectly) in people with HF and CKD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies through 12 September 2019 in consultation with an Information Specialist and using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of any pharmacological intervention for acute or chronic heart failure, among people of any age with chronic kidney disease of at least three months duration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened the records to identify eligible studies and extracted data on the following dichotomous outcomes: death, hospitalisations, worsening heart failure, worsening kidney function, hyperkalaemia, and hypotension. We used random effects meta-analysis to estimate treatment effects, which we expressed as a risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane tool. We applied the GRADE methodology to rate the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

One hundred and twelve studies met our selection criteria: 15 were studies of adults with CKD; 16 studies were conducted in the general population but provided subgroup data for people with CKD; and 81 studies included individuals with CKD, however, data for this subgroup were not provided. The risk of bias in all 112 studies was frequently high or unclear. Of the 31 studies (23,762 participants) with data on CKD patients, follow-up ranged from three months to five years, and study size ranged from 16 to 2916 participants. In total, 26 studies (19,612 participants) reported disaggregated and extractable data on at least one outcome of interest for our review and were included in our meta-analyses. In acute heart failure, the effects of adenosine A1-receptor antagonists, dopamine, nesiritide, or serelaxin on death, hospitalisations, worsening heart failure or kidney function, hyperkalaemia, hypotension or quality of life were uncertain due to sparse data or were not reported. In chronic heart failure, the effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) (4 studies, 5003 participants: RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.02; I² = 78%; low certainty evidence), aldosterone antagonists (2 studies, 34 participants: RR 0.61 95% CI 0.06 to 6.59; very low certainty evidence), and vasopressin receptor antagonists (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.89; 2 studies, 1840 participants; low certainty evidence) on death (any cause) were uncertain. Treatment with beta-blockers may reduce the risk of death (any cause) (4 studies, 3136 participants: RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.79; I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). Treatment with ACEi or ARB (2 studies, 1368 participants: RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.90; I² = 97%; very low certainty evidence) had uncertain effects on hospitalisation for heart failure, as treatment estimates were consistent with either benefit or harm. Treatment with beta-blockers may decrease hospitalisation for heart failure (3 studies, 2287 participants: RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.05; I² = 87%; low certainty evidence). Aldosterone antagonists may increase the risk of hyperkalaemia compared to placebo or no treatment (3 studies, 826 participants: RR 2.91, 95% CI 2.03 to 4.17; I² = 0%; low certainty evidence). Renin inhibitors had uncertain risks of hyperkalaemia (2 studies, 142 participants: RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.49; I² = 0%; very low certainty). We were unable to estimate whether treatment with sinus node inhibitors affects the risk of hyperkalaemia, as there were few studies and meta-analysis was not possible. Hyperkalaemia was not reported for the CKD subgroup in studies investigating other therapies. The effects of ACEi or ARB, or aldosterone antagonists on worsening heart failure or kidney function, hypotension, or quality of life were uncertain due to sparse data or were not reported. Effects of anti-arrhythmic agents, digoxin, phosphodiesterase inhibitors, renin inhibitors, sinus node inhibitors, vasodilators, and vasopressin receptor antagonists were very uncertain due to the paucity of studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effects of pharmacological interventions for heart failure in people with CKD are uncertain and there is insufficient evidence to inform clinical practice. Study data for treatment outcomes in patients with heart failure and CKD are sparse despite the potential impact of kidney impairment on the benefits and harms of treatment. Future research aimed at analysing existing data in general population HF studies to explore the effect in subgroups of patients with CKD, considering stage of disease, may yield valuable insights for the management of people with HF and CKD.

New pharmacological treatments for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF): A Bayesian network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has contributed to an increasing number of deaths and readmissions over the past few decades. Despite the appearance of standard treatments, including diuretics, β-receptor blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI), there are still a large number of patients who have progressive deterioration of heart function and, inevitably, end-stage heart failure. In recent years, new medications for treating chronic heart failure have been clinically applied, but there is controversy surrounding drug selection and whether patients with HFrEF benefit from these medications. Therefore, we aimed to compare and rank different new pharmacological treatments in patients with HFrEF.

METHODS

We performed a network meta-analysis to identify both direct and indirect evidence from relevant studies. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO through the OVID database and CENTRAL through the Cochrane Library for clinical randomized controlled trials investigating new pharmacological treatments in patients with HFrEF published up to September 30, 2018. We included trials of ivabradine, levosimendan, omega-3, tolvaptan, recombinant human B-type natriuretic peptide (rhBNP), isosorbide dinitrate and hydralazine (ISDN/HYD) and angiotensin-neprilysin inhibition (LCZ696). We extracted the relevant information from these trials with a predefined data extraction sheet and assessed the risk of bias with the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Based on these items, more than half of the entries were judged as having an overall low to moderate risk of bias; the remaining studies had a high or unclear risk of bias. The outcomes investigated were left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF %), heart rate (HR) and serum level of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP). We performed a random-effects network meta-analysis within a Bayesian framework.

RESULTS

We deemed 32 trials to be eligible that included 3810 patients and 32 treatments. Overall, 32 (94.1%) trials had a low to moderate risk of bias, while 2 (5.9%) trials had a high risk of bias. The quality of the included studies was rated as low in regard to allocation concealment and blinding and high in regard to other domains according to the Cochrane tools. As for increasing LVEF%, levosimendan was better than placebo (-3.77 (-4.96, -2.43)) and was the best intervention for improving ventricle contraction. As for controlling HR, n3-PUFA was better than placebo (4.01 (-0.44, 8.48)) and was the best choice for regulating HR. As for decreasing BNP, omega-3 was better than placebo (941.99 (-47.48, 1952.89) and was the best therapy for improving ventricle wall tension.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study confirmed the effectiveness of the included new pharmacological treatments for optimizing the structural performance and improving the cardiac function in the management of patients with HFrEF and recommended several interventions for clinical practice.

Ivabradine and metoprolol in fixed dose combination: When, why and how to use it

Heart rate is an important factor in coronary artery disease and its manifestations, and as such has been considered as a possible target for therapy. Although in epidemiological, and in less degree, in clinical studies derived indications of a possible pathogenetic role of heart rate in major cardiac diseases, clinical trials did not provided any strong evidence. However, even as a simple risk marker, remains important in the treatment of coronary artery disease and heart failure. Beta-blockers are the drugs most frequently used for heart rate control. However, recent studies constantly find insufficient effectiveness of beta-blockers in heart rate control and go further to question their efficacy on outcomes, making clear the need for an additional therapy. Ivabradine, a pure heart rate inhibitor, added to classic beta-blocker treatment represent the new therapeutic option in stable coronary disease and heart failure.

Achieving Guideline-Directed Heart Rate ControlEarly Posthospitalization

Guidelines for the treatment of heart failure (HF) recommend the titration of β blockers (BB) to a target dosage shown to be effective in clinical trials. The benefit of BBs is associated with heart rate (HR) control, with a target resting HR <70 bpm which in clinical trials have been associated with improved clinical outcomes. The primary purpose of this study was to gauge the ability to achieve guideline-directed medical therapy HR control in the early posthospitalization period for HF patients with the wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD), assessing whether the WCD could be used to evaluate HR both at rest and during activity to determine if targets were being met and to adequately direct clinical decision making. The WCD platform allows continuous recording of HR. To assess the guideline-directed therapy goals for reduction of resting HR, HR was evaluated both at rest (nighttime: midnight-7 a.m.; daytime: 7 a.m. midnight), and during activity of daily living. HR data during activity of daily living (ADL) and rest were collected from patients with HF that wore the WCD for ≥5 weeks (n = 1,353) between 2015 and 2017. First, 643,891 activity episodes from 1,353 patients were analyzed. Daytime and nighttime resting HRs significantly dropped from beginning to end of WCD use (day: 72.5 bpm vs 69.0 bpm, p <0.0001; night: 68.1 vs 64.3, p <0.0001). However, 43% of patients still had an average daytime resting HR ≥70 bpm during the last week of WCD use. When comparing a patient's peak activity HR during the first week of WCD use to the last week, there was no difference (93.6 bpm vs 94.1 bpm, p = 0.23). During ADL, 31% of patients had a HR ≥100 bpm, 14% of patients had a HR ≥110 bpm, and 6% had a HR ≥120 bpm. In conclusion, months after hospital discharge, 43% of patients did not meet guideline-directed resting target HR control, indicating they may not have been effectively managed with BB. HR during ADL may have also been higher than preferred. Remote HR monitoring may help physicians to adequately titrate guideline-directed medical therapy, thus improving clinical outcomes in HF patients.

Prognosis of heart failure treated with digoxin or with ivabradine: A cohort study in the community

BACKGROUND

Resting heart rate (HR) reduction with ivabradine (IVA) improves outcomes of patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Nevertheless, the best option to slow HR in patients with HFrEF treated with beta-blockers and a HR >70 bpm is unsettled.

AIMS

To evaluate whether, in patients with HFrEF, commencing therapy with digoxin (CT-DIG) is associated to a worse prognosis than commencing treatment with ivabradine (CT-IVA).

METHODS

Observational study over 10 years on 2364 patients with HFrEF in sinus rhythm and a HR >70 bpm. Main outcomes were mortality, hospitalisations and visits. We analyse the independent relationship of CT-DIG or CT-IVA with the prognosis, stratifying patients for cardiovascular comorbidity, and for other potential confounders (378 patients who CT-DIG vs another 355 patients who CT-IVA vs another 1631 patients non-exposed to IVA or DIG).

RESULTS

During a median follow-up of 57.5 months, 1751 patients (74.1%) died, and 2151 (91.0%) were hospitalised for HF. CT-DIG or CT-IVA was associated with a lower all-cause mortality (DIG: HR = 0.86 [95% CI, 0.82-0.90], and IVA: HR = 0.88 [0.83-0.93]), cardiovascular mortality (DIG: HR = 0.84 [0.80-0.89] and IVA: HR = 0.83 [0.78-0.89]), hospitalisation (DIG: HR = 0.86 [0.83-0.89] and IVA: HR = 0.87 [0.83-0.91]) and 30-day readmission (DIG: HR = 0.84 [0.79-0.90] and IVA: HR = 0.88 [0.79-0.95]), after adjustment for cardiovascular comorbidity, and other potential confounders. These associations with the prognosis of HFrEF did not differ between patients who CT-DIG and those who CT-IVA.

CONCLUSION

Commencing therapy with digoxin or with ivabradine is associated with an improved prognosis of patients with HFrEF.

Myocardial recovery after cardiac resynchronization therapy in left bundle branch block-associated idiopathic nonischemic cardiomyopathy: A NEOLITH II substudy

BACKGROUND

Baseline predictors of myocardial recovery after cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in left bundle branch block (LBBB)-associated idiopathic nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) are unknown.

METHODS

A retrospective study included subjects with idiopathic NICM, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35%, and LBBB. Myocardial recovery was defined as post-CRT LVEF ≥50%. Logistic regression analyses described associations between baseline characteristics and myocardial recovery. Cox regression analyses estimated the hazard ratio (HR) between myocardial recovery status and adverse clinical events.

RESULTS

In 105 subjects (mean age 61 years, 44% male, mean initial LVEF 22.6% ± 6.6%, 81% New York Heart Association class III, and 98% CRT-defibrillators), myocardial recovery after CRT was observed in 56 (54%) subjects. Hypertension, heart rate, and serum blood urea nitrogen (BUN) had negative associations with myocardial recovery in univariable analyses. These associations persisted in multivariable analysis: hypertension (odds ratio (OR), 0.40; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.17-0.95; p = 0.04), heart rate (OR per 10 bpm, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.48-0.997; p = 0.048), and serum BUN (OR per 1 mg/dl, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.88-0.99; p = 0.04). Subjects with post-CRT LVEF ≥50%, when compared to <50%, had lower risk for adverse clinical events (heart failure hospitalization, appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shock, appropriate anti-tachycardia pacing therapy, ventricular assist device implantation, heart transplantation, and death) over a median follow-up of 75.9 months (HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.16-0.88; p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

In LBBB-associated idiopathic NICM, myocardial recovery after CRT was associated with absence of hypertension, lower heart rate, and lower serum BUN. Those with myocardial recovery had fewer adverse clinical events.

Role of ivabradine and heart rate lowering in chronic heart failure: guideline update

INTRODUCTION

This review summarizes the current management of heart failure (HF) in patients with reduced ejection fraction and the potential role of heart rate lowering agents in select populations, as recommended in the updated guidelines. Areas covered: PubMed was searched for studies that evaluated the role of heart rate lowering or ivabradine in HF management. Expert commentary: Targeting heart rate may offer benefit when added to renin-angiotensin aldosterone antagonists, and beta-blockers. Ivabradine is a heart rate lowering agent that acts on the funny current (I_f) in the sinoatrial node, thereby reducing heart rate without directly affecting cardiac contraction and relaxation. Clinical data from a phase III trial demonstrated that ivabradine reduced the composite end point of cardiovascular death or hospital admission for worsening systolic HF, while maintaining an acceptable safety profile in patients receiving standard of care therapy. These data, in addition to more recently published guidelines, suggest ivabradine as a promising new treatment option for lowering heart rate after optimizing standard therapy in select patients with chronic HF.

Effects of ivabradine on endothelial function, aortic properties and ventricular-arterial coupling in chronic systolic heart failure patients

AIM

Heart rate (HR) is an important prognostic factor in patients affected by chronic heart failure (CHF); ivabradine has been demonstrated to significantly reduce nonfatal myocardial infarction and hospitalization rate for acute heart failure and to improve left ventricular (LV) reverse remodeling, quality of life, exercise capacity, and arterial elastance (Ea) in these patients. We aimed at evaluating the short-term effects of ivabradine on ventricular-arterial coupling (VAC), aortic stiffness, and endothelial function in stable patients with CHF.

METHODS

We evaluated 30 consecutive CHF patients (LVEF≤ 35%, NYHA class II) with sinus rhythm and HR ≥ 70 bpm on optimized pharmacological therapy. All of them underwent both transthoracic echocardiogram to assess aortic elastic properties (aortic distensibility, AD; aortic stiffness index, ASI; systolic aortic strain, SAS) and VAC, and peripheral arterial tonometry to measure endothelial function. Therapy with ivabradine 5 mg bid was added and each patient was evaluated with the same examinations after 4 months.

RESULTS

At the baseline, 73% of patients had impaired VAC and 63% endothelial dysfunction. After 4 months, there was a significant improvement in the VAC value (ΔVAC -0.10 ± 0.18, P = .021), mainly linked to Ea (ΔEa -0.40 ± 0.23 mm Hg/mL; P = .003). All the parameters of aortic elasticity underwent significant improvement (ΔAD 1.82 ± 1.43 cm² × dyn^- ¹, P = .004; ΔASI -4.73 ± 6.07, P = .033; ΔSAS -7.98 ± 4.37%, P = .003). Lastly, we also noted a significant improvement of endothelial function (Δ RHI 0.35 ± 0.35; P < .001). At follow-up 40% of patients had impaired VAC (P = .018) and 33% endothelial dysfunction (P = .038).

CONCLUSION

In patients with CHF adding ivabradine on top to the standard optimized medical therapy, when indicated, seems to improve endothelial function, aortic properties, and VAC.

The Effects of Ivabradine on Left Ventricular Synchronization and Tei Index in Patients with Systolic Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

The aim of our study was to evaluate in stable outpatients with systolic heart failure (HF) the 3 months effect of ivabradine on LV synchronization and Tei index in stable outpatients with systolic HF.

METHODS

We evaluated prospectively 40 (30 males, 10 females) patients with HF. All patients were evaluated before and after treatment by transthoracic M mode, two dimensional (2D), pulsed-wave (PW), continuous wave (CW), color flow and tissue Doppler imaging (TDI) and tissue synchronization imaging (TSI). Standard deviation of Ts of the 12 LV segments (Ts-SD-12) is the most widely used parameter of intra-LV asynchrony.

RESULTS

Thirty men and 10 women with mean ± SD age of 64.7 ± 9.9 years were included in this study. Most of the patients benefitted from some degree of clinical improvement, 12/16 (75.0%) from NYHA III to II and 18/24 (75.0%) from II to I, respectively. Resting heart rate was significantly reduced after ivabradine treatment (84.3 ± 11.4 vs. 66.5 ± 11.5 bpm, p < 0.001). E/E' and Tei index were significantly changed after ivabradine treatment (17.3 ± 9.0 vs. 14.8 ± 7.1, p = 0.02 and 0.86 ± 0.74 vs. 0.81 ± 0.69, p = 0.02). Intra-LV synchrony parameters Ts-SD-12 and Ts-12 were significantly reduced after ivabradine (46.8 ± 13.6 vs. 42.7 ± 13.1, p = 0.01 and 142.5 ± 44.0 vs. 128.5 ± 45.2, p = 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study demonstrated that adding ivabradine to the standard therapy reduced HR and significantly improved LV ventricular asynchrony and Tei index in systolic HF patients.

Traditional Chinese medicine, Danlou tablets alleviate adverse left ventricular remodeling after myocardial infarction: results of a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, pilot study

BACKGROUND

Danlou tablets, a patented Chinese Medicine, have been long approved for the treatment of ischemic heart disease in China. While numerous empirical observations suggested Danlou tablets could decrease frequency and duration of angina pectoris attacks, evidence supporting its efficacy on cardiac remodeling remains inadequate. Therefore, this pilot trial was designed to determine whether Danlou tablets would reduce adverse left ventricular (LV) remodeling in patients with myocardial infarction (MI).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Eligible patients with acute MI were enrolled and randomly assigned to Danlou tablets or placebo groups, superimposed on standard treatment for MI. Then, in addition to assessment of the clinical outcome, the changes in LV volumes were evaluated by a serial echocardiography. In total, 83 patients (Danlou tablets 42 and placebo 41) completed 90 days of treatment and had complete baseline and outcome data. Standard echocardiographic evaluations revealed significant differences in the change of LV end-diastolic volume index (LVEDVi) between group of patients treated with Danlou tablets and the placebo group (-4.49 ± 7.29 vs. -0.34 ± 9.01 mL/m2, P < 0.001). The reduction in LVEDVi was independent of beta-blocker, ACE inhibitors/ARBs use. Furthermore, treatment with Danlou tablets significantly reduced LV end-systolic volume index (-4.09 ± 5.85 vs. -0.54 ± 5.72 mL/m2, P < 0.001) and improved the LV ejection fraction (4.83 ± 9.23 vs. 0.23 ± 8.15 %, P < 0.001), as compared to placebo. Meaningfully, the incidence of the major adverse cardiovascular events was also lower in patients receiving Danlou tablets (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Superimposed on the standard pharmacologic treatment, Danlou tablets significantly reversed post-MI adverse LV remodeling, thereby contributed to the overall positive clinical outcome.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT02675322 (February 1, 2016).

Integrated Omic Analysis of a Guinea Pig Model of Heart Failure and Sudden Cardiac Death

Here, we examine key regulatory pathways underlying the transition from compensated hypertrophy (HYP) to decompensated heart failure (HF) and sudden cardiac death (SCD) in a guinea pig pressure-overload model by integrated multiome analysis. Relative protein abundances from sham-operated HYP and HF hearts were assessed by iTRAQ LC-MS/MS. Metabolites were quantified by LC-MS/MS or GC-MS. Transcriptome profiles were obtained using mRNA microarrays. The guinea pig HF proteome exhibited classic biosignatures of cardiac HYP, left ventricular dysfunction, fibrosis, inflammation, and extravasation. Fatty acid metabolism, mitochondrial transcription/translation factors, antioxidant enzymes, and other mitochondrial procsses, were downregulated in HF but not HYP. Proteins upregulated in HF implicate extracellular matrix remodeling, cytoskeletal remodeling, and acute phase inflammation markers. Among metabolites, acylcarnitines were downregulated in HYP and fatty acids accumulated in HF. The correlation of transcript and protein changes in HF was weak (R(2) = 0.23), suggesting post-transcriptional gene regulation in HF. Proteome/metabolome integration indicated metabolic bottlenecks in fatty acyl-CoA processing by carnitine palmitoyl transferase (CPT1B) as well as TCA cycle inhibition. On the basis of these findings, we present a model of cardiac decompensation involving impaired nuclear integration of Ca(2+) and cyclic nucleotide signals that are coupled to mitochondrial metabolic and antioxidant defects through the CREB/PGC1α transcriptional axis.

Is Heart Rate a Norepiphenomenon in Heart Failure?

There has been an increased focus on heart rate as a target in the management of cardiovascular disease and more specifically in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in recent years with several studies showing the benefit of a lower resting heart rate on outcomes. This review paper examines the pathophysiology behind the benefits of lowering heart rate in heart failure and also the evidence for and against the pharmacological agents available to achieve this.

Heart rate and left ventricular adverse remodelling after ST-elevation myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

Discharge heart rate (HR) following ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is a predictor of adverse left ventricular remodelling (LVR). However, the prognostic relevance of HR values in the earlier phase after revascularization is unknown. We aimed to investigate resting HR assessed at different time points during hospital stay following STEMI for the prediction of LVR.

METHODS

In this prospective observational study of 143 consecutive STEMI patients, HR was measured serially on admission (AHR), at day 1 (HRd1) and 2 (HRd2) following revascularization and finally at discharge (DHR). Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) scans were performed at baseline and 4months thereafter to evaluate LVR and major CMR determinants of LVR (infarct size, microvascular obstruction). LVR was defined as ≥15% increase of left ventricular end-diastolic volume.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients (20%) have developed LVR. HRd1 (80[72-88] vs. 71[62-79]bpm, p=0.003), HRd2 (74[64-83] vs. 67[59-78]bpm, p=0.04), DHR (74[62-81] vs. 64[58-73] bpm, p=0.008) and the mean HR of all measurements (76[68-82] vs. 67[60-77]bpm, p=0.004) were significantly higher in patients with LVR, whereas admission HR (75[68-85] vs. 70[60-82]bpm, p=0.12) did not differ significantly. The associations for all post-admission HRs remained significant after adjustment for clinical (high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T and C-reactive protein, left anterior descending artery as culprit) and CMR (infarct size, microvascular obstruction, ejection fraction) predictors of LVR. The predictive values of the post-admission HRs were equivalent (area under the curve differences: all p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

Besides DHR, resting HR values in the early stage following reperfusion are independent predictors of LVR after STEMI.

Heart Rate Reduction With Ivabradine Protects Against Left Ventricular Remodeling by Attenuating Infarct Expansion and Preserving Remote-Zone Contractile Function and Synchrony in a Mouse Model of Reperfused Myocardial Infarction

BACKGROUND

Ivabradine selectively inhibits the pacemaker current of the sinoatrial node, slowing heart rate. Few studies have examined the effects of ivabradine on the mechanical properties of the heart after reperfused myocardial infarction (MI). Advances in ultrasound speckle-tracking allow strain analyses to be performed in small-animal models, enabling the assessment of regional mechanical function.

METHODS AND RESULTS

After 1 hour of coronary occlusion followed by reperfusion, mice received 10 mg/kg per day of ivabradine dissolved in drinking water (n=10), or were treated as infarcted controls (n=9). Three-dimensional high-frequency echocardiography was performed at baseline and at days 2, 7, 14, and 28 post-MI. Speckle-tracking software was used to calculate intramural longitudinal myocardial strain (Ell) and strain rate. Standard deviation time to peak radial strain (SD Tpeak Err) and temporal uniformity of strain were calculated from short-axis cines acquired in the left ventricular remote zone. Ivabradine reduced heart rate by 8% to 16% over the course of 28 days compared to controls (P<0.001). On day 28 post-MI, the ivabradine group was found to have significantly smaller end-systolic volumes, greater ejection fraction, reduced wall thinning, and greater peak Ell and Ell rate in the remote zone, as well as globally. Temporal uniformity of strain and SD Tpeak Err were significantly smaller in the ivabradine-treated group by day 28 (P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

High-frequency ultrasound speckle-tracking demonstrated decreased left ventricular remodeling and dyssynchrony, as well as improved mechanical performance in remote myocardium after heart rate reduction with ivabradine.

Addressing Major Unmet Needs in Patients with Systolic Heart Failure: The Role of Ivabradine

We reviewed clinical evidence for the use of ivabradine in systolic heart failure (HF), in which it appears to improve symptoms, improve quality of life, prevent hospitalization, and prolong survival, thereby addressing unmet needs in the management of HF. Ivabradine provides symptomatic benefits in HF on top of standard therapies, in terms of functional parameters and exercise capacity, and there is some evidence that this leads to improvements in quality of life in symptomatic HF patients, who may have dyspnea, altered exercise capacity, and fatigue. The SHIFT trial demonstrated that ivabradine has significant beneficial effects on major outcomes in HF. Ivabradine had a significant effect on pump failure death, which was reduced by 26 % (p = 0.014), with no effect on sudden cardiac death. This is an important result since pump failure death is currently the main cause of death in HF, and also because the reductions in mortality obtained with beta-blockers and spironolactone in the last 20 years appear to be mainly due to reduction in sudden death rather than reduction in pump failure death. Ivabradine also has a beneficial effect on hospital admissions (-26 %, p < 0.0001), which is clinically relevant since a quarter of HF patients can expect to be readmitted to hospital for HF within 1 month of discharge. Ivabradine-treated patients are also at significantly lower risk of experiencing a second or third hospitalization for worsening HF. Ivabradine clearly has a key role to play in the management of HF by covering the main therapeutic objectives of symptoms, quality of life, and outcomes.

Role of Ivabradine in the Treatment of Patients With Cardiovascular Disease

OBJECTIVE

To review the role of heart rate in myocardial ischemia and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) as well as ivabradine's pharmacology and pharmacokinetics, clinical trials, and place in therapy.

DATA SOURCES

We conducted MEDLINE searches from 1980 to October 2015 using the terms heart failure, HFrEF, angina, f-channel inhibitor, and ivabradine, with forward and backward citation tracking.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

English-language trials assessing ivabradine were obtained. Studies and narrative reviews of the topic areas were incorporated if they provided relevant data to inform the practicing clinician.

DATA SYNTHESIS

In the SIGNIFY (Study Assessing the Morbidity-Mortality Benefits of the If Inhibitor Ivabradine in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease) trial, there was no difference in the primary composite end point of cardiovascular (CV) mortality or nonfatal myocardial infarction with ivabradine use in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) versus placebo (P = 0.20). In the subgroup with Canadian Cardiovascular Society angina class ≥II, there was an 18% increase in the primary end point with ivabradine versus placebo (P = 0.02). In HFrEF patients, ivabradine reduced CV mortality or heart failure hospitalizations versus placebo, as seen in the SHIFT (Systolic Heart failure treatment with the If inhibitor ivabradine Trial; P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The SIGNIFY trial negated much of the enthusiasm for using ivabradine in CAD. Ivabradine is a promising therapy in HFrEF based on the results of the SHIFT, but it is an adjunctive therapy, not a substitute for drugs with proven mortality benefits.

The Role of Ivabradine in Cardiac Rehabilitation in Patients With Recent Coronary Artery Bypass Graft

BACKGROUND

Little is known about ivabradine in cardiac rehabilitation in patients with coronary artery bypass graft (CABG).

METHODS

In this prospective, randomized study, suitable patients admitted for cardiac rehabilitation after recent CABG were randomized to ivabradine 5 mg twice a day + standard medical therapy including bisoprolol 1.25 mg once daily (group I-BB, n = 38) or standard medical therapy including bisoprolol 2.5 to 3.75 mg once daily (group BB, n = 43). Patients were evaluated at admission, discharge, and 3 months. The primary end point was improvement in functional status, and other end points were improvement in diastolic function and recovery of systolic function. End points were assessed by distance covered in 6-minute walking test (6MWT), percentage with normal diastolic function, and percentage increase in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).

RESULTS

Cardiac rehabilitation improved functional capacity in both groups. In group BB, distances covered in the 6MWT at admission, discharge, and 3 months were 215 ± 53, 314 ± 32, and 347 ± 42 m, respectively. Corresponding distances in group I-BB were 180 ± 91, 311 ± 58, and 370 ± 55 m. Normal diastolic function was restored in I-BB patients, increasing from 24% at admission to 50% and 79% at discharge and 3 months; in BB patients, it decreased from 23% to 19% and 16%. The LVEF improved in I-BB patients, from 57% ± 3% at admission to 62% ± 4% at discharge and 66% ± 3% at 3 months, while remaining unchanged in BB patients (57% ± 3%, 59% ± 4%, and 59% ± 3%).

CONCLUSION

Adding ivabradine to low-dose bisoprolol during cardiac rehabilitation in patients with CABG improved functional capacity, enhanced recovery of systolic function, and reduced diastolic dysfunction.

Treatment of heart failure in real-world clinical practice: findings from the REFLECT-HF registry in patients with NYHA class II symptoms and a reduced ejection fraction

BACKGROUND

Optimal medical therapy (OMT) for patients with chronic heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction (HF-REF) includes angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, β-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, plus a diuretic.

HYPOTHESIS

We hypothesized that OMT is less often prescribed in HF-REF patients (≤35%) with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II symptoms compared with those with NYHA class III/IV symptoms.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional, observational, multicenter survey of hospital-based cardiologists, office-based cardiologists, and general practitioners in Germany.

RESULTS

Out of a total of 384 patients enrolled, 144 had REF ≤35%. Patients with REF had NYHA class II symptoms in 39.6% (n = 57) and NYHA class III/IV symptoms in 60.4% (n = 87). The REF/NYHA class II group had a higher proportion of males than the REF/NYHA class III/IV group. For angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers and β-blockers, prescription rates were high and comparable between groups. However, prescription rates for mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists were lower compared with other guideline-recommended treatments. Multivariate analyses indicated that OMT prescription was reduced for older patients and increased for patients cared for by an office-based cardiologist.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the high proportion of patients with reduced left ventricular systolic function but only minor symptoms, HF-REF appears to be underdiagnosed, and a higher proportion of patients than are currently recognized could potentially be candidates for OMT.

Ivabradine, coronary artery disease, and heart failure: beyond rhythm control

Elevated heart rate could negatively influence cardiovascular risk in the general population. It can induce and promote the atherosclerotic process by means of several mechanisms involving endothelial shear stress and biochemical activities. Furthermore, elevated heart rate can directly increase heart ischemic conditions because of its skill in unbalancing demand/supply of oxygen and decreasing the diastolic period. Thus, many pharmacological treatments have been proposed in order to reduce heart rate and ameliorate the cardiovascular risk profile of individuals, especially those suffering from coronary artery diseases (CAD) and chronic heart failure (CHF). Ivabradine is the first pure heart rate reductive drug approved and currently used in humans, created in order to selectively reduce sinus node function and to overcome the many side effects of similar pharmacological tools (ie, β-blockers or calcium channel antagonists). The aim of our review is to evaluate the role and the safety of this molecule on CAD and CHF therapeutic strategies.

Selective and specific inhibition of If with ivabradine for the treatment of coronary artery disease or heart failure

Heart rate is an important contributor in the pathophysiology of both coronary artery disease (CAD) and heart failure (HF). Ivabradine is an anti-anginal and anti-ischaemic agent, which selectively and specifically inhibits the I_f current in the sino-atrial node and provides pure heart rate reduction without altering other cardiac parameters, including conduction, and without directly affecting other haemodynamic parameters. It is approved for the treatment of CAD and HF. This article summarises the pharmacological properties, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy and tolerability of ivabradine in the treatment of CAD and HF, and presents evidence demonstrating that the pharmacological and clinical properties and clinical efficacy of ivabradine make it an important therapeutic choice for patients with stable CAD or HF. The positive effect of ivabradine on angina pectoris symptoms and its ability to reduce myocardial ischemia make it an important agent in the management of patients with stable CAD or chronic HF. Further studies are underway to add to the already robust evidence of ivabradine for the prevention of cardiovascular events in patients with CAD but without clinical HF. The SIGNIFY (Study assessInG the morbidity–mortality beNefits of the I_f inhibitor ivabradine in patients with coronarY artery disease) trial includes patients with stable CAD and an LVEF above 40 %, with no clinical sign of HF, and is investigating the long-term effects (over a period of 48 months) of ivabradine in a large study population. So far, this study has included more than 19,000 patients from 51 countries.

An evaluation of the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of ivabradine for the treatment of heart failure

INTRODUCTION

Ivabradine is a new heart-rate-lowering drug; the aim of this review was to analyze its role in heart failure (HF).

AREAS COVERED

This systematic review on the role of ivabradine in HF is based on material searched and obtained through Pubmed and Medline up to September 2013.

EXPERT OPINION

Heart rate (HR) is a risk factor in patients with HF, and its reduction is considered an important goal of therapy. The BEAUTIFUL trial demonstrated the benefits of ivabradine on prognosis (only on ischemic endpoints) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) and HR ≥ 60 bpm. In the SHIFT trial, which enrolled patients with LVSD, HF and HR ≥ 70 bpm, ivabradine administration (on top of guideline-based therapy, including β-blockers [BB]) was associated with a reduction of cardiovascular death and hospitalizations for HF, but BB were underutilized. Further studies are needed to test the efficacy of ivabradine in CAD patients with high HR and to shed light on the comparison between ivabradine and a more aggressive therapy with higher doses of BB in HF patients.

Effect of ivabradine on endothelial function in diastolic and right heart failure patients

Background. Ivabradine is an If ion current inhibitor that has proved to reduce mortality in patients with systolic heart failure by slowing heart rate without decreasing myocardial contractility. Photoplethysmography is a simple, low-cost optical technique that can evaluate vascular function and detect changes in blood flow, pulse, and swelling of tissular microvascular space. Objective. To evaluate the effect of ivabradine on endothelial function by photoplethysmography in diastolic and right heart failure patients. Methodology. 15 patients were included (mean age of 78.1 ± 9.2 years) with optimally treated diastolic and right heart failure. They underwent photoplethysmography before and after induced ischemia to evaluate the wave blood flow on the finger, using the maximum amplitude time/total time (MAT/TT) index. Two measurements were made before and after oral Ivabradine (mean 12.5 mg a day during 6 months of followup). Results. In the study group, the MAT/TT index was 29.1 ± 2.2 versus 24.3 ± 3.2 (P = 0.05) in basal recording and 30.4 ± 2.1 versus 23.3 ± 2.9 (P = 0.002), before versus after ischemia and before versus after Ivabradine intervention, respectively. Conclusions. Ivabradine administration improves endothelial function (shear stress) in diastolic and right heart failure patients.

Early NT-proBNP decrease with ivabradine in ambulatory patients with systolic heart failure

BACKGROUND

Heart rate (HR) reduction in patients with systolic heart failure (HF) is a cornerstone of current therapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term effect of the HR reduction with ivabradine on N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) in outpatients with systolic HF.

HYPOTHESIS

Ivabradine improves survival and promotes left ventricle remodelling by reducing resting heart rate. Nt-ProBNP absolute and trends predict prognosis. We hypothesized a possible association between heart rate decrease and Nt-ProBNP values.

METHODS

We included 25 outpatients with systolic HF on optimized medical therapy (80% on angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, 56% on spironolactone, and 88% on β-blocker therapy), left ventricle ejection fraction <40%, and sinus rhythm and HR >70/bpm. After a 1 month running-out period, to establish the clinical and NT-proBNP stability, patients were started on ivabradine for 3 months.

RESULTS

Ivabradine decreased NT-proBNP (P = 0.002) from a median of 2850 pg/mL to 1802 pg/mL, corresponding to a median absolute and percent decrease of 964 pg/mL and 44.5%, respectively. The baseline HR correlated significantly with the baseline NT-proBNP (rs = 0.411, P = 0.041). The absolute and percent HR decrease correlated with the absolute NT-proBNP decrease (rs = 0.442, P = 0.027; rs = 0.395, P = 0.05). The greater the NT-proBNP absolute decrease tertile, the greater the baseline HR (P = 0.023) and the absolute (P = 0.028) and percent (P = 0.064) HR variation.

CONCLUSIONS

In outpatients with systolic HF, the NT-proBNP reduction obtained by short-term ivabradine treatment correlates closely with the degree of HR reduction.

Evaluation of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles and tolerability after single (2.5, 5, or 10 mg) and repeated (2.5, 5, or 10 mg bid for 4.5 days) oral administration of ivabradine in healthy male Korean volunteers

BACKGROUND

Ivabradine, a selective inhibitor of the pacemaker current in the sinoatrial node, has shown pure heart rate (HR)-reducing effects with anti-ischemic efficacy as well as improvement in heart failure outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to explore pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) characteristics and tolerability in healthy male Korean volunteers, as well as to compare them with PK/PD profiles of white subjects.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase I study conducted in healthy male subjects. For each of the 3 dosing groups, 9 subjects were randomized to receive ivabradine and 3 to receive placebo. Subjects received a single oral dose of ivabradine 2.5, 5, or 10 mg and after a 3-day washout period, repeat doses of 2.5, 5, or 10 mg BID for 4.5 days. Blood and urine samples were collected over 72 hours during each period, and levels of ivabradine and its metabolite S18982 were determined by using validated LC-MS/MS, followed by noncompartmental PK analysis. For PD properties and tolerability, 24-hour Holter recordings were obtained: at baseline, after a single dose, after repeated doses, and after the last dose. Serial resting 12-lead ECG assessments were also performed throughout the study.

RESULTS

Forty-eight subjects were enrolled, and 45 completed the study. After single doses of 2.5, 5, and 10 mg, respective mean Cmax levels of ivabradine were 9, 15, and 39 ng/mL, and mean AUC0-last values were 30, 52, and 121 ng h/mL. At steady state, mean Cmax,ss levels were 11, 19, and 42 ng/mL, reached at a median Tmax of 0.67 hour for all 3 doses. The mean AUC0-τ levels were 43, 58, and 139 ng h/mL, respectively. The PK findings were linear with dose and time. Decreases in mean HR on both the Holter recordings and ECGs were observed in all of the ivabradine groups compared with placebo. After the repeated doses, mean decreases in HR were greater than those for the single doses for the same period. Statistically significant differences were observed between the 5- and 10-mg ivabradine groups and placebo. A total of 3 adverse events were reported in 2 subjects receiving ivabradine; both fully recovered without sequelae.

CONCLUSIONS

Single and repeated administration of ivabradine were generally well tolerated in these healthy male Korean volunteers. Ivabradine induced significant reductions in HR, especially at doses of 5 and 10 mg. PK/PD characteristics were similar to those found in white subjects, suggesting that the dose concentration-response relationship of ivabradine is similar between Korean and white subjects.