The carvedilol hibernation reversible ischaemia trial, marker of success (CHRISTMAS) study. Methodology of a randomised, placebo controlled, multicentre study of carvedilol in hibernation and heart failure

Beta-blockers and inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin aldosterone system for chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

BACKGROUND

Beta-blockers and inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system improve survival and reduce morbidity in people with heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF); a review of the evidence is required to determine whether these treatments are beneficial for people with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists in people with HFpEF.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and one clinical trial register on 14 May 2020 to identify eligible studies, with no language or date restrictions. We checked references from trial reports and review articles for additional studies.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials with a parallel group design, enrolling adults with HFpEF, defined by LVEF greater than 40%.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 41 randomised controlled trials (231 reports), totalling 23,492 participants across all comparisons. The risk of bias was frequently unclear and only five studies had a low risk of bias in all domains. Beta-blockers (BBs) We included 10 studies (3087 participants) investigating BBs. Five studies used a placebo comparator and in five the comparator was usual care. The mean age of participants ranged from 30 years to 81 years. A possible reduction in cardiovascular mortality was observed (risk ratio (RR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 to 0.99; number needed to treat for an additional benefit (NNTB) 25; 1046 participants; three studies), however, the certainty of evidence was low. There may be little to no effect on all-cause mortality (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.00; 1105 participants; four studies; low-certainty evidence). The effects on heart failure hospitalisation, hyperkalaemia, and quality of life remain uncertain. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) We included 13 studies (4459 participants) investigating MRA. Eight studies used a placebo comparator and in five the comparator was usual care. The mean age of participants ranged from 54.5 to 80 years. Pooled analysis indicated that MRA treatment probably reduces heart failure hospitalisation (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.98; NNTB = 41; 3714 participants; three studies; moderate-certainty evidence). However, MRA treatment probably has little or no effect on all-cause mortality (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.06; 4207 participants; five studies; moderate-certainty evidence) and cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.11; 4070 participants; three studies; moderate-certainty evidence). MRA treatment may have little or no effect on quality of life measures (mean difference (MD) 0.84, 95% CI -2.30 to 3.98; 511 participants; three studies; low-certainty evidence). MRA treatment was associated with a higher risk of hyperkalaemia (RR 2.11, 95% CI 1.77 to 2.51; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) = 11; 4291 participants; six studies; high-certainty evidence). Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) We included eight studies (2061 participants) investigating ACEIs. Three studies used a placebo comparator and in five the comparator was usual care. The mean age of participants ranged from 70 to 82 years. Pooled analyses with moderate-certainty evidence suggest that ACEI treatment likely has little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.42; 945 participants; two studies), all-cause mortality (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.45; 1187 participants; five studies) and heart failure hospitalisation (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.15; 1019 participants; three studies), and may result in little or no effect on the quality of life (MD -0.09, 95% CI -3.66 to 3.48; 154 participants; two studies; low-certainty evidence). The effects on hyperkalaemia remain uncertain. Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) Eight studies (8755 participants) investigating ARBs were included. Five studies used a placebo comparator and in three the comparator was usual care. The mean age of participants ranged from 61 to 75 years. Pooled analyses with high certainty of evidence suggest that ARB treatment has little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.02, 95% 0.90 to 1.14; 7254 participants; three studies), all-cause mortality (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.11; 7964 participants; four studies), heart failure hospitalisation (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.02; 7254 participants; three studies), and quality of life (MD 0.41, 95% CI -0.86 to 1.67; 3117 participants; three studies). ARB was associated with a higher risk of hyperkalaemia (RR 1.88, 95% CI 1.07 to 3.33; 7148 participants; two studies; high-certainty evidence). Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs) Three studies (7702 participants) investigating ARNIs were included. Two studies used ARBs as the comparator and one used standardised medical therapy, based on participants' established treatments at enrolment. The mean age of participants ranged from 71 to 73 years. Results suggest that ARNIs may have little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.15; 4796 participants; one study; moderate-certainty evidence), all-cause mortality (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.11; 7663 participants; three studies; high-certainty evidence), or quality of life (high-certainty evidence). However, ARNI treatment may result in a slight reduction in heart failure hospitalisation, compared to usual care (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.00; 7362 participants; two studies; moderate-certainty evidence). ARNI treatment was associated with a reduced risk of hyperkalaemia compared with valsartan (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.01; 5054 participants; two studies; moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that MRA and ARNI treatment in HFpEF probably reduces heart failure hospitalisation but probably has little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality and quality of life. BB treatment may reduce the risk of cardiovascular mortality, however, further trials are needed. The current evidence for BBs, ACEIs, and ARBs is limited and does not support their use in HFpEF in the absence of an alternative indication. Although MRAs and ARNIs are probably effective at reducing the risk of heart failure hospitalisation, the treatment effect sizes are modest. There is a need for improved approaches to patient stratification to identify the subgroup of patients who are most likely to benefit from MRAs and ARNIs, as well as for an improved understanding of disease biology, and for new therapeutic approaches.

Role of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance in Ischemic Cardiomyopathy

Ischemic heart disease is the most common cause of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) improves on other noninvasive modalities in detection, assessment, and prognostication of ischemic heart disease. The incorporation of CMR in clinical trials allows for smaller patient samples without the sacrifice of power needed to demonstrate clinical efficacy. CMR can accurately quantify infarct acuity, size, and complications; guide therapy; and prognosticate recovery. Timing of revascularization remains the holy grail of ischemic heart disease, and viability assessment using CMR may be the missing link needed to help reduce morbidity and mortality associated with the disease.

Beta-blockers and inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin aldosterone system for chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

BACKGROUND

Beta-blockers and inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin aldosterone system improve survival and reduce morbidity in people with heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. There is uncertainty whether these treatments are beneficial for people with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and a comprehensive review of the evidence is required.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of beta-blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists in people with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and two clinical trial registries on 25 July 2017 to identify eligible studies. Reference lists from primary studies and review articles were checked for additional studies. There were no language or date restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials with a parallel group design enrolling adult participants with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, defined by a left ventricular ejection fraction of greater than 40 percent.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted data. The outcomes assessed included cardiovascular mortality, heart failure hospitalisation, hyperkalaemia, all-cause mortality and quality of life. Risk ratios (RR) and, where possible, hazard ratios (HR) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes. For continuous data, mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) were calculated. We contacted trialists where neccessary to obtain missing data.

MAIN RESULTS

37 randomised controlled trials (207 reports) were included across all comparisons with a total of 18,311 participants.Ten studies (3087 participants) investigating beta-blockers (BB) were included. A pooled analysis indicated a reduction in cardiovascular mortality (15% of participants in the intervention arm versus 19% in the control arm; RR 0.78; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 to 0.99; number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) 25; 1046 participants; 3 studies). However, the quality of evidence was low and no effect on cardiovascular mortality was observed when the analysis was limited to studies with a low risk of bias (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.50 to 1.29; 643 participants; 1 study). There was no effect on all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalisation or quality of life measures, however there is uncertainty about these effects given the limited evidence available.12 studies (4408 participants) investigating mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA) were included with the quality of evidence assessed as moderate. MRA treatment reduced heart failure hospitalisation (11% of participants in the intervention arm versus 14% in the control arm; RR 0.82; 95% CI 0.69 to 0.98; NNTB 41; 3714 participants; 3 studies; moderate-quality evidence) however, little or no effect on all-cause and cardiovascular mortality and quality of life measures was observed. MRA treatment was associated with a greater risk of hyperkalaemia (16% of participants in the intervention group versus 8% in the control group; RR 2.11; 95% CI 1.77 to 2.51; 4291 participants; 6 studies; high-quality evidence).Eight studies (2061 participants) investigating angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) were included with the overall quality of evidence assessed as moderate. The evidence suggested that ACEI treatment likely has little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalisation, or quality of life. Data for the effect of ACEI on hyperkalaemia were only available from one of the included studies.Eight studies (8755 participants) investigating angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) were included with the overall quality of evidence assessed as high. The evidence suggested that treatment with ARB has little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalisation, or quality of life. ARB was associated with an increased risk of hyperkalaemia (0.9% of participants in the intervention group versus 0.5% in the control group; RR 1.88; 95% CI 1.07 to 3.33; 7148 participants; 2 studies; high-quality evidence).We identified a single ongoing placebo-controlled study investigating the effect of angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI) in people with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that MRA treatment reduces heart failure hospitalisation in heart failure with preserverd ejection fraction, however the effects on mortality related outcomes and quality of life remain unclear. The available evidence for beta-blockers, ACEI, ARB and ARNI is limited and it remains uncertain whether these treatments have a role in the treatment of HFpEF in the absence of an alternative indication for their use. This comprehensive review highlights a persistent gap in the evidence that is currently being addressed through several large ongoing clinical trials.

The effects of long-term beta-blockade on the ventilatory responses to exercise in chronic heart failure

AIMS

Chronic heart failure (CHF) patients complain of breathlessness and fatigue. Beta-blockers improve symptoms, echocardiograpahic variables and prognosis in CHF, but their effect on exercise capacity remains unclear. The aim of this study was to describe the effects of long-term beta-blocker therapy on metabolic gas exchange variables and ventilation during exercise in CHF patients.

METHODS

42 patients with symptomatic heart failure due to left ventricular systolic dysfunction (ejection fraction 33.2 (8.2)) on loop diuretics and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II antagonists, underwent exercise testing with metabolic gas exchange. They were then initiated onto and uptitrated to the maximum tolerated dose of beta-blockers. After 1 year of follow-up, patients were invited back for repeat testing.

RESULTS

35 patients attended for repeat exercise testing. Four patients had died, and three had not tolerated beta-blockade. After 1 year, exercise time was increased (487 (221) vs. 500 (217), p<0.05), and peak oxygen consumption and V(E)/V(CO(2)) slope were unchanged (20.9 (5.0) vs. 20.0 (5.4), p=0.15 and 36.7 (8.3) vs. 37.3 (7.8), p=0.70). Peak ventilation, (61.5 (12.9) vs. 57.1 (13.4), p<0.05), peak carbon dioxide production (1629 (404) vs. 1496 (375), p<0.02) and hence respiratory exchange ratio (1.02 (0.08) vs. 0.98 (0.06) p<0.02) and p<0.05) were reduced. Submaximal oxygen consumption and carbon dioxide production were lower at matched workloads. The slope relating symptoms to ventilation (Borg/V(E) slope) was less steep following beta-blockade (0.18 (0.09) vs. 0.15 (0.06), p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Long term beta-blocker therapy increases exercise time but not peak oxygen consumption, and reduces peak carbon dioxide production. CHF patients are less symptomatic for a given ventilation during exercise following beta-blocker treatment.

β-Blockers and Inspiratory Pulmonary Function in Chronic Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

Chronic heart failure (CHF) patients complain of breathlessness and fatigue. Respiratory muscle function is impaired in CHF patients and may contribute to their symptoms. Beta-blockers cause fatigue but have become part of the standard management of CHF. We explored the relation between respiratory muscle power in CHF and the effects of long-term beta-blockade.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 52 CHF patients and 25 control subjects underwent echocardiography, peak exercise testing with metabolic gas exchange analysis, and measurement of forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), peak inspiratory flow (PIF), and forced inspiratory volume in 1 second (FIV1). Of the patients, 35 started beta-blocker therapy and were tested again at 1 year. Patients had lower peak oxygen consumption (pV(O2) (19.3 [4.5] versus 37.3 [8.4] mL/kg/min, P < .0001), exercise time (414 [134] versus 817 [193] seconds, P < .0001), and anaerobic threshold (13.8 [3.8] versus 27.2 [8.2] mL/kg/min, P < .0001). Patients also had a steeper relationship between ventilation (V(E)) and carbon dioxide (CO2 ) (V(E)/V(CO2)) (40.0 [6.8] versus 26.4 [2.0], P < .0001); lower FEV1, FVC, and FIV1 (89 [15] versus 111 [24]% expected, P < .0001, 80 [20] versus 94 [21]% expected, P < .001 and 2.5 [1.6] versus 3.0 (0.9) L, P < .02); and there was a correlation between pV(O2) and FIV1 (r = 0.24, P < .05) for the patients. The slope relating symptoms of breathlessness (Borg score) to ventilation (Borg/V(E) slope) also correlated with FIV1 (r = 0.36, P < .02). Beta-blocker therapy improved echocardiographic variables, but not pV(O2). There was no change in PIF or FIV1. There was a significant reduction in FEV 1 after beta-blocker treatment (P < .01).

CONCLUSION

Inspiratory flows are impaired in patients with chronic heart failure and correlate with the degree of functional impairment. This may be due to a combination of respiratory muscle weakness and reduced lung compliance. The reduction in inspiratory capacity is not influenced by long-term beta-blockade.

Effects of carvedilol on left ventricular remodelling in chronic stable heart failure: a cardiovascular magnetic resonance study

BACKGROUND

The ability of beta blockers to improve left ventricular function has been demonstrated, but data on the effects on cardiac remodelling are limited.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate, using cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR), the effects of carvedilol on left ventricular remodelling in patients with chronic stable heart failure and left ventricular systolic dysfunction caused by coronary artery disease.

DESIGN

Randomised, double blind, placebo controlled study.

SETTING

Chronic stable heart failure.

PATIENTS AND INTERVENTION

34 patients with chronic stable heart failure and left ventricular systolic function taking part in the CHRISTMAS trial (double blind carvedilol v placebo) underwent CMR before randomisation and after six months of treatment.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Left ventricular remodelling at six months.

RESULTS

The carvedilol and placebo groups were well balanced at baseline, with no significant intergroup differences. Over the study period, there was a significant reduction in end systolic volume index (ESV(I)) and end diastolic volume index (EDV(I)) between the carvedilol and the placebo group (carvedilol -9 v placebo +3 ml/m2, p = 0.0004; carvedilol -8 v placebo 0 ml/m2, p = 0.05). The ejection fraction increased significantly between the groups (carvedilol +3% v placebo -2%, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of chronic stable heart failure with carvedilol results in significant improvement in left ventricular volumes and function. These effects might contribute to the benefits of carvedilol on mortality and morbidity in patients with chronic heart failure.

Myocardial viability as a determinant of the ejection fraction response to carvedilol in patients with heart failure (CHRISTMAS trial): randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The improvement in left-ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in response to beta blockers is heterogeneous in patients with heart failure due to ischaemic heart disease, possibly indicating variations in the myocardial substrate underlying left-ventricular dysfunction. We investigated whether improvement in LVEF was associated with the volume of hibernating myocardium (viable myocardium with contractile failure).

METHODS

We did a double-blind, randomised trial to compare placebo and carvedilol for 6 months in individuals with stable, chronic heart failure due to ischaemic left-ventricular systolic dysfunction. We enrolled 489 patients, of whom 387 were randomised. Patients were designated hibernators or non-hibernators according to the volume of hibernating myocardium. The primary endpoint was change in LVEF, measured by radionuclide ventriculography, in hibernators versus non-hibernators, on carvedilol compared with placebo. Analysis was by intention to treat.

RESULTS

82 patients dropped out of the study because of adverse events, withdrawal of consent, or failure to complete the investigation. Thus, 305 (79%) were analysed. LVEF was unchanged with placebo (mean change -0.4 [SE 0.9] and -0.4 [0.8] for non-hibernators and hibernators, respectively) but increased with carvedilol (2.5 [0.9] and 3.2 [0.8], respectively; p<0.0001 compared with baseline). Mean placebo-subtracted change in LVEF was 3.2% (95% CI 1.8-4.7; p=0.0001) overall, and 2.9% (0.7-5.1; p=0.011) and 3.6% (1.7-5.4; p=0.0002) in non-hibernators and hibernators, respectively. Effect of hibernator status on response of LVEF to carvedilol was not significant (0.7 [-2.2 to 3.5]; p=0.644). However, patients with more myocardium affected by hibernation or by hibernation and ischaemia had a greater increase in LVEF on carvedilol (p=0.0002 and p=0.009, respectively).

INTERPRETATION

Some of the effect of carvedilol on LVEF might be mediated by improved function of hibernating or ischaemic myocardium, or both. Medical treatment might be an important adjunct or alternative to revascularisation for patients with hibernating myocardium.

The heart failure revascularisation trial (HEART): rationale, design and methodology

BACKGROUND

Most patients with heart failure due to left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) secondary to coronary artery disease (CAD) have evidence of myocardium in jeopardy (reversible ischaemia and/or stunning hibernation). It is not known whether revascularisation in such cases is safe or beneficial.

AIMS

To determine whether revascularisation will improve the survival of patients with LVSD and heart failure secondary to CAD and myocardium in jeopardy.

METHODS

This is a randomised controlled trial comparing revascularisation or not, in addition to optimal medical therapy with ACE inhibitors, beta-blockers, aldosterone antagonists and an anti-thrombotic agent. Patients must have heart failure requiring treatment with diuretics, a left ventricular ejection fraction <35% and evidence of coronary disease. Myocardial viability and ischaemia are assessed by a broad range of techniques including stress echocardiography and nuclear imaging. All imaging tests are reviewed in core laboratories to ensure uniform reporting. Any conventional revascularisation technique is permitted. The primary outcome measure is all cause mortality. Symptoms, quality of life and health economic issues will also be explored. Assuming an annual mortality of 10% in the control group and allowing for substantial cross-over rates, a study of 800 patients followed for 5 years has 80% power with an alpha of 0.05 (two-sided) to show a 25% reduction in mortality with revascularisation.

RESULTS

At the time of writing 180 patients have been screened for inclusion, 111 have consented to participate and 70 have been randomised. The results of viability testing are awaited in 22 patients. Twenty-six patients had been investigated for myocardial viability and/or by angiography prior to consent, as part of the routine practice in that cardiology department. Of 68 patients who have completed assessment only after consent, 47 (69%) were included. The principal reason for drop-out between consent and randomisation was lack of evidence of myocardial ischaemia or hibernation.

CONCLUSION

The HEART trial will help to determine whether investigation of myocardial ischaemia and/or viability with a view to revascularisation should become part of the routine care of patients with heart failure due to LVSD and CAD.

Beta-adrenergic blockade 2002: a pharmacologic odyssey in chronic heart failure

The treatment for heart failure has evolved considerably during the past two decades. Initially focused on hemodynamic derangement, diuretics and vasodilator agents were employed for symptomatic management. Beta blocking agents, with intrinsic negative inotropic activity, were considered specifically contraindicated. Neurohormonal activation subsequently became recognized and validated as a self-perpetuating influence on chronic heart failure and progressive adverse ventricular remodeling. Antagonism of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone axis produced significant survival benefits in chronic heart failure populations. Concomitant intense sympathetic nervous system activation remained an additional therapeutic target. Pathophysiologic insights revealed a biologically plausible framework for the use of beta blocking agents in heart failure. This review summarizes the major clinical trials of beta blockers in heart failure populations with systolic left ventricular dysfunction. These trials support the integration of beta blockade as a critical component of standard therapy for chronic heart failure. Ongoing trials and unresolved issues are also discussed.

Validation of an echocardiographic wall motion index in heart failure due to ischaemic heart disease

AIMS

The echocardiographic assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) by geometric methods is limited in many patients because of inadequate views and also in the presence of regional wall motion abnormalities due to ischaemic heart disease (IHD). This study aimed to examine the application of a wall motion index (WMI) method, using a nine-segment LV model in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) due to IHD.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Echocardiography was performed in 71 consecutive subjects with CHF due to IHD. WMI could be derived in 70 subjects (99%). The inter-observer variability (repeatability coefficient) of WMI was 0.66, i.e. LVEF+/-20%. In 66 subjects, LVEF was measured, within 4 weeks, using radionuclide ventriculography (RNV-EF). The inter-observer variability of RNV-EF was +/-3.1%. Using the mean of two observations for each method, the Bland-Altman range of agreement for LVEF was 26% (+/-13%).

CONCLUSION

WMI is a widely applicable echocardiographic method for assessing LV systolic function and has moderate agreement with RNV-EF. Unlike RNV-EF, however, WMI is not likely to be a suitable method for the measurement of small, but prognostically important, changes in LV function that may occur in CHF.

CAPRICORN: a story of alpha allocation and beta-blockers in left ventricular dysfunction post-MI

Beta-blocker therapy is beneficial both after myocardial infarction and in mild, moderate and severe chronic heart failure. Recent sub-group analysis of the Goteborg Metoprolol Trial and the AIRE study confirm that patients receiving beta-blockers in the setting of post-MI heart failure fare better than patients not receiving this therapy. For all these reasons the CAPRICORN trial of carvedilol in post-MI LV dysfunction was an important and eagerly awaited trial. The results were presented for the first time at The American College of Cardiology on March 20 2001. CAPRICORN randomised 984 patients to placebo and 975 to carvedilol between 3 and 21 days (mean 10) after a confirmed MI. Patients had to have evidence of a left ventricular ejection fraction 40% or less. All patients had received ACEI therapy for at least 48 hours prior to randomisation. The mean ejection fraction of the patients recruited was 32.7% in the placebo group and 32.9% in the carvedilol group. Follow-up was for a mean of 15 months (maximum 2.7 years). All cause mortality was 15.3% (151 deaths) in the placebo group and 11.9% (116 deaths) in the carvedilol group, giving a hazard ratio of 0.77 (0.60-0.98) and a significance of p = 0.031. And yet this agent will probably not be given a licence for this indication in the European Union and the USA. The reason is one of trial design and statistical declarations. Some way into the trial the Steering Committee decided to change the primary end-point form all-cause mortality to two co-primary end-points and to allocate their alpha power of 0.05 unevenly between the combined end-points of all cause mortality and cardiovascular hospitalisation (alpha 0.045) and all cause mortality (alpha 0.005). In the end neither was achieved, one because of the large number of non-specific hospitalisations for chest pain and the mortality effect because it was allocated a punitive and unachievable target of p < 0.005. The trial is thus officially neutral despite showing convincing clinical benefit. Clearly arcane matters of statistical plans do matter and steering committees should think very carefully before changing the primary end-points of major trials.

Comparing the image quality of myocardial perfusion agents in the clinical laboratory: small test groups and large reference populations

Myocardial perfusion studies have been performed for 6 years using technetium-99m (99Tcm)-sestamibi (MIBI). In this study we evaluated a newer agent, 99Tcm-tetrofosmin (TF), on a trial basis for 2 weeks, and compared the results from each week to those in an adjacent week of MIBI use. The routine protocol included weight-based dosing, frequent dipyridamole use, and separate-day rest and stress wherever possible. During the first week, TF was used with 'usual' image timing, i.e. stress tomography performed 30-60 min after stress, and ancillary immediate images performed 4 min after injection. For the second week, 'early' tomography was performed 15-30 min after stress. TF scans (n = 53) were compared with MIBI scans for the adjacent weeks (n = 54) and with a historical reference series (n = 1800). Blinded analysis was made of tomographic image quality, peak myocardial counts and background activity (lung and abdomen) on immediate and delayed acquisitions and on tomographic reconstructions. The TF and MIBI test groups were similar with respect to gender, weight, stress protocol, tracer doses, imaging times and scintigraphic findings. Using analysis of variance, the tomographic quality scores were similar for the two observers, with stress>rest (P<0.0001), 'usual'>'early' (P<0.001) and MIBI>TF (P<0.05). Myocardial counts were approximately 20% higher with the MIBI test group than with TF at all times after stress (P=0.001), and were similar to the reference population. MIBI with usual timing gave more favourable stress abdominal background ratios than the other three agent/timing combinations. Satisfactory images could be obtained with TF, but no apparent advantage over MIBI could be attained with earlier post-stress imaging. Subtle advantages for MIBI over TF were suggested by comparison of the small test groups. In our local imaging context, these conclusions were reinforced by a large control series.