Cargando…

A pilot study evaluating the role of ivabradine for rate control in patients with rheumatic atrial fibrillation

OBJECTIVES: Ivabradine may have a role in rate control of atrial fibrillation (AF) due to effects on HCN channels in AV node. We studied role of Ivabradine in rate control of rheumatic AF. METHODS: 80 patients, rheumatic AF, HR > 100 bpm (age 47 ± 11 yrs, AF duration 6.8 ± 2.9 years, rate 131 ± 1...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Katheria, Arpita, Kapoor, Aditya, Sahu, Ankit, Raut, Kamlesh, Khare, Harshit, Khanna, Roopali, Kumar, Sudeep, Garg, Naveen, Tewari, Satyendra
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10568053/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37666416
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ihj.2023.08.006
_version_ 1785119273332506624
author Katheria, Arpita
Kapoor, Aditya
Sahu, Ankit
Raut, Kamlesh
Khare, Harshit
Khanna, Roopali
Kumar, Sudeep
Garg, Naveen
Tewari, Satyendra
author_facet Katheria, Arpita
Kapoor, Aditya
Sahu, Ankit
Raut, Kamlesh
Khare, Harshit
Khanna, Roopali
Kumar, Sudeep
Garg, Naveen
Tewari, Satyendra
author_sort Katheria, Arpita
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Ivabradine may have a role in rate control of atrial fibrillation (AF) due to effects on HCN channels in AV node. We studied role of Ivabradine in rate control of rheumatic AF. METHODS: 80 patients, rheumatic AF, HR > 100 bpm (age 47 ± 11 yrs, AF duration 6.8 ± 2.9 years, rate 131 ± 16 bpm) on maximally tolerated ββ or CCB's, randomized to Ivabradine or escalated ββ/CCB. Ivabradine started @ 2.5 mg BD; increased to 5 mg BD if inadequate response at 1 week (failure to decrease HR < 10% vs baseline). After Holter at 1 month, dose escalated to 7.5 mg BD if needed. RESULTS: Ivabradine resulted in significantly lower HR (81 ± 10 vs 99 ± 9) at 3 months and 6 months (79 ± 8 vs 94 ± 8, p < 0.001). Absolute reduction in HR: 56 ± 15 vs 31 ± 14 bpm and % change in HR: 41 ± 7 vs 24 ± 9%, both p < 0.00001). At 6 months, Ivabradine group had. 1Significantly lower NT Pro BNP (1168 vs 1314 pg/ml), higher 6 min walk distance (410 ± 47 vs 349 ± 54 m, all p < 0.001) 2Better symptom class (EHRA score 1: asymptomatic 84% vs 40%), improvement >1 EHRA class; baseline 60% vs 17% 3Better LA Strain (22.8 ± 2.8% vs 20.6 ± 2.5%) Ivabradine was well tolerated and there was no drug withdrawal. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that Ivabradine can be an option for rate control in rheumatic AF.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10568053
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105680532023-10-13 A pilot study evaluating the role of ivabradine for rate control in patients with rheumatic atrial fibrillation Katheria, Arpita Kapoor, Aditya Sahu, Ankit Raut, Kamlesh Khare, Harshit Khanna, Roopali Kumar, Sudeep Garg, Naveen Tewari, Satyendra Indian Heart J Original Article OBJECTIVES: Ivabradine may have a role in rate control of atrial fibrillation (AF) due to effects on HCN channels in AV node. We studied role of Ivabradine in rate control of rheumatic AF. METHODS: 80 patients, rheumatic AF, HR > 100 bpm (age 47 ± 11 yrs, AF duration 6.8 ± 2.9 years, rate 131 ± 16 bpm) on maximally tolerated ββ or CCB's, randomized to Ivabradine or escalated ββ/CCB. Ivabradine started @ 2.5 mg BD; increased to 5 mg BD if inadequate response at 1 week (failure to decrease HR < 10% vs baseline). After Holter at 1 month, dose escalated to 7.5 mg BD if needed. RESULTS: Ivabradine resulted in significantly lower HR (81 ± 10 vs 99 ± 9) at 3 months and 6 months (79 ± 8 vs 94 ± 8, p < 0.001). Absolute reduction in HR: 56 ± 15 vs 31 ± 14 bpm and % change in HR: 41 ± 7 vs 24 ± 9%, both p < 0.00001). At 6 months, Ivabradine group had. 1Significantly lower NT Pro BNP (1168 vs 1314 pg/ml), higher 6 min walk distance (410 ± 47 vs 349 ± 54 m, all p < 0.001) 2Better symptom class (EHRA score 1: asymptomatic 84% vs 40%), improvement >1 EHRA class; baseline 60% vs 17% 3Better LA Strain (22.8 ± 2.8% vs 20.6 ± 2.5%) Ivabradine was well tolerated and there was no drug withdrawal. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that Ivabradine can be an option for rate control in rheumatic AF. Elsevier 2023 2023-09-02 /pmc/articles/PMC10568053/ /pubmed/37666416 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ihj.2023.08.006 Text en © 2023 Published by Elsevier, a division of RELX India, Pvt. Ltd on behalf of Cardiological Society of India. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Article
Katheria, Arpita
Kapoor, Aditya
Sahu, Ankit
Raut, Kamlesh
Khare, Harshit
Khanna, Roopali
Kumar, Sudeep
Garg, Naveen
Tewari, Satyendra
A pilot study evaluating the role of ivabradine for rate control in patients with rheumatic atrial fibrillation
title A pilot study evaluating the role of ivabradine for rate control in patients with rheumatic atrial fibrillation
title_full A pilot study evaluating the role of ivabradine for rate control in patients with rheumatic atrial fibrillation
title_fullStr A pilot study evaluating the role of ivabradine for rate control in patients with rheumatic atrial fibrillation
title_full_unstemmed A pilot study evaluating the role of ivabradine for rate control in patients with rheumatic atrial fibrillation
title_short A pilot study evaluating the role of ivabradine for rate control in patients with rheumatic atrial fibrillation
title_sort pilot study evaluating the role of ivabradine for rate control in patients with rheumatic atrial fibrillation
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10568053/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37666416
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ihj.2023.08.006
work_keys_str_mv AT katheriaarpita apilotstudyevaluatingtheroleofivabradineforratecontrolinpatientswithrheumaticatrialfibrillation
AT kapooraditya apilotstudyevaluatingtheroleofivabradineforratecontrolinpatientswithrheumaticatrialfibrillation
AT sahuankit apilotstudyevaluatingtheroleofivabradineforratecontrolinpatientswithrheumaticatrialfibrillation
AT rautkamlesh apilotstudyevaluatingtheroleofivabradineforratecontrolinpatientswithrheumaticatrialfibrillation
AT khareharshit apilotstudyevaluatingtheroleofivabradineforratecontrolinpatientswithrheumaticatrialfibrillation
AT khannaroopali apilotstudyevaluatingtheroleofivabradineforratecontrolinpatientswithrheumaticatrialfibrillation
AT kumarsudeep apilotstudyevaluatingtheroleofivabradineforratecontrolinpatientswithrheumaticatrialfibrillation
AT gargnaveen apilotstudyevaluatingtheroleofivabradineforratecontrolinpatientswithrheumaticatrialfibrillation
AT tewarisatyendra apilotstudyevaluatingtheroleofivabradineforratecontrolinpatientswithrheumaticatrialfibrillation
AT katheriaarpita pilotstudyevaluatingtheroleofivabradineforratecontrolinpatientswithrheumaticatrialfibrillation
AT kapooraditya pilotstudyevaluatingtheroleofivabradineforratecontrolinpatientswithrheumaticatrialfibrillation
AT sahuankit pilotstudyevaluatingtheroleofivabradineforratecontrolinpatientswithrheumaticatrialfibrillation
AT rautkamlesh pilotstudyevaluatingtheroleofivabradineforratecontrolinpatientswithrheumaticatrialfibrillation
AT khareharshit pilotstudyevaluatingtheroleofivabradineforratecontrolinpatientswithrheumaticatrialfibrillation
AT khannaroopali pilotstudyevaluatingtheroleofivabradineforratecontrolinpatientswithrheumaticatrialfibrillation
AT kumarsudeep pilotstudyevaluatingtheroleofivabradineforratecontrolinpatientswithrheumaticatrialfibrillation
AT gargnaveen pilotstudyevaluatingtheroleofivabradineforratecontrolinpatientswithrheumaticatrialfibrillation
AT tewarisatyendra pilotstudyevaluatingtheroleofivabradineforratecontrolinpatientswithrheumaticatrialfibrillation