scholarly journals Emerging role of ivabradine for rate control in atrial fibrillation

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 348-352 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah L. Turley ◽  
Kerry E. Francis ◽  
Denise K. Lowe ◽  
William D. Cahoon
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Rate Control ◽  
Beta Blockers ◽  
Control Treatment ◽  
Ventricular Rate ◽  
Channel Blockers ◽  
Target Heart Rate ◽  
Heart Failure Patients

Control of ventricular rate is recommended for patients with paroxysmal, persistent, or permanent atrial fibrillation (AF). Existing rate-control options, including beta-blockers, nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers, and digoxin, are limited by adverse hemodynamic effects and their ability to attain target heart rate (HR). Ivabradine, a novel HR-controlling agent, decreases HR through deceleration of conduction through If (‘funny’) channels, and is approved for HR reduction in heart failure patients with ejection fraction less than 35% and elevated HR, despite optimal pharmacological treatment. Because If channels were thought to be expressed solely in sinoatrial (SA) nodal tissue, ivabradine was not investigated in heart failure patients with concomitant AF. Subsequent identification of hyperpolarization-activated cyclic nucleotide-gated cation channel 4 (HCN4), the primary gene responsible for If current expression throughout the myocardium, stimulated interest in the potential role of ivabradine for ventricular rate control in AF. Preclinical studies of ivabradine in animal models with induced AF demonstrated a reduction in HR, with no significant worsening of QT interval or mean arterial pressure. Preliminary human data suggest that ivabradine provides HR reduction without associated hemodynamic complications in patients with AF. Questions remain regarding efficacy, safety, optimal dosing, and length of therapy in these patients. Prospective, randomized studies are needed to determine if ivabradine has a role as a rate-control treatment in patients with AF.

scholarly journals Beta-blockers or Digoxin for Atrial Fibrillation and Heart Failure?

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurent Fauchier ◽  
Guillaume Laborie ◽  
Nicolas Clementy ◽  
Dominique Babuty ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Beta Blocker ◽  
Rate Control ◽  
Beta Blockers ◽  
Therapeutic Option ◽  
Systolic Dysfunction ◽  
Ventricular Rate ◽  
Channel Blockers ◽  
Reduced Ejection Fraction

In patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) with or without systolic dysfunction, either rhythm control or rate control is an acceptable primary therapeutic option. If a rate control strategy is chosen, treatment with a beta-blocker is almost always required to achieve rate control. Adequate ventricular rate control is usually a resting rate of less than 100 beats per minute, but lower resting rates may be appropriate. Non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers are often contraindicated when AF is associated with HF with systolic dysfunction. There have been recent debates on a possible reduced efficacy of beta-blockers as well as safety issues with digoxin when treating HF patients with AF. The benefit of beta-blockers on survival may be lower in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction when AF is present. Digoxin does not improve survival but may help to obtain satisfactory rate control in combination with a beta-blocker. Digoxin may be useful in the presence of hypotension or an absolute contraindication to beta-blocker treatment.

scholarly journals PROGNOSTIC ROLE OF ATRIAL FIBRILLATION AND HEART RATE CONTROL IN CHRONIC HEART FAILURE PATIENTS

2013 ◽  
Vol 61 (10) ◽  
pp. E735
Author(s):  
Savina Nodari ◽  
Marco Triggiani ◽  
Laura Lupi ◽  
Alessandra Manerba ◽  
Giuseppe Milesi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Heart Rate ◽  
Chronic Heart Failure ◽  
Rate Control ◽  
Heart Rate Control ◽  
Prognostic Role ◽  
Heart Failure Patients

Antiadrenergic Therapy in the Control of Atrial Fibrillation

2005 ◽  
Vol 10 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. S33-S43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerald V. Naccarelli
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Mortality Risk ◽  
Rate Control ◽  
Synergistic Effects ◽  
Normal Sinus Rhythm ◽  
Ventricular Rate ◽  
Older Individuals ◽  
Heart Failure Patients ◽  
Increased Risk

Atrial fibrillation (AF) in heart failure develops commonly in older individuals and its prevalence increases as heart failure severity progresses. Because of deteriorating hemodynamics, patients with heart failure are at increased risk for developing AF and, conversely, AF in heart failure patients is associated with adverse hemodynamic changes. AF is believed to increase the mortality risk in heart failure, which may be minimized by treatment that includes the control of ventricular rate, prevention of thrombotic events, and conversion to normal sinus rhythm. Clinical guidelines recommend amiodarone or dofetilide in heart failure patients, but these drugs have certain drawbacks, such as an increased risk for bradyarrhythmias with amiodarone and proarrhythmic reaction with dofetilide. Some but not all clinical trials have suggested that rate control should be the primary therapeutic goal in high-risk heart failure patients with AF and, if unsuccessful, followed by rhythm control. The former is effectively achieved with rate-lowering β-blockers alone or in combination with digoxin. Recent studies evaluating the effects of combination carvedilol/digoxin therapy demonstrate synergistic effects between the two drugs. This combination therapy decreased heart failure symptoms, effectively reduced ventricular rate, and improved ventricular function to a greater extent compared with that produced by either drug alone. Although digoxin alone is an effective heart failure treatment, its use as a single rate-control therapy is often ineffective in heart failure patients with AF associated with rapid ventricular response. Carvedilol is effective, alone or in combination, with digoxin in such heart failure patients with AF, and has been shown to reduce mortality risk in patients with chronic heart failure during prolonged therapy.

scholarly journals P4899Do beta-blockers improve one-year survival in heart failure patients with atrial fibrillation? Results from the ESC-HF Registry

2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Ozieranski ◽  
A. Kaplon-Cieslicka ◽  
P. Balsam ◽  
A. Tyminska ◽  
A. Wancerz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Beta Blockers ◽  
Heart Failure Patients ◽  
One Year

scholarly journals Impact of rate control medications on one-year outcomes with atrial fibrillation and heart failure

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
R Mo ◽  
Y Yang ◽  
L Yu
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Rate Control ◽  
Cardiovascular Death ◽  
Control Treatment ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
One Year ◽  
Cox Analysis ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Purpose Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) often coexist. The impact of rate-control regimens in AF and HF patients has not been well understood. Methods In this multicenter, prospective registry with one-year follow-up, 1359 persistent or permanent AF patients got enrolled. A 1:1 HF to non-HF propensity score matching was applied to adjust for confounding variables. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality while the secondary endpoint was defined as cardiovascular death and stroke. Multivariate Cox analysis was performed to evaluate the association between different rate-control treatment and incidence of adverse events. Results Before matching, HF patients were much younger and more likely to be female. They had a much higher prevalence of previous myocardial infarction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and valvular heart disease. Among 1359 participants, we identified 1016 matched patients. The number of drugs did not affect the risk of all-cause mortality in both cohorts. For non-HF patients, using calcium channel blockers (CCBs) plus digoxin had a significant higher risk of all-cause death (HR=5.703, 95% CI 1.334–24.604, p=0.019) and cardiovascular death (HR=9.558, 95% CI 2.127–42.935, p=0.003) compared with patients not receiving rate-control treatment. The use of beta-blockers, CCBs, digoxin alone, other dual or triple combinations was not related to risk of adverse events in both groups. Conclusions The combined use of CCBs and digoxin was related to increase all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in AF patients without HF but not for those with HF. However, the ideal rate-control regimen for AF and HF patients has not been established and well-designed clinical trials are needed. FUNDunding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None. Results of multivariate Cox analysis Kaplan-Meier curves by drug numbers

scholarly journals 107Antecedent cardiovascular disease, medication use, and risk of developing ALS: a population-based nested case-control study

2021 ◽  
Vol 50 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hoda Abdel Magid ◽  
Barbara Topal ◽  
Valerie McGuire ◽  
Jessica Hinman ◽  
Edward Karasakis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Case Control Study ◽  
Beta Blockers ◽  
Medication Use ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Channel Blockers ◽  
Nested Case Control ◽  
Control Study

Abstract Background We investigated the association between hypertension, ischemic heart disease, heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, and atrial fibrillation with the risk of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). This study also examined associations with use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin II receptors blockers (ARBs), calcium channel blockers, beta blockers, and antiarrhythmics Methods We conducted a population-based nested case-control study in the Medicare fee for service population, including 3,714 enrollees ages 65 and above with newly diagnosed ALS between 2006-2014. Cases were compared with 18,750 sex-, age, county, and enrollment-matched controls. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs) were estimated using conditional logistic regression models adjusting for diabetes, obesity, tobacco use, socioeconomic status, and controlling for confounding by indication. Medication use was identified through claims pharmacy data and similarly analyzed using a dose response approach. Results The fully adjusted OR for any CVD diagnosis was 0.93 (95% CI 0.86–1.02). Our results varied across cause-specific CVD diagnoses. We observed inverse associations for heart failure (OR 0.79; 95% CI 0.70–0.89) and atrial fibrillation (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.76–0.92). ALS risk was reduced with use of ACEIs (OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.77–0.91), calcium channel blockers (OR 0.64; 95% CI 0.59–0.70), and beta blockers (OR 0.76; 95% CI 0.71–0.83). Conclusions In this large population-based Medicare study, the risk of ALS was 7% lower among individuals with any CVD diagnosis. Key messages Our findings suggest having a cardiovascular condition or use of a CVD medication may be protective for ALS.

1412Effect of beta-blocker dose on the prognosis in chronic heart failure patients depending on the presence of atrial fibrillation. Data from FAR NHL (FARmacology and NeuroHumoraL activation) registry

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
K Labr ◽  
J Spinar ◽  
J Parenica ◽  
L Spinarova ◽  
F Malek ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Chronic Heart Failure ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Beta Blocker ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Beta Blockers ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Heart Failure Patients ◽  
Medium Dose

Abstract Background Beta-blockers (BB) decrease morbidity and mortality in heart failure patients and are part of the first line treatment together with inhibitors of angiotensin converting enzyme. New metaanalysis from year 2014 of main BB studies in chronic heart failure showed no benefit of BB in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods 1088 at least one month stable chronic heart failure patients with ejection fraction <50% were included in FAR NHL (FARmacology and NeuroHumoraL activation) registry. Three centers with speciality in heart failure in the Czech Republic were participating from November 2014 to December 2015. Results 80% patients were male with median age 66 years. Aetiology of heart failure was in 49.4% ischemic heart disease, in 42.3% dilated cardiomyopathy, in 0.5% hypertrophy cardiomyopathy. From those receiving beta-blockers 20% received low dose similar to the starting dose, 57% medium dose and 17% high dose which was set as the target BB dose. Nearly 93.8% of patients received BB. But only 17.0% received the high dose of BB. 6.2% of patients were not treated by BB at all. One third of patients (34.5%) had atrial fibrillation in medical history or newly recorded on electrocardiogram. Patients with AF were much older (median 63 vs. 70 years, respectively; p<0.001), had higher heart rate (72 vs. 74 /min; p<0.006) and were also in higher class of NYHA (New York Heart Association; p=0.005). The primary endpoint was set as all cause death, mechanical circulatory support implantation, orthotopic heart transplantation or hospitalization for acute heart failure. Patients with AF survived without primary endpoint in 70.6%, patients without AF in 78.8% (p=0.005) even after age standardization. There was significantly different survival according to dose of beta-blocker, the higher was dose of BB, the higher was survival. Patients with no beta-blocker survived without primary endpoint in 63.9%, with low dose survived in 72.6%, medium dose in 77.0% and with high dose in 80.9%. We devided FAR NHL patients into two groups according to atrial fibrillation. Patients without AF had the better survival without primary endpoint. The higher dose of beta-blockers they got, the better survival they had (69.5%, 76.7%, 78.9%, 85.1%; p=0.007). Also patients with AF had better survival without primary endpoint, the higher dose of beta-blocker they got, the higher was their survival without endpoitnt (56.0%, 63.6%, 73.0%, 75.8%; p=0.007). Conclusion In FAR NHL registry of stable chronic heart failure patietnts was one third of patients with atrial fibrillation. Nearly 94% of patients received beta-blocker. But only 17% received the target dose. Pacients even with or without atrial fibrillation had the significantly better survival without primary endpoint the higher was the dose of beta-blocker.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document