Journal
FRONTIERS IN CARDIOVASCULAR MEDICINE
Volume 9, Issue -, Pages -Publisher
FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.1036418
Keywords
heart failure; ivabradine; atrial fibrillation; heart rate; acute heart failure
Categories
Funding
- Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taiwan [CGRPG6J0041, CMRPG6H0481, CMRPG6H0482]
- Maintenance Project of the Center for Big Data Analytics and Statistics at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital [CLRPG3D0049]
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Ivabradine is effective in controlling heart rate when initiated in patients with acute heart failure, but it does not seem to provide significant benefits in reducing heart failure hospitalization, all-cause hospitalization, and mortality after one year.
BackgroundHeart rate (HR) control is important in heart failure (HF) patients with reduced ejection fraction, and ivabradine is indicated for patients with chronic HF and sinus rhythm. However, ivabradine is limited in initiation of ivabradine at acute stage of HF. Materials and methodsThis multi-institutional retrospective study enrolled 30,639 patients who were admitted for HF from January 01, 2013 to December 31, 2018 at Chang Gung Memorial Hospitals. After applying selection criteria, the eligible patients were divided into ivabradine and non-ivabradine groups according to the initiation of ivabradine at the index hospitalization. HR, clinical outcomes including HF hospitalization, all-cause hospitalization, mortality, the composite of cardiovascular (CV) death or HF hospitalization and newly developed atrial fibrillation, and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and left atrium size were compared between the ivabradine and non-ivabradine groups after inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis after 12 months. ResultsThe HR at admission in the ivabradine group (n = 433) was 99.04 +/- 20.69/min, compared to 86.99 +/- 20.34/min in the non-ivabradine group (n = 9,601). After IPTW, HR was lower in the ivabradine group than that in the non-ivabradine group after 12 months (74.14 +/- 8.53 vs. 81.23 +/- 16.79 bpm, p = 0.079). However, there were no significant differences in HF hospitalization (HR = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.38-2.79), all-cause hospitalization (HR = 0.95; 95% CI, 0.54-1.68), mortality (HR = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.69-1.08), the composite of CV death or HF hospitalization (HR = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.69-1.08) and newly developed AF between the two groups. In addition, LVEF increased with time in both groups, but there were no significant differences during the observation period. ConclusionIvabradine was beneficial in controlling HR when initiated in patients with acute stage of HF, but it did not seem to provide any benefits in reducing HF hospitalization, all-cause hospitalization, and mortality in 1 year after discharge.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available