4.3 Article

Effects of empagliflozin treatment on cardiac function and structure in patients with type 2 diabetes: a cardiac magnetic resonance study

期刊

INTERNAL MEDICINE JOURNAL
卷 49, 期 8, 页码 1006-1010

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/imj.14260

关键词

diabetes mellitus; type 2; heart function test; sodium-glucose transporter 2; cardiac volume; hypoglycemic agent

资金

  1. Victorian Government's Operational Infrastructure Support Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background The effects of empagliflozin on cardiac structure and function are not known. Aims To examine the changes in cardiac structure and function following the addition of empagliflozin in patients with type 2 (T2D) diabetes using cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging. Methods Twenty patients attending a specialist diabetes service recommended for treatment with empagliflozin, and 8 control patients with T2D on stable glucose lowering therapy were recruited for cardiac imaging. Participants underwent CMR scans at baseline and 6 months. Inclusion criteria were established T2D, age < 75 years, estimated glomerular filtration rate >= 45 mL/min/1.73 m(2). Results 17 of 20 in the empagliflozin group, and all of 8 in the control group completed the study. Empagliflozin therapy was associated with reduction in left ventricular end diastolic volume 155 mL (137 mL, 174 mL) at baseline to 145 mL (125 mL, 165 mL) at 6 months, P < 0.01, compared with the control group 153 mL (128 mL, 179 mL) at baseline and 158 mL (128 mL, 190 mL), not significant. There were no differences in measures of left ventricular mass, ejection fraction, heart rate or markers of cardiac fibrosis at baseline and 6 months in either group. Conclusions This is the first CMR study to examine the effects of empagliflozin on cardiac function and structure, showing evidence of reduced end diastolic volume. This is likely to reflect change in plasma volume, and may explain the reduced cardiovascular death and heart failure seen in the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据