Aims To test the effect of ivabradine on the outcomes in a broad population with left-ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction with coronary artery disease (CAD) and/or heart failure (HF). Methods and results Individual trial data from BEAUTIFUL and SHIFT were pooled to evaluate the effect of ivabradine on the outcomes in patients with LV dysfunction and heart rate ≥70 b.p.m. The pooled population (n ¼ 11 897; baseline age 62.3+10.4 years, heart rate 79.6+9.2 b.p.m., and LVejection fraction 30.3+5.6%)waswell treated according to current recommendations (87% beta-blockers, 90% renin–angiotensin system inhibitors). Median follow-up was 21 months. Treatment with ivabradinewas associated with a 13% relative risk reduction for the composite of cardiovascular mortality or HF hospitalization (P , 0.001 vs. placebo); this was driven by HF hospitalizations (19%, P , 0.001). There were also significant relative risk reductions for the composite of cardiovascular mortality, HF hospitalizations, or myocardial infarction (MI) hospitalization (15%, P, 0.001); cardiovascular mortality and non-fatal MI (10%, P ¼ 0.023); and MI hospitalization (23%, P ¼ 0.009). Similar results were found in patients with differing clinical profiles. Ivabradine was well tolerated. Conclusion Ivabradine may be important for the improvement of clinical outcomes in patients with LV systolic dysfunction and heart rate ≥70 b.p.m., whatever the primary clinical presentation (CAD or HF) or clinical status (NYHA class)
Effect of ivabradine in patients with left-ventricular systolic dysfunction: a pooled analysis of individual patient data from the BEAUTIFUL and SHIFT trials
FERRARI, Roberto;
2013
Abstract
Aims To test the effect of ivabradine on the outcomes in a broad population with left-ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction with coronary artery disease (CAD) and/or heart failure (HF). Methods and results Individual trial data from BEAUTIFUL and SHIFT were pooled to evaluate the effect of ivabradine on the outcomes in patients with LV dysfunction and heart rate ≥70 b.p.m. The pooled population (n ¼ 11 897; baseline age 62.3+10.4 years, heart rate 79.6+9.2 b.p.m., and LVejection fraction 30.3+5.6%)waswell treated according to current recommendations (87% beta-blockers, 90% renin–angiotensin system inhibitors). Median follow-up was 21 months. Treatment with ivabradinewas associated with a 13% relative risk reduction for the composite of cardiovascular mortality or HF hospitalization (P , 0.001 vs. placebo); this was driven by HF hospitalizations (19%, P , 0.001). There were also significant relative risk reductions for the composite of cardiovascular mortality, HF hospitalizations, or myocardial infarction (MI) hospitalization (15%, P, 0.001); cardiovascular mortality and non-fatal MI (10%, P ¼ 0.023); and MI hospitalization (23%, P ¼ 0.009). Similar results were found in patients with differing clinical profiles. Ivabradine was well tolerated. Conclusion Ivabradine may be important for the improvement of clinical outcomes in patients with LV systolic dysfunction and heart rate ≥70 b.p.m., whatever the primary clinical presentation (CAD or HF) or clinical status (NYHA class)I documenti in SFERA sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
