We have located links that may give you full text access.
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Metoprolol succinate vs. ivabradine in the treatment of inappropriate sinus tachycardia in patients unresponsive to previous pharmacological therapy.
AIMS: Inappropriate sinus tachycardia (IST) is a clinical syndrome characterized by excessive resting heart rate (HR) or disproportional increasing HR during exercise. The treatment of IST symptoms using beta-blockers or calcium channel-blockers is often non-effective or not well tolerated. Ivabradine is a new agent inhibiting sinus node I(f) current, resulting in a decrease of HR without haemodynamic compromise.
METHODS AND RESULTS: We enrolled 20 patients (36 ± 10 years; 14 women) affected by IST and resistant to previous administered therapy by using beta-blockers or verapamil. After 4 weeks of treatment with metoprolol succinate (up to 190 mg once a day) the therapy was switched to ivabradine up to 7.5 mg twice daily. Holter monitoring and treadmill stress test were performed after 1 and 2 months following start of the study. We observed a significant reduction of resting HR both for metoprolol and for ivabradine compared with baseline (92.8 vs. 90.2 vs. 114.3 b.p.m.; P< 0.001). During daily activity there was an even larger decrease of HR on ivabradine (mean daytime HR 94.6 vs. 87.1 vs. 107.3 b.p.m.; P< 0.001). Ivabradine was very well tolerated whereas in 10 patients on metoprolol we observed hypotension or bradycardia requiring dose reduction. Significantly lower incidence of IST-related symptoms were registered on ivabradine therapy than on metoprolol. Fourteen patients (70%) treated with I(f) blocker were free of IST-related complaints.
CONCLUSIONS: Metoprolol and ivabradine exert a similar effect on resting HR in patients with IST. Ivabradine seems to be more effective to relieve symptoms during exercise or daily activity.
METHODS AND RESULTS: We enrolled 20 patients (36 ± 10 years; 14 women) affected by IST and resistant to previous administered therapy by using beta-blockers or verapamil. After 4 weeks of treatment with metoprolol succinate (up to 190 mg once a day) the therapy was switched to ivabradine up to 7.5 mg twice daily. Holter monitoring and treadmill stress test were performed after 1 and 2 months following start of the study. We observed a significant reduction of resting HR both for metoprolol and for ivabradine compared with baseline (92.8 vs. 90.2 vs. 114.3 b.p.m.; P< 0.001). During daily activity there was an even larger decrease of HR on ivabradine (mean daytime HR 94.6 vs. 87.1 vs. 107.3 b.p.m.; P< 0.001). Ivabradine was very well tolerated whereas in 10 patients on metoprolol we observed hypotension or bradycardia requiring dose reduction. Significantly lower incidence of IST-related symptoms were registered on ivabradine therapy than on metoprolol. Fourteen patients (70%) treated with I(f) blocker were free of IST-related complaints.
CONCLUSIONS: Metoprolol and ivabradine exert a similar effect on resting HR in patients with IST. Ivabradine seems to be more effective to relieve symptoms during exercise or daily activity.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app