Key result
Ranolazine fails to improve diastolic function versus placebo in CMD patients.
Why the study?
Does ranolazine improve diastolic function in subjects with coronary microvascular dysfunction?
RCT
double-blind
randomized crossover
Does ranolazine improve diastolic function in subjects with coronary microvascular dysfunction?
Ranolazine does not improve diastolic function in patients with coronary microvascular dysfunction, despite the presence of subclinical systolic and diastolic dysfunction in this population.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Ranolazine should not be used to target diastolic dysfunction in CMD; leaves open whether strain imaging identifies modifiable phenotypes in larger trials.
BACKGROUND: Patients with coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) often have diastolic dysfunction, representing an important therapeutic target. Ranolazine-a late sodium current inhibitor-improves diastolic function in animal models and subjects with obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that ranolazine would beneficially alter diastolic function in CMD. METHODS: To test this hypothesis, we performed retrospective tissue tracking analysis to evaluate systolic/diastolic strain, using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging cine images acquired in a recently completed, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial of short-term ranolazine in subjects with CMD and from 43 healthy reference controls. RESULTS: Diastolic strain rate was impaired in CMD vs controls (circumferential diastolic strain rate: 99.9% ± 2.5%/s vs 120.1% ± 4.0%/s, P = 0.0003; radial diastolic strain rate: -199.5% ± 5.5%/s vs -243.1% ± 9.6%/s, P = 0.0008, case vs control). Moreover, peak systolic circumferential strain (CS) and radial strain (RS) were also impaired in cases vs controls (CS: -18.8% ± 0.3% vs -20.7% ± 0.3%; RS: 35.8% ± 0.7% vs 41.4% ± 0.9%; respectively; both P < 0.0001), despite similar and preserved ejection fraction. In contrast to our hypothesis, however, we observed no significant changes in left ventricular diastolic function in CMD cases after 2 weeks of ranolazine vs placebo. CONCLUSIONS: The case-control comparison both confirms and extends our prior observations of diastolic dysfunction in CMD. That CMD cases were also found to have subclinical systolic dysfunction is a novel finding, highlighting the utility of this retrospective approach. In contrast to previous studies in obstructive CAD, ranolazine did not improve diastolic function in CMD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nelson et al. (2016) conducted an RCT in coronary microvascular dysfunction. ranolazine vs. placebo was evaluated on systolic and diastolic strain. Ranolazine did not improve diastolic function versus placebo in CMD patients, who had impaired circumferential diastolic strain rate compared to healthy controls (99.9 vs 120.1 %/s, P=0.0003).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: