Key result
Early ivabradine shows no benefit over standard care for 12-month heart failure hospitalizations in ADHF.
Why the study?
Ivabradine is indicated for chronic heart failure with sinus rhythm, but evidence regarding its initiation during the acute stage of heart failure is limited.
Does early administration of ivabradine reduce heart failure hospitalization in patients admitted for acute decompensated heart failure with reduced ejection fraction?
Cohort (n=10,034)
Yes
Does early administration of ivabradine reduce heart failure hospitalization in patients admitted for acute decompensated heart failure with reduced ejection fraction?
Effect estimate: HR 1.02 (95% CI 0.38-2.79)
Absolute Event Rate: 8.98% vs 7.7%
p-value: p=0.964
Early initiation of ivabradine in patients hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure effectively reduces heart rate but does not significantly improve 1-year clinical outcomes such as heart failure hospitalization or mortality.
Early ivabradine should not yet change practice in acute decompensated HF; leaves open efficacy in randomized trials.
Background: Heart 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 methods: This 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. Results: = 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. Conclusion: Ivabradine 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.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yang et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in Acute decompensated heart failure (n=10,034). Ivabradine vs. Non-ivabradine (standard care) was evaluated on Heart failure hospitalization (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.38-2.79, p=0.964). Early administration of ivabradine in patients admitted for acute decompensated heart failure did not significantly reduce the risk of heart failure hospitalization at 12 months compared to standard care (HR 1.02).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: