Why the study?
Heart rate reduction is a promising heart failure treatment, but β-blockers are difficult to dose in Duchenne muscular dystrophy due to low blood pressure, so ivabradine was evaluated.
Does ivabradine ameliorate cardiomyopathy progression in a Duchenne muscular dystrophy rat model?
Does ivabradine ameliorate cardiomyopathy progression in a Duchenne muscular dystrophy rat model?
Ivabradine reduces heart rate without lowering blood pressure and ameliorates cardiac dysfunction and fibrosis in a rat model of Duchenne muscular dystrophy, suggesting a potential early treatment option for DMD cardiomyopathy.
Should not yet change DMD practice; hypothesis-generating for ivabradine in cardiomyopathy models.
Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) is an X-linked recessive myopathy caused by dystrophin mutations. Inevitable progressive cardiomyopathy is a current leading cause of premature death although respiratory management has improved the prognosis of patients with DMD. Recent evidence shows that reducing the heart rate is expected as one of the promising strategies for heart failure treatment, but administering a sufficient dose of β-blocker for patients with DMD with tachycardia is difficult because of their low blood pressure (BP). Thus, this study aimed to clarify the role of ivabradine, which suppresses cardiac sinus node pacemakers without decreasing BP, in ameliorating cardiomyopathy progression in a rat model with DMD. A trans-oral single ivabradine administration demonstrated a declined dose-dependent heart rate without any significant BP reduction. Trans-gastric repeated administrations of 5 mg/kg of ivabradine twice a day for 3 months showed ameliorated cardiomyopathy in DMD rats based on echocardiography and histopathological observations (left ventricular dysfunction, right ventricular dysfunction, and myocardial fibrosis) as compared with vehicle administration.Our finding indicates that ivabradine is expected as another treatment choice for patients with DMD having tachycardia.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tochinai et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: