PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
June 1, 1982Circulation146 citations

Effects of verapamil and propranolol on left ventricular systolic function and diastolic filling in patients with coronary artery disease: radionuclide angiographic studies at rest and during exercise.

View Full Paper
RBRobert O. BonowMLM.B. LeonDRDouglas R. Rosing

Structured PICO

Does oral verapamil improve left ventricular systolic function and diastolic filling in symptomatic patients with coronary artery disease?

P
Population
16 symptomatic patients with coronary artery disease (CAD)
I
Intervention
Oral verapamil 480 mg/day
C
Comparator
Baseline (before therapy) and oral propranolol 160-320 mg/day (in 12 of the patients)
O
Outcome
Left ventricular systolic function (ejection fraction) and diastolic filling (peak filling rate and time to peak filling rate) at rest and during exercise measured by gated radionuclide angiographysurrogate

Verapamil enhances left ventricular diastolic filling at rest and during exercise in patients with coronary artery disease, which may explain its symptomatic benefits despite a slight reduction in resting systolic function.

Abstract

To determine the effects of verapamil on left ventricular (LV) systolic function and diastolic filling in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD), we performed gated radionuclide angiography at rest and during exercise in 16 symptomatic patients before and during oral verapamil therapy (480 mg/day). Twelve patients were also studied during oral propranolol (160--320 mg/day). LV ejection fraction at rest was normal in 13 patients, but abnormal diastolic filling at rest, defined as peak filling rate (PFR) less than 2.5 end-diastolic volumes (EDV)/sec or time to PFR greater than 180 msec, was present in 15. During verapamil, resting ejection fraction decreased (control 50 +/- 10% [+/- SD), verapamil 45 +/- 12%, p less than 0.005), but resting diastolic filling improved: PFR increased (control 1.9 +/- 0.6 EDV/sec, verapamil 2.3 +/- 0.9 ECV/sec, p less than 0.005) and time to PFR decreased (control 185 +/- 38 msec, verapamil 161 +/- 27 msec, p less than 0.05). Exercise ejection fraction did not change during verapamil (control 42 +/- 13%, verapamil 43 +/- 12%, NS), but exercise PFR increased (control 3.1 +/- 0.9 EDV/sec, verapamil 3.6 +/- 1.1 EDV/sec, p less than 0.05) and exercise time to PFR decreased (control 108 +/- 30 msec, verapamil 91 +/- 17 msec, p less than 0.05). In contrast, propranolol did not alter ejection fraction, PFR, or time to PFR at rest or during exercise. Thus, LV ejection fraction is decreased by verapamil at rest but is unchanged during exercise. While LV systolic function is not improved by verapamil, LV diastolic filling is enhanced by verapamil, both at rest and during exercise. These mechanisms may account in part for the symptomatic improvement in many patients during verapamil therapy.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Bonow et al. (1982) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1bdfc2d54006be995f2603https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.65.7.1337
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper