Why the study?
Does sustained-release dipyridamole/aspirin improve coronary flow reserve and left ventricular systolic function in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy?
Does sustained-release dipyridamole/aspirin improve coronary flow reserve and left ventricular systolic function in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy?
A 6-month course of sustained-release dipyridamole/aspirin significantly improved hyperemic myocardial blood flow and left ventricular systolic function in a small pilot study of patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Hypothesis-generating for dipyridamole/aspirin in ischemic cardiomyopathy; larger trials needed before any practice change.
Dipyridamole increases adenosine levels and augments coronary collateralization in patients with coronary ischemia. This pilot study tested whether a 6-month course of sustained-release dipyridamole/aspirin improves coronary flow reserve and left ventricular systolic function in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. Six outpatients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <40% were treated with sustained-release dipyridamole 200 mg/aspirin 25 mg twice daily for 6 months. Myocardial function and perfusion, including coronary sinus flow at rest and during intravenous dipyridamole-induced hyperemia, were measured using velocity-encoded cine magnetic resonance stress perfusion studies at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months. There was no change in heart failure or angina class at 6 months. LVEF increased by 39%+/-64% (31.0%+/-13.3% at baseline vs 38.3%+/-10.7% at 6 months; P=.01), hyperemic coronary sinus flow increased more than 2-fold (219.6+/-121.3 mL/min vs 509.4+/-349.3 mL/min; P=.01), and stress-induced relative myocardial perfusion increased by 35%+/-13% (9.4%+/-3.4% vs 13.9%+/-8.5%; P=.004). Sustained-release dipyridamole improved hyperemic myocardial blood flow and left ventricular systolic function in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Akhtar et al. (2007) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: