Md Noornabi Khondokar, Khurshed Ahmed, M. A. Hossain, R. Rashed, M. Siraj, Mohammad Walidur Rahman, S. Banerjee, S. Ahsan, F. Rahman, S. Zaman, Md. Harisul Hoque
{"title":"螺内酯与依普利酮对慢性心力衰竭患者左室收缩功能的影响","authors":"Md Noornabi Khondokar, Khurshed Ahmed, M. A. Hossain, R. Rashed, M. Siraj, Mohammad Walidur Rahman, S. Banerjee, S. Ahsan, F. Rahman, S. Zaman, Md. Harisul Hoque","doi":"10.3329/uhj.v16i2.49649","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background:Chronic heart failure (CHF) is the most common and prognostically unfavorable outcome of many diseases of the cardiovascular system. Clinical trials have demonstrated mortality and morbidity benefits of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) in patients with heart failure. These studies have used either eplerenone or spironolactone as the MRA. Eplerenone is a selective aldosterone antagonist expected to have a lower incidence of hormonal side effects than spironolactone. The present study is designed to compare these two drugs in chronic heart failure patients as no head to head trial between these two drugs is found regarding improvement of systolic function, tolerability and safety. The aim of this study is to compare the effects of eplerenone and spironolactone on LV systolic function in patients with chronic heart failure in a single center. \nMethods:It was a randomized clinical trial single blind study. A total of 224 cases of chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and NYHA class III or IV were selected by random sampling, from July 2017 to June 2018. Each patient was randomly allocated into either of the two arms, and was continued receiving treatment with either spironolactone (Arm-I) or eplerenone(Arm-II). Each patient was evaluated clinically, biochemically and echocardiographically at the beginning of treatment (baseline) at 1 month and at the end of 6th month. Echocardiography was performed to find out change in left ventricular systolic function. \nResult: After 6 months of treatment, ejection fraction was found higher in the eplerenonearm (40.3 ± 6.5 versus 38.3 ± 4.6%; P < 0.05). Ejection fraction (EF) changes were 6.2% in eplerenone group and 4.1% in spironolactonearm. A significant reduction in left ventricular end-systolic volume (21.9±2.5 in group I versus 14.9±5.7 in group II; P < 0.05) and left ventricular systolic diameter (48.7±4.0 in arm I versus 45.2±4.9 in arm II; P<0.05) occurred after 6 months of treatment. But no significant differences were observed in left ventricular end-diastolic volume (187.8±37.4 versus 184.5±33.9; P=0.101) and left ventricular diastolic diameter (60.1±4.5 versus 61.0±4.9; P=0.0818) between arms. Assessment of blood pressure six months after treatment shows, systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were improved in both arms but difference between two arms were statistically non-significant (p>0.05). \nConclusion: In this study, the improvement in systolic function was more in eplerenone arm, which also had fewer adverse side effects when compared to spironolactone arm. So, it can be concluded that eplerenone can be advised in patient with chronic heart failure in addition to other drugs that are used to treat heart failure. \nUniversity Heart Journal Vol. 16, No. 2, Jul 2020; 65-70","PeriodicalId":23424,"journal":{"name":"University Heart Journal","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison between Spironolactone and Eplerenone on LV Systolic Function in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure\",\"authors\":\"Md Noornabi Khondokar, Khurshed Ahmed, M. A. Hossain, R. Rashed, M. Siraj, Mohammad Walidur Rahman, S. Banerjee, S. Ahsan, F. Rahman, S. Zaman, Md. Harisul Hoque\",\"doi\":\"10.3329/uhj.v16i2.49649\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background:Chronic heart failure (CHF) is the most common and prognostically unfavorable outcome of many diseases of the cardiovascular system. Clinical trials have demonstrated mortality and morbidity benefits of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) in patients with heart failure. These studies have used either eplerenone or spironolactone as the MRA. Eplerenone is a selective aldosterone antagonist expected to have a lower incidence of hormonal side effects than spironolactone. The present study is designed to compare these two drugs in chronic heart failure patients as no head to head trial between these two drugs is found regarding improvement of systolic function, tolerability and safety. The aim of this study is to compare the effects of eplerenone and spironolactone on LV systolic function in patients with chronic heart failure in a single center. \\nMethods:It was a randomized clinical trial single blind study. A total of 224 cases of chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and NYHA class III or IV were selected by random sampling, from July 2017 to June 2018. Each patient was randomly allocated into either of the two arms, and was continued receiving treatment with either spironolactone (Arm-I) or eplerenone(Arm-II). Each patient was evaluated clinically, biochemically and echocardiographically at the beginning of treatment (baseline) at 1 month and at the end of 6th month. Echocardiography was performed to find out change in left ventricular systolic function. \\nResult: After 6 months of treatment, ejection fraction was found higher in the eplerenonearm (40.3 ± 6.5 versus 38.3 ± 4.6%; P < 0.05). Ejection fraction (EF) changes were 6.2% in eplerenone group and 4.1% in spironolactonearm. A significant reduction in left ventricular end-systolic volume (21.9±2.5 in group I versus 14.9±5.7 in group II; P < 0.05) and left ventricular systolic diameter (48.7±4.0 in arm I versus 45.2±4.9 in arm II; P<0.05) occurred after 6 months of treatment. But no significant differences were observed in left ventricular end-diastolic volume (187.8±37.4 versus 184.5±33.9; P=0.101) and left ventricular diastolic diameter (60.1±4.5 versus 61.0±4.9; P=0.0818) between arms. Assessment of blood pressure six months after treatment shows, systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were improved in both arms but difference between two arms were statistically non-significant (p>0.05). \\nConclusion: In this study, the improvement in systolic function was more in eplerenone arm, which also had fewer adverse side effects when compared to spironolactone arm. So, it can be concluded that eplerenone can be advised in patient with chronic heart failure in addition to other drugs that are used to treat heart failure. \\nUniversity Heart Journal Vol. 16, No. 2, Jul 2020; 65-70\",\"PeriodicalId\":23424,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"University Heart Journal\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"University Heart Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3329/uhj.v16i2.49649\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University Heart Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3329/uhj.v16i2.49649","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:慢性心力衰竭(CHF)是许多心血管系统疾病中最常见和预后不利的结果。临床试验已经证明矿皮质激素受体拮抗剂(MRAs)对心力衰竭患者的死亡率和发病率都有好处。这些研究使用依普利酮或螺内酯作为MRA。依普利酮是一种选择性醛固酮拮抗剂,预期其激素副作用发生率低于螺内酯。本研究旨在比较这两种药物在慢性心力衰竭患者中的疗效,因为没有发现这两种药物在改善收缩功能、耐受性和安全性方面的正面试验。本研究的目的是在单中心比较依普利酮和螺内酯对慢性心力衰竭患者左室收缩功能的影响。方法:采用随机临床试验、单盲研究。随机抽取2017年7月至2018年6月慢性心力衰竭伴射血分数降低、NYHA III或IV级患者224例。每位患者被随机分配到两组中的任何一组,并继续接受螺内酯(1组)或依普利酮(2组)的治疗。在治疗开始(基线)1个月和6个月结束时,对每位患者进行临床、生化和超声心动图评估。超声心动图观察左室收缩功能的变化。结果:治疗6个月后,大网膜射血分数升高(40.3±6.5 vs 38.3±4.6%);P < 0.05)。埃普利酮组的射血分数(EF)变化为6.2%,螺内酯组为4.1%。左心室收缩末期容积显著降低(I组21.9±2.5 vs II组14.9±5.7);P < 0.05)和左心室收缩直径(组1 48.7±4.0 vs组2 45.2±4.9);P0.05)。结论:本研究中,与螺内酯组相比,依普利酮组的收缩功能改善更多,不良反应也更少。因此,可以得出结论,在其他治疗心力衰竭的药物之外,依普利酮可以被建议用于慢性心力衰竭患者。《大学心脏杂志》第16卷第2期,2020年7月;65 - 70
Comparison between Spironolactone and Eplerenone on LV Systolic Function in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure
Background:Chronic heart failure (CHF) is the most common and prognostically unfavorable outcome of many diseases of the cardiovascular system. Clinical trials have demonstrated mortality and morbidity benefits of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) in patients with heart failure. These studies have used either eplerenone or spironolactone as the MRA. Eplerenone is a selective aldosterone antagonist expected to have a lower incidence of hormonal side effects than spironolactone. The present study is designed to compare these two drugs in chronic heart failure patients as no head to head trial between these two drugs is found regarding improvement of systolic function, tolerability and safety. The aim of this study is to compare the effects of eplerenone and spironolactone on LV systolic function in patients with chronic heart failure in a single center.
Methods:It was a randomized clinical trial single blind study. A total of 224 cases of chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and NYHA class III or IV were selected by random sampling, from July 2017 to June 2018. Each patient was randomly allocated into either of the two arms, and was continued receiving treatment with either spironolactone (Arm-I) or eplerenone(Arm-II). Each patient was evaluated clinically, biochemically and echocardiographically at the beginning of treatment (baseline) at 1 month and at the end of 6th month. Echocardiography was performed to find out change in left ventricular systolic function.
Result: After 6 months of treatment, ejection fraction was found higher in the eplerenonearm (40.3 ± 6.5 versus 38.3 ± 4.6%; P < 0.05). Ejection fraction (EF) changes were 6.2% in eplerenone group and 4.1% in spironolactonearm. A significant reduction in left ventricular end-systolic volume (21.9±2.5 in group I versus 14.9±5.7 in group II; P < 0.05) and left ventricular systolic diameter (48.7±4.0 in arm I versus 45.2±4.9 in arm II; P<0.05) occurred after 6 months of treatment. But no significant differences were observed in left ventricular end-diastolic volume (187.8±37.4 versus 184.5±33.9; P=0.101) and left ventricular diastolic diameter (60.1±4.5 versus 61.0±4.9; P=0.0818) between arms. Assessment of blood pressure six months after treatment shows, systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were improved in both arms but difference between two arms were statistically non-significant (p>0.05).
Conclusion: In this study, the improvement in systolic function was more in eplerenone arm, which also had fewer adverse side effects when compared to spironolactone arm. So, it can be concluded that eplerenone can be advised in patient with chronic heart failure in addition to other drugs that are used to treat heart failure.
University Heart Journal Vol. 16, No. 2, Jul 2020; 65-70