Jean L. Rouleau

The Effect of Pravastatin on Coronary Events after Myocardial Infarction in Patients with Average Cholesterol Levels

BACKGROUND In patients with high cholesterol levels, lowering the cholesterol level reduces the risk of coronary events, but the effect of lowering cholesterol levels in the majority of patients with coronary disease, who have average levels, is less clear. METHODS In a double-blind trial lasting five years we administered either 40 mg of pravastatin per day or placebo to 4159 patients (3583 men and 576 women) with myocardial infarction who had plasma total cholesterol levels below 240 mg per deciliter (mean, 209) and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels of 115 to 174 mg per deciliter (mean, 139). The primary end point was a fatal coronary event or a nonfatal myocardial infarction. RESULTS The frequency of the primary end point was 10.2 percent in the pravastatin group and 13.2 percent in the placebo group, an absolute difference of 3 percentage points and a 24 percent reduction in risk (95 percent confidence interval, 9 to 36 percent; P = 0.003). Coronary bypass surgery was needed in 7.5 percent of the patients in the pravastatin group and 10 percent of those in the placebo group, a 26 percent reduction (P=0.005), and coronary angioplasty was needed in 8.3 percent of the pravastatin group and 10.5 percent of the placebo group, a 23 percent reduction (P=0.01). The frequency of stroke was reduced by 31 percent (P=0.03). There were no significant differences in overall mortality or mortality from noncardiovascular causes. Pravastatin lowered the rate of coronary events more among women than among men. The reduction in coronary events was also greater in patients with higher pretreatment levels of LDL cholesterol. CONCLUSIONS These results demonstrate that the benefit of cholesterol-lowering therapy extends to the majority of patients with coronary disease who have average cholesterol levels.

Effect of captopril on mortality and morbidity in patients with left ventricular dysfunction after myocardial infarction: Results of the survival and ventricular enlargement trial

BACKGROUND Left ventricular dilatation and dysfunction after myocardial infarction are major predictors of death. In experimental and clinical studies, longterm therapy with the angiotensin-converting--enzyme inhibitor captopril attenuated ventricular dilatation and remodeling. We investigated whether captopril could reduce morbidity and mortality in patients with left ventricular dysfunction after a myocardial infarction. METHODS Within 3 to 16 days after myocardial infarction, 2231 patients with ejection fractions of 40 percent or less but without overt heart failure or symptoms of myocardial ischemia were randomly assigned to receive doubleblind treatment with either placebo (1116 patients) or captopril (1115 patients) and were followed for an average of 42 months. RESULTS Mortality from all causes was significantly reduced in the captopril group (228 deaths, or 20 percent) as compared with the placebo group (275 deaths, or 25 percent); the reduction in risk was 19 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 3 to 32 percent; P = 0.019). In addition, the incidence of both fatal and nonfatal major cardiovascular events was consistently reduced in the captopril group. The reduction in risk was 21 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 5 to 35 percent; P = 0.014) for death from cardiovascular causes, 37 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 20 to 50 percent; P less than 0.001) for the development of severe heart failure, 22 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 4 to 37 percent; P = 0.019) for congestive heart failure requiring hospitalization, and 25 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 5 to 40 percent; P = 0.015) for recurrent myocardial infarction. CONCLUSIONS In patients with asymptomatic left ventricular dysfunction after myocardial infarction, long-term administration of captopril was associated with an improvement in survival and reduced morbidity and mortality due to major cardiovascular events. These benefits were observed in patients who received thrombolytic therapy, aspirin, or beta-blockers, as well as those who did not, suggesting that treatment with captopril leads to additional improvement in outcome among selected survivors of myocardial infarction.

Angiotensin-neprilysin inhibition versus enalapril in heart failure.

BACKGROUND We compared the angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor LCZ696 with enalapril in patients who had heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction. In previous studies, enalapril improved survival in such patients. METHODS In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 8442 patients with class II, III, or IV heart failure and an ejection fraction of 40% or less to receive either LCZ696 (at a dose of 200 mg twice daily) or enalapril (at a dose of 10 mg twice daily), in addition to recommended therapy. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes or hospitalization for heart failure, but the trial was designed to detect a difference in the rates of death from cardiovascular causes. RESULTS The trial was stopped early, according to prespecified rules, after a median follow-up of 27 months, because the boundary for an overwhelming benefit with LCZ696 had been crossed. At the time of study closure, the primary outcome had occurred in 914 patients (21.8%) in the LCZ696 group and 1117 patients (26.5%) in the enalapril group (hazard ratio in the LCZ696 group, 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 0.87; P<0.001). A total of 711 patients (17.0%) receiving LCZ696 and 835 patients (19.8%) receiving enalapril died (hazard ratio for death from any cause, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.93; P<0.001); of these patients, 558 (13.3%) and 693 (16.5%), respectively, died from cardiovascular causes (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.89; P<0.001). As compared with enalapril, LCZ696 also reduced the risk of hospitalization for heart failure by 21% (P<0.001) and decreased the symptoms and physical limitations of heart failure (P=0.001). The LCZ696 group had higher proportions of patients with hypotension and nonserious angioedema but lower proportions with renal impairment, hyperkalemia, and cough than the enalapril group. CONCLUSIONS LCZ696 was superior to enalapril in reducing the risks of death and of hospitalization for heart failure. (Funded by Novartis; PARADIGM-HF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01035255.).

Cardiac-Resynchronization Therapy for Mild-to-Moderate Heart Failure

BACKGROUND Cardiac-resynchronization therapy (CRT) benefits patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction and a wide QRS complex. Most of these patients are candidates for an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). We evaluated whether adding CRT to an ICD and optimal medical therapy might reduce mortality and morbidity among such patients. METHODS We randomly assigned patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II or III heart failure, a left ventricular ejection fraction of 30% or less, and an intrinsic QRS duration of 120 msec or more or a paced QRS duration of 200 msec or more to receive either an ICD alone or an ICD plus CRT. The primary outcome was death from any cause or hospitalization for heart failure. RESULTS We followed 1798 patients for a mean of 40 months. The primary outcome occurred in 297 of 894 patients (33.2%) in the ICD-CRT group and 364 of 904 patients (40.3%) in the ICD group (hazard ratio in the ICD-CRT group, 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 0.87; P<0.001). In the ICD-CRT group, 186 patients died, as compared with 236 in the ICD group (hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.91; P = 0.003), and 174 patients were hospitalized for heart failure, as compared with 236 in the ICD group (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.83; P<0.001). However, at 30 days after device implantation, adverse events had occurred in 124 patients in the ICD-CRT group, as compared with 58 in the ICD group (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with NYHA class II or III heart failure, a wide QRS complex, and left ventricular systolic dysfunction, the addition of CRT to an ICD reduced rates of death and hospitalization for heart failure. This improvement was accompanied by more adverse events. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and Medtronic of Canada; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00251251.).

Effect of Captopril on Mortality and Morbidity in Patients with Left Ventricular Dysfunction after Myocardial Infarction

BACKGROUND Left ventricular dilatation and dysfunction after myocardial infarction are major predictors of death. In experimental and clinical studies, longterm therapy with the angiotensin-converting--enzyme inhibitor captopril attenuated ventricular dilatation and remodeling. We investigated whether captopril could reduce morbidity and mortality in patients with left ventricular dysfunction after a myocardial infarction. METHODS Within 3 to 16 days after myocardial infarction, 2231 patients with ejection fractions of 40 percent or less but without overt heart failure or symptoms of myocardial ischemia were randomly assigned to receive doubleblind treatment with either placebo (1116 patients) or captopril (1115 patients) and were followed for an average of 42 months. RESULTS Mortality from all causes was significantly reduced in the captopril group (228 deaths, or 20 percent) as compared with the placebo group (275 deaths, or 25 percent); the reduction in risk was 19 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 3 to 32 percent; P = 0.019). In addition, the incidence of both fatal and nonfatal major cardiovascular events was consistently reduced in the captopril group. The reduction in risk was 21 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 5 to 35 percent; P = 0.014) for death from cardiovascular causes, 37 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 20 to 50 percent; P less than 0.001) for the development of severe heart failure, 22 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 4 to 37 percent; P = 0.019) for congestive heart failure requiring hospitalization, and 25 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 5 to 40 percent; P = 0.015) for recurrent myocardial infarction. CONCLUSIONS In patients with asymptomatic left ventricular dysfunction after myocardial infarction, long-term administration of captopril was associated with an improvement in survival and reduced morbidity and mortality due to major cardiovascular events. These benefits were observed in patients who received thrombolytic therapy, aspirin, or beta-blockers, as well as those who did not, suggesting that treatment with captopril leads to additional improvement in outcome among selected survivors of myocardial infarction.

Effect of Carvedilol on the Morbidity of Patients With Severe Chronic Heart Failure Results of the Carvedilol Prospective Randomized Cumulative Survival (COPERNICUS) Study

Background—&bgr;-Blocking agents improve functional status and reduce morbidity in mild-to-moderate heart failure, but it is not known whether they produce such benefits in severe heart failure. Methods and Results—We randomly assigned 2289 patients with symptoms of heart failure at rest or on minimal exertion and with an ejection fraction <25% (but not volume-overloaded) to double-blind treatment with either placebo (n=1133) or carvedilol (n=1156) for an average of 10.4 months. Carvedilol reduced the combined risk of death or hospitalization for a cardiovascular reason by 27% (P =0.00002) and the combined risk of death or hospitalization for heart failure by 31% (P =0.000004). Patients in the carvedilol group also spent 27% fewer days in the hospital for any reason (P =0.0005) and 40% fewer days in the hospital for heart failure (P <0.0001). These differences were as a result of both a decrease in the number of hospitalizations and a shorter duration of each admission. More patients felt improved and fewer patients felt worse in the carvedilol group than in the placebo group after 6 months of maintenance therapy (P =0.0009). Carvedilol-treated patients were also less likely than placebo-treated patients to experience a serious adverse event (P =0.002), especially worsening heart failure, sudden death, cardiogenic shock, or ventricular tachycardia. Conclusion—In euvolemic patients with symptoms at rest or on minimal exertion, the addition of carvedilol to conventional therapy ameliorates the severity of heart failure and reduces the risk of clinical deterioration, hospitalization, and other serious adverse clinical events.

Comparison of vasopeptidase inhibitor, omapatrilat, and lisinopril on exercise tolerance and morbidity in patients with heart failure: IMPRESS randomised trial

BACKGROUND We aimed to assess in patients with congestive heart failure whether dual inhibition of neutral endopeptidase and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) with the vasopeptidase inhibitor omapatrilat is better than ACE inhibition alone with lisinopril on functional capacity and clinical outcome. METHODS We did a prospective, randomised, double-blind, parallel trial of 573 patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II-IV congestive heart failure, left-ventricular ejection fraction of 40% or less, and receiving an ACE inhibitor. Patients were randomly assigned omapatrilat at a daily target dose of 40 mg (n=289) or lisinopril at a daily target dose of 20 mg (n=284) for 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was improvement in maximum exercise treadmill test (ETT) at week 12. Secondary endpoints included death and comorbid events indicative of worsening heart failure. FINDINGS Week 12 ETT increased similarly in the omapatrilat and lisinopril groups (24 vs 31 s, p=0.45). The two drugs were fairly well tolerated, but there were fewer cardiovascular-system serious adverse events in the omapatrilat group than in the lisinopril group (20 [7%] vs 34 [12%], p=0.04). There was a suggestive trend in favour of omapatrilat on the combined endpoint of death or admission for worsening heart failure (p=0.052; hazard ratio 0.53 [95% CI 0.27-1.02]) and a significant benefit of omapatrilat in the composite of death, admission, or discontinuation of study treatment for worsening heart failure (p=0.035; 0.52 [0.28-0.96]). Omapatrilat improved NYHA class more than lisinopril in patients who had NYHA class III and IV (p=0.035), but not if patients with NYHA class II were included. INTERPRETATION Our findings suggest that omapatrilat could have some advantages over lisinopril in the treatment of patients with congestive heart failure. Thus use of vasopeptidase inhibitors could constitute a potentially important treatment for further improving the prognosis and well being of patients with this disorder.

A Sensitive Cardiac Troponin T Assay in Stable Coronary Artery Disease

BACKGROUND In most patients with stable coronary artery disease, plasma cardiac troponin T levels are below the limit of detection for the conventional assay. The distribution and determinants of very low circulating troponin T levels, as well as their association with cardiovascular events, in such patients are unknown. METHODS We used a new, high-sensitivity assay to determine the concentration of cardiac troponin T in plasma samples from 3679 patients with stable coronary artery disease and preserved left ventricular function. Results of the assay were analyzed in relation to the incidence of cardiovascular events during a median follow-up period of 5.2 years. RESULTS With the highly sensitive assay, concentrations of cardiac troponin T were at or above the limit of detection (0.001 microg per liter) in 3593 patients (97.7%) and at or above the 99th percentile for apparently healthy subjects (0.0133 microg per liter) in 407 patients (11.1%). After adjustment for other independent prognostic indicators, there was a strong and graded increase in the cumulative incidence of cardiovascular death (adjusted hazard ratio per unit increase in the natural logarithm of the troponin T level, 2.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.60 to 2.74; P<0.001) and of heart failure (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.66 to 2.90; P<0.001) in this study group. Increased risk associated with higher levels of troponin T was evident well below the limit of detection of conventional cardiac troponin T assays and below the 99th percentile of values in a healthy population. There was no association between troponin T levels as measured with the highly sensitive assay and the incidence of myocardial infarction (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.40; P=0.11). CONCLUSIONS After adjustment for other independent prognostic indicators, cardiac troponin T concentrations as measured with a highly sensitive assay were significantly associated with the incidence of cardiovascular death and heart failure but not with myocardial infarction in patients with stable coronary artery disease.

Ventricular Dysfunction and the Risk of Stroke after Myocardial Infarction

BACKGROUND In patients who have had a myocardial infarction, the long-term risk of stroke and its relation to the extent of left ventricular dysfunction have not been determined. We studied whether a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction is associated with an increased risk of stroke after myocardial infarction and whether other factors such as older age and therapy with anticoagulants, thrombolytic agents, or captopril affect long-term rates of stroke. METHODS We performed an observational analysis of prospectively collected data on 2231 patients who had left ventricular dysfunction after acute myocardial infarction who were enrolled in the Survival and Ventricular Enlargement trial. The mean follow-up was 42 months. Risk factors for stroke were assessed by both univariate and multivariate Cox proportional-hazards analysis. RESULTS Among these patients, 103 (4.6 percent) had fatal or nonfatal strokes during the study (rate of stroke per year of follow-up, 1.5 percent). The estimated five-year rate of stroke in all the patients was 8.1 percent. As compared with patients without stroke, patients with stroke were older (mean [+/-SD] age, 63+/-9 years vs. 59+/-11 years; P<0.001) and had lower ejection fractions (29+/-7 percent vs. 31+/-7 percent, P=0.01). Independent risk factors for stroke included a lower ejection fraction (for every decrease of 5 percentage points in the ejection fraction there was an 18 percent increase in the risk of stroke), older age, and the absence of aspirin or anticoagulant therapy. Patients with ejection fractions of < or = 28 percent after myocardial infarction had a relative risk of stroke of 1.86, as compared with patients with ejection fractions of more than 35 percent (P=0.01). The use of thrombolytic agents and captopril had no significant effect on the risk of stroke. CONCLUSIONS During the five years after myocardial infarction, patients have a substantial risk of stroke. A decreased ejection fraction and older age are both independent predictors of an increased risk of stroke. Anticoagulant therapy appears to have a protective effect against stroke after myocardial infarction.

Coronary Bypass Surgery with or without Surgical Ventricular Reconstruction

BACKGROUND Surgical ventricular reconstruction is a specific procedure designed to reduce left ventricular volume in patients with heart failure caused by coronary artery disease. We conducted a trial to address the question of whether surgical ventricular reconstruction added to coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) would decrease the rate of death or hospitalization for cardiac causes, as compared with CABG alone. METHODS Between September 2002 and January 2006, a total of 1000 patients with an ejection fraction of 35% or less, coronary artery disease that was amenable to CABG, and dominant anterior left ventricular dysfunction that was amenable to surgical ventricular reconstruction were randomly assigned to undergo either CABG alone (499 patients) or CABG with surgical ventricular reconstruction (501 patients). The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause and hospitalization for cardiac causes. The median follow-up was 48 months. RESULTS Surgical ventricular reconstruction reduced the end-systolic volume index by 19%, as compared with a reduction of 6% with CABG alone. Cardiac symptoms and exercise tolerance improved from baseline to a similar degree in the two study groups. However, no significant difference was observed in the primary outcome, which occurred in 292 patients (59%) who were assigned to undergo CABG alone and in 289 patients (58%) who were assigned to undergo CABG with surgical ventricular reconstruction (hazard ratio for the combined approach, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.84 to 1.17; P=0.90). CONCLUSIONS Adding surgical ventricular reconstruction to CABG reduced the left ventricular volume, as compared with CABG alone. However, this anatomical change was not associated with a greater improvement in symptoms or exercise tolerance or with a reduction in the rate of death or hospitalization for cardiac causes. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00023595.)