Whedy Wang

Clinical effects of early angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor treatment for acute myocardial infarction are similar in the presence and absence of aspirin: systematic overview of individual data from 96,712 randomized patients. Angiotensin-converting Enzyme Inhibitor Myocardial Infarction Collaborative Group.

OBJECTIVES We sought to determine whether the clinical effects of early angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor (ACEi) treatment for acute myocardial infarction (MI) are influenced by the concomitant use of aspirin (ASA). BACKGROUND Aspirin and ACEi both reduce mortality when given early after MI. Aspirin inhibits the synthesis of vasodilating prostaglandins, and, in principle, this inhibition might antagonize some of the effects of ACEi. But it is uncertain whether, in practice, this influences the effects of ACEi on mortality and major morbidity after MI. METHODS This overview sought individual patient data from all trials involving more than 1,000 patients randomly allocated to receive ACEi or control starting in the acute phase of MI (0-36 h from onset) and continuing for four to six weeks. Data on concomitant ASA use were available for 96,712 of 98,496 patients in four eligible trials (and for none of 1,556 patients in the one other eligible trial). RESULTS Overall 30-day mortality was 7.1% among patients allocated to ACEi and 7.6% among those allocated to control, corresponding to a 7% (standard deviation [SD], 2%) proportional reduction (95% confidence interval 2% to 11%, p = 0.004). Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor was associated with similar proportional reductions in 30-day mortality among the 86,484 patients who were taking ASA (6% [SD, 3%] reduction) and among the 10,228 patients who were not (10% [SD, 5%] reduction: chi-squared test of heterogeneity between these reductions = 0.4; p = 0.5). Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor produced definite increases in the incidence of persistent hypotension (17.9% ACEi vs. 9.4% control) and of renal dysfunction (1.3% ACEi vs. 0.6% control), but there was no good evidence that these effects were different in the presence or absence of ASA (chi-squared for heterogeneity = 0.4 and 0.0, respectively; both not significant). Nor was there good evidence that the effects of ACEi on other clinical outcomes were changed by concomitant ASA use. CONCLUSIONS Both ASA and ACEi are beneficial in acute MI. The present results support the early use of ACEi in acute MI, irrespective of whether or not ASA is being given.

Relationship Between Nonsustained Ventricular Tachycardia After Non–ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome and Sudden Cardiac Death Observations From the Metabolic Efficiency With Ranolazine for Less Ischemia in Non–ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome–Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 36 (MERLIN-TIMI 36) Randomized Controlled Trial

Background— Most studies examining the relationship between ventricular tachycardia (VT) after acute coronary syndrome and sudden cardiac death (SCD) were performed before widespread use of reperfusion, revascularization, or contemporary medical therapy and were limited to ST-elevation myocardial infarction. The incidence and prognostic implications of VT in patients with non–ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome receiving contemporary care have not been examined. Methods and Results— The Metabolic Efficiency With Ranolazine for Less Ischemia in Non–ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome–Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 36 (MERLIN-TIMI 36) trial randomized 6560 patients hospitalized with a non–ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome to ranolazine or placebo in addition to standard therapy. Continuous ECG recording was performed for the first 7 days after randomization and evaluated in a blinded core laboratory. SCD (n=121) was assessed over a median follow-up of 1 year. A total of 6345 patients (97%) had continuous ECG recordings evaluable for analysis. Compared with patients with no VT (n=2764), there was no increased risk of SCD in patients with only ventricular triplets (n=1978, 31.2%) (1.4% versus 1.2%); however, the risk of SCD was significantly greater in patients with VT lasting 4 to 7 beats (n=1172, 18.5%) (SCD, 2.9%; adjusted hazard ratio, 2.3; P<0.001) and in patients with VT lasting at least 8 beats (n=431, 6.8%) (SCD, 4.3%; adjusted hazard ratio, 2.8; P=0.001). This effect was independent of baseline characteristics and ejection fraction. VT occurring within the first 48 hours after admission was not associated with SCD. Conclusion— Nonsustained VT is common after admission for non–ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome, and even short episodes of VT lasting 4 to 7 beats are independently associated with the risk of SCD over the subsequent year. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00099788.

Differences in heart rate response to adenosine and regadenoson in patients with and without diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND Adenosine and regadenoson increase heart rate (HR) when used as stress agents to produce coronary hyperemia due to direct sympathetic stimulation. We hypothesized that the HR response will be lower in patients with than in those without diabetes mellitus (DM). METHODS We studied the HR response (percentage maximal increase) in 2,000 patients in The ADenoscan Versus regAdenosoN Comparative Evaluation for Myocardial Perfusion Imaging (ADVANCE MPI 1 and 2) Trials with known DM status. RESULTS There were 643 patients with a history of DM (65.4 +/- 0.4 years, 32% women) and 1,357 patients with no DM (65.5 +/- 0.3 years, 29% women). Compared with non-DM, the DM group had higher HR at baseline (68.4 +/- 0.48 vs 65.2 +/- 0.31 beat/min, P < .001) and smaller HR response after adenosine or regadenoson administration (29.4% +/- 0.64% vs 36.1% +/- 0.54%, P < .001). Insulin therapy was associated with further blunting in the HR response (25.9% +/- 1.0% vs 31.2% +/- 0.8%, P < .001). After adjusting for beta-blocker intake, baseline HR, age, gender, renal function, systolic blood pressure, and left ventricular systolic function, DM independently accounted for a decrease in the HR response. CONCLUSIONS The HR response to adenosine and regadenoson in patients with DM is blunted. If additional studies confer an agreement between traditional tests for determination of autonomic neuropathy and this measure, then examination of HR response to these agents during myocardial perfusion imaging might add prognostic power.

Interaction of caffeine with regadenoson-induced hyperemic myocardial blood flow as measured by positron emission tomography: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial.

To the Editor: Regadenoson is a selective A2A adenosine receptor agonist under investigation as a pharmacologic vasodilator in nuclear stress myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) ([1][1]). It has a higher affinity for A2A receptors than adenosine and is a more potent coronary vasodilator. It

The risk of sudden cardiac death in patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome and prolonged QTc interval: effect of ranolazine

AIMS Clinical utility of QTc prolongation as a predictor for sudden cardiac death (SCD) has not been definitely established. Ranolazine causes modest QTc prolongation, yet it shows antiarrhythmic properties. We aimed to determine the association between prolonged QTc and risk of SCD, and the effect of ranolazine on this relationship. METHODS AND RESULTS The relationship between baseline QTc and SCD was studied in 6492 patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS) randomized to placebo or ranolazine in the MERLIN-TIMI 36 trial. In the placebo group, an abnormal QTc interval (≥450 ms in men, ≥470 ms in women) was associated with a two-fold increased risk of SCD (hazard ratio, HR, 2.3, P = 0.005) after adjustment for other risk factors (age ≥75 years, NYHA class III/IV, high TIMI risk score, ventricular tachycardia ≥8 beats, digitalis, and antiarrhythmics). In the ranolazine group, the association between abnormal QTc and SCD was similar to placebo, but not significant (HR 1.8, P = 0.074). There was no significant difference between placebo and ranolazine in the risk for SCD in patients with abnormal QTc (HR 0.78, P = 0.48). When QTc was used as a continuous variable, for every 10 ms increase in QTc, hazard rate for SCD increased significantly by 8% (P = 0.007) in the placebo group, and only by 2.9% (P = 0.412; P for interaction=0.25) in the ranolazine group. CONCLUSION In NSTEACS patients treated with placebo, prolonged QTc was a significant independent predictor for SCD. Ranolazine, compared with placebo, was not associated with increased risk for SCD in patients with prolonged QTc.