Pharmacologic Treatment of Patients With Myocardial Ischemia With No Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease

Pharmacologic Treatment of Patients With Myocardial Ischemia With No Obstructive Coronary Artery... Half of women and 1/3 of men with angina and ischemia on stress testing have ischemia with no obstructive coronary artery disease (INOCA). These patients have quality of life (QoL) impairment comparable with patients with obstructive coronary artery disease. Clinicians generally treat INOCA with traditional antianginal agents despite previous studies demonstrating variable response to these medications. We performed a systematic review to evaluate the efficacy and safety of available pharmacologic therapies for INOCA. We systematically searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, MEDLINE, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform in July 2017 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating pharmacologic agents for INOCA. The primary outcome of interest was QoL. Secondary outcomes included subjective and objective efficacy measures and safety outcomes. We included 35 RCTs from 333 identified studies. Interventions that improved QoL with moderate-quality evidence included angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor (±statin) and ranolazine. Low-to-very-low-quality evidence also suggests that ACE inhibitors, β blockers, calcium-channel blockers, nicorandil, ranolazine, and statins may decrease angina frequency and delay ischemia on stress testing. Other interventions, most notably nitrates, did not significantly improve any outcome. In conclusion, evidence for pharmacologic treatment of INOCA is generally poor, and higher-quality RCTs using a standardized definition of INOCA are needed. Moderate-quality evidence suggests that ACE inhibitors and ranolazine improve QoL. Other interventions had low-quality evidence or no evidence of efficacy. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png The American Journal of Cardiology Elsevier

Pharmacologic Treatment of Patients With Myocardial Ischemia With No Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease

Loading next page...
 
/lp/elsevier/pharmacologic-treatment-of-patients-with-myocardial-ischemia-with-no-lhHpJ02Gqo
Publisher
Elsevier
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc.
ISSN
0002-9149
D.O.I.
10.1016/j.amjcard.2017.12.025
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Half of women and 1/3 of men with angina and ischemia on stress testing have ischemia with no obstructive coronary artery disease (INOCA). These patients have quality of life (QoL) impairment comparable with patients with obstructive coronary artery disease. Clinicians generally treat INOCA with traditional antianginal agents despite previous studies demonstrating variable response to these medications. We performed a systematic review to evaluate the efficacy and safety of available pharmacologic therapies for INOCA. We systematically searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, MEDLINE, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform in July 2017 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating pharmacologic agents for INOCA. The primary outcome of interest was QoL. Secondary outcomes included subjective and objective efficacy measures and safety outcomes. We included 35 RCTs from 333 identified studies. Interventions that improved QoL with moderate-quality evidence included angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor (±statin) and ranolazine. Low-to-very-low-quality evidence also suggests that ACE inhibitors, β blockers, calcium-channel blockers, nicorandil, ranolazine, and statins may decrease angina frequency and delay ischemia on stress testing. Other interventions, most notably nitrates, did not significantly improve any outcome. In conclusion, evidence for pharmacologic treatment of INOCA is generally poor, and higher-quality RCTs using a standardized definition of INOCA are needed. Moderate-quality evidence suggests that ACE inhibitors and ranolazine improve QoL. Other interventions had low-quality evidence or no evidence of efficacy.

Journal

The American Journal of CardiologyElsevier

Published: Apr 1, 2018

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 12 million articles from more than
10,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Unlimited reading

Read as many articles as you need. Full articles with original layout, charts and figures. Read online, from anywhere.

Stay up to date

Keep up with your field with Personalized Recommendations and Follow Journals to get automatic updates.

Organize your research

It’s easy to organize your research with our built-in tools.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve Freelancer

DeepDyve Pro

Price
FREE
$49/month

$360/year
Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed
Create lists to
organize your research
Export lists, citations
Read DeepDyve articles
Abstract access only
Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles
Print
20 pages/month
PDF Discount
20% off