BACKGROUND: Accelerated coronary artery disease is a major cause of late morbidity and mortality among heart-transplant recipients. Because calcium-channel blockers can suppress diet-induced atherosclerosis in laboratory animals, we assessed the efficacy of diltiazem in preventing coronary artery disease in transplanted hearts. METHODS:Consecutive eligible cardiac-transplant recipients were randomly assigned to receive diltiazem (n = 52) or no calcium-channel blocker (n = 54). Coronary angiograms obtained early after cardiac transplantation and annually thereafter were used for the visual assessment of the extent of coronary artery disease. The average diameters of identical coronary artery segments were measured on the angiograms obtained at base line and at the first and second follow-up examinations. RESULTS: In the 57 patients who had all three angiograms, the average coronary artery diameter (+/- SD) 0.27 decreased in the group that received no calcium-channel blocker from 2.41 +/- 0.27 mm at base line to 2.19 +/- 0.28 mm at one year, and to 2.22 +/- 0.26 mm at two years (P < 0.001 for both years). The average diameter in the diltiazem group changed little from the base-line value of 2.32 +/- 0.22 mm (2.32 +/- 0.27 mm at one year and 2.36 +/- 0.22 mm at two years). The average change in the diameter of the segment differed significantly between the two treatment groups (P < 0.001), and the estimated effect of treatment changed only negligibly after adjustment for other relevant clinical variables. New angiographic evidence of coronary artery disease developed in 14 patients not givencalcium-channel blockers, as compared with 5 diltiazem-treated patients (P = 0.082). Coronary stenoses greater than 50 percent of the luminal diameter developed in seven patients not given calcium-channel blockers, as compared with two patients given diltiazem; death due to coronary artery disease or retransplantation occurred in five patients in the group that did not receive calcium-channel blockers and none of those who received diltiazem. CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary results suggest that diltiazem can prevent the usual reduction in the diameter of the coronary artery in cardiac-transplant recipients, but further follow-up will be required to determine whether diltiazem can decrease the long-term incidence of symptomatic coronary artery disease.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Accelerated coronary artery disease is a major cause of late morbidity and mortality among heart-transplant recipients. Because calcium-channel blockers can suppress diet-induced atherosclerosis in laboratory animals, we assessed the efficacy of diltiazem in preventing coronary artery disease in transplanted hearts. METHODS: Consecutive eligible cardiac-transplant recipients were randomly assigned to receive diltiazem (n = 52) or no calcium-channel blocker (n = 54). Coronary angiograms obtained early after cardiac transplantation and annually thereafter were used for the visual assessment of the extent of coronary artery disease. The average diameters of identical coronary artery segments were measured on the angiograms obtained at base line and at the first and second follow-up examinations. RESULTS: In the 57 patients who had all three angiograms, the average coronary artery diameter (+/- SD) 0.27 decreased in the group that received no calcium-channel blocker from 2.41 +/- 0.27 mm at base line to 2.19 +/- 0.28 mm at one year, and to 2.22 +/- 0.26 mm at two years (P < 0.001 for both years). The average diameter in the diltiazem group changed little from the base-line value of 2.32 +/- 0.22 mm (2.32 +/- 0.27 mm at one year and 2.36 +/- 0.22 mm at two years). The average change in the diameter of the segment differed significantly between the two treatment groups (P < 0.001), and the estimated effect of treatment changed only negligibly after adjustment for other relevant clinical variables. New angiographic evidence of coronary artery disease developed in 14 patients not given calcium-channel blockers, as compared with 5 diltiazem-treated patients (P = 0.082). Coronary stenoses greater than 50 percent of the luminal diameter developed in seven patients not given calcium-channel blockers, as compared with two patients given diltiazem; death due to coronary artery disease or retransplantation occurred in five patients in the group that did not receive calcium-channel blockers and none of those who received diltiazem. CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary results suggest that diltiazem can prevent the usual reduction in the diameter of the coronary artery in cardiac-transplant recipients, but further follow-up will be required to determine whether diltiazem can decrease the long-term incidence of symptomatic coronary artery disease.
Authors: Georges Khoueiry; Basem Azab; Estelle Torbey; Nidal Abi Rafeh; Jean-Paul Atallah; Kathleen Ahern; James Malpeso; Donald McCord; Elie R Chemaly Journal: Am J Hypertens Date: 2012-06-28 Impact factor: 2.689
Authors: Kory J Lavine; Marc Sintek; Eric Novak; Gregory Ewald; Edward Geltman; Susan Joseph; John Pfeifer; Douglas L Mann Journal: Circ Heart Fail Date: 2013-05-24 Impact factor: 8.790