We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can negative cardiac effect of proton pump inhibitor and high-dose H2-blocker have clinical influence on patients with stable angina?
Journal of Cardiology 2008 August
BACKGROUND: Aspirin and anti-platelet drugs are used commonly for patients with coronary heart disease. Proton pump inhibitor (PPI) and high-dose H2-blocker were recommended for preventing NSAIDs-related ulcer. Previously H2-blocker reported to have some negative cardiovascular effects. Additionally, a recent in vitro study showed that PPI reduced cardiac contractility. In this study, we evaluated whether chronic administration of PPI and high-dose H2-blocker affects left ventricular function.
METHOD: Fifty-two stable angina patients were enrolled and classified into PPI group ([P]; lansoprazole: 15 mg/day, n=28), H2-blocker group ([H]; famotidine: 40 mg/day, n=8), and control ([C]; none or mucosal-defense drug, n=16). Eligible patients showed normal cardiac function in initial catheterization without administrated PPI or H2-blocker. They received percutaneous coronary intervention and follow-up catheterization. We compared changes in ejection fraction (EF: %), end diastolic/systolic volume index (EDVI/ESVI: ml/m(2)), and peak positive/negative dp/dt (+/-dp/dt: mmHg/s) in left ventricular angiography series.
RESULT: There were no significant differences among three groups regarding patient characteristics, backgrounds of angiographic and intervention, except for fewer smokers in [C]. Other drugs such as beta- and Ca-blocker did not have effects on cardiac function except for aspirin during 255+/-115 days follow-up. Rate of EF changes significantly decreased in [P], and tended to decrease in [H] (C: 3.8+/-9.8%, H: -1.6+/-7.6%, P: -2.1+/-5.9%; p<0.05 for [C] vs. [P]). Those of ESVI changes were significantly greater in [P], and tended to be greater in [H] (C: -4.5+/-16.2%, H: 4.9+/-15.5%, P: 7.3+/-16.2%; p<0.05 for [C] vs. [P]), though, EDVI changes' were similar (C: 2.5+/-8.9%, H: 2.6+/-3.6%, P: 1.6+/-6.1%; p=ns). Rate of +/-dp/dt-changes tended to decrease in [H] (+dp/dt: C: 3.9+/-15.5%, H: -10.0+/-25.2%, P: 0.3+/-19.6%; p=ns, -dp/dt: C: -0.1+/-19.5%, H: -8.5+/-20.4%, P: 5.7+/-27.7%; p=ns).
CONCLUSION: In this study, PPI and high-dose H2-blocker have EF-reducing tendency. However, these changes were small and these drugs seemed to exhibit little influence clinically.
METHOD: Fifty-two stable angina patients were enrolled and classified into PPI group ([P]; lansoprazole: 15 mg/day, n=28), H2-blocker group ([H]; famotidine: 40 mg/day, n=8), and control ([C]; none or mucosal-defense drug, n=16). Eligible patients showed normal cardiac function in initial catheterization without administrated PPI or H2-blocker. They received percutaneous coronary intervention and follow-up catheterization. We compared changes in ejection fraction (EF: %), end diastolic/systolic volume index (EDVI/ESVI: ml/m(2)), and peak positive/negative dp/dt (+/-dp/dt: mmHg/s) in left ventricular angiography series.
RESULT: There were no significant differences among three groups regarding patient characteristics, backgrounds of angiographic and intervention, except for fewer smokers in [C]. Other drugs such as beta- and Ca-blocker did not have effects on cardiac function except for aspirin during 255+/-115 days follow-up. Rate of EF changes significantly decreased in [P], and tended to decrease in [H] (C: 3.8+/-9.8%, H: -1.6+/-7.6%, P: -2.1+/-5.9%; p<0.05 for [C] vs. [P]). Those of ESVI changes were significantly greater in [P], and tended to be greater in [H] (C: -4.5+/-16.2%, H: 4.9+/-15.5%, P: 7.3+/-16.2%; p<0.05 for [C] vs. [P]), though, EDVI changes' were similar (C: 2.5+/-8.9%, H: 2.6+/-3.6%, P: 1.6+/-6.1%; p=ns). Rate of +/-dp/dt-changes tended to decrease in [H] (+dp/dt: C: 3.9+/-15.5%, H: -10.0+/-25.2%, P: 0.3+/-19.6%; p=ns, -dp/dt: C: -0.1+/-19.5%, H: -8.5+/-20.4%, P: 5.7+/-27.7%; p=ns).
CONCLUSION: In this study, PPI and high-dose H2-blocker have EF-reducing tendency. However, these changes were small and these drugs seemed to exhibit little influence clinically.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app