Noninvasive assessment of the direct action of oral nifedipine and nicardipine on left ventricular contractile state in patients with systemic hypertension: importance of reflex sympathetic responses.

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to noninvasively assess the direct action of calcium channel blockers on left ventricular contractility in humans and to establish a framework for determining the importance of reflex sympathetic responses to any pharmacologic intervention. BACKGROUND: Assessment of left ventricular contractility in patients taking calcium channel blockers by using traditional indexes of systolic performance is difficult because of the after-load-reducing and reflex sympathetic effects of the drugs. METHODS: Fifteen hypertensive patients (mean blood pressure 127 +/- 15 mm Hg) were studied with Doppler echocardiography and calibrated subclavian pulse tracings while receiving placebo and 1 week after randomization to treatment with oral nifedipine (20 mg three times daily; n = 7) or nicardipine (30 mg three times daily; n = 8). Left ventricular circumferential end-systolic wall stress versus rate-corrected velocity of shortening (Vcfc) relations were generated over a range of loads using nitroprusside. Data were acquired before and during esmolol infusion, thereby allowing assessment of hemodynamic responses with the sympathetic nervous system functionally intact as well as ablated. The adequacy of sympathetic blockade was confirmed with isoproterenol challenges. In each case, left ventricular contractile state was measured relative to placebo and esmolol data as delta Vcfc at a common end-systolic wall stress. Increased and decreased contractility were defined as delta Vcfc > 0 and delta Vcfc < 0, respectively. RESULTS: Nifedipine and nicardipine equally decreased blood pressure and end-systolic wall stress and increased left ventricular percent fractional shortening and stroke volume. Neither drug alone consistently altered ventricular contractility compared with placebo. Ablation of reflex sympathetic tone with esmolol unmasked a negative inotropic effect for nifedipine (p = 0.03 vs. esmolol alone) but not nicardipine (p = 0.68 vs. esmolol alone). The difference between the contractility effects of nifedipine plus esmolol versus those of nicardipine plus esmolol approached statistical significance (p = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: Totally noninvasive techniques showed a differential effect on left ventricular contractility between nifedipine and nicardipine when alterations in afterload and reflex sympathetic responses were eliminated as confounding variables. This diagnostic approach, based on the use of pharmacologic probes, should have wide applicability for assessing the direct inotropic effect of any agent, even in the presence of complex primary and secondary physiologic modes of action.

Influence of histamine receptors on basal left ventricular contractile tone in humans: assessment using the H2 receptor antagonist famotidine and the beta-adrenoceptor antagonist esmolol as pharmacologic probes.

Histamine has a positive inotropic action in humans. Recent controversial data have suggested that histamine2 (H2) receptor blockade depresses overall left ventricular systolic performance in healthy volunteers. To explore the possibility that H2 receptors positively influence basal left ventricular contractile tone, 10 normal subjects were studied by using imaging and Doppler echocardiography and calibrated subclavian pulse data in a blinded, randomized, two-period crossover trial with measurements obtained at the end of each 7-day period. Oral drug administration consisted of either the potent H2 antagonist famotidine (40 mg/day) or placebo. Left ventricular circumferential end-systolic wall stress-rate-corrected velocity of fiber shortening (Vcfc) relations were generated over a range of loads with methoxamine. Contractility was assessed by using Vcfc at a common end-systolic wall stress. During each study, data were obtained before and during high dose intravenous esmolol administration to determine the contributions, if any, of sympathetic reflex responses. Famotidine did not alter blood pressure, left ventricular percent fractional shortening, circumferential end-systolic wall stress, stroke volume index, cardiac index, total vascular resistance or ventricular contractile state in comparison with placebo but did decrease heart rate by 3 beats/min (p less than 0.05). With beta-adrenergic blockade, no differences in contractility were evident between esmolol alone and famotidine plus esmolol. Thus, H2 receptor blockade with famotidine does not alter myocardial mechanics or cardiac sympathetic tone, suggesting that in humans basal left ventricular contractile state is not physiologically dependent on the H2-mediated effects of histamine.