RESUMO
AIMS: Short-term treatment with calcium channel blockers lowers levels of N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and reduces rhythm-related symptoms compared to treatment with beta-blockers. The aim of this study was to compare the longer-term effects of metoprolol and diltiazem for rate control in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation after six months. METHODS AND RESULTS: Men and women with permanent atrial fibrillation and preserved left ventricular systolic function were randomised to receive either diltiazem 360 mg or metoprolol 100 mg once daily. The primary endpoint was the level of NT-proBNP after a six-month treatment period. Secondary endpoints included heart rate, rhythm-related symptoms and exercise capacity. A total of 93 patients (mean age 71 ±7 years, 28 women) were randomised. After six months' treatment, mean levels of NT-proBNP decreased in the diltiazem group and increased in the metoprolol group, with a significant between-group difference (409.8 pg/mL, 95% CI: 230.6 - 589.1, P<0.001). Treatment with diltiazem significantly reduced rhythm-related symptoms compared to baseline, but no change was observed in the metoprolol group. Diltiazem and metoprolol had similar effects on heart rate and exercise capacity. CONCLUSION: Diltiazem reduced NT-proBNP levels and improved rhythm-related symptoms. Metoprolol increased peptide levels but had no impact on symptoms despite similar heart rate reduction. Non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers should be considered more often for rate control in permanent atrial fibrillation.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the frequency of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and CVD risk factor development in adult patients previously diagnosed with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). METHOD: A cohort study was conducted utilizing patients at two academic institutions (cohorts 1 and 2). Each institution evaluated the common endpoint of CVD outcomes and CVD risk factor development in adults aged ≥ 30 years and at the 29-year follow-up from disease onset in cohorts 1 and 2, respectively, with comparison to control groups of similar age and sex. RESULTS: Cohort 1 included 41 patients with JIA and follow-up ≥ 30 years of age with comparison to 41 controls. Three patients (7%) had CVD, compared to one control (2%; p = 0.31). Cohort 2 included 170 patients with JIA and a median of 29 years of follow-up from disease onset with comparison to 91 controls. Two patients (2%) had CVD, compared to none of the controls (p = 0.29). The presence of CVD risk factors was found to be increased in the JIA group compared to the controls in three categories: family history of CVD (cohort 1), hypertension (cohort 2), and ever smokers (cohorts 2). CONCLUSIONS: There is no increase in CVD events in patients with JIA 29 years following disease onset when compared to the general population. As these cohorts age, it will be informative to evaluate whether this baseline risk remains present or a trend towards increasing CVD emerges. Continued longitudinal follow-up of these cohorts and larger population-based studies are needed to establish a definitive relationship between JIA and CVD.
