Impact of ranolazine on clinical outcomes and healthcare resource utilization in patients with refractory angina pectoris

Improving Terminology to Describe Coronary Artery Procedures: JACC Review Topic of the Week

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is treated with medical therapy with or without percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The latter 2 options are commonly referred to as "myocardial revascularization" procedures. We reason that this term is inappropriate because it is suggestive of a single treatment effect of PCI and CABG (ie, the reestablishment of blood flow to ischemic myocardium) and obscures key mechanisms, such as the improvement in coronary flow capability in the absence of ongoing ischemia, the reperfusion in the presence of ischemia, and the prevention of myocardial infarction from CAD progression. We review the current evidence on the topic and suggest the use of a purely descriptive terminology ("invasive treatment by PCI or CABG") which has the potential to improve clinical decision making and guide future trial design.

Revascularization Rates and Associated Costs in Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease Initiating Ranolazine Versus Traditional Antianginals as Add-on Therapy

To assess the frequency and costs of revascularization procedures in patients with stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD) initiating ranolazine versus traditional antianginals. Adults (≥18 years) with a diagnosis of SIHD who initiated ranolazine or a traditional antianginal (beta-blocker [BB], calcium channel blocker [CCB], or long-acting nitrate [LAN]) as second or third line therapy between 2008 and 2016, were selected from the IBM MarketScan Databases. Inverse probability weighting based on propensity score was employed to balance the ranolazine and traditional antianginals cohorts on patient clinical characteristics. Outcomes assessed were frequency and total cost of revascularization procedures over a 12-month follow-up. A total of 108,741 patients with SIHD were included. Of these, 18% initiated treatment with ranolazine, 21% received BBs, 24% received CCBs, and 37% were treated with LANs. Revascularization rates were significantly lower in ranolazine patients (11%) than in BB (16%) and LAN (14%) patients (both p <0.001), and more comparable to CCB patients (10%; p = 0.007). Compared with BB and LAN, those in the ranolazine cohort were less likely to have a revascularization procedure during hospitalization and had a shorter length of stay if hospitalized (all p <0.001). The mean healthcare costs associated with revascularization were lower in ranolazine patients ($2,933) than in BB ($4,465) and LAN ($3,609) patients (p <0.001), but similar to CCB patients ($2,753; p = 0.29). In conclusion, ranolazine treatment in patients with SIHD was associated with fewer revascularization procedures and lower associated healthcare costs compared with patients initiating BB or LAN, and comparable to patients initiating CCBs.

Management of Refractory Angina Pectoris

With improvements in survival from coronary artery disease (CAD) and an ageing population, refractory angina (RA) is becoming an increasingly common clinical problem facing clinicians in routine clinical practice. These patients experience chronic symptoms in the context of CAD, characterised by angina-type pain, which is uncontrolled despite optimal pharmacological, interventional and surgical therapy. Although mortality rates are no worse in this cohort, patients experience a significantly impaired quality of life with disproportionately high utilisation of healthcare services. It has been increasingly recognised that the needs of RA patients are multifactorial and best provided by specialist multi-disciplinary units. In this review, we consider the variety of therapies available to clinicians in the management of RA and discuss the promise of novel treatments.

Comparative Effectiveness of Ranolazine Versus Traditional Therapies in Chronic Stable Angina Pectoris and Concomitant Diabetes Mellitus and Impact on Health Care Resource Utilization and Cardiac Interventions

Comparative studies evaluating traditional versus newer antianginal (AA) medications in chronic stable angina pectoris (CSA) on cardiovascular (CV) outcomes and utilization are limited, particularly in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM). Claims data (2008 to 2012) were analyzed using a commercial database. Patients with CSA receiving a β blocker (BB), calcium channel blocker (CCB), long-acting nitrate (LAN), or ranolazine were identified and followed for 12 months after a change in AA therapy. Patients on traditional AA medications were required to have concurrent sublingual nitroglycerin. Therapy change was defined as adding or switching to another traditional AA medication or ranolazine to identify patients whose angina was inadequately controlled with previous therapy. Four groups were identified (BB, CCB, LAN, or ranolazine users) and matched on relevant characteristics. A DM subset was identified. Logistic regression compared revascularization at 30, 60, 90, 180, and 360 days. Negative binomial regression compared all-cause, CV-, and DM-related (in the DM cohort) health care utilization. A total of 8,008 patients were identified with 2,002 patients in each matched group. Majority were men (mean age 66 years). A subset of 3,724 patients with DM (BB, n = 933; CCB, n = 940; LAN, n = 937; and ranolazine, n = 914) resulted from this cohort. Compared to ranolazine in the overall cohort, traditional AA medication exhibited greater odds for revascularization and higher rates in all-cause outpatient, emergency room visits, inpatient length of stay, and CV-related emergency room visits. In the DM cohort, ranolazine demonstrated similar benefits over traditional AA medication. In conclusion, ranolazine use in patients with inadequately controlled chronic angina is associated with less revascularization and all-cause and CV-related health care utilization compared to traditional AA medication.