↓ Skip to main content

Cardiac and Hemodynamic Benefits: Mode of Action of Ivabradine in Heart Failure

Overview of attention for article published in Advances in Therapy, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
Title
Cardiac and Hemodynamic Benefits: Mode of Action of Ivabradine in Heart Failure
Published in
Advances in Therapy, October 2015
DOI 10.1007/s12325-015-0257-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Antonio Carlos Pereira-Barretto

Abstract

Heart failure has seen a number of therapeutic advances in recent years. Despite this, heart failure is still related to increasing rates of morbidity, repeated hospitalizations, and mortality. Ivabradine is a recent treatment option for heart failure. It has a mode of action that includes reduction in heart rate, and leads to improvement in outcomes related to heart failure mortality and morbidity, as demonstrated by the results of the SHIFT trial in patients with systolic heart failure, functional classes II and III on the New York Heart Association classification, and left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35%. These results are intriguing since many heart failure drugs reduce heart rate without such benefits, or with quite different effects, making it more difficult to understand the novelty of ivabradine in this setting. Many of the drugs used in heart failure modify heart rate, but most have other pathophysiological effects beyond their chronotropic action, which affect their efficacy in preventing morbidity and mortality outcomes. For instance, heart rate reduction at rest or exercise with ivabradine prolongs diastolic perfusion time, improves coronary blood flow, and increases exercise capacity. Another major difference is the increase in stroke volume observed with ivabradine, which may underlie its beneficial cardiac effects. Finally, there is mounting evidence from both preclinical and clinical studies that ivabradine has an anti-remodeling effect, improving left ventricular structures and functions. All together, these mechanisms have a positive impact on the prognosis of ivabradine-treated patients with heart failure, making a compelling argument for use of ivabradine in combination with other treatments. Servier.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 46 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Student > Master 3 6%
Researcher 3 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 23 49%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 26%
Sports and Recreations 4 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 25 53%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 November 2015.
All research outputs
#18,429,829
of 22,831,537 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Therapy
#1,630
of 2,341 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#204,538
of 284,235 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Therapy
#18
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,831,537 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,341 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 284,235 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.