Open AccessEffects of pimobendan in cats with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and recent congestive heart failure: Results of a prospective, double‐blind, randomized, nonpivotal, exploratory field study
Author(s) -
Schober Karsten E.,
Rush John E.,
Luis Fuentes Virginia,
Glaus Tony,
Summerfield Nuala J.,
Wright Kathy,
Lehmkuhl Linda,
Wess Gerhard,
Sayer Margaret P.,
Loureiro Joao,
MacGregor John,
Mohren Nicole
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
journal of veterinary internal medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.356
H-Index - 103
eISSN - 1939-1676
pISSN - 0891-6640
DOI - 10.1111/jvim.16054
Subject(s) - medicine , heart failure , furosemide , hypertrophic cardiomyopathy , cardiology , placebo , clinical endpoint , cats , population , odds ratio , cardiomyopathy , randomized controlled trial , anesthesia , alternative medicine , environmental health , pathology
Background The benefits of pimobendan in the treatment of congestive heart failure (CHF) in cats with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) have not been evaluated prospectively. Hypothesis/Objectives To investigate the effects of pimobendan in cats with HCM and recent CHF and to identify possible endpoints for a pivotal study. We hypothesized that pimobendan would be well‐tolerated and associated with improved outcome. Animals Eighty‐three cats with HCM and recently controlled CHF: 30 with and 53 without left ventricular outflow tract obstruction. Methods Prospective randomized placebo‐controlled double‐blind multicenter nonpivotal field study. Cats received either pimobendan (0.30 mg/kg q12h, n = 43), placebo (n = 39), or no medication (n = 1) together with furosemide (<10 mg/kg/d) with or without clopidogrel. The primary endpoint was a successful outcome (ie, completing the 180‐day study period without a dose escalation of furosemide). Results The proportion of cats in the full analysis set population with a successful outcome was not different between treatment groups ( P = .75). For nonobstructive cats, the success rate was 32% in pimobendan‐treated cats versus 18.2% in the placebo group (odds ratio [OR], 2.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54‐8.34). For obstructive cats, the success rate was 28.6% and 60% in the pimobendan and placebo groups, respectively (OR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.06‐1.26). No difference was found between treatments for the secondary endpoints of time to furosemide dose escalation or death ( P = .89). Results were similar in the per‐protocol sets. Adverse events in both treatment groups were similar. Conclusions and Clinical Importance In this study of cats with HCM and recent CHF, no benefit of pimobendan on 180‐day outcome was identified.