Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Combined olmesartan and bepridil therapy reduces atrial fibrillation
By Fukaya, Hidehira et al.·Published in International journal of cardiology·2012·Kitasato University, Japan·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Combined effects of up- and downstream therapies on atrial fibrillation in a canine rapid stimulation model.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
Ten dogs with atrial fibrillation (AF) were treated with either a medication called olmesartan alone or a combination of olmesartan and bepridil to see which worked better. After six weeks of treatment, the dogs receiving both medications showed a significant reduction in the frequency of AF episodes compared to those on olmesartan alone. Both treatments also helped reduce heart tissue damage, but the combination therapy was more effective in preventing AF from occurring. This suggests that using both medications together may be a better option for managing AF in dogs.
People also search for: dog atrial fibrillation treatment · olmesartan for dogs · bepridil for canine heart problems
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent reports suggest angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and some antiarrhythmic agents affect atrial remodeling in atrial fibrillation (AF). We evaluated the effect of combination therapy with olmesartan (Olm) and bepridil (Bep) in a canine model of AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: An atrial stimulation device was implanted in 10 dogs undergoing 6-week pacing at 400 bpm. They were divided into Olm (2 mg/kg/day) (n=5) and Olm+Bep (Olm, 2 mg/kg/day; Bep, 10 mg/kg/day) groups (n=5). Atrial effective refractory period (AERP), conduction velocity (CV), and AF inducibility were evaluated weekly, and hemodynamics, atrial histology, and mRNA expression and protein expression of ion-channel and gap junction-related molecules at 6 weeks. Data were compared between groups and with non-pacing control and pacing-control groups from our previous report. The pacing-control group exhibited shortened AERP, decreased CV, increased AF inducibility and tissue fibrosis, and down-regulated L-type Ca(2+) channel (LCC), SCN5A, Kv4.3 and connexin43 (Cx43). By comparison, the Olm group exhibited suppression of the decrease in CV and of the increase in AF inducibility, but no change in AERP shortening. The Olm+Bep group exhibited suppression of AERP shortening as well as the greatest decrease in AF inducibility. Histologically, tissue fibrosis was suppressed in Olm and Olm+Bep groups. Down-regulation of Cx43 was partly suppressed in the Olm group while that of LCC, SCN5A, and Cx43 was suppressed in the Olm+Bep group. CONCLUSION: Olm and Bep in combination suppressed AF inducibility more strongly than Olm alone, and may be more useful in the suppression of AF.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21193236/