Context.—
Depression and ischemic heart disease often are comorbid conditions
and, in patients who have had a myocardial infarction, the presence of depression
is associated with increased mortality. Patients with heart disease need a
safe and effective treatment for depression.Objective.—
To compare the efficacy, cardiovascular effects, and safety of a specific
serotonin reuptake inhibitor, paroxetine, with a tricyclic antidepressant,
nortriptyline hydrochloride, in depressed patients with ischemic heart disease.Design.—
Two-week placebo lead-in followed by a double-blind randomized 6-week
medication trial.Setting.—
Research clinics in 4 university centers.Patients.—
Eighty-one outpatients meeting Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition criteria for major depressive
disorder and with documented ischemic heart disease.Interventions.—
Treatment with either paroxetine, 20 to 30 mg/d, or nortriptyline targeted
to a therapeutic plasma level, 190 to 570 nmol/L (50-150 ng/mL), for 6 weeks.Main Outcome Measures.—
For effectiveness of treatment, a decline in the score of the Hamilton
Rating Scale for Depression by 50% and final score of 8 or less; for cardiovascular
safety, heart rate and rhythm, supine and standing systolic and diastolic
blood pressures, electrocardiogram conduction intervals, indexes of heart
rate variability, and rate of adverse events.Results.—
By intent-to-treat analysis, 25 (61%) of 41 patients improved during
treatment with paroxetine and 22 (55%) of 40 improved with nortriptyline.
Neither drug significantly affected blood pressure or conduction intervals.
Paroxetine had no sustained effects on heart rate or rhythm or indexes of
heart rate variability, whereas patients treated with nortriptyline had a
sustained 11% increase in heart rate from a mean of 75 to 83 beats per minute
(P<.001) and a reduction in heart rate variability,
as measured by the SD of all normal R-R intervals over a 24-hour period, from
112 to 96 (P<.01). Adverse cardiac events occurred
in 1 (2%) of 41 patients treated with paroxetine and 7 (18%) of 40 patients
treated with nortriptyline (P<.03).Conclusions.—
Paroxetine and nortriptyline are effective treatments for depressed
patients with ischemic heart disease. Nortriptyline treatment was associated
with a significantly higher rate of serious adverse cardiac events compared
with paroxetine.
THE NEED to find a safe and effective treatment for depressed patients
with cardiac disease has intensified because of 2 relatively recent findings,
one that emphasizes the potential importance of treatment and the other that
emphasizes the potential risks. Frasure-Smith et al1
reported compelling new evidence that patients who develop depression following
a myocardial infarction (MI) are at significantly greater risk for death than
medically comparable post-MI patients who are not depressed.1
In their study, 222 patients were evaluated approximately 1 week after MI
and 16% of the sample met criteria for major depression. Over the next 6 months,
the depressed patients had a 3.5 times greater risk of cardiac death than
patients not diagnosed as depressed. Subsequently, this finding was extended
to establish that depression was a significant predictor of post-MI cardiac
mortality at 18 months. Intriguingly, the risk associated with depression
is greatest in patients who have 10 or more ventricular premature depolarizations
(VPDs) per hour.2 This observation is compatible
with other findings that suggest that the association of depression and sudden
cardiac death involves an arrhythmic mechanism. It is unknown whether treatment
of the depressive episode will reduce the associated increase in cardiac mortality.
However, before one can consider studying this question, it needs to
be established that there is a safe and effective antidepressant treatment
for the post-MI depressed patient. The tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) have
been the most systematically studied with respect to cardiovascular effects,
and it has been documented that the tricyclics (1) increase heart rate, (2)
induce orthostatic hypotension, (3) slow intraventricular cardiac conduction,
and (4) suppress VPDs.3 Although TCAs can cause
significant complications in depressed patients with cardiac disease, their
robust efficacy combined with knowledge that forewarns the clinician as to
when problems are likely to occur had led to the belief that, in most cases,
the use of TCAs in patients with heart disease was a "relatively" safe procedure
with a favorable risk-benefit ratio.
However, the results of the cardiac arrhythmia suppression trials (CAST)
suggest that this conclusion be revised.4- 5
The hypothesis of the CAST studies was that suppression of post-MI VPDs would
decrease mortality. Contrary to expectations, patients treated with drugs
with class 1C (encainide hydrochloride or flecainide acetate) or class 1A
(moricizine) antiarrhythmic activity had an increased mortality rate compared
with placebo-treated patients. The mechanism by which the antiarrhythmics
induce this increased mortality rate has not been definitively established.
To date, most evidence points to an interaction between drugs with class 1
antiarrhythmic activity and ischemic myocardium, which results in an increased
vulnerability to ventricular fibrillation.6- 8
Thus, patients with ischemic heart disease treated with a class 1A or 1C antiarrhythmic
drug may be at risk when their next ischemic episode occurs. Because TCAs
are class 1A antiarrhythmic drugs, similar in effect to quinidine and moricizine,
it is both reasonable and prudent to assume that TCA treatment carries a similar
risk.9
Given the probable risk associated with TCA treatment in patients with
ischemic heart disease, the obvious question is whether the selective serotonin
reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are a safe and effective alternative. The available
data on the cardiovascular effects of the SSRIs are quite limited.10- 14
It has been reported that the SSRIs slightly decrease heart rate, do not routinely
slow intracardiac conduction, do not affect supine or standing systolic or
diastolic blood pressure, and do not induce orthostatic hypotension. However,
these findings are compromised by methodological problems in data collection
and their applicability is limited because the sample studied consisted of
predominantly medically healthy patients with depression and, specifically,
patients free of cardiac disease.
To date, there is only one study of the cardiovascular effects of an
SSRI, fluoxetine, in the treatment of depressed patients with significant
cardiac disease.15 In that study, 27 patients
with major depression and left ventricular impairment and/or conduction disease
and/or ventricular arrhythmia were treated openly with fluoxetine for 7 weeks
at a maximum dose of 60 mg/d. Fluoxetine induced a small reduction in heart
rate, but did not have a statistically significant effect on blood pressure,
ejection fraction, ventricular arrhythmia, or conduction intervals. However,
the study included patients with multiple types of cardiac disease and did
not specifically address the issue of risk in depressed patients with ischemic
heart disease.
In this article, we report the first prospective double-blind study
comparing the safety and efficacy of an SSRI, paroxetine, with a TCA, nortriptyline
hydrochloride, in depressed patients with ischemic heart disease.