Comparison of the efficacy and prognosis of dapagliflozin versus empagliflozin in elderly patients with heart failure complicated by cardiac pacemaker implantation
- VernacularTitle:达格列净与恩格列净治疗心力衰竭合并心脏起搏器植入老年患者的效果及预后比较
- Author:
Bo WANG
1
;
Ou ZHANG
1
;
Jie LI
1
;
Dong HAN
2
Author Information
1. Dept. of Cardiovascular Medicine，The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanyang Medical College，Henan Nanyang 473002，China
2. Dept. of Cardiac and Great Vascular Surgery，Nanyang Central Hospital，Henan Nanyang 473009，China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Dapagliflozin;
empagliflozin;
Heart failure;
cardiac pacemaker;
Elderly patient;
Cardiac function;
prognosis
- From:
China Pharmacy
2026;37(16):2166-2170
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE To compare the efficacy and prognosis between dapagliflozin and empagliflozin in elderly patients with heart failure （HF） complicated by cardiac pacemaker implantation.METHODS The clinical data of 237 elderly patients with HF complicated by cardiac pacemaker implantation， who were admitted to the Department of Cardiovascular Medicine at the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanyang Medical College from July 1， 2023， to January 1， 2025， were retrospectively collected. According to medication use， the patients were divided into the control group （conventional therapy， n ＝90）， dapagliflozin group （conventional therapy plus dapagliflozin， n ＝77）， and empagliflozin group （conventional therapy plus empagliflozin， n ＝70）. Cardiac function and HF-related indicators were evaluated before treatment and after 6 months of treatment among the 3 groups. The incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events （MACE）， HF rehospitalization rate， and the occurance of adverse reaction were compared among the 3 groups.RESULTS After 6 months of treatment， compared with the same group before treatment， left ventricular ejection fraction was significantly increased， 6-minute walk distance was significantly prolonged， left ventricular end-diastolic diameter and left ventricular end-systolic diameter were significantly shortened， and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels were significantly decreased in all 3 groups （ P ＜0.05）. The improvements in most of the above indicators were greater in the dapagliflozin and empagliflozin groups than in the control group （ P ＜0.05）， and were all greater in the empagliflozin group than in the dapagliflozin group （ P ＜0.05）. The HF rehospitalization rate was significantly lower in both dapagliflozin and empagliflozin groups than in the control group （ P ＜0.05）， and was significantly lower in the empagliflozin group than in the dapagliflozin group （ P ＜0.05）. There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of MACE among the 3 groups （ P ＞0.05）， although the incidence was numerically lower in the dapagliflozin and empagliflozin groups than in the control group. There was also no statistically significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions among the 3 groups （ P ＞0.05）.CONCLUSIONS Both dapagliflozin and empagliflozin can improve cardiac function and HF-related indicators and reduce the risk of HF rehospitalization in elderly patients with HF complicated by cardiac pacemaker implantation on the basis of conventional therapy， without increasing the risk of adverse reactions. Compared with dapagliflozin， empagliflozin shows more pronounced effects.
