Selection of optimal therapy for chronic stable angina

  • Udho Thadani

Optional statement

Patients with chronic stable angina (CSA) seek a medical opinion for relief of their symptoms and because of fear of having a heart attack. The underlying lesion responsible for CSA is often a severe narrowing of one or more coronary arteries. In addition, the coronary arteries of patients with CSA contain many more nonobstructive lesions, which progress at variable rates, and are prone to rupture and may manifest as acute coronary syndromes (myocardial infarction [MI], unstable angina [UA], or sudden ischemic death). Most patients with CSA can be managed with medical treatment. For angina relief, optimum doses of one of the antianginal drugs (ß blockers [BBs], long-acting organic nitrates, or calcium channel blockers [CCBs]) should be used. If the patient remains symptomatic, combination treatment of BBs plus nitrates or BBs plus dihydropyridine CCBs, or nondihydropyridine CCBs plus nitrates should be tried. Triple therapy has not been shown to be more effective than treatment with two agents. To reduce the incidence of MI, UA, and sudden ischemic death, treatment strategies should include smoking cessation, daily aspirin, daily exercise, and pharmacologic therapy for dyslipidemias, and for elevated blood pressure. Patients who remain symptomatic despite medical therapy and those not willing to take or unable to tolerate antianginal drugs should be considered for percutaneous or surgical coronary revascularization. Patients who do not respond to medical therapy and are not candidates for a revascularization procedure may be considered for additional treatment with trimetazidine or nicorandil (these drugs are not available in the United States or approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, but are available in some other countries). Ranolazine also looks promising but is not yet available for clinical use. As a last resort, enhanced external counterpulsation, spinal cord stimulation, sympathectomy, or direct transmyocardial revascularization should be considered for symptom relief.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References and Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    Thadani U: Chronic stable angina pectoris. In Cardiology. Edited by Crawford MH, et al. Mosby; 2004:257–270.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Thadani U: Current medical management of chronic stable angina. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol Ther 2004, 9(suppl 1):S11-S29. A recent review article that provides comprehensive current management of chronic stable angina with references.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Abrams J, Thadani U: Therapy of stable angina pectoris: the uncomplicated patient. Circulation 2005, 112:e255-e259.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Thadani U: The pursuit of optimum outcomes in stable angina. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs 2003, 3(suppl 1):11–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gage JE, Jess DM, Murakami T, et al.: Vasoconstriction of stenotic coronary arteries during dynamic exercise in patients with classic angina pectoris: reversibility by nitroglycerin. Circulation 1986, 73:865–871.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Davies MJ, Thomas AC: Plaque fissuring: the cause of acute myocardial infarction, sudden ischemic death, and crescendo angina. Br Heart J 1985, 53:363–368.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hinton TC, Chaitman BR: The prognosis in stable and unstable angina. Cardiol Clin 1991, 9:27–38.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Thadani U: Management of patients with chronic stable angina at low risk for serious cardiac events. Am J Cardiol 1997, 79:24–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mark DB, Shaw L, Harrell GE, et al.: Prognostic value of a treadmill exercise score in outpatients with suspected coronary disease. N Eng J Med 1991, 325:849–853.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gibbons RJ, Abrams J, Chatterjee K, et al.: ACC/AHA/ ACP-ASIM Guideline update for the management of patients with chronic stable angina: summary and abstract. Circulation 2003, 107:143–158.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Thadani U: Management of stable angina pectoris. Curr Opin Cardiol 1999, 14:349–358.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Asirvatham S, Sebastian C, Thadani U: Choosing the most appropriate treatment for stable angina: safety considerations. Drug Saf 1998, 19:23–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Heidenreich PA, McDonald KM, Hastie T, et al.: Metaanalysis of trials comparing beta-blockers, calcium antagonists, and nitrates for stable angina. JAMA 1999, 281:1927–1936.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Thadani U: Prevention of nitrate tolerance with angiotensin II receptor type 1 blocker in patients with stable angina: yet another failed strategy to prevent tolerance. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther 2004, 18:339–342.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Opie LH: Calcium channel antagonists in the treatment of coronary artery disease: fundamental pharmacological properties relevant to clinical use. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 1996, 38:273–290.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Thadani U: Selective L-type, and non-selective calcium channel blockers for stable angina pectoris [editorial]. Am Heart J 2002, 144:8–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rehnquist N, Hjemdahl P, Billing E, et al.: Effect of metoprolol versus verapamil in patients with stable angina pectoris. The angina prognosis study in Stockholm (APSIS). Eur Heart J 1996, 17:76–81.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dargie HJ, Ford I, Fox KM: Effects of ischemia and treatment with atenolol, nifedipine SR and their combination on outcomes in patient with chronic stable angina. Eur Heart J 1996, 17:104–112.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dunselman P, van Kempen L, Bouwens L, et al.: Value of the addition of amlodipine to atenolol in patients with angina pectoris despite adequate beta blockade. Am J Cardiol 1998, 81:128–132.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Knight C, Fox K: Amlodipine versus diltiazem as additional antianginal treatment to atenolol. Am J Cardiol 1998, 81:133–136.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Akhras F, Jackson A: Efficacy of nifedipine and isosorbide mononitrate in combination with atenolol in stable angina. Lancet 1991, 338:1036–1039.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Thadani U: Combination therapy. Am Coll Cardiol Curr J Rev 1997, 6:24–25.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Strauss WE, Parisi AF: Combined use of calcium channel and beta blockers for the treatment of stable angina, rationale, efficacy and adverse events. Ann Intern Med 1988, 109:570–575.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tolins M, Weir EK, Chesler E, Pierpont GL: Maximal drug therapy is not necessarily optimal in chronic angina pectoris. Am Coll Cardiol 1984, 4:1051–1057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chavoz EI, Lepakchin VK, Zharova EA, et al.: Trimetazidine in angina combination therapy—the TACT study: trimetazidine versus conventional treatment in patients with stable angina pectoris in a randomized, placebo controlled, multicenter study. Am J Ther 2005, 12:35–42. A well-designed study showing that trimetazidine exerts antianginal and anti-ischemic effects when added to other antianginal drugs.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Thadani U: Modified release formulation of trimetazidine for exceptional control of angina pectoris: fact or fiction. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs 2005, 5:331–334.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chaitman BR, Skettino SL, Parker JO: Anti-ischemic and long term survival during ranolazine monotherapy in patients with severe chronic stable angina. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004, 43:1375–1382. A well-designed, large, placebo-controlled trial showing that ranolazine is an effective antianginal and anti-ischemic agent.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Chaitman BR, Pepine J, Parker JO: Effects of ranolazine with atenolol, amlodipine or diltiazem on exercise tolerance and angina frequency in patients with severe chronic angina. JAMA 2004, 291:309–316.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    The IONA Study group: Effect of nicorandil on coronary events in patients with stable angina: the impact of nicorandil in angina (IONA) randomized trial. Lancet 2002, 359:1269–1275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Thadani U: Can nicorandil effectively treat angina? Nat Clin Pract Cardiovasc Med 2005, 2:186–187.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Pepine CJ, Rouleau JL, Annis K, et al.: Effect of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor on transient ischemia: the Quinapril anti-ischemia and symptoms of angina reduction (QUASAR) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003, 42:2043–2059. A large placebo-controlled trial refutes previously published data that ACE inhibitors exert antianginal and anti-ischemic effects.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Doll R, Peto R: Mortality in relation to smoking: 20-year observations on British doctors. BMJ 1976, 2:1526–1536.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Juul-Moller S, Edvardson N, Jahnmatz B, et al.: Double blind trial of aspirin in primary prevention of myocardial infarction in patients with stable chronic angina pectoris. Lancet 1992, 340:1421–1425.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Food and Drug Administration: Acetylsalicylic acid and the heart. JAMA 1993, 270:2669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Yusuf S, Zhao F, Mehta SR, et al.: Effects of clopidogrel in addition to aspirin in patients with acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation. N Engl J Med 2001, 345:494–502.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR, et al.: The seventh report of the joint national committee on prevention, detection,evaluation, and treatment of high blood pressure. The JNC 7 Report. JAMA 2003, 289:2560–2572.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Vaughan CJ, Gotto AM, Basson CT: The evolving role of statins in the management of atherosclerosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000, 35:1–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study of cholesterol lowering with simvastatin in high risk individuals. A randomized placebo controlled trial [no authors listed]. Lancet 2003, 36:7–22.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Grundy SM, Cleeman JI, Merz CN, et al.: Implications of recent clinical trials for the National Cholesterol Education Program. Adult Treatment Panel III Guidelines. Circulation 2004, 110:227–239.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Rubins HB, Robins S, Collins D, et al.: Gemfibrozil for the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in men with low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. N Eng J Med 1999, 341:410–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Seventh report of the joint national committee on prevention, detection, evaluation and treatment of high blood pressure (JNCVII) [no authors listed]. Hypertension 2004, 43:1–3.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    ALLHAT Officers and Coordinators for the ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group. The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial: Major outcomes in high risk hypertensive patients. Randomized angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, calcium channel blocker vs. diuretic. The Antihypertensive and Lipid Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). JAMA 2002, 288:2981–2987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Zouridakis E, Avanzas P, Arroyo-Espliguero R, et al.: Markers of inflammation and rapid coronary progression in patients with stable angina pectoris. Circulation 2004, 110:1747–1753. A recent review of the relationship between inflammatory markers and progression of disease in patients with stable angina.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Chaitman BR, Rosen AD, Williams DO, et al.: Myocardial infarction and cardiac mortality in the bypass angioplasty revascularization investigation (BARI) randomized trial. Circulation 1997, 96:2162–2170.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Henderson RA, Pocock SJ, Clayton TC, et al.: Seven-year outcome in the RITA-2 trial: coronary angioplasty versus medical therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003, 42:1167–1170. A well-designed large randomized trial comparing medical treatment to coronary angioplasty.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Faxon DP: Bringing reality to drug-coated stents. Circulation 2004, 109:140–142. An important editorial that cautions against the widespread use of stents in CAD.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Pitt B, Waters D, Brown WV, et al.: Aggressive lipidlowering therapy compared with angioplasty in stable coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 1999, 341:70–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    HambrechtR, Walther C, Mobius-Winkler S, et al.: Percutaneous coronary angioplasty compared with exercise training in patients with stable coronary artery disease. Circulation 2004, 109:1371–1378. A small but provocative trial showing that exercise training is superior compared with coronary angioplasty in patients with stable CAD.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Muneretto C, Bisleri G, Negri A, et al.: Total arterial myocardial revascularization with composite grafts improves results of coronary surgery in elderly: a prospective randomized comparison with conventional coronary artery bypass surgery. Circulation 2003, 108:1129–1133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Kim MC, Kini A, Sharma SK: Refractory angina pectoris. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002, 39:923–934. A good review article highlighting the problems of managing patients with refractory angina.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Thadani U: Patient with disabling angina not amenable to revascularization procedures. In Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Companion to Braunwald’s Heart Disease. Edited by Theroux P. Philadelpha, PA: WB Saunders; 2003:535–552. An in-depth article on current usefulness and limitations of pharmacotherapy, invasive therapy, and devices in the management of patients with refractory angina.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Thadani U: Recurrent and refractory angina following revascularization procedures in patients with stable angina [editorial]. Coron Artery Dis 2004, 15(suppl 1):S1-S4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Lawson WE, Hui JC, Cohn PF: Long-term prognosis of patients with angina treatment with enhanced external counterpulsation: five-year follow-up study. Clin Cardiol 2000, 23:254–258.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Barsness G, Feldman AM, Holmes DR, et al.: The International EECP Patient Registry (IEPR): design, methods, baseline characteristics, and acute results. Clin Cardiol 2001, 24:435–442.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Horvath KA, Aranki SF, Cohn LH, et al.: Sustained angina relief 5 years after transmyocardial laser revascularization with a CO2 laser. Circulation 2001, 104(suppl 1):1–4.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Mannheimer C, Eliasson T, Augustinsson LE, et al.: Electrical stimulation versus coronary artery bypass surgery is severe angina pectoris: the ESBY study. Circulation 1998, 37:1157–1163.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    BraunwaldE, Domanski MJ, Fowler SE, et al.: Angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibition in stable coronary artery disease. N Eng J Med 2004, 351:2058–2068. A large long-term trial that shows that ACE inhibitor did not reduce adverse clinical outcomes compared with placebo in patients with documented CAD and preserved LV function.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Current Science Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Udho Thadani
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Medicine, Cardiovascular SectionUniversity of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center and VA Medical CenterOklahoma CityUSA

Personalised recommendations