cardiovascular-agents and Osteoarthritis

Osteoarthritis (OA) and cardiovascular diseases (CVD) share many similar features, including similar risk factors and molecular mechanisms. A great number of cardiovascular drugs act via different ion channels and change ion balance, thus modulating cell metabolism, osmotic responses, turnover of cartilage extracellular matrix and inflammation. These drugs are consumed by patients with CVD for many years; however, information about their effects on the joint tissues has not been fully clarified. Nevertheless, it is becoming increasingly likely that different cardiovascular drugs may have an impact on articular tissues in OA. Here, we discuss the potential effects of direct and indirect ion channel modulating drugs, including inhibitors of voltage gated calcium and sodium channels, hyperpolarization-activated cyclic nucleotide-gated channels, β-adrenoreceptor inhibitors and angiotensin-aldosterone system affecting drugs. The aim of this review was to summarize the information about activities of cardiovascular drugs on cartilage and subchondral bone and to discuss their possible consequences on the progression of OA, focusing on the modulation of ion channels in chondrocytes and other joint cells, pain control and regulation of inflammation. The implication of cardiovascular drug consumption in aetiopathogenesis of OA should be considered when prescribing ion channel modulators, particularly in long-term therapy protocols.

Topics: Cardiovascular Agents; Female; Humans; Ion Channels; Male; Osteoarthritis

During the past decade, major advances have reported the importance of the vitamin D on the bone metabolism, and recent studies have suggested the potential non skeletal effects of the vitamin D. Adequate vitamin D contributes to reduce the risk of non vertebral fractures, improves the neuromuscular function and reduces the risk of falls when serum 25OHD level are greater than 30ng/mL (75nmol/L). A possible role of vitamin D has been implicated in the reduction of mortality, of the non-skin cancers, of the risk of infections, of inflammatory diseases, of cardiovascular diseases and maybe osteoarthritis. However the current level of evidence for associations is weaker than for skeletal effects. Serum 25OHD level is influenced by several factors (cutaneous vitamin D production, fat mass, dietary sources, UV-B exposure, latitude, season...), and the measurement of the serum 25OHD level is the only way to determine the vitamin D status. It is recommended to measure the serum 25OHD level in patients with osteoporosis or at risk of osteoporosis, and to correct the deficiency.

Topics: Anti-Infective Agents; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Antineoplastic Agents; Bone and Bones; Cardiovascular Agents; Fractures, Bone; Humans; Muscle, Skeletal; Neuromuscular Junction; Osteoarthritis; Osteoporosis; Vitamin D; Vitamins

Pain is one of the major symptoms of the osteoarthritis (OA). The objective of the study was to evaluate impact of combined therapy with diclofenac, aescin and original glucosamine sulfate on pain severity in patients with OA of different localizations in real life clinical settings in Russia and Ukraine.. Design--prospective, non-controlled, before and after post-marketing study. Study was performed in 38 cities across Russia and Ukraine in 2012. Registered anti-inflammatory and symptomatic slow acting drugs were used according to the registered indications and dosages. In Russian sites combined therapy A using diclofenac ("Dorosan" formulation, Rottapharm S.p.A., aerosole 1%, 3-4 times/day) for two weeks, original glucosamine sulfate ("Dona" formulation, Rottapharm S.p.A.) intramuscular (ampule 200 mg/ml, 2 ml 3 times/week) for 4 weeks and per os (powder 1500 mg, once/day) for 8 weeks was used. In Ukraine sites (scheme B) diclofenac was substituted with topical aescin ("Reparil-Gel" formulation, Madaus AG, tube 400 mg, 2-3 times/day) anti-inflammatory product. Physicians were free to change therapy and study organizers had no impact on prescribing and management practice. Patients with OA of different localizations were included into the study. Pain severity was assessed using numeric rating scale. Total duration of the study was 8 weeks. Questionnaires were distributed to patients via physician out-patient offices. The only endpoint was the difference in median pain severity at the end of the study compared with the baseline level.. In total 4931 patients were included into the study (mean age 57 +/- 12 years, 75% were females). Scheme A was used in 3956 patients and scheme B in 975 patients. The median pain severity decreased from 0.7 at the baseline (interquartile range +/- 0.2) to 0.2 (interquartile range +/- 0.2) after 8 weeks of the study in both treatment regimens (p < 0.001). Limitations of the study include absence of the control group, collection of the questionnaires from physician offices, rather than directly from patients, limited range of clinical data collected and use of single instrument to assess pain severity.. Post-marketing study of combined therapy of OA of different localizations using diclofenac, aescin and original glucosamine sulfate in Russia and Ukraine demonstrated decrease of the pain severity, assessed by numeric rating scale, after 8 weeks of the treatment.

Topics: Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Cardiovascular Agents; Diclofenac; Drug Therapy, Combination; Escin; Female; Glucosamine; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Osteoarthritis; Pain; Pain Measurement; Prospective Studies; Russia; Treatment Outcome; Ukraine

Ivabradine is most commonly used for the treatment of worsening cardiac failure in patients who cannot tolerate the maximum dose of β-blockers or in whom treatment with β-blockers is contraindicated. While ivabradine is regarded as a highly selective "funny current" (I

Topics: ADAMTS4 Protein; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Cardiovascular Agents; Cartilage, Articular; Cells, Cultured; Chondrocytes; Collagen Type II; Extracellular Matrix; Humans; Hyperpolarization-Activated Cyclic Nucleotide-Gated Channels; Interleukin-1beta; Interleukin-6; Ivabradine; Matrix Metalloproteinase 13; Matrix Metalloproteinase 3; NF-kappa B; Osteoarthritis; Potassium Channels; RNA, Small Interfering; Signal Transduction; Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha

This study aims to compare use and costs of anti-secretory and cardiovascular co-medication in osteoarthritis patients treated with selective or non-selective NSAIDs.. A retrospective study examined Belgian patients aged 65 years or more who suffer from osteoarthritis and are chronic users of selective NSAIDs (n=1,376) or non-selective NSAIDs (n=8,482). A before-and-after analysis compared drug use and costs between period 1 (first 6 months of 2002) and period 2 (several 1-year periods stretching over 2003-2004). A cohort analysis contrasted patients taking selective NSAIDs with patients taking non-selective NSAIDs.. Anti-secretory co-medication included histamine H2-receptor antagonists and proton pump inhibitors. Cardiovascular co-medication referred to cardiac glycosides, anti-arrhythmics, anti-thrombotics, anti-angina drugs, anti-hypertensive drugs and serum-lipid-reducing drugs. Volume of drug use was expressed as number of packages and costs were computed in Euro.. The volume of anti-secretory co-medication increased by 36% with selective NSAIDs and by 55% with non-selective NSAIDs between periods 1 and 2. Cardiovascular co-medication rose by 18% with selective NSAIDs and by 12% for non-selective NSAIDs. Focusing on patients who did not take anti-secretory co-medication in period 1, patients taking selective NSAIDs were just as likely to start anti-secretory co-medication in period 2 as patients taking non-selective NSAIDs (odds ratio: 1.05; 95% confidence interval: 0.90-1.23). Patients taking selective NSAIDs were just as likely to start cardiovascular co-medication as patients taking non-selective NSAIDs (odds ratio: 1.03; 95% confidence interval: 0.78-1.36). Annual costs of treating osteoarthritis in ambulatory care amounted to 756 with selective NSAIDs and 416 with non-selective NSAIDs. This originated from higher acquisition costs (278 vs. 24 ) and higher costs of co-medication (477 vs. 392 ) with selective NSAIDs.. The use of selective and non-selective NSAIDs is accompanied by a higher use of co-medication over time. The increase in anti-secretory co-medication was more prominent with non-selective NSAIDs. The rise in cardiovascular co-medication was more pronounced with selective NSAIDs. Treatment of osteoarthritis with selective NSAIDs is more expensive than with non-selective NSAIDs in terms of acquisition costs and costs of co-medication.

Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Cardiovascular Agents; Cardiovascular Diseases; Cohort Studies; Female; Humans; Male; Osteoarthritis