Related Experiment Videos
β-Blocker use and clinical outcomes in stable outpatients with and without coronary artery disease
Sripal Bangalore1, Gabriel Steg, Prakash Deedwania
1Cardiovascular Clinical Research Center, New York University School of Medicine, 550 First Ave, New York, NY 10016, USA. sripalbangalore@gmail.com
Insights
Beta-blocker use did not significantly reduce cardiovascular events in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) or risk factors, except for recent myocardial infarction (MI). This study questions their benefit beyond standard post-MI care.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Pharmacology
- Epidemiology
Background:
- Beta-blockers are standard post-myocardial infarction (MI) care.
- Their benefit in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) without MI, remote MI history, or only CAD risk factors is uncertain.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the association between beta-blocker use and cardiovascular events in stable patients with prior MI, CAD without MI, or only CAD risk factors.
Main Methods:
- Longitudinal observational study of 44,708 patients from the REACH registry.
- Patients categorized into three cohorts: prior MI, CAD without MI, and CAD risk factors only.
- Propensity score matching used for primary analyses with a median follow-up of 44 months.
Main Results:
- No significant difference in composite cardiovascular events (death, nonfatal MI, stroke) with beta-blocker use across all cohorts.
- Higher rates of secondary outcomes (atherothrombotic events/revascularization) observed in CAD without MI cohort with beta-blocker use.
- Increased primary and secondary event rates noted in the CAD risk factors only cohort with beta-blocker use.
- Beta-blocker use was associated with lower secondary outcome incidence in patients with recent MI (≤1 year).
Conclusions:
- Beta-blocker use was not associated with a reduced risk of composite cardiovascular events in patients with CAD risk factors, prior MI, or CAD without MI.
- Findings suggest a potential re-evaluation of beta-blocker indications in certain stable CAD patient populations.
Context:
β-Blockers remain the standard of care after a myocardial infarction (MI). However, the benefit of β-blocker use in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) but no history of MI, those with a remote history of MI, and those with only risk factors for CAD is unclear.
Objective:
To assess the association of β-blocker use with cardiovascular events in stable patients with a prior history of MI, in those with CAD but no history of MI, and in those with only risk factors for CAD.
Design, Setting, And Patients:
Longitudinal, observational study of patients in the Reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health (REACH) registry who were divided into 3 cohorts: known prior MI (n = 14,043), known CAD without MI (n = 12,012), or those with CAD risk factors only (n = 18,653). Propensity score matching was used for the primary analyses. The last follow-up data collection was April 2009.
Main Outcome Measures:
The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal MI, or nonfatal stroke. The secondary outcome was the primary outcome plus hospitalization for atherothrombotic events or a revascularization procedure.
Results:
Among the 44,708 patients, 21,860 were included in the propensity score-matched analysis. With a median follow-up of 44 months (interquartile range, 35-45 months), event rates were not significantly different in patients with β-blocker use compared with those without β-blocker use for any of the outcomes tested, even in the prior MI cohort (489 [16.93%] vs 532 [18.60%], respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 0.90 [95% CI, 0.79-1.03]; P = .14). In the CAD without MI cohort, the associated event rates were not significantly different in those with β-blocker use for the primary outcome (391 [12.94%]) vs without β-blocker use (405 [13.55%]) (HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.79-1.08]; P = .31), with higher rates for the secondary outcome (1101 [30.59%] vs 1002 [27.84%]; odds ratio [OR], 1.14 [95% CI, 1.03-1.27]; P = .01) and for the tertiary outcome of hospitalization (870 [24.17%] vs 773 [21.48%]; OR, 1.17 [95% CI, 1.04-1.30]; P = .01). In the cohort with CAD risk factors only, the event rates were higher for the primary outcome with β-blocker use (467 [14.22%]) vs without β-blocker use (403 [12.11%]) (HR, 1.18 [95% CI, 1.02-1.36]; P = .02), for the secondary outcome (870 [22.01%] vs 797 [20.17%]; OR, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.00-1.24]; P = .04) but not for the tertiary outcomes of MI (89 [2.82%] vs 68 [2.00%]; HR, 1.36 [95% CI, 0.97-1.90]; P = .08) and stroke (210 [6.55%] vs 168 [5.12%]; HR, 1.22 [95% CI, 0.99-1.52]; P = .06). However, in those with recent MI (≤1 year), β-blocker use was associated with a lower incidence of the secondary outcome (OR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.64-0.92]).
Conclusion:
In this observational study of patients with either CAD risk factors only, known prior MI, or known CAD without MI, the use of β-blockers was not associated with a lower risk of composite cardiovascular events.
Related Concept Videos
Heart Failure Drugs: β-Blockers
Adrenergic Antagonists: Pharmacological Actions of β-Receptor Blockers
Antihypertensive Drugs: Types of β-Blockers
Antianginal Drugs: Nitrates and β-Blockers
Organic nitrates, such as nitroglycerin, play a pivotal role. Once metabolized, they liberate nitric oxide, a molecular marvel. Nitric oxide triggers guanylyl cyclase and augments cGMP production. This biochemical cascade orchestrates the relaxation of vascular smooth muscles, ushering in vasodilation and enhancing coronary blood flow. Administered...
Adrenergic Antagonists: ɑ and β-Receptor Blockers
Adrenergic Antagonists: Chemistry and Classification of β-Receptor Blockers