Beta-blockers for suspected or diagnosed acute myocardial infarction.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Safi S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6915833 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8570410 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFor acute myocardial infarction (AMI) without heart failure (HF), it is unclear if β-blockers are associated with reduced mortality.ObjectivesThe goal of this study was to determine the association between β-blocker use and mortality in patients with AMI without HF or left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD).MethodsThis cohort study used national English and Welsh registry data from the Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project. A total of 179,810 survivors of hospitalization with AMI without HF or LVSD, between January 1, 2007, and June 30, 2013 (final follow-up: December 31, 2013), were assessed. Survival-time inverse probability weighting propensity scores and instrumental variable analyses were used to investigate the association between the use of β-blockers and 1-year mortality.ResultsOf 91,895 patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and 87,915 patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, 88,542 (96.4%) and 81,933 (93.2%) received β-blockers, respectively. For the entire cohort, with >163,772 person-years of observation, there were 9,373 deaths (5.2%). Unadjusted 1-year mortality was lower for patients who received β-blockers compared with those who did not (4.9% vs. 11.2%; p < 0.001). However, after weighting and adjustment, there was no significant difference in mortality between those with and without β-blocker use (average treatment effect [ATE] coefficient: 0.07; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.60 to 0.75; p = 0.827). Findings were similar for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (ATE coefficient: 0.30; 95% CI: -0.98 to 1.58; p = 0.637) and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (ATE coefficient: -0.07; 95% CI: -0.68 to 0.54; p = 0.819).ConclusionsAmong survivors of hospitalization with AMI who did not have HF or LVSD as recorded in the hospital, the use of β-blockers was not associated with a lower risk of death at any time point up to 1 year. (β-Blocker Use and Mortality in Hospital Survivors of Acute Myocardial Infarction Without Heart Failure; NCT02786654).
| S-EPMC5457288 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Pivotal trials of beta-blockers (BB) and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (ACEI/ARB) in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) were largely conducted prior to the widespread adoption of early revascularization. A total of 15,073 patients with AMI who underwent inhospital coronary revascularization from January 2007 to December 2013 were analyzed. At 12 months, BB was significantly associated with a lower incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE, adjusted HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.70-0.93) and all-cause mortality (adjusted HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.55-0.88), while ACEI/ARB was significantly associated with lower all-cause mortality (adjusted HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.66-0.98) and heart failure (HF) hospitalization (adjusted HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.68-0.95). Combined BB and ACEI/ARB use was associated with the lowest incidence of MACE (adjusted HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.57-0.86), all-cause mortality (adjusted HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.40-0.77) and HF hospitalization (adjusted HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.48-0.86). This were consistent for left ventricular ejection fraction < 50% or ≥ 50%. In conclusion, in AMI managed with revascularization, both BB and ACEI/ARB were associated with a lower incidence of 12-month all-cause mortality. Combined BB and ACEI/ARB was associated with the lowest incidence of all-cause mortality and HF hospitalization.
| S-EPMC7495427 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:The optimal duration of ?-blocker therapy in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is unknown. We aimed to evaluate the late effect of ?-blockers in patients with AMI. METHODS AND RESULTS:We enrolled all consecutive patients who presented with AMI at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, between June 3, 2003 and February 24, 2015. The primary end point was 5-year all-cause mortality, depending on the use of ?-blockers at discharge, 1 year after AMI, and 3 years after AMI. Of 2592 patients, the prescription rates of ?-blockers were 72%, 69%, 63%, and 60% at discharge and 1, 3, and 5 years after AMI, respectively. The patients who were receiving ?-blocker therapy had more favorable clinical characteristics, such as younger age (62 versus 65 years; P<0.001). They received reperfusion therapy more often (92% versus 80%; P<0.001) than those without ?-blocker prescription. In the univariate analysis, the patients with ?-blocker prescription had lower 5-year mortality at all time points. In the Cox model after adjustment for significant covariates, ?-blocker prescription at discharge was associated with a 29% reduced mortality risk (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.55-0.90; P=0.006); however, ?-blocker prescriptions at 1 and 3 years after AMI were not associated with reduced mortality. CONCLUSIONS:The beneficial effect of ?-blocker therapy after AMI may be limited until 1 year after AMI. Whether late ?-blocker therapy beyond 1 year after AMI offers clinical benefits should be confirmed in further clinical trials.
| S-EPMC5866322 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background It remains controversial whether long-term clinical impact of newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF) in the acute phase of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is different from that of prior AF diagnosed before the onset of AMI. Methods and Results The current study population from the CREDO-Kyoto AMI (Coronary Revascularization Demonstrating Outcome Study in Kyoto Acute Myocardial Infarction) Registry Wave-2 consisted of 6228 patients with AMI who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. The baseline characteristics and long-term clinical outcomes were compared according to AF status (newly diagnosed AF: N=489 [7.9%], prior AF: N=589 [9.5%], and no AF: N=5150 [82.7%]). Median follow-up duration was 5.5 years. Patients with newly diagnosed AF and prior AF had similar baseline characteristics with higher risk profile than those with no AF including older age and more comorbidities. The cumulative 5-year incidence of all-cause death was higher in newly diagnosed AF and prior AF than no AF (38.8%, 40.7%, and 18.7%, P<0.001). The adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for mortality of newly diagnosed AF and prior AF relative to no AF remained significant with similar magnitude (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.12-1.54; P<0.001, and HR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.14-1.52; P<0.001, respectively). The cumulative 5-year incidence of stroke decreased in the order of newly diagnosed AF, prior AF and no AF (15.5%, 12.9%, and 6.3%, respectively, P<0.001). The higher adjusted HRs of both newly diagnosed AF and prior AF relative to no AF were significant for stroke, with a greater risk of newly diagnosed AF than that of prior AF (HR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.56-2.69; P<0.001, and HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.00-1.78; P=0.048, respectively). The higher stroke risk of newly diagnosed AF compared with prior AF was largely driven by the greater risk within 30 days. The higher adjusted HRs of newly diagnosed AF and prior AF relative to no AF were significant for heart failure hospitalization (HR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.35-2.22; P<0.001, and HR, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.82-2.74; P<0.001, respectively) and major bleeding (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.23-1.73; P<0.001, and HR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.15-1.60; P<0.001, respectively). Conclusions Newly diagnosed AF in AMI had risks for mortality, heart failure hospitalization, and major bleeding higher than no AF, and comparable to prior AF. The risk of newly diagnosed AF for stroke might be higher than that of prior AF.
| S-EPMC8649521 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsMost trials showing benefit of beta-blocker treatment after myocardial infarction (MI) included patients with large MIs and are from an era before modern biomarker-based MI diagnosis and reperfusion treatment. The aim of the randomized evaluation of decreased usage of beta-blockers after acute myocardial infarction (REDUCE-AMI) trial is to determine whether long-term oral beta-blockade in patients with an acute MI and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) reduces the composite endpoint of death of any cause or recurrent MI.Methods and resultsIt is a registry-based, randomized, parallel, open-label, multicentre trial performed at 38 centres in Sweden, 1 centre in Estonia, and 6 centres in New Zealand. About 5000 patients with an acute MI who have undergone coronary angiography and with EF ≥ 50% will be randomized to long-term treatment with beta-blockade or not. The primary endpoint is the composite endpoint of death of any cause or new non-fatal MI. There are several secondary endpoints, including all-cause death, cardiovascular death, new MI, readmission because of heart failure and atrial fibrillation, symptoms, functional status, and health-related quality of life after 6-10 weeks and after 1 year of treatment. Safety endpoints are bradycardia, AV-block II-III, hypotension, syncope or need for pacemaker, asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and stroke.ConclusionThe results from REDUCE-AMI will add important evidence regarding the effect of beta-blockers in patients with MI and preserved EF and may change guidelines and clinical practice.
| S-EPMC9892870 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) less often receive β-blockers after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). This may influence their outcomes after AMI. This study evaluated the efficacy of β-blockers after AMI in patients with COPD, compared with non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (NDCCBs) and absence of these two kinds of treatment. METHODS AND RESULTS:We conducted a nationwide population-based cohort study using data retrieved from Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. We collected 28,097 patients with COPD who were hospitalized for AMI between January 2004 and December 2013. After hospital discharge, 24,056 patients returned to outpatient clinics within 14 days (the exposure window). Those who received both β-blockers and NDCCBs (n = 302) were excluded, leaving 23,754 patients for analysis. Patients were classified into the β-blocker group (n = 10,638, 44.8%), the NDCCB group, (n = 1,747, 7.4%) and the control group (n = 11,369, 47.9%) based on their outpatient prescription within the exposure window. The β-blockers group of patients had lower overall mortality risks (adjusted hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.91 [0.83-0.99] versus the NDCCB group; 0.88 [0.84-0.93] versus the control group), but the risk of major adverse cardiac events within 1 year was not statistically different. β-blockers decreased risks of re-hospitalization for COPD and other respiratory diseases by 12-32%. CONCLUSIONS:The use of β-blockers after AMI was associated with a reduced mortality risk in patients with COPD. β-blockers did not increase the risk of COPD exacerbations.
| S-EPMC6400336 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Long term β-blocker therapy after myocardial infarction (MI) reduces mortality and recurrent MI but evidence for this treatment predates contemporary acute coronary care. β-blocker treatment is a key quality of care indicator in the Swedish national quality register for acute coronary care, Riks-HIA. Between 2011 and 2015 a declining number of MI-patients discharged with a β-blocker from the coronary care unit (CCU) at Helsingborg and other hospitals was reported. This retrospective observational study aimed to investigate the causes for discharge without a β-blocker and relate it to outcome, compared to patients discharged with a β-blocker. METHODS:MI-patients registered in Riks-HIA discharged without β-blocker during 2011-2015 (no-β-group) and a control group (β-group) comprised of patients discharged with β-blocker treatment between January 1 to December 31, 2013, were matched by RIKS-HIA criteria for β-blocker use. Clinical characteristics, date of death, readmission for MI, other cardiovascular events were collected from Riks-HIA and medical records. RESULTS:The no-β-group included 141 patients, where 65.2% had a justified reason for non-β-blocker use. The β-group included 206 patients. There was no difference in cardiovascular risk factor profile. There were a trend towards a higher number of readmissions for MI in the no-β-group was (n = 8 (5.7%) vs n = 2 (1.0%), p = 0.02), but not mortality (6 (4.3%) vs 2 (1.0%), p = 0.07) and combined readmission for angina pectoris, heart failure, arrhythmias or stroke/TIA (n = 23 (16.3%) vs n = 25 (12.1%), p = 0.27). CONCLUSION:A majority of the patients in the no-β-group had a justified absence of a β-blocker. β-blocker treatment post-MI showed a trend towards fewer readmissions for MI. But important quality information is lacking to make a firm conclusion of the effect on outcome.
| S-EPMC7146968 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveBeta-blockers (BB) are an established treatment following myocardial infarction (MI). However, there is uncertainty as to whether BB beyond the first year of MI have a role in patients without heart failure or left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD).MethodsA nationwide cohort study was conducted including 43 618 patients with MI between 2005 and 2016 in the Swedish register for coronary heart disease. Follow-up started 1 year after hospitalisation (index date). Patients with heart failure or LVSD up until the index date were excluded. Patients were allocated into two groups according to BB treatment. Primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, MI, unscheduled revascularisation and hospitalisation for heart failure. Outcomes were analysed using Cox and Fine-Grey regression models after inverse propensity score weighting.ResultsOverall, 34 253 (78.5%) patients received BB and 9365 (21.5%) did not at the index date 1 year following MI. The median age was 64 years and 25.5% were female. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the unadjusted rate of primary outcome was lower among patients who received versus not received BB (3.8 vs 4.9 events/100 person-years) (HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.73 to 1.04). Following inverse propensity score weighting and multivariable adjustment, the risk of the primary outcome was not different according to BB treatment (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.04). Similar findings were observed when censoring for BB discontinuation or treatment switch during follow-up.ConclusionEvidence from this nationwide cohort study suggests that BB treatment beyond 1 year of MI for patients without heart failure or LVSD was not associated with improved cardiovascular outcomes.
| S-EPMC10359586 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundContrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI) is a common complication of coronary angiography (CAG), which is associated with worse prognosis. Some studies indicated β-blockers could preserve renal function among patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), but the relationship between β-blockers and CI-AKI has not been well documented among patients with AMI who were undergoing CAG or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).MethodsIn this prospective, observational study, 1,309 AMI patients who were undergoing CAG or PCI were consecutively recruited between January 2010 and December 2013. Patients were assigned into β-blockers group (n=1,074) or non-β-blockers group (n=235) according to use or non-use of β-blockers (including metoprolol tartrate/metoprolol succinate/Bisoprolol Fumarate) within 24 hours of perioperative period. CI-AKI was defined as an absolute increase of >0.5 mg/dL from baseline serum creatinine (SCr) within 48-72 hours after contrast medium (CM) exposure.ResultsThe overall incidence of CI-AKI was 247/1,309 (18.9%).After multivariate adjusting, a total of 10 variables were related to CI-AKI, including β-blockers [β-blockers group vs. non-β-blockers group: odds ratio (OR) =0.520; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.291-0.930; P=0.027], age, diabetes mellitus, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <60 mL/min/1.73 m2, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <40%, use of intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), peri-hypotension, emergent PCI, coronary lesions and CM dose >200 mL. During the mean follow-up of 2.35±0.99 years, the β-blockers group was significantly associated with lower rates of mortality [β-blockers group vs. non-β-blockers group: adjusted hazard ratio (HR) =0.43; 95% CI, 0.27-0.71; P=0.001] among patients with AMI.ConclusionsUse of β-blockers within 24 hours of perioperative period may be associated with lower rates of CI-AKI and long-term mortality among patients with AMI who are undergoing CAG or PCI.Trial registrationPRECOMIN, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01400295.
| S-EPMC6531699 | biostudies-literature