Dataset Information

Long-term efficacy of vasodilating β-blocker in patients with acute myocardial infarction: nationwide multicenter prospective registry.

ABSTRACT:

Background/aims

Long-term benefit of vasodilating β-blockers is unknown. This study aimed to investigate the long-term benefit of vasodilating β-blockers over conventional β-blockers in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI).

Methods

Using nationwide prospective multicenter Korean Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry data, we analyzed 3-year clinical outcomes of 7,269 patients with AMI who received percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and β-blocker therapy. Patients were classified according to treatment strategy (vasodilating β-blockers vs. conventional β-blockers). The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), and hospitalization for heart failure (HF) at 3 years. Secondary outcomes were each component of the primary outcome. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for differences of baseline characteristics.

Results

In 3,079 pairs (6,158 patients) of propensity score-matched patients, the primary outcome occurred significantly less in the vasodilating β-blockers group compared with the conventional β-blockers group (7.6% vs. 9.8%, p = 0.003). Among the secondary outcomes, cardiac death occurred significantly less in the vasodilating β-blockers group than in the conventional group (3.5% vs. 4.8%, p = 0.015). The incidence rates of MI (2.4% vs. 3.0%, p = 0.160) or hospitalization for HF (2.6% vs. 3.2%, p = 0.192) were not significantly different between the two groups.

Conclusion

Vasodilating β-blocker therapy was associated with better clinical outcomes compared with conventional β-blocker therapy in AMI patients undergoing PCI during 3 years follow-up. Vasodilating β-blockers could be recommended preferentially for these patients.

SUBMITTER: Chung J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8009151 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe prognostic effect of admission blood glucose (ABG) for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) has not been well validated, especially in patients with diabetes. We performed this study to assess the predictive value of ABG for all-cause mortality in AMI patients with different glucose metabolism status.MethodsWe evaluated a total of 6,892 AMI patients from the prospective, nationwide, multicenter CAMI registry, of which 2,820 had diabetes, 2,011 had pre-diabetes, and 2,061 had normal glucose regulation (NGR). Patients were divided into high ABG and low ABG groups according to the optimal cutoff values of ABG to predict 2-year mortality for patients with diabetes, pre-diabetes and NGR, respectively. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality.ResultsThe optimal cutoff values of ABG for predicting 2-year mortality was 9.0mmol/l, 7.2mmol/l and 6.2mmol/l for patients with diabetes, pre-diabetes and NGR, respectively. Overall, the risk of all-cause mortality in high ABG group was significantly increased compared with that in low ABG group among patients with diabetes (15.2% vs. 8.9%; hazard ratio [HR] 1.787, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.413-2.260; P<0.0001), pre-diabetes (12.1% vs. 6.1%; HR 2.069, 95%CI 1.518-2.821; P<0.0001) and NGR (11.8% vs. 6.1%; HR 2.009, 95%CI 1.473-2.740; P<0.0001). After the potential confounders were adjusted, high ABG was significantly associated with higher risk of 2-year mortality in patients with diabetes (adjusted HR 1.710, 95%CI 1.327-2.203; P<0.0001), pre-diabetes (adjusted HR 1.731, 95%CI 1.249-2.399; P=0.001) and NGR (adjusted HR 1.529, 95%CI 1.110-2.106; P=0.009). Moreover, adding ABG to the original model led to a slight albeit significant improvement in C-statistic and net reclassification in patients with diabetes and NGR (all P<0.05).ConclusionsThis study is the first to demonstrate a strong positive association between ABG and 2-year mortality in AMI patients with diabetes, pre-diabetes and NGR. ABG should be considered as a useful marker for risk stratification in patients with diabetes and NGR. Further randomized trials are warranted to investigate the effects of blood glucose control on the reduction of long-term mortality according to the corresponding ABG thresholds for different glucose metabolism status.Clinical trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT01874691.

Project description:Beta-blocker therapy after acute myocardial infarction (MI) improves survival. Beta-blocker doses used in clinical practice are often substantially lower than those used in the randomized trials establishing their efficacy.This study evaluated the association of beta-blocker dose with survival after acute MI, hypothesizing that higher dose beta-blocker therapy will be associated with increased survival.A multicenter registry enrolled 7,057 consecutive patients with acute MI. Discharge beta-blocker dose was indexed to the target beta-blocker doses used in randomized clinical trials, grouped as >0% to 12.5%, >12.5% to 25%, >25% to 50%, and >50% of target dose. Follow-up vital status was assessed, with the primary endpoint of time-to-death right-censored at 2 years. Multivariable and propensity score analyses were used to account for group differences.Of 6,682 patients with follow-up (median 2.1 years), 91.5% were discharged on a beta-blocker (mean dose 38.1% of the target dose). Lower mortality was observed with all beta-blocker doses (p < 0.0002) versus no beta-blocker therapy. After multivariable adjustment, hazard ratios for 2-year mortality compared with the >50% dose were 0.862 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.677 to 1.098), 0.799 (95% CI: 0.635 to 1.005), and 0.963 (95% CI: 0.765 to 1.213) for the >0% to 12.5%, >12.5% to 25%, and >25% to 50% of target dose groups, respectively. Multivariable analysis with an extended set of covariates and propensity score analysis also demonstrated that higher doses were not associated with better outcome.These data do not demonstrate increased survival in patients treated with beta-blocker doses approximating those used in previous randomized clinical trials compared with lower doses. These findings provide the rationale to re-engage in research to establish appropriate beta-blocker dosing after MI to derive optimal benefit from this therapy. (The PACE-MI Registry Study-Outcomes of Beta-blocker Therapy After Myocardial Infarction [OBTAIN]: NCT00430612).

Project description:Background It is not clear whether β1-selective or nonselective β-blockers should be used in patients with cirrhosis and acute myocardial infarction. Methods and Results Medical records were retrieved from Taiwan NHIRD (National Health Insurance Research Database) during 2001-2013. Patients were excluded for age <20, previous acute myocardial infarction, contraindication to β-blockers, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma, or atrioventricular conduction disease. Patients who died during index admission, had a follow-up <6 months, had a medication ratio of either β1-selective or nonselective β-blocker <80%, or who switched between β-blockers were also excluded. Patients on β1-selective blockers and nonselective β-blockers were propensity score matched and compared for outcome. Primary outcomes were 1- and 2-year cardiovascular events, liver adverse outcomes, and all-cause mortality. A total of 203 595 patients with acute myocardial infarction were enrolled, of whom 6355 had cirrhosis. After screening for exclusion criteria, 1769 patients (655 patients on β-blockers and 1114 patients not on β-blockers) were eligible for analysis. Among patients on β-blockers, propensity score matching was performed, and 218 patients on β1-selective blockers and 218 patients on nonselective β-blockers were studied. During a 2-year follow-up, patients on β1-selective blockers had significantly fewer major cardiac and cerebrovascular events (hazard ratio=0.62; 95% confidence interval=0.42-0.91; P=0.014), a trend toward lower all-cause mortality (hazard ratio=0.66; 95% confidence interval=0.38-1.14; P=0.135), and nonworsening liver outcome (hazard ratio=0.66; 95% confidence interval=0.38-1.14; P=0.354). Conclusions In patients with cirrhosis and acute myocardial infarction, selecting a β-blocker is a clinical dilemma. Our study showed that the use of β1-selective blockers is associated with lower risks of major cardiac and cerebrovascular events.