Short-term effects of early intravenous treatment with a beta-adrenergic blocking agent or a specific bradycardiac agent in patients with acute myocardial infarction receiving thrombolytic therapy

Therapeutic Targets for Regulating Oxidative Damage Induced by Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury: A Study from a Pharmacological Perspective

Ischemia-reperfusion (I-R) injury is damage caused by restoring blood flow into ischemic tissues or organs. This complex and characteristic lesion accelerates cell death induced by signaling pathways such as apoptosis, necrosis, and even ferroptosis. In addition to the direct association between I-R and the release of reactive oxygen species and reactive nitrogen species, it is involved in developing mitochondrial oxidative damage. Thus, its mechanism plays a critical role via reactive species scavenging, calcium overload modulation, electron transport chain blocking, mitochondrial permeability transition pore activation, or noncoding RNA transcription. Other receptors and molecules reduce tissue and organ damage caused by this pathology and other related diseases. These molecular targets have been gradually discovered and have essential roles in I-R resolution. Therefore, the current study is aimed at highlighting the importance of these discoveries. In this review, we inquire about the oxidative damage receptors that are relevant to reducing the damage induced by oxidative stress associated with I-R. Several complications on surgical techniques and pathology interventions do not mitigate the damage caused by I-R. Nevertheless, these therapies developed using alternative targets could work as coadjuvants in tissue transplants or I-R-related pathologies

Intravenous metoprolol during ongoing STEMI ameliorates markers of ischemic injury: a METOCARD-CNIC trial electrocardiographic study

Besides its protective effect against neutrophil-mediated injury at reperfusion, intravenous (IV) metoprolol was recently shown to reduce the progression of ischemic injury in a pig model of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Here, we tested the hypothesis that IV metoprolol administration in humans with ongoing STEMI blunts the time‑dependent progression of ischemic injury assessed by serial electrocardiogram (ECG) evaluations before reperfusion. The METOCARD-CNIC trial randomized 270 anterior STEMI patients to IV metoprolol or control before reperfusion by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In 139 patients (69 IV metoprolol, 70 controls), two ECGs were available (ECG-1 before randomization, ECG-2 pre-PCI). Between-group ECG differences were analyzed using univariate and multivariate regression models. No significant between-group differences were observed on ECG-1. On ECG-2, patients who received IV metoprolol had a narrower QRS than those in the control group (84 ms vs. 90 ms, p = 0.029), a lower prevalence of QRS distortion (10% vs. 26%, p = 0.017), and a lower sum of anterior and total ST-segment elevation (10.1 mm vs. 13.6 mm, p = 0.014 and 10.4 mm vs. 14.0 mm, p = 0.015, respectively). Adjusted analysis revealed similar results. Significant associations were observed between ECG-2 variables and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging measurements (extent of myocardial edema, infarct size, microvascular obstruction, and left-ventricular ejection fraction) after STEMI. In summary, IV metoprolol administration before reperfusion ameliorates ECG markers of myocardial ischemia in anterior STEMI patients. These data confirm that IV metoprolol is able to reduce ischemic injury and highlight the ability of ECG analysis to provide relevant real-time information on the effect of cardioprotective therapies before reperfusion.

Metoprolol exerts a non-class effect against ischaemia-reperfusion injury by abrogating exacerbated inflammation

Aims

Clinical guidelines recommend early intravenous β-blockers during ongoing myocardial infarction; however, it is unknown whether all β-blockers exert a similar cardioprotective effect. We experimentally compared three clinically approved intravenous β-blockers.

Methods and results

Mice undergoing 45 min/24 h ischaemia–reperfusion (I/R) received vehicle, metoprolol, atenolol, or propranolol at min 35. The effect on neutrophil infiltration was tested in three models of exacerbated inflammation. Neutrophil migration was evaluated in vitro and in vivo by intravital microscopy. The effect of β-blockers on the conformation of the β1 adrenergic receptor was studied in silico. Of the tested β-blockers, only metoprolol ameliorated I/R injury [infarct size (IS) = 18.0% ± 0.03% for metoprolol vs. 35.9% ± 0.03% for vehicle; P < 0.01]. Atenolol and propranolol had no effect on IS. In the three exacerbated inflammation models, neutrophil infiltration was significantly attenuated only in the presence of metoprolol (60%, 50%, and 70% reductions vs. vehicle in myocardial I/R injury, thioglycolate-induced peritonitis, and lipopolysaccharide-induced acute lung injury, respectively). Migration studies confirmed the particular ability of metoprolol to disrupt neutrophil dynamics. In silico analysis indicated different intracellular β1 adrenergic receptor conformational changes when bound to metoprolol than to the other two β-blockers.

Conclusions

Metoprolol exerts a disruptive action on neutrophil dynamics during exacerbated inflammation, resulting in an infarct-limiting effect not observed with atenolol or propranolol. The differential effect of β-blockers may be related to distinct conformational changes in the β1 adrenergic receptor upon metoprolol binding. If these data are confirmed in a clinical trial, metoprolol should become the intravenous β-blocker of choice for patients with ongoing infarction.

Novel Findings and Therapeutic Targets on Cardioprotection of Ischemia/ Reperfusion Injury in STEMI

Acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality around the world. A large number of STEMI patients after the infarction gradually develop heart failure due to the infarcted myocardium. Timely reperfusion is essential to salvage ischemic myocardium from the infarction, but the restoration of coronary blood flow in the infarct-related artery itself induces myocardial injury and cardiomyocyte death, known as ischemia/reperfusion injury (IRI). The factors contributing to IRI in STEMI are complex, and microvascular obstruction, inflammation, release of reactive oxygen species, myocardial stunning, and activation of myocardial cell death are involved. Therefore, additional cardioprotection is required to prevent the heart from IRI. Although many mechanical conditioning procedures and pharmacological agents have been identified as effective cardioprotective approaches in animal studies, their translation into the clinical practice has been relatively disappointing due to a variety of reasons. With new emerging data on cardioprotection in STEMI over the past few years, it is mandatory to reevaluate the effectiveness of "old" cardioprotective interventions and highlight the novel therapeutic targets and new treatment strategies of cardioprotection.

Beta-blockers for suspected or diagnosed acute myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease is the number one cause of death globally. According to the World Health Organization, 7.4 million people died from ischaemic heart diseases in 2012, constituting 15% of all deaths. Acute myocardial infarction is caused by blockage of the blood supplied to the heart muscle. Beta-blockers are often used in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Previous meta-analyses on the topic have shown conflicting results ranging from harms, neutral effects, to benefits. No previous systematic review using Cochrane methodology has assessed the effects of beta-blockers for acute myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of beta-blockers compared with placebo or no intervention in people with suspected or diagnosed acute myocardial infarction.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded and BIOSIS Citation Index in June 2019. We also searched the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, Turning Research into Practice, Google Scholar, SciSearch, and the reference lists of included trials and previous reviews in August 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised clinical trials assessing the effects of beta-blockers versus placebo or no intervention in people with suspected or diagnosed acute myocardial infarction. Trials were included irrespective of trial design, setting, blinding, publication status, publication year, language, and reporting of our outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed the Cochrane methodological recommendations. Four review authors independently extracted data. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events according to the International Conference on Harmonization - Good Clinical Practice (ICH-GCP), and major adverse cardiovascular events (composite of cardiovascular mortality and non-fatal myocardial infarction during follow-up). Our secondary outcomes were quality of life, angina, cardiovascular mortality, and myocardial infarction during follow-up. Our primary time point of interest was less than three months after randomisation. We also assessed the outcomes at maximum follow-up beyond three months. Due to risk of multiplicity, we calculated a 97.5% confidence interval (CI) for the primary outcomes and a 98% CI for the secondary outcomes. We assessed the risks of systematic errors through seven bias domains in accordance to the instructions given in the Cochrane Handbook. The quality of the body of evidence was assessed by GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 63 trials randomising a total of 85,550 participants (mean age 57.4 years). Only one trial was at low risk of bias. The remaining trials were at high risk of bias. The quality of the evidence according to GRADE ranged from very low to high. Fifty-six trials commenced beta-blockers during the acute phase of acute myocardial infarction and seven trials during the subacute phase. At our primary time point 'less than three months follow-up', meta-analysis showed that beta-blockers versus placebo or no intervention probably reduce the risk of a reinfarction during follow-up (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 98% confidence interval (CI) 0.73 to 0.91; 67,562 participants; 18 trials; moderate-quality evidence) with an absolute risk reduction of 0.5% and a number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) of 196 participants. However, we found little or no effect of beta-blockers when assessing all-cause mortality (RR 0.94, 97.5% CI 0.90 to 1.00; 80,452 participants; 46 trials/47 comparisons; high-quality evidence) with an absolute risk reduction of 0.4% and cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.08; 45,852 participants; 1 trial; moderate-quality evidence) with an absolute risk reduction of 0.4%. Regarding angina, it is uncertain whether beta-blockers have a beneficial or harmful effect (RR 0.70, 98% CI 0.25 to 1.84; 98 participants; 3 trials; very low-quality evidence) with an absolute risk reduction of 7.1%. None of the trials specifically assessed nor reported serious adverse events according to ICH-GCP. Only two trials specifically assessed major adverse cardiovascular events, however, no major adverse cardiovascular events occurred in either trial. At maximum follow-up beyond three months, meta-analyses showed that beta-blockers versus placebo or no intervention probably reduce the risk of all-cause mortality (RR 0.93, 97.5% CI 0.86 to 0.99; 25,210 participants; 21 trials/22 comparisons; moderate-quality evidence) with an absolute risk reduction of 1.1% and a NNTB of 91 participants, and cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.90, 98% CI 0.83 to 0.98; 22,457 participants; 14 trials/15 comparisons; moderate-quality evidence) with an absolute risk reduction of 1.2% and a NNTB of 83 participants. However, it is uncertain whether beta-blockers have a beneficial or harmful effect when assessing major adverse cardiovascular events (RR 0.81, 97.5% CI 0.40 to 1.66; 475 participants; 4 trials; very low-quality evidence) with an absolute risk reduction of 1.7%; reinfarction (RR 0.89, 98% CI 0.75 to 1.08; 6825 participants; 14 trials; low-quality evidence) with an absolute risk reduction of 0.9%; and angina (RR 0.64, 98% CI 0.18 to 2.0; 844 participants; 2 trials; very low-quality evidence). None of the trials specifically assessed nor reported serious adverse events according to ICH-GCP. None of the trials assessed quality of life. We identified two ongoing randomised clinical trials investigating the effect of early administration of beta-blockers after percutaneous coronary intervention or thrombolysis to patients with an acute myocardial infarction and one ongoing trial investigating the effect of long-term beta-blocker therapy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our present review indicates that beta-blockers for suspected or diagnosed acute myocardial infarction probably reduce the short-term risk of a reinfarction and the long-term risk of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality. Nevertheless, it is most likely that beta-blockers have little or no effect on the short-term risk of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality. Regarding all remaining outcomes (serious adverse events according to ICH-GCP, major adverse cardiovascular events (composite of cardiovascular mortality and non-fatal myocardial infarction during follow-up), the long-term risk of a reinfarction during follow-up, quality of life, and angina), further information is needed to confirm or reject the clinical effects of beta-blockers on these outcomes for people with or suspected of acute myocardial infarction.

Cyclocreatine protects against ischemic injury and enhances cardiac recovery during early reperfusion

Introduction: A critical mechanism of how hypoxia/ischemia causes irreversible myocardial injury is through the exhaustion of adenosine triphosphate (ATP). Cyclocreatine (CCr) and its water-soluble salt Cyclocreatine-Phosphate (CCrP) are potent bioenergetic agents that preserve high levels of ATP during ischemia. Areas covered: CCr and CCrP treatment prior to the onset of ischemia, preserved high levels of ATP in ischemic myocardium, reduced myocardial cell injury, exerted anti-inflammatory and anti-apoptotic activities, and restored contractile function during reperfusion in animal models of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), global cardiac arrest, cardiopulmonary bypass, and heart transplantation. Medline and Embase (1970 - Feb 2019), the WIPO databank (up to Feb 2019); no language restriction. Expert opinion: This review provides the basis for a number of clinical applications of CCrP and CCr to minimize ischemic injury and necrosis. One strategy is to administer CCrP to AMI patients in the pre-hospital phase, as well as during, or after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) procedure to potentially achieve protection of the myocardium, reduce infarcted-size, and, thus, limit the progression to heart failure. Another clinical applications are in predictable myocardial ischemia where pretreatment with CCrP would likely improve outcome and quality of life of patients who will undergo cardiopulmonary bypass for coronary revascularization and end-stage heart failure patients scheduled for heart transplantation.

Role of Beta-blockers in Cardiovascular Disease in 2019

Beta-blockers are the cornerstone of treatment for various cardiovascular conditions. Although their effects have classically been considered to be driven by their antagonistic and competitive action on beta-adrenergic receptors, nowadays it is known that their effect goes beyond that of mere competition with catecholamines on these receptors. Beta-blockers were discovered as antianginal drugs in the 1960s and are currently widely used in heart failure, arrhythmias, and ischemic heart disease. In this article, we review the evidence for the beneficial effects of beta-blockers in these conditions, as well as the current recommendations in clinical practice guidelines for their use. Surprisingly, despite having been prescribed for more than 4 decades, new, previously unnoticed mechanisms of action on cellular compartments are still being discovered, which continues to open up new horizons for their use. All in all, beta-blockers are one of the most fascinating drug groups in our therapeutic armamentarium.

Comparison of Early Versus Delayed Oral β Blockers in Acute Coronary Syndromes and Effect on Outcomes

The aim of this study was to determine if earlier administration of oral β ​blocker therapy in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACSs) is associated with an increased short-term survival rate and improved left ventricular (LV) function. We studied 11,581 patients enrolled in the International Survey of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Transitional Countries registry from January 2010 to June 2014. Of these patients, 6,117 were excluded as they received intravenous β blockers or remained free of any β ​blocker treatment during hospital stay, 23 as timing of oral β ​blocker administration was unknown, and 182 patients because they died before oral β blockers could be given. The final study population comprised 5,259 patients. The primary outcome was the incidence of in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcome was the incidence of severe LV dysfunction defined as an ejection fraction <40% at hospital discharge. Oral β blockers were administered soon (≤24 hours) after hospital admission in 1,377 patients and later (>24 hours) during hospital stay in the remaining 3,882 patients. Early β ​blocker therapy was significantly associated with reduced in-hospital mortality (odds ratio 0.41, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.80) and reduced incidence of severe LV dysfunction (odds ratio 0.57, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.78). Significant mortality benefits with early β ​blocker therapy disappeared when patients with Killip class III/IV were included as dummy variables. The results were confirmed by propensity score-matched analyses. In conclusion, in patients with ACSs, earlier administration of oral β ​blocker therapy should be a priority with a greater probability of improving LV function and in-hospital survival rate. Patients presenting with acute pulmonary edema or cardiogenic shock should be excluded from this early treatment regimen.

Signalling pathways and mechanisms of protection in pre- and postconditioning: historical perspective and lessons for the future

Ischaemic pre- and postconditioning are potent cardioprotective interventions that spare ischaemic myocardium and decrease infarct size after periods of myocardial ischaemia/reperfusion. They are dependent on complex signalling pathways involving ligands released from ischaemic myocardium, G-protein-linked receptors, membrane growth factor receptors, phospholipids, signalling kinases, NO, PKC and PKG, mitochondrial ATP-sensitive potassium channels, reactive oxygen species, TNF-α and sphingosine-1-phosphate. The final effector is probably the mitochondrial permeability transition pore and the signalling produces protection by preventing pore formation. Many investigators have worked to produce a roadmap of this signalling with the hope that it would reveal where one could intervene to therapeutically protect patients with acute myocardial infarction whose hearts are being reperfused. However, attempts to date to show efficacy of such an intervention in large clinical trials have been unsuccessful. Reasons for this inability to translate successes in the experimental laboratory to the clinical arena are evaluated in this review. It is suggested that all patients with acute coronary syndromes currently presenting to the hospital and being treated with platelet P2Y12 receptor antagonists, the current standard of care, are indeed already benefiting from protection from the conditioning pathways outlined earlier. If that proves to be the case, then future attempts to further decrease infarction will have to rely on interventions which protect by a different mechanism.

Clinical outcomes with β-blockers for myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Debate exists about the efficacy of β-blockers in myocardial infarction and their required duration of usage in contemporary practice.

METHODS

We conducted a MEDLINE/EMBASE/CENTRAL search for randomized trials evaluating β-blockers in myocardial infarction enrolling at least 100 patients. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Analysis was performed stratifying trials into reperfusion-era (> 50% undergoing reperfusion or receiving aspirin/statin) or pre-reperfusion-era trials.

RESULTS

Sixty trials with 102,003 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. In the acute myocardial infarction trials, a significant interaction (Pinteraction = .02) was noted such that β-blockers reduced mortality in the pre-reperfusion (incident rate ratio [IRR] 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79-0.94) but not in the reperfusion era (IRR 0.98; 95% CI, 0.92-1.05). In the pre-reperfusion era, β-blockers reduced cardiovascular mortality (IRR 0.87; 95% CI, 0.78-0.98), myocardial infarction (IRR 0.78; 95% CI, 0.62-0.97), and angina (IRR 0.88; 95% CI, 0.82-0.95), with no difference for other outcomes. In the reperfusion era, β-blockers reduced myocardial infarction (IRR 0.72; 95% CI, 0.62-0.83) (number needed to treat to benefit [NNTB] = 209) and angina (IRR 0.80; 95% CI, 0.65-0.98) (NNTB = 26) at the expense of increase in heart failure (IRR 1.10; 95% CI, 1.05-1.16) (number needed to treat to harm [NNTH] = 79), cardiogenic shock (IRR 1.29; 95% CI, 1.18-1.41) (NNTH = 90), and drug discontinuation (IRR 1.64; 95% CI, 1.55-1.73), with no benefit for other outcomes. Benefits for recurrent myocardial infarction and angina in the reperfusion era appeared to be short term (30 days).

CONCLUSIONS

In contemporary practice of treatment of myocardial infarction, β-blockers have no mortality benefit but reduce recurrent myocardial infarction and angina (short-term) at the expense of increase in heart failure, cardiogenic shock, and drug discontinuation. The guideline authors should reconsider the strength of recommendations for β-blockers post myocardial infarction.

Efficacy and safety of out-of-hospital intravenous metoprolol administration in anterior ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction: insights from the METOCARD-CNIC trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

We seek to examine the efficacy and safety of prereperfusion emergency medical services (EMS)-administered intravenous metoprolol in anterior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients undergoing eventual primary angioplasty.

METHODS

This is a prespecified subgroup analysis of the Effect of Metoprolol in Cardioprotection During an Acute Myocardial Infarction trial population, who all eventually received oral metoprolol within 12 to 24 hours. We studied patients receiving intravenous metoprolol by EMS and compared them with others treated by EMS but not receiving intravenous metoprolol. Outcomes included infarct size and left ventricular ejection fraction on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging at 1 week, and safety by measuring the incidence of the predefined combined endpoint (composite of death, malignant ventricular arrhythmias, advanced atrioventricular block, cardiogenic shock, or reinfarction) within the first 24 hours.

RESULTS

From the total population of the trial (N=270), 147 patients (54%) were recruited during out-of-hospital assistance and transferred to the primary angioplasty center (74 intravenous metoprolol and 73 controls). Infarct size was smaller in patients receiving intravenous metoprolol compared with controls (23.4 [SD 15.0] versus 34.0 [SD 23.7] g; adjusted difference -11.4; 95% confidence interval [CI] -18.6 to -4.3). Left ventricular ejection fraction was higher in the intravenous metoprolol group (48.1% [SD 8.4%] versus 43.1% [SD 10.2%]; adjusted difference 5.0; 95% CI 1.6 to 8.4). Metoprolol administration did not increase the incidence of the prespecified safety combined endpoint: 6.8% versus 17.8% in controls (risk difference -11.1; 95% CI -21.5 to -0.6).

CONCLUSION

Out-of-hospital administration of intravenous metoprolol by EMS within 4.5 hours of symptom onset in our subjects reduced infarct size and improved left ventricular ejection fraction with no excess of adverse events during the first 24 hours.

Beta-blocker use in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction in the reperfusion era (GRACE)

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend early oral beta-blocker administration in the management of acute coronary syndromes for patients who are not at high risk of complications.

METHODS

Data from patients enrolled between 2000 and 2007 in the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) were used to evaluate hospital outcomes in 3 cohorts of patients admitted with ST-elevation myocardial infarction, based on beta-blocker use (early [first 24 hours] intravenous (IV) [± oral], only early oral, or delayed [after first 24 hours]).

RESULTS

Among 13,110 patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction, 21% received any early IV beta-blockers, 65% received only early oral beta-blockers, and 14% received delayed (>24 hours) beta-blockers. Higher systolic blood pressure, higher heart rate, and chronic beta-blocker use were independent predictors of early beta-blocker use. Early beta-blocker use was less likely in older patients, patients with moderate to severe left ventricular dysfunction, and in those presenting with inferior myocardial infarction or Killip class II or III heart failure. IV beta-blocker use and delayed beta-blocker use were associated with higher rates of cardiogenic shock, sustained ventricular fibrillation/ventricular tachycardia, and acute heart failure, compared with oral beta-blocker use. In-hospital mortality was increased with IV beta-blocker use (propensity score adjusted odds ratio, 1.41; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.92) but significantly reduced with delayed beta-blocker administration (propensity adjusted odds ratio, 0.44; 95% confidence interval, 0.26-0.74).

CONCLUSIONS

Early beta-blocker use is common in patients presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction, with oral administration being the most prevalent. Oral beta-blockers were associated with a decrease in the risk of cardiogenic shock, ventricular arrhythmias, and acute heart failure. However, the early receipt of any form of beta-blockers was associated with an increase in hospital mortality.

Effect of early metoprolol on infarct size in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention: the Effect of Metoprolol in Cardioprotection During an Acute Myocardial Infarction (METOCARD-CNIC) trial

BACKGROUND

The effect of β-blockers on infarct size when used in conjunction with primary percutaneous coronary intervention is unknown. We hypothesize that metoprolol reduces infarct size when administered early (intravenously before reperfusion).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients with Killip class II or less anterior ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention within 6 hours of symptoms onset were randomized to receive intravenous metoprolol (n=131) or not (control, n=139) before reperfusion. All patients without contraindications received oral metoprolol within 24 hours. The predefined primary end point was infarct size on magnetic resonance imaging performed 5 to 7 days after STEMI. Magnetic resonance imaging was performed in 220 patients (81%). Mean ± SD infarct size by magnetic resonance imaging was smaller after intravenous metoprolol compared with control (25.6 ± 15.3 versus 32.0 ± 22.2 g; adjusted difference, -6.52; 95% confidence interval, -11.39 to -1.78; P=0.012). In patients with pre-percutaneous coronary intervention Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction grade 0 to 1 flow, the adjusted treatment difference in infarct size was -8.13 (95% confidence interval, -13.10 to -3.16; P=0.0024). Infarct size estimated by peak and area under the curve creatine kinase release was measured in all study populations and was significantly reduced by intravenous metoprolol. Left ventricular ejection fraction was higher in the intravenous metoprolol group (adjusted difference, 2.67%; 95% confidence interval, 0.09-5.21; P=0.045). The composite of death, malignant ventricular arrhythmia, cardiogenic shock, atrioventricular block, and reinfarction at 24 hours in the intravenous metoprolol and control groups was 7.1% and 12.3%, respectively (P=0.21).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with anterior Killip class II or less ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention, early intravenous metoprolol before reperfusion reduced infarct size and increased left ventricular ejection fraction with no excess of adverse events during the first 24 hours after STEMI.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL

http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01311700. EUDRACT number: 2010-019939-35.

Impact of pre-procedural beta blockade on inpatient mortality in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST elevation myocardial infarction

Early use of β blockers (BBs) in acute myocardial infarction remains controversial, with some studies demonstrating benefit and others harm. The aim of this study was to assess the association between pre-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) BB use and in-hospital outcomes in patients who underwent primary PCI for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction between 2007 and 2009 at institutions participating in the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan Cardiovascular Consortium (BMC-2). Inverse propensity score weighting was used to account for the nonrandomized use of pre-PCI BBs. The cohort comprised 7,667 patients, with 4,769 (62%) receiving pre-PCI BBs. These patients were older, with higher rates of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and previous myocardial infarction, PCI, or coronary artery bypass grafting. In adjusted models, pre-PCI BB use was associated with lower rates of intraprocedural ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation (odds ratio [OR] 0.58, p <0.01) and lower in-hospital mortality (OR 0.65, p = 0.022), with increases in rates of emergent coronary artery bypass grafting (OR 1.56, p <0.01) and repeat PCI (OR 1.93, p <0.01). There were no significant increases in rates of cardiogenic shock and congestive heart failure. In conclusion, pre-PCI BB use in this population was associated with decreased arrhythmia and mortality, without increasing rates of cardiogenic shock and heart failure but with higher rates of repeat PCI and emergent coronary artery bypass grafting, suggesting that there may yet remain a role for early BB use in pre-PCI patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarctions.

Early intravenous beta-blockers in patients with acute coronary syndrome--a meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Intravenous (IV) beta-blockade is currently a Class IIa recommendation in early management of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) without obvious contraindications.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Register for Controlled Clinical Trials for randomized clinical trials from 1965 through December, 2011, comparing intravenous beta-blockers administered within 12 hours of presentation of ACS with standard medical therapy and/or placebo. The primary outcome assessed was the risk of short-term (in-hospital mortality-with maximum follow up duration of 90 days) all-cause mortality in the intervention group versus the comparator group. The secondary outcomes assessed were ventricular tachyarrhythmias, myocardial reinfarction, cardiogenic shock, and stroke. Pooled treatment effects were estimated using relative risk with Mantel-Haenszel risk ratio, using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies enrolling 73,396 participants met the inclusion ⁄ exclusion criteria. In- hospital mortality was reduced 8% with intravenous beta-blockers, RR=0.92 (95% CI, 0.86-1.00; p=0.04) when compared with controls. Moreover, intravenous beta-blockade reduced the risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmias (RR=0.61; 95 % CI 0.47-0.79; p=0.0003) and myocardial reinfarction (RR=0.73, 95 % CI 0.59-0.91; p=0.004) without increase in the risk of cardiogenic shock, (RR=1.02; 95% CI 0.77-1.35; p=0.91) or stroke (RR=0.58; 95 % CI 0.17-1.98; p=0.38).

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous beta-blockers early in the course of appropriate patients with ACS appears to be associated with significant reduction in the risk of short-term cardiovascular outcomes, including a reduction in the risk of all-cause mortality.

Study design for the "effect of METOprolol in CARDioproteCtioN during an acute myocardial InfarCtion" (METOCARD-CNIC): a randomized, controlled parallel-group, observer-blinded clinical trial of early pre-reperfusion metoprolol administration in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

Infarct size predicts post-infarction mortality. Oral β-blockade within 24 hours of a ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (STEMI) is a class-IA indication, however early intravenous (IV) β-blockers initiation is not encouraged. In recent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based experimental studies, the β(1)-blocker metoprolol has been shown to reduce infarct size only when administered before coronary reperfusion. To date, there is not a single trial comparing the pre- vs. post-reperfusion β-blocker initiation in STEMI.

OBJECTIVE

The METOCARD-CNIC trial is testing whether the early initiation of IV metoprolol before primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) could reduce infarct size and improve outcomes when compared to oral post-pPCI metoprolol initiation.

DESIGN

The METOCARD-CNIC trial is a randomized parallel-group single-blind (to outcome evaluators) clinical effectiveness trial conducted in 5 Counties across Spain that will enroll 220 participants. Eligible are 18- to 80-year-old patients with anterior STEMI revascularized by pPCI ≤6 hours from symptom onset. Exclusion criteria are Killip-class ≥III, atrioventricular block or active treatment with β-blockers/bronchodilators. Primary end point is infarct size evaluated by MRI 5 to 7 days post-STEMI. Prespecified major secondary end points are salvage-index, left ventricular ejection fraction recovery (day 5-7 to 6 months), the composite of (death/malignant ventricular arrhythmias/reinfarction/admission due to heart failure), and myocardial perfusion.

CONCLUSIONS

The METOCARD-CNIC trial is testing the hypothesis that the early initiation of IV metoprolol pre-reperfusion reduces infarct size in comparison to initiation of oral metoprolol post-reperfusion. Given the implications of infarct size reduction in STEMI, if positive, this trial might evidence that a refined use of an approved inexpensive drug can improve outcomes of patients with STEMI.

[Modulation of the beta-adrenergic system during acute myocardial infarction: rationale for a new clinical trial]

Acute myocardial infarction is caused by sudden coronary artery occlusion. Persistent ischemia results in necrosis of the myocardial tissue supplied by the occluded vessel. It has recently been shown that the final size of the infarct is a major predictor of future clinical events, and is, therefore, used as a surrogate outcome in clinical trials. Moreover, it has become clear that the duration of ischemia in the main determinant of the success of myocardial salvage (i.e. of non-necrotic at-risk myocardium). In addition to minimizing the time between symptom onset and reperfusion, there is considerable interest in finding therapies that can further limit the size of the infarction (i.e. cardioprotective therapies) and they are the focus of numerous clinical studies. Oral β-blockade within the first few hours of an AMI is a class-IA indication in clinical practice guidelines. However, early intravenous β-blockade, even before coronary artery reperfusion, is not routinely recommended. Preclinical research has demonstrated that the selectiveβ1-blocker metoprolol is able to reduce the infarct size only when administered before coronary artery reperfusion, which indicates that its cardioprotective properties are secondary to its ability to reduce reperfusion injury. In addition, retrospective studies of AMI suggest that starting intravenous β-blockade early has clinical benefits (i.e. lower mortality and better recovery of left ventricular contractility) in patients without contraindications. Our general hypothesis is that early administration of metoprolol (i.e. intravenously before reperfusion) results in smaller infarcts than administering the drug orally after reperfusion. The Effect of METOprolol in CARDioproteCtioN during an acute myocardial InfarCtion (METOCARD-CNIC) trial will test this hypothesis in patients with ST-segment elevation AMI.

Treatment and outcomes in patients with myocardial infarction treated with acute β-blocker therapy: results from the American College of Cardiology's NCDR(®)

BACKGROUND

Although β-blockers (BBs) reduce long-term mortality in patients after myocardial infarction (MI), data regarding acute usage are conflicting.

METHODS

We examined acute (≤24 hours) BB use in 34,661 patients with ST-elevation MI (STEMI) and non-ST-segment MI (NSTEMI) included in the NCDR(®) ACTION Registry(®)-GWTG™ (291 US hospitals) between January 2007 and June 2008. Patients with contraindications or did not receive BBs or with missing data were excluded. We analyzed the use and impact of BB stratified by variables associated with increased risk for shock specified in the recent guidelines: age >70 years, symptoms >12 hours (STEMI patients), systolic blood pressure <120 mm Hg, and heart rate >110 beat/min on presentation.

RESULTS

Among patients without contraindications, at least 1 high-risk variable was found in 45% of STEMI and 63% of NSTEMI patients. In-hospital complications including cardiogenic shock, mortality, and the composite outcome of shock or mortality were significantly increased with more shock risk factors in both STEMI and NSTEMI patients. Very early use in the emergency department was associated with a significantly increased risk of shock for both STEMI and NSTEMI patients compared to patients treated later but within 24 hours.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk factors for shock are common in STEMI and NSTEMI patients treated with early BBs. Increasing numbers of risk factors were associated with increased risk for shock or death in patients treated with BBs. These results are consistent with current recommendations for avoiding early BB treatment for patients with acute MI.

Lethal myocardial reperfusion injury: a necessary evil?

Despite being the most effective means of limiting infarct size, coronary reperfusion comes at a price and induces additional damage to the myocardium. Lethal reperfusion injury (death of myocytes that were viable at the time of reperfusion) is an increasingly acknowledged phenomenon. There are many interconnected mechanisms involved in this type of cell death. Calcium overload (generating myocyte hypercontracture), rapid recovery of physiological pH, neutrophil infiltration of the ischemic area, opening of the mitochondrial permeability-transition-pore (PTP), and apoptotic cell death are among the more important mechanisms involved in reperfusion injury. The activation of a group of proteins called reperfusion injury salvage kinases (RISK) pathway confers protection against reperfusion injury, mainly by inhibiting the opening of the mitochondrial PTP. Many interventions have been tested in human trials triggered by encouraging animal studies. In the present review we will explain in detail the main mechanism involved in reperfusion injury, as well as the various approaches (pre-clinical and human trials) performed targeting these mechanisms. Currently, no intervention has been consistently shown to reduce reperfusion injury in large randomized multicenter trials, but the research in this field is intense and the future is highly promising.

beta-Adrenergic receptor blockers and heart failure risk after myocardial infarction: a critical review

Remodeling after myocardial infarction is a complex biological process that leads to progressive left ventricular dilation and clinical heart failure. Multiple influences, including autonomic imbalance with sympathetic activation, contribute to the process. This article reviews clinical data in favor of early- and long-term use of beta-adrenergic receptor blockers in patients after myocardial infarction. Areas of uncertainty, such as the selection of dose and duration of therapy, current guidelines, and patterns of underuse of therapy with this important class of drugs are outlined and highlighted.

Does the early administration of beta-blockers improve the in-hospital mortality rate of patients admitted with acute coronary syndrome?

OBJECTIVES

Beta-blockade is currently recommended in the early management of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). This was a systematic review of the medical literature to determine if early beta-blockade improves the outcome of patients with ACS.

METHODS

The authors searched the PubMed and EMBASE databases for randomized controlled trials from 1965 through May 2009 using a search strategy derived from the following PICO formulation of our clinical question: Patients included adults (18+ years) with an acute or suspected myocardial infarction (MI) within 24 hours of onset of chest pain. Intervention included intravenous or oral beta-blockers administered within 8 hours of presentation. The comparator included standard medical therapy with or without placebo versus early beta-blocker administration. The outcome was the risk of in-hospital death in the intervention groups versus the comparator groups. The methodologic quality of the studies was assessed. Qualitative methods were used to summarize the study results. In-hospital mortality rates were compared using a forest plot of relative risk (RR; 95% confidence interval [CI]) between beta-blockers and controls. Statistical analysis was done with Review Manager V5.0.

RESULTS

Eighteen articles (total N = 72,249) met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. For in-hospital mortality, RR = 0.95 (95% CI, 0.90-1.01). In the largest of these studies (n = 45,852), a significantly higher rate (p < 0.0001) of cardiogenic shock was observed in the beta-blocker (5.0%) versus control group (3.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review failed to demonstrate a convincing in-hospital mortality benefit for using beta-blockers early in the course of patients with an acute or suspected MI.

Acute coronary syndromes: Diagnosis and management, part II

At the most severe end of the spectrum of acute coronary syndromes is ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), which usually occurs when a fibrin-rich thrombus completely occludes an epicardial coronary artery. The diagnosis of STEMI is based on clinical characteristics and persistent ST-segment elevation as demonstrated by 12-lead electrocardiography. Patients with STEMI should undergo rapid assessment for reperfusion therapy, and a reperfusion strategy should be implemented promptly after the patient's contact with the health care system. Two methods are currently available for establishing timely coronary reperfusion: primary percutaneous coronary intervention and fibrinolytic therapy. Percutaneous coronary intervention is the preferred method but is not always available. Antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants are critical adjuncts to reperfusion. This article summarizes the current evidence-based guidelines for the diagnosis and management of STEMI. This summary is followed by a brief discussion of the role of noninvasive stress testing in the assessment of patients with acute coronary syndrome and their selection for coronary revascularization.

Effect of early treatment with anti-hypertensive drugs on short and long-term mortality in patients with an acute cardiovascular event

BACKGROUND

Acute cardiovascular events represent a therapeutic challenge. Blood pressure lowering drugs are commonly used and recommended in the early phase of these settings. This review analyses randomized controlled trial (RCT) evidence for this approach.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of immediate and short-term administration of anti-hypertensive drugs on all-cause mortality, total non-fatal serious adverse events (SAE) and blood pressure, in patients with an acute cardiovascular event, regardless of blood pressure at the time of enrollment.

SEARCH STRATEGY

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane clinical trial register from Jan 1966 to February 2009 were searched. Reference lists of articles were also browsed. In case of missing information from retrieved articles, authors were contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing anti-hypertensive drug with placebo or no treatment administered to patients within 24 hours of the onset of an acute cardiovascular event.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Fixed effects model with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used. Sensitivity analyses were also conducted.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty-five RCTs (N=166,206) were included, evaluating four classes of anti-hypertensive drugs: ACE inhibitors (12 trials), beta-blockers (20), calcium channel blockers (18) and nitrates (18). Acute stroke was studied in 6 trials (all involving CCBs). Acute myocardial infarction was studied in 59 trials. In the latter setting immediate nitrate treatment (within 24 hours) reduced all-cause mortality during the first 2 days (RR 0.81, 95%CI [0.74,0.89], p<0.0001). No further benefit was observed with nitrate therapy beyond this point. ACE inhibitors did not reduce mortality at 2 days (RR 0.91,95%CI [0.82, 1.00]), but did after 10 days (RR 0.93, 95%CI [0.87,0.98] p=0.01). No other blood pressure lowering drug administered as an immediate treatment or short-term treatment produced a statistical significant mortality reduction at 2, 10 or >/=30 days. There was not enough data studying acute stroke, and there were no RCTs evaluating other acute cardiovascular events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Nitrates reduce mortality (4-8 deaths prevented per 1000) at 2 days when administered within 24 hours of symptom onset of an acute myocardial infarction. No mortality benefit was seen when treatment continued beyond 48 hours. Mortality benefit of immediate treatment with ACE inhibitors post MI at 2 days did not reach statistical significance but the effect was significant at 10 days (2-4 deaths prevented per 1000). There is good evidence for lack of a mortality benefit with immediate or short-term treatment with beta-blockers and calcium channel blockers for acute myocardial infarction.

Use of beta-blockers and effects on heart rate and blood pressure post-acute coronary syndromes: are we on target?

BACKGROUND

beta-blockers have been shown to benefit patients after myocardial infarction by decreasing mortality, sudden cardiac death, and reinfarction. Although beta-blockers are recommended for all patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) without contraindications, a target heart rate (HR) is recommended only for patients with unstable angina/non ST-elevation myocardial infarction. A contemporary series documenting trends in beta-blocker usage and achieved HR and blood pressures (BP) is not available. The study objectives were to monitor trends in HR and BP in relation to beta-blocker use in a contemporary series of patients with ACS.

METHODS

In this observational study, 300 consecutive patients with proven ACS had HR and BP values collected hourly from admission until hospital discharge and averaged at multiple intervals throughout hospital stay. Data on baseline demographic characteristics, beta-blocker doses, and titration schedules, procedures performed, cardiac regimens, concurrent medical issues, and contraindications to therapy were collected.

RESULTS

Only 5.3% achieved an average HR of 50 to 60 beat/min throughout the hospital stay. Overall, the average HR was 74 beat/min and average BP was 115/64 mm Hg. Admission daily doses of metoprolol averaged 58 mg compared to discharge daily doses of 88 mg; only 52% of patients had dosage increases.

CONCLUSIONS

Although effective levels of BP were maintained during hospitalization for an ACS, target HRs were generally not achieved. Future studies are needed to determine the relationship between treatment objectives and clinical outcomes in the present era of ACS management.

Early metoprolol administration before coronary reperfusion results in increased myocardial salvage: analysis of ischemic myocardium at risk using cardiac magnetic resonance

BACKGROUND

Beta-blockers improve clinical outcome when administered early after acute myocardial infarction. However, whether beta-blockers actually reduce the myocardial infarction size is still in dispute. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging can accurately depict the left ventricular (LV) ischemic myocardium at risk (T2-weighted hyperintense region) early after myocardial infarction, as well as the extent of necrosis (delayed gadolinium enhancement). The aim of this study was to determine whether early administration of metoprolol could increase myocardial salvage, measured as the difference between the extent of myocardium at risk and myocardial necrosis.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Twelve Yorkshire pigs underwent a 90-minute left anterior descending coronary occlusion, followed by reperfusion. They were randomized to metoprolol (7.5 mg during myocardial infarction) or placebo. Global and regional LV function, extent of myocardium at risk, and myocardial necrosis were quantified by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging studies performed 4 and 22 days after reperfusion in 10 survivors. Despite similar extent of myocardium at risk in metoprolol- and placebo-treated pigs (30.9% of LV versus 30.6%; P=NS), metoprolol resulted in 5-fold-larger salvaged myocardium (32.4% versus 6.2% of myocardium at risk; P=0.015). The LV ejection fraction significantly improved in metoprolol-treated pigs between days 4 and 22 (37.2% versus 43.0%; P=0.037), whereas it remained unchanged in pigs treated with placebo (35.1% versus 35.0%; P=NS). The extent of myocardial salvage was related directly to LV ejection fraction improvement (P=0.031) and regional LV wall motion recovery (P=0.039) at day 22.

CONCLUSIONS

Early metoprolol administration during acute coronary occlusion increases myocardial salvage. The extent of myocardial salvage, measured as the difference between myocardium at risk and myocardial necrosis, was associated with regional and global LV motion improvement.