A double-blind trial of metoprolol in acute myocardial infarction. Effects on ventricular tachyarrhythmias

The Effect of Beta-Blocker Post-Myocardial Infarction With Ejection Fraction >40% Pooled Analysis From Seven Arabian Gulf Acute Coronary Syndrome Registries

The use of beta-blockers (BB) in reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) post-myocardial infarction (MI) is associated with reduced 1-year mortality, while their role in patients with mid-range and preserved LVEF post-MI remains controversial. We studied 31,620 patients who presented with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) enrolled in seven Arabian Gulf registries between 2005 and 2017. Patients with LVEF ≤40% were excluded. The remaining cohort was divided into two groups: BB group (n = 15,541) and non-BB group (n = 2,798), based on discharge medications. Patients in the non-BB group were relatively younger (55.3 vs. 57.4, P = .004) but higher risk at presentation; with higher Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) score (119.2 vs 109.2, P < .001), higher percentage of cardiogenic shock (3.5 vs 1.4%, P < .001), despite lower prevalence of comorbidities, such as hypertension and hyperlipidemia. BB use was associated with lower 1-year mortality in a multivariate logistic regression analysis, adjusting for major confounders [adjusted odds ratio (OR): 0.71 (95% CI 0.51-0.99)]. This remained the case in a sensitivity analysis using propensity score matching [adjusted OR: 0.34 (95% CI 0.16-0.73)]. In this study, using Arabian Gulf countries registries, the use of BB after ACS with LVEF >40% was independently associated with lower 1-year mortality.

Routine beta-blocker therapy after acute coronary syndromes: The end of an era?

BACKGROUND

Beta-blocker therapy, a treatment burdened by side effects including fatigue, erectile dysfunction and depression, was shown to reduce mortality and cardiovascular events after acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in the pre-coronary reperfusion era. Potential mechanisms include protection from ventricular arrhythmias, increased ischaemia threshold and prevention of left ventricular (LV) adverse remodelling. With the advent of early mechanical reperfusion and contemporary pharmacologic secondary prevention, the benefit of beta-blockers after ACS in the absence of LV dysfunction has been challenged.

METHODS

The present narrative review discusses the contemporary evidence based on searching the PubMed database and references in identified articles.

RESULTS

Recently, the REDUCE-AMI trial-the first adequately powered randomized trial in the reperfusion era to test beta-blocker therapy after myocardial infarction with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)-showed no benefit on the composite of all-cause death or myocardial infarction over a median 3.5-year follow-up. While the benefit of beta-blockers in patients with reduced LVEF remains undisputed, their value in post-ACS patients with mildly reduced systolic function (LVEF 41%-49%) has not been studied in contemporary randomized trials; in this setting, observational studies have suggested a reduction in cardiovascular events with these agents. The adequate duration of beta-blocker therapy remains unknown, but observational data suggests that any mortality benefit may be lost beyond 1-12 months after ACS in patients with LVEF >40%.

CONCLUSION

We believe that there is sufficient evidence to abandon routine beta-blocker prescription in post-ACS patients with preserved LV systolic function.

Roles of β-adrenoceptor Subtypes and Therapeutics in Human Cardiovascular Disease: Heart Failure, Tachyarrhythmias and Other Cardiovascular Disorders

β-Adrenoceptors (β-ARs) provide an important therapeutic target for the treatment of cardiovascular disease. Three β-ARs, β1-AR, β2-AR, β3-AR are localized to the human heart. Activation of β1-AR and β2-ARs increases heart rate, force of contraction (inotropy) and consequently cardiac output to meet physiological demand. However, in disease, chronic over-activation of β1-AR is responsible for the progression of disease (e.g. heart failure) mediated by pathological hypertrophy, adverse remodelling and premature cell death. Furthermore, activation of β1-AR is critical in the pathogenesis of cardiac arrhythmias while activation of β2-AR directly influences blood pressure haemostasis. There is an increasing awareness of the contribution of β2-AR in cardiovascular disease, particularly arrhythmia generation. All β-blockers used therapeutically to treat cardiovascular disease block β1-AR with variable blockade of β2-AR depending on relative affinity for β1-AR vs β2-AR. Since the introduction of β-blockers into clinical practice in 1965, β-blockers with different properties have been trialled, used and evaluated, leading to better understanding of their therapeutic effects and tolerability in various cardiovascular conditions. β-Blockers with the property of intrinsic sympathomimetic activity (ISA), i.e. β-blockers that also activate the receptor, were used in the past for post-treatment of myocardial infarction and had limited use in heart failure. The β-blocker carvedilol continues to intrigue due to numerous properties that differentiate it from other β-blockers and is used successfully in the treatment of heart failure. The discovery of β3-AR in human heart created interest in the role of β3-AR in heart failure but has not resulted in therapeutics at this stage.

Effect of early metoprolol before PCI in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction on infarct size and left ventricular ejection fraction. A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials

Aim

This meta‐analysis aims to look at the impact of early intravenous Metoprolol in ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) before percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) on infarct size, as measured by cardio magnetic resonance (CMR) and left ventricular ejection fraction.

Methods

We searched the following databases: PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane library, and Web of Science. We included only randomized control trials that reported the use of early intravenous Metoprolol in STEMI before PCI on infarct size, as measured by CMR and left ventricular ejection fraction. RevMan software 5.4 was used for performing the analysis.

Results

Following a literature search, 340 publications were found. Finally, 18 studies were included for the systematic review, and 8 clinical trials were included in the meta‐analysis after the full‐text screening. At 6 months, the pooled effect revealed a statistically significant association between Metoprolol and increased left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (%) compared to controls (mean difference [MD] = 3.57, [95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.22–4.92], p < .00001), as well as decreased infarcted myocardium(g) compared to controls (MD = −3.84, [95% [CI] = −5.75 to −1.93], p < .0001). At 1 week, the pooled effect revealed a statistically significant association between Metoprolol and increased LVEF (%) compared to controls (MD = 2.98, [95% CI = 1.26−4.69], p = .0007), as well as decreased infarcted myocardium(%) compared to controls (MD = −3.21, [95% CI = −5.24 to −1.18], p = .002).

Conclusion

A significant decrease in myocardial infarction and increase in LVEF (%) was linked to receiving Metoprolol at 1 week and 6‐month follow‐up.

Effects of Metoprolol on Periprocedural Myocardial Infarction After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (Type 4a MI): An Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Analysis

Background: Metoprolol is the most used cardiac selective β-blocker and has been recommended as a mainstay drug in the management of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). However, the evidence supporting this regimen in periprocedural myocardial infarction (PMI) is limited.

Methods: This study identified 860 individuals who suffered PMI following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedure and median followed up for 3.2 years. Subjects were dichotomized according to whether they received chronic oral sustained-release metoprolol succinate following PMI. After inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) adjustment, logistic regression analysis, Kaplan-Meier curve, and Cox regression analysis were performed to estimate the effects of metoprolol on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) which composed of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and revascularization. Moreover, an exploratory analysis was performed according to hypertension, cardiac troponin I (cTnI) elevation, and cardiac function. A double robust adjustment was used for sensitivity analysis.

Results: Among enrolled PMI subjects, 456 (53%) patients received metoprolol treatment and 404 (47%) patients received observation. After IPTW adjustment, receiving metoprolol was found to reduce the subsequent 3-year risk of MACEs by nearly 7.1% [15 vs. 22.1%, absolute risk difference (ARD) = 0.07, number needed to treat (NNT) = 14, relative risk (RR) = 0.682]. In IPTW-adjusted Cox regression analyses, receiving metoprolol was related to a reduced risk of MACEs (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.588, 95%CI [0.385–0.898], P = 0.014) and revascularization (HR = 0.538, 95%CI [0.326–0.89], P = 0.016). Additionally, IPTW-adjusted logistic regression analysis showed that receiving metoprolol reduced the risk of MI at the third year (odds ratio [OR] = 0.972, 95% CI [0.948–997], P = 0.029). Exploratory analysis showed that the protective effect of metoprolol was more pronounced in subgroups of hypertension and cTnI elevation ≥1,000%, and was remained in patients without cardiac dysfunction. The benefits above were consistent when double robust adjustments were performed.

Conclusion: In the real-world setting, receiving metoprolol treatment following PCI-related PMI has decreased the subsequent risk of MACEs, particularly the risk of recurrent MI and revascularization.

Impact of Bisoprolol on Ventricular Arrhythmias in Experimental Myocardial Infarction

Following acute myocardial infarction (AMI), early use of beta-blockers (BBs) reduced the incidences of ventricular arrhythmia (VA) and death in the pre reperfusion era. However, some studies have reported a worsening of clinical outcomes and therefore, this study used a porcine model of AMI to evaluate the efficacy of bisoprolol on VAs and mortality. Twenty pigs were divided into two groups with one group using oral bisoprolol which was given for 3 hours before the experiment and then maintained for 7 days. A loop recorder was implanted, AMI was induced by balloon occlusion for 60 min, and then, reperfusion. One week later, the echocardiography and loop recorder data were analyzed in the surviving animals. Bisoprolol did not increase the heart rate (62.9±14.5 vs 79.0±20.3; p=0.048), lower the rate of premature ventricular contractions (PVC) (0.8±0.8 vs 11.0±12.8; p=0.021) or tend to lower recurrent VA (0.6±0.5 vs 1.1±1.1; p=0.131) during coronary artery occlusion. After reperfusion, bisoprolol did reduce VA in the early AMI period (0.1±0.3 vs 4.2±4.6; p=0.001) and it was not associated with the extent of myocardial recovery. In this porcine model, early oral bisoprolol might help reduce the incidences of PVC and recurrent VA and determine whether effects are more pronounced during the early AMI period. Our results suggest that bisoprolol might help reduce lethal VA and cardiac death following AMI in this reperfusion era.

Ivabradine is as effective as metoprolol in the prevention of ventricular arrhythmias in acute non-reperfused myocardial infarction in the rat

Ventricular arrhythmias are a major source of early mortality in acute myocardial infarction (MI) and remain a major therapeutic challenge. Thus we investigated effects of ivabradine, a presumably specific bradycardic agent versus metoprolol, a β-blocker, at doses offering the same heart rate (HR) reduction, on ventricular arrhythmias in the acute non-reperfused MI in the rat. Immediately after MI induction a single dose of ivabradine/ metoprolol was given. ECG was continuously recorded and ventricular arrhythmias were analyzed. After 6 h epicardial monophasic action potentials (MAPs) were recorded and cardiomyocyte Ca²⁺ handling was assessed. Both ivabradine and metoprolol reduced HR by 17% and arrhythmic mortality (14% and 19%, respectively, versus 33% in MI, p < 0.05) and ventricular arrhythmias in post-MI rats. Both drugs reduced QTc prolongation and decreased sensitivity of ryanodine receptors in isolated cardiomyocytes, but otherwise had no effect on Ca²⁺ handling, velocity of conduction or repolarization. We did not find any effects of potential I_Kr inhibition by ivabradine in this setting. Thus Ivabradine is an equally effective antiarrhythmic agent as metoprolol in early MI in the rat. It could be potentially tested as an alternative antiarrhythmic agent in acute MI when β-blockers are contraindicated.

Long-Term Quality of Prescription for ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) Patients: A Real World 1-Year Follow-Up Study

AIM

American and European associations of cardiology published specific guidelines about recommended drugs for secondary prevention in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. Our aim was to assess whether drug prescription for STEMI patients was in accordance with the guidelines at discharge and after 1 year.

METHOD

We used data of 361 patients admitted for STEMI in a tertiary hospital in Switzerland from 2014 to 2016. We assessed the adequacy of prescription of recommended drugs at two time points: discharge and after 1 year. Medications assessed were aspirin, P2Y12 inhibitors, statin, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and β-blockers. We took into account several criteria like statin dosage (low versus high intensity) and presence of contraindication for consideration of optimal therapy. Predictors of incomplete prescription of guideline medications were then assessed with multivariate logistic regression models.

RESULTS

From discharge (n = 358) to 1-year follow-up (n = 303), rate of optimal prescription was reduced from 98.6 to 91.7% for aspirin, from 93.9 to 79.1% for P2Y12 inhibitors, from 83.8 to 65.7% for statins, from 98.6 to 95.6% for ACEIs/ARBs, and from 97.1 to 96.9% for β-blockers. Predictors of incomplete prescription of guideline medications at discharge were female sex (odds ratio [OR] 2.54, p = 0.007), active or former smoker status (OR 2.29, p = 0.017), multivessel disease (OR 2.07, p = 0.022), left ventricular ejection fraction < 40% (OR 2.49, p = 0.008), and transfer to cardiac surgery (OR 9.66, p = 0.018). At 1 year, age > 65 (OR 1.92, p = 0.036) remained the only significant predictor.

CONCLUSION

The present study showed a high prescription rate of guideline-recommended medications in a referral center for primary percutaneous coronary intervention. At discharge, women and co-morbid patients were at the highest risk of incomplete prescription of guideline medications, whereas long-term prescription was suboptimal for elderly. A drug lacking at time of discharge was rarely introduced within the year, which underscores the paramount importance of optimal prescription at time of discharge. Strategies like implementing a standardized prescription could reduce the proportion of suboptimal prescription. It could therefore be one way to improve the long-term quality of care of our patients to the highest level. This study used local data from AMIS Plus-National Registry of Acute Myocardial Infarction in Switzerland (NCT01305785).

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.

Effect of Pre-Procedural Beta-Blocker on Clinical Outcome after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Acute Coronary Syndrome

The efficacy of pre-procedural beta-blocker use in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is not well established in the current percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) era. We investigate the effect of pre-procedural beta-blocker use on clinical outcomes in patients with ACS undergoing PCI. Among 44,967 consecutive cases of PCI enrolled in the nationwide, retrospective, multicenter registry (K-PCI registry), 31,040 patients with ACS were selected and analyzed. We classified patients into pre-procedural beta-blocker group (n = 8,678) and pre-procedural no-beta-blocker group (n = 22,362) according to the use of beta-blockers at least for two weeks before index PCI. Propensity score-matching analysis was performed and resulted in 7,445 pairs. The primary outcome was in-hospital cardiac death. In propensity score-matched populations, the pre-procedural beta-blocker group had a lower incidence of in-hospital cardiac death compared with the pre-procedural no-beta-blocker group (1.1% versus 2.0%, unadjusted odds ratio [OR]: 0.56, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.42-0.73, P < 0.01). In subgroup analysis, the pre-procedural beta-blocker group had a lower incidence of in-hospital cardiac death, compared with the pre-procedural no-beta-blocker group in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction subpopulation (3.1% versus 6.1%, unadjusted OR: 0.49, 95% CI: 0.34-0.71, P < 0.01) and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction subpopulation (1.5% versus 2.9%, unadjusted OR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.33-0.79, P < 0.01). However, in unstable angina subpopulation, the in-hospital cardiac death rate was comparable between both groups. In conclusion, the use of pre-procedural beta-blocker was associated with a lower risk of in-hospital cardiac death in patients with ACS undergoing PCI. This result adds to the body of evidence that use of pre-procedural beta-blocker in patients with ACS might be reasonable.

Heart failure as a substrate and trigger for ventricular tachycardia

Heart failure (HF) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality with more than 5.1 million individuals affected in the USA. Ventricular tachyarrhythmias (VAs) including ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation are common in patients with heart failure. The pathophysiology of these mechanisms as well as the contribution of heart failure to the genesis of these arrhythmias is complex and multifaceted. Myocardial hypertrophy and stretch with increased preload and afterload lead to shortening of the action potential at early repolarization and lengthening of the action potential at final repolarization which can result in re-entrant ventricular tachycardia. Myocardial fibrosis and scar can create the substrate for re-entrant ventricular tachycardia. Altered calcium handling in the failing heart can lead to the development of proarrhythmic early and delayed after depolarizations. Various medications used in the treatment of HF such as loop diuretics and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors have not demonstrated a reduction in sudden cardiac death (SCD); however, beta-blockers (BB) are effective in reducing mortality and SCD. Amongst patients who have HF with reduced ejection fraction, the angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (sacubitril/valsartan) has been shown to reduce cardiovascular mortality, specifically by reducing SCD, as well as death due to worsening HF. Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation in HF patients reduces the risk of SCD; however, subsequent mortality is increased in those who receive ICD shocks. Prophylactic ICD implantation reduces death from arrhythmia but does not reduce overall mortality during the acute post-myocardial infarction (MI) period (less than 40 days), for those with reduced ejection fraction and impaired autonomic dysfunction. Furthermore, although death from arrhythmias is reduced, this is offset by an increase in the mortality from non-arrhythmic causes. This article provides a review of the aforementioned mechanisms of arrhythmogenesis in heart failure; the role and impact of HF therapy such as cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), including the role, if any, of CRT-P and CRT-D in preventing VAs; the utility of both non-invasive parameters as well as multiple implant-based parameters for telemonitoring in HF; and the effect of left ventricular assist device implantation on VAs.

Do Patients need Lifelong β-Blockers after an Uncomplicated Myocardial Infarction?

The lifelong use of β-adrenoceptor antagonists (β-blockers) after a myocardial infarction (MI) has been the standard of care based on trials performed before the era of revascularization, when heart failure was common. Large randomized trials in the mid-1980s demonstrated that β-blockers played a major role in improving the in-hospital and long-term survival of patients admitted for MI. However, the implementation of rapid myocardial reperfusion led to a substantial survival benefit and a reduction of heart failure because of reduced infarct size. Modern large longitudinal registries did not provide sufficient evidence to support long-term β-blocker therapy in patients with uncomplicated acute MI. The long-term prescription of this therapy has become a matter of debate given the lack of contemporary evidence, frequent side effects, and treatment adherence issues. Furthermore, this shift into the reperfusion era led to a downgraded recommendation for the use of β-blockers in post-MI patients (class IIa B recommendation) in the 2017 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) recommendations for the treatment of ST-segment elevation MI (STEMI). Three large ongoing multicenter randomized trials (AβYSS, REDUCE-SWEDEHEART, and REBOOT-CNIC) are evaluating early discontinuation of β-blockers after an uncomplicated acute MI. The tested hypothesis is that β-blocker withdrawal is safe versus major adverse cardiovascular events and improves quality of life by reducing side effects. Thus, the present review summarizes the exhaustive evidence-based data for long-term β-blocker use after uncomplicated MI and the ongoing trials.

Early β-blockers administration might be associated with a reduced risk of contrast-induced acute kidney injury in patients with acute myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

Contrast-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).

METHODS

In 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.

RESULTS

The 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.

CONCLUSIONS

Use 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 REGISTRATION

PRECOMIN, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01400295.

Beta-blockers use from the general to the hemodialysis population

Beta-blockers have numerous indications in the general population and are strongly recommended in heart failure, post-myocardial infarction and arrhythmias. In hemodialysis patients, their use is based on weak evidence because of the lack of a sufficient number of randomized clinical trials. The strongest evidence is based on two trials. The first showed better survival with carvedilol in hemodialysis patients with four sessions per week and systolic heart failure. The second found reduced cardiovascular morbidity with atenolol compared to lisinopril in mostly black hypertensive hemodialysis patients. No clinical trials exist regarding myocardial infarction. Large retrospective studies have assessed the benefits of beta-blockers in hemodialysis. A large cohort of hemodialysis patients with new-onset heart failure showed better survival when treated with carvedilol, bisoprolol or metoprolol. Another recent one of 20,064 patients found out that metoprolol compared to carvedilol was associated with less all-cause mortality. There is still uncertainty also regarding the impact of dialysability of beta-blockers on patient's survival. On top of that, many observations suggested that beta-blockers were associated with a reduced rate of sudden cardiac death in hemodialysis patients but recent data show a link between bradycardia and sudden cardiac death questioning the benefit of beta-blockade in this population. Finally, what we know for sure so far is that beta-blockers should be avoided in patients with intradialytic hypotension associated with bradycardia.

Non-ST-Segment Acute Coronary Syndromes

Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) represents an umbrella of ischemic myocardial disease and diagnoses encompassing unstable angina (UA), non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), and ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). UA and NSTEMI for all intents and purposes, share similar pathophysiology, but at increasing severity. This article focuses on the diagnosis, risk stratification, management, and strategies that impact outcomes in NSTEMI.

2018 Guidelines of the Taiwan Society of Cardiology, Taiwan Society of Emergency Medicine and Taiwan Society of Cardiovascular Interventions for the management of non ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome

In Taiwan, the incidence of non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) continues to increase in recent years. The purpose of this guideline is to help health care professionals in Taiwan to use adequate tests and treatments for management of NSTE-ACS. For rapid diagnosis, in addition to history and physical examination, 0/3 h rapid diagnosis protocol with high sensitivity cardiac troponin assay is recommended in this guideline. Dual antiplatelet and anticoagulation therapies are important parts in the initial treatment. Risk stratification should be performed to identify high risk patients for early coronary angiography. Through evaluation of the coronary anatomy and other clinical factors, the decision for coronary revascularization, either by percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting, should be decided by the heart team. The duration of dual antiplatelet therapy should be given for at least 12 months after discharge. Other secondary preventive medications are also recommended for long term use.

Comparison between renal denervation and metoprolol on the susceptibility of ventricular arrhythmias in rats with myocardial infarction

Ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) are the leading cause of sudden cardiac death in patients with myocardial infarction (MI). We sought to compare effects of renal denervation (RDN) and metoprolol on VAs after MI. Fifty-four male Sprague-Dawley rats underwent ligation of left anterior descending coronary artery to induce MI, while 6 rats served as Control. Metoprolol was given 20 mg/kg/day for 5 weeks after MI surgery. RDN/Sham-RDN procedure was performed at 1 week after MI. At 5 weeks after MI, electrical programmed stimulation (EPS) was performed in all groups for evaluation of VAs. After EPS, heart and kidneys were harvested. Compared with MI group, RDN and metoprolol significantly decreased the incidence of VAs, and RDN is superior to metoprolol. Compared with metoprolol group, Masson staining showed that RDN significantly reduced the myocardial fibrosis. Both RDN and metoprolol decreased the protein expression of connexin43 (Cx43) compared with MI group, while only RDN lighted this decrease remarkably. Immunohistochemical staining of Tyrosine hydroxylase (TH) and growth associated protein 43 (GAP43) revealed that RDN and metoprolol had similar effect on reducing densities of sympathetic nerve in infarction border zone. According to this study, RDN is more effective in reducing VAs than metoprolol in ischemic cardiomyopathy model.

Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection: Diagnosis and Management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) is a non-iatrogenic and non-traumatic separation of the coronary arterial wall. While SCAD represents an important cause of myocardial infarction, optimal diagnostic and therapeutic options remain challenging. We sought to review recent studies and provide an update on diagnosis and management of SCAD.

RECENT FINDINGS

Coronary angiography is the first-line diagnostic modality for SCAD, with three angiographic features commonly observed in SCAD: type 1 (pathognomonic angiographic appearance with contrast staining of the arterial wall), type 2 (long coronary stenosis), and type 3 (focal tubular stenosis). In addition, adjunctive intracoronary imaging can aid in identifying coronary dissections. Conservative management with beta-blockers and aspirin remains the mainstay of therapy. However, patients with high-risk features and recurrent symptoms may require revascularization. Several techniques have been reported, such as long stents to seal the entire length of the dissection, stepwise stenting starting at the distal edge followed by proximal edge stenting, use of bioabsorbable stents, and cutting balloon angioplasty. Furthermore, cardiac rehabilitation appears to be safe and offers significant benefits for patients with SCAD. Coronary angiographic classification contributed to the increased recognition of SCAD in recent years. Selecting the most suitable and appropriate therapy based on accurate diagnosis is the cornerstone of management in SCAD. Further studies are needed to establish optimal treatment of SCAD depending on anatomical and/or clinical features.

Perioperative beta-blockers for preventing surgery-related mortality and morbidity

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials have yielded conflicting results regarding the ability of beta-blockers to influence perioperative cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Thus routine prescription of these drugs in unselected patients remains a controversial issue.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to systematically analyse the effects of perioperatively administered beta-blockers for prevention of surgery-related mortality and morbidity in patients undergoing any type of surgery while under general anaesthesia.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified trials by searching the following databases from the date of their inception until June 2013: MEDLINE, Embase , the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Biosis Previews, CAB Abstracts, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Derwent Drug File, Science Citation Index Expanded, Life Sciences Collection, Global Health and PASCAL. In addition, we searched online resources to identify grey literature.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials if participants were randomly assigned to a beta-blocker group or a control group (standard care or placebo). Surgery (any type) had to be performed with all or at least a significant proportion of participants under general anaesthesia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data from all studies. In cases of disagreement, we reassessed the respective studies to reach consensus. We computed summary estimates in the absence of significant clinical heterogeneity. Risk ratios (RRs) were used for dichotomous outcomes, and mean differences (MDs) were used for continuous outcomes. We performed subgroup analyses for various potential effect modifiers.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 88 randomized controlled trials with 19,161 participants. Six studies (7%) met the highest methodological quality criteria (studies with overall low risk of bias: adequate sequence generation, adequate allocation concealment, double/triple-blinded design with a placebo group, intention-to-treat analysis), whereas in the remaining trials, some form of bias was present or could not be definitively excluded (studies with overall unclear or high risk of bias). Outcomes were evaluated separately for cardiac and non-cardiac surgery.CARDIAC SURGERY (53 trials)We found no clear evidence of an effect of beta-blockers on the following outcomes.• All-cause mortality: RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.52, 3783 participants, moderate quality evidence.• Acute myocardial infarction (AMI): RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.51, 3553 participants, moderate quality evidence.• Myocardial ischaemia: RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.05, 166 participants, low quality evidence.• Cerebrovascular events: RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.58 to 4.02, 1400 participants, low quality evidence.• Hypotension: RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.67 to 3.51, 558 participants, low quality evidence.• Bradycardia: RR 1.61, 95% CI 0.97 to 2.66, 660 participants, low quality evidence.• Congestive heart failure: RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.34, 311 participants, low quality evidence.Beta-blockers significantly reduced the occurrence of the following endpoints.• Ventricular arrhythmias: RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.58, number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 29, 2292 participants, moderate quality evidence.• Supraventricular arrhythmias: RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.53, NNTB five, 6420 participants, high quality evidence.• On average, beta-blockers reduced length of hospital stay by 0.54 days (95% CI -0.90 to -0.19, 2450 participants, low quality evidence).NON-CARDIAC SURGERY (35 trials)Beta-blockers significantly increased the occurrence of the following adverse events.• All-cause mortality: RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.57, 11,413 participants, low quality of evidence, number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 167.• Hypotension: RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.38 to 1.64, NNTH 16, 10,947 participants, high quality evidence.• Bradycardia: RR 2.23, 95% CI 1.48 to 3.36, NNTH 21, 11,033 participants, moderate quality evidence.We found a potential increase in the occurrence of the following outcomes with the use of beta-blockers.• Cerebrovascular events: RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.93 to 2.71, 9150 participants, low quality evidence.Whereas no clear evidence of an effect was found when all studies were analysed, restricting the meta-analysis to low risk of bias studies revealed a significant increase in cerebrovascular events with the use of beta-blockers: RR 2.09, 95% CI 1.14 to 3.82, NNTH 265, 8648 participants.Beta-blockers significantly reduced the occurrence of the following endpoints.• AMI: RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.87, NNTB 76, 10,958 participants, high quality evidence.• Myocardial ischaemia: RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.77, NNTB nine, 978 participants, moderate quality evidence.• Supraventricular arrhythmias: RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.94, NNTB 112, 8744 participants, high quality evidence.We found no clear evidence of an effect of beta-blockers on the following outcomes.• Ventricular arrhythmias: RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.49, 476 participants, moderate quality evidence.• Congestive heart failure: RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.48, 9173 participants, moderate quality evidence.• Length of hospital stay: mean difference -0.45 days, 95% CI -1.75 to 0.84, 551 participants, low quality evidence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

According to our findings, perioperative application of beta-blockers still plays a pivotal role in cardiac surgery, as they can substantially reduce the high burden of supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmias in the aftermath of surgery. Their influence on mortality, AMI, stroke, congestive heart failure, hypotension and bradycardia in this setting remains unclear.In non-cardiac surgery, evidence shows an association of beta-blockers with increased all-cause mortality. Data from low risk of bias trials further suggests an increase in stroke rate with the use of beta-blockers. As the quality of evidence is still low to moderate, more evidence is needed before a definitive conclusion can be drawn. The substantial reduction in supraventricular arrhythmias and AMI in this setting seems to be offset by the potential increase in mortality and stroke.

Adrenergic Blockade Bi-directionally and Asymmetrically Alters Functional Brain-Heart Communication and Prolongs Electrical Activities of the Brain and Heart during Asphyxic Cardiac Arrest

Sudden cardiac arrest is a leading cause of death in the United States. The neurophysiological mechanism underlying sudden death is not well understood. Previously we have shown that the brain is highly stimulated in dying animals and that asphyxia-induced death could be delayed by blocking the intact brain-heart neuronal connection. These studies suggest that the autonomic nervous system plays an important role in mediating sudden cardiac arrest. In this study, we tested the effectiveness of phentolamine and atenolol, individually or combined, in prolonging functionality of the vital organs in CO₂-mediated asphyxic cardiac arrest model. Rats received either saline, phentolamine, atenolol, or phentolamine plus atenolol, 30 min before the onset of asphyxia. Electrocardiogram (ECG) and electroencephalogram (EEG) signals were simultaneously collected from each rat during the entire process and investigated for cardiac and brain functions using a battery of analytic tools. We found that adrenergic blockade significantly suppressed the initial decline of cardiac output, prolonged electrical activities of both brain and heart, asymmetrically altered functional connectivity within the brain, and altered, bi-directionally and asymmetrically, functional, and effective connectivity between the brain and heart. The protective effects of adrenergic blockers paralleled the suppression of brain and heart connectivity, especially in the right hemisphere associated with central regulation of sympathetic function. Collectively, our results demonstrate that blockade of brain-heart connection via alpha- and beta-adrenergic blockers significantly prolonged the detectable activities of both the heart and the brain in asphyxic rat. The beneficial effects of combined alpha and beta blockers may help extend the survival of cardiac arrest patients.

β-blocker dosage and outcomes after acute coronary syndrome

BACKGROUND

Although β-blockers increase survival in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients, the doses used in trials were higher than doses used in practice, and recent data do not support an advantage of higher doses. We hypothesized that rates of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and stroke are equivalent for patients on low-dose and high-dose β-blocker.

METHODS

Patients admitted to Intermountain Healthcare with ACS and diagnosed with ≥70% coronary stenosis between 1994 and 2013 were studied (N = 7,834). We classified low dose as ≤25% and high dose as ≥50% of an equivalent daily dose of 200 mg of metoprolol. Multivariate analyses were used to test association between low-dose versus high-dose β-blocker dosage and MACE at 0-6 months and 6-24 months.

RESULTS

A total of 5,287 ACS subjects were discharged on β-blockers (87% low dose, 12% high dose, and 1% intermediate dose). The 6-month MACE outcomes rates for the β-blocker dosage (low versus high) were not equivalent (P = .18) (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.76; 95% CI, 0.52-1.10). However, subjects on low-dose β-blocker therapy did have a significantly decreased risk of myocardial infarction for 0-6 months (HR = 0.53; 95% CI, 0.33-0.86). The rates of MACE events during the 6-24 months after presentation with ACS were equivalent for the 2 doses (P = .009; HR = 1.03 [95% CI, 0.70-1.50]).

CONCLUSIONS

In ACS patients, rates of MACE for high-dose and low-dose β-blocker doses are similar. These findings question the importance of achieving a high dose of β-blocker in ACS patients and highlight the need for further investigation of this clinical question.

9th Hatter Biannual Meeting: position document on ischaemia/reperfusion injury, conditioning and the ten commandments of cardioprotection

In the 30 years since the original description of ischaemic preconditioning, understanding of the pathophysiology of ischaemia/reperfusion injury and concepts of cardioprotection have been revolutionised. In the same period of time, management of patients with coronary artery disease has also been transformed: coronary artery and valve surgery are now deemed routine with generally excellent outcomes, and the management of acute coronary syndromes has seen decade on decade reductions in cardiovascular mortality. Nonetheless, despite these improvements, cardiovascular disease and ischaemic heart disease in particular, remain the leading cause of death and a significant cause of long-term morbidity (with a concomitant increase in the incidence of heart failure) worldwide. The need for effective cardioprotective strategies has never been so pressing. However, despite unequivocal evidence of the existence of ischaemia/reperfusion in animal models providing a robust rationale for study in man, recent phase 3 clinical trials studying a variety of cardioprotective strategies in cardiac surgery and acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction have provided mixed results. The investigators meeting at the Hatter Cardiovascular Institute workshop describe the challenge of translating strong pre-clinical data into effective clinical intervention strategies in patients in whom effective medical therapy is already altering the pathophysiology of ischaemia/reperfusion injury-and lay out a clearly defined framework for future basic and clinical research to improve the chances of successful translation of strong pre-clinical interventions in man.

Electrical Storm: Case Series and Review of Management

Electrical storm is defined as a recurrent episode of hemodynamically destabilizing ventricular tachyarrhythmia that usually requires electrical cardioversion or defibrillation. We describe three cases presenting with electrical storm under differing circumstances: (1) a 57-year-old man with ST-elevation myocardial infarction within 1 week of a posterior circulation stroke who developed refractory sustained ventricular tachycardia 10 days after an acute myocardial infarction; (2) a 65-year-old man who developed polymorphic ventncular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation following dobutamine echocardiography; and (3) a 20-year-old woman who developed intractable ventricular fibrillation following an overdose of a weight-reduction pill. The management of electrical storm is discussed, and evolving literature supporting the routine use of intravenous amiodarone and β-blockers in place of intravenous lidocaine is critically examined.

Effect of early bisoprolol administration on ventricular arrhythmia and cardiac death in patients with non-ST elevation myocardial infarction

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the impact of early oral beta blockade in patients presenting with acute non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).

METHODS

We retrospectively identified 890 consecutive patients presenting with NSTEMI to a single UK centre from 2012 to 2014. Included patients all received standardised antiplatelet therapy plus low-dose oral bisoprolol (1.25-2.5 mg) within 4 h (mean 2.2±1.36; 'Early Group') or within 5-24 h (mean 15.4±5.7; 'Late Group') of presentation. Patients were followed up for the duration of hospital stay with the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE-defined as ventricular arrhythmia, cardiac death or repeat infarction) set as the primary outcome. Multivariate logistic regression models analysed early versus late bisoprolol administration and adjusted for potential confounders.

RESULTS

399 patients were included. Of the patient parameters, only the GRACE score was significantly different between the early (n=99, GRACE 164.5±29.6) and late (n=300, GRACE 156.7±31.4) groups (p=0.033). The early group had significantly fewer ventricular arrhythmias (1 vs 20, p=0.034), cardiac deaths (0 vs 13, p=0.044) and consequently MACE (1 vs 27, p=0.005) than the late group. After adjusting for the confounders of pulse, blood pressure, smoking and creatinine, logistic regression analysis identified early bisoprolol administration as protective for ventricular arrhythmia (p=0.038, OR 0.114, CI 0.015 to 0.885) and MACE (p=0.011, OR 0.064, CI 0.008 to 0.527). There was one episode of symptomatic bradycardia in the late group.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that low-dose oral bisoprolol administered to patients with NSTEMI within 4 h of admission may be protective and lead to reduced inpatient MACE.

Prognostic Benefit of Beta-blockers After Acute Coronary Syndrome With Preserved Systolic Function. Still Relevant Today?

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

The scientific evidence for using beta-blockers after acute coronary syndrome stems from studies conducted in the days before coronary revascularization and in patients with ventricular dysfunction. The aim of this study was to analyze the current long-term prognostic benefit of beta-blockers in patients with acute coronary syndrome and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 3236 patients with acute coronary syndrome and left ventricular ejection fraction ≥ 50%. We performed a propensity-matched analysis to draw up two groups of 555 patients paired according to whether or not they had been treated with beta-blockers. The prognostic value of beta-blockers to predict mortality during follow-up was analyzed using Cox regression.

RESULTS

During the follow-up (median, 5.2 years), 506 patients (15.6%) died. Patients treated with beta-blockers (n=2277 [70.4%]) had a lower mortality rate (11.6% vs 25.2%; P<.001). After propensity score matching, we found that mortality during follow-up was still lower in the beta-blocker group (14.4% vs 18.9%; P=.020). Therefore, this treatment was an independent protective factor after adjusting for confounding variables in the multivariate Cox regression analysis (hazard ratio=0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-0.87; P=.004).

CONCLUSIONS

Beta-blocker treatment in patients with acute coronary syndrome and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction is associated with lower long-term mortality.

Nationwide trends in development of heart failure and mortality after first-time myocardial infarction 1997-2010: A Danish cohort study

AIMS

Pharmacological and revascularization strategies following myocardial infarction (MI) have changed substantially during the last two decades. We investigated the temporal trends in heart failure (HF) incidence and mortality during the first 90 days following first-time MI between 1997 and 2010 in Denmark.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Through administrative nationwide registers we identified 89,389 patients without prior HF hospitalized with first MI. The number of patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) days 0-1 after index MI increased from 2.5% in 1997-98 to 38.2% in 2009-10. Treatment with clopidogrel increased from 0.02% in 1997-98 to 68.1% in 2009-10 and statins from 8.1% in 1997-98 to 78.3% in 2009-10. The incidence of HF (defined as HF diagnosis or incident use of loop diuretics) decreased from 23.6% in 1997-98 to 19.6% in 2009-10 (p<0.001). Adjusted for age, sex, and comorbidity, hazard ratio was 0.77 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74-0.79) for developing HF in 2009-10, compared with 1997-98. Adjusted for coronary interventions, and pharmacotherapy HR increased to 0.82 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79-0.85) compared with 1997-98. The 90-day mortality decreased from 19.6% in 1997-98 to 11.7% in 2009-10 (p<0.001). Adjusted for age, sex, and comorbidity HR was 0.59 (CI 0.55-0.64) in 2009-10 compared with 1997-98; upon additional adjustment for coronary interventions and pharmacotherapy the estimate was 0.75 (95% CI 0.69-0.81).

CONCLUSION

We found a temporal decrease in HF incidence and mortality during the first 90 days after MI in 1997-2010. This could partly be explained by changes in interventional and pharmacological treatment strategies.

Perioperative beta-blockers for preventing surgery-related mortality and morbidity

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials have yielded conflicting results regarding the ability of beta-blockers to influence perioperative cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Thus routine prescription of these drugs in unselected patients remains a controversial issue.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to systematically analyse the effects of perioperatively administered beta-blockers for prevention of surgery-related mortality and morbidity in patients undergoing any type of surgery while under general anaesthesia.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified trials by searching the following databases from the date of their inception until June 2013: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Biosis Previews, CAB Abstracts, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Derwent Drug File, Science Citation Index Expanded, Life Sciences Collection, Global Health and PASCAL. In addition, we searched online resources to identify grey literature.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials if participants were randomly assigned to a beta-blocker group or a control group (standard care or placebo). Surgery (any type) had to be performed with all or at least a significant proportion of participants under general anaesthesia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data from all studies. In cases of disagreement, we reassessed the respective studies to reach consensus. We computed summary estimates in the absence of significant clinical heterogeneity. Risk ratios (RRs) were used for dichotomous outcomes, and mean differences (MDs) were used for continuous outcomes. We performed subgroup analyses for various potential effect modifiers.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 89 randomized controlled trials with 19,211 participants. Six studies (7%) met the highest methodological quality criteria (studies with overall low risk of bias: adequate sequence generation, adequate allocation concealment, double/triple-blinded design with a placebo group, intention-to-treat analysis), whereas in the remaining trials, some form of bias was present or could not be definitively excluded (studies with overall unclear or high risk of bias). Outcomes were evaluated separately for cardiac and non-cardiac surgery. CARDIAC SURGERY (53 trials)We found no clear evidence of an effect of beta-blockers on the following outcomes.• All-cause mortality: RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.52, 3783 participants, moderate quality of evidence.• Acute myocardial infarction (AMI): RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.51, 3553 participants, moderate quality of evidence.• Myocardial ischaemia: RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.05, 166 participants, low quality of evidence.• Cerebrovascular events: RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.58 to 4.02, 1400 participants, low quality of evidence.• Hypotension: RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.67 to 3.51, 558 participants, low quality of evidence.• Bradycardia: RR 1.61, 95% CI 0.97 to 2.66, 660 participants, low quality of evidence.• Congestive heart failure: RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.34, 311 participants, low quality of evidence.Beta-blockers significantly reduced the occurrence of the following endpoints.• Ventricular arrhythmias: RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.58, number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 29, 2292 participants, moderate quality of evidence.• Supraventricular arrhythmias: RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.53, NNTB six, 6420 participants, high quality of evidence.• On average, beta-blockers reduced length of hospital stay by 0.54 days (95% CI -0.90 to -0.19, 2450 participants, low quality of evidence). NON-CARDIAC SURGERY (36 trials)We found a potential increase in the occurrence of the following outcomes with the use of beta-blockers.• All-cause mortality: RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.54, 11,463 participants, low quality of evidence.Whereas no clear evidence of an effect was noted when all studies were analysed, restricting the meta-analysis to low risk of bias studies revealed a significant increase in all-cause mortality with the use of beta-blockers: RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.59, number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 189, 10,845 participants.• Cerebrovascular events: RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.93 to 2.71, 9150 participants, low quality of evidence.Whereas no clear evidence of an effect was found when all studies were analysed, restricting the meta-analysis to low risk of bias studies revealed a significant increase in cerebrovascular events with the use of beta-blockers: RR 2.09, 95% CI 1.14 to 3.82, NNTH 255, 8648 participants.Beta-blockers significantly reduced the occurrence of the following endpoints.• AMI: RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.87, NNTB 72, 10,958 participants, high quality of evidence.• Myocardial ischaemia: RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.70, NNTB seven, 1028 participants, moderate quality of evidence.• Supraventricular arrhythmias: RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.92, NNTB 111, 8794 participants, high quality of evidence.Beta-blockers significantly increased the occurrence of the following adverse events.• Hypotension: RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.38 to 1.64, NNTH 15, 10,947 participants, high quality of evidence.• Bradycardia: RR 2.24, 95% CI 1.49 to 3.35, NNTH 18, 11,083 participants, moderate quality of evidence.We found no clear evidence of an effect of beta-blockers on the following outcomes.• Ventricular arrhythmias: RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.33, 526 participants, moderate quality of evidence.• Congestive heart failure: RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.47, 9223 participants, moderate quality of evidence.• Length of hospital stay: mean difference -0.27 days, 95% CI -1.29 to 0.75, 601 participants, low quality of evidence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

According to our findings, perioperative application of beta-blockers still plays a pivotal role in cardiac surgery , as they can substantially reduce the high burden of supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmias in the aftermath of surgery. Their influence on mortality, AMI, stroke, congestive heart failure, hypotension and bradycardia in this setting remains unclear.In non-cardiac surgery, evidence from low risk of bias trials shows an increase in all-cause mortality and stroke with the use of beta-blockers. As the quality of evidence is still low to moderate, more evidence is needed before a definitive conclusion can be drawn. The substantial reduction in supraventricular arrhythmias and AMI in this setting seems to be offset by the potential increase in mortality and stroke.

Targeting sarcoplasmic reticulum calcium ATPase by gene therapy

Although pharmacologic therapies have provided gains in reducing the mortality of heart failure, the rising incidence of the disease requires new approaches to combat its health burden. Twenty-five years ago, abnormal calcium cycling was identified as a characteristic of failing human myocardium. Sarcoplasmic reticulum calcium ATPase (SERCA2a), the sarcoplasmic reticulum calcium pump, was found to be a key factor in the alteration of calcium cycling. With the advancement of gene vectors, SERCA2a emerged as an attractive clinical target for gene delivery purposes. Using adeno-associated virus constructs, SERCA2a upregulation has been found to improve myocardial function in animal models. The clinical benefits of overexpressing SERCA2a have been demonstrated in the phase I study Calcium Upregulation by Percutaneous Administration of Gene Therapy in Cardiac Disease (CUPID). This study has demonstrated that a persistent expression of the transgene SERCA2a is associated with a significant improvement in associated biochemical alterations and clinical symptoms of heart failure. In the coming years, additional targets will likely emerge that are amenable to genetic manipulations along with the development of more advanced vector systems with safer delivery approaches.

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.

Device-Based Approaches to Modulate the Autonomic Nervous System and Cardiac Electrophysiology

Alterations in resting autonomic tone can be pathogenic in many cardiovascular disease states, such as heart failure and hypertension. Indeed, autonomic modulation by way of beta-blockade is a standard treatment of these conditions. There is a significant interest in developing non-pharmacological methods of autonomic modulation as well. For instance, clinical trials of vagal stimulation and spinal cord stimulation in the treatment of heart failure are currently underway, and renal denervation has been studied recently in the treatment of resistant hypertension. Notably, autonomic stimulation is also a potent modulator of cardiac electrophysiology. Manipulating the autonomic nervous system in studies designed to treat heart failure and hypertension have revealed that autonomic modulation may have a role in the treatment of common atrial and ventricular arrhythmias as well. Experimental data on vagal nerve and spinal cord stimulation suggest that each technique may reduce ventricular arrhythmias. Similarly, renal denervation may play a role in the treatment of atrial fibrillation, as well as in controlling refractory ventricular arrhythmias. In this review, we present the current experimental and clinical data on the effect of these therapeutic modalities on cardiac electrophysiology and their potential role in arrhythmia management.

Current and emerging antiarrhythmic drug therapy for ventricular tachycardia

Ventricular arrhythmias, including ventricular fibrillation (VF) and sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT), are the principal causes of sudden cardiac death in patients with structural heart disease. While coronary artery disease is the predominant substrate associated with the development of VT, these arrhythmias are known to occur in a variety of disorders, including dilated cardiomyopathy, valvular and congenital heart disease, and cardiac ion channelopathies such as the long QT syndrome. In a minority of patients, VT occurs in the absence of structural heart disease. Despite the established mortality benefit of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) in patients at risk of lethal arrhythmias, recurrent VT/VF events continue to be a source of morbidity and impaired quality of life in such patients. Antiarrhythmic therapy is indicated in select patients to treat symptomatic VT episodes, to reduce the incidence of ICD shocks, and potentially to improve quality of life and reduce hospitalizations related to cardiac arrhythmia. The primary adverse effects of antiarrhythmic medications are related to both cardiac and extracardiac toxicity, including the risk of proarrhythmia. Current drug therapy for ventricular arrhythmia has been limited by suboptimal efficacy in many patients, resulting in recurrent VT/VF events, and by drug toxicity or intolerance leading to discontinuation in a large percentage of patients. Amiodarone and sotalol are the principal agents used in the chronic treatment of VT. In addition, dronedarone and dofetilide, agents approved for the treatment of atrial fibrillation, and ranolazine, an antianginal agent, have been demonstrated to be protective against ventricular arrhythmia in small clinical studies. Finally, advances in basic electrophysiology have uncovered new molecular targets for the treatment of ventricular arrhythmia, and pharmacologic agents directed at these targets may emerge as promising VT treatments in the future. The roles of these current and emerging therapies for the treatment of VT in humans will be summarized in this review.

Beta blocker use after acute myocardial infarction in the patient with normal systolic function: when is it "ok" to discontinue?

Beta-Blockers [BB] have been used extensively in the last 40 years after acute myocardial infarction [AMI] as part of therapy and in secondary prevention. The evidence for “routine” therapy with beta-blocker use post AMI rests largely on results of trials conducted over 25 years ago. However, there remains no clear recommendation regarding the appropriate duration of treatment with BBs in post AMI patients with normal left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] who are not experiencing angina, or who require BB for hypertension or dysrhythmia. Based on the latest ACC/AHA guidelines, BBs are recommended for early use in the setting of AMI, except in patients who are at low risk and then indefinitely as secondary prevention after AMI. This recommendation was downgraded to class IIa in low risk patients and the updated 2007 ACC/AHA guidelines suggest that the rationale for BB for secondary prevention is from limited data derived from extrapolations of chronic angina and heart failure trials. In this review, we examine the key trials that have shaped the current guidelines and recommendations. In addition, we attempt to answer the question of the duration of BB use in patients with preserved LVEF after acute MI, as well as which subgroups of patients benefits most from post AMI use of beta blockers.

Acute Antiarrhythmic Therapy of Ventricular Tachycardia and Ventricular Fibrillation

Ventricular arrhythmias (ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation) are often associated with underlying structural heart disease and require prompt assessment and treatment. Acute treatment involves initial hemodynamic stabilization of the patient followed by suppressive treatment with pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic approaches for reducing the risk of recurrence of ventricular arrhythmias and potential development of sudden cardiac death. This article reviews acute antiarrhythmic drug therapy for ventricular arrhythmias based on the clinical presentation.

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.

High-frequency ventricular ectopy can increase sympathetic neural activity in humans

BACKGROUND

Sudden cardiac death is usually caused by ventricular arrhythmias and in many cases, is preceded by frequent ventricular ectopy. It is known that ectopic beats cause transient increases in sympathetic nerve activity (SNA).

OBJECTIVE

Because high SNA is known to be arrhythmogenic, we hypothesized that high rates of ectopy increase SNA, thereby creating a milieu that favors development of ventricular tachycardia and/or fibrillation.

METHODS

This study measured muscle SNA, coronary sinus catecholamine, and arterial pressure during graded rates of ventricular ectopy (from 4:1 to 1:1, sinus to ectopic beat ratio) in a total of 21 patients referred for electrophysiologic testing.

RESULTS

Both muscle SNA and coronary sinus norepinephrine increased significantly with increased ectopy frequency (P < .05). Moreover, the change in muscle SNA correlated significantly with the change in coronary sinus norepinephrine levels (r = .72, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

These data demonstrate that sympathoexcitation evoked by high rates of ventricular ectopy can contribute to a state of elevated SNA both in peripheral tissues and within the heart. This altered autonomic state may contribute to an increased susceptibility to life-threatening tachyarrhythmias in patients with high rates of ectopy.

End-Stage Renal Disease and Sudden Cardiac Death

Patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are at a high risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD). SCD is the most common cause of death in this population and, as in the general population, ventricular arrhythmias seem to be the most common cause of SCD. The increased risk of SCD in ESRD is likely due to factors that are unique to the metabolic derangements associated with this state, as well as the increased prevalence of traditional risk factors. Despite this, the evidence base for the assessment and management of SCD in these patients is limited. This article reviews the current data on underlying risk factors for SCD in patients with ESRD, the role of common medical and device-based therapies for the prevention and treatment of SCD, and the applicability of common methods of risk stratification to patients with ESRD.

Tolerability to treatment with metoprolol in acute myocardial infarction in relation to age

A double-blind trial with the beta 1-selective blocker metoprolol in suspected acute myocardial infarction and during 3 months' follow-up included 1395 patients, aged 40-74 years, 698 on metoprolol and 697 on placebo. In order to further evaluate the tolerability to beta-blockade in the elderly, the total series was divided into 2 groups according to median age (61 years) and into quartiles, the lowest quartile (40-57 years) being compared with the highest (67-74 years). The decrease in heart rate and systolic blood pressure after intravenous metoprolol in the acute phase was similar in the elderly and the younger patients. Hypotension was observed more often in the metoprolol-treated than in the placebo-treated younger patients, while no difference was observed in the elderly. Bradycardia was observed more often in the metoprolol group in both age groups, while there was no difference regarding the incidence of congestive heart failure in either the younger or in the elderly patients. The effect on mortality, serious ventricular arrhythmias and chest pain seemed to be similar in different age groups. From the present series we conclude that hemodynamic reactions and tolerability to beta-blockade can be expected to be similar in elderly and younger patients.