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

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.

Association of Guideline-Based Admission Treatments and Life Expectancy After Myocardial Infarction in Elderly Medicare Beneficiaries

BACKGROUND

Guideline-based admission therapies for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) significantly improve 30-day survival, but little is known about their association with long-term outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated the association of 5 AMI admission therapies (aspirin, beta-blockers, acute reperfusion therapy, door-to-balloon [D2B] time ≤90 min, and time to fibrinolysis ≤30 min) with life expectancy and years of life saved after AMI.

METHODS

We analyzed data from the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project, a study of Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized for AMI, with 17 years of follow-up. Life expectancy and years of life saved after AMI were calculated using Cox proportional hazards regression with extrapolation using exponential models.

RESULTS

Survival for recipients and non-recipients of the 5 guideline-based therapies diverged early after admission and continued to diverge during 17-year follow-up. Receipt of aspirin, beta-blockers, and acute reperfusion therapy on admission was associated with longer life expectancy of 0.78 (standard error [SE]: 0.05), 0.55 (SE: 0.06), and 1.03 (SE: 0.12) years, respectively. Patients receiving primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) within 90 min lived 1.08 (SE: 0.49) years longer than patients with D2B times >90 min, and door-to-needle (D2N) times ≤30 min were associated with 0.55 (SE: 0.12) more years of life. A dose-response relationship was observed between longer D2B and D2N times and shorter life expectancy after AMI.

CONCLUSIONS

Guideline-based therapy for AMI admission is associated with both early and late survival benefits, and results in meaningful gains in life expectancy and large numbers of years of life saved in elderly patients.

Beta-blockers reduced the risk of cardiac rupture in patients with acute myocardial infarction: A meta-analysis of randomized control trials

BACKGROUND

Cardiac rupture (CR) is a catastrophic complication that occurs after acute myocardial infarction (MI) and, at present, there are no effective pharmacological strategies for preventing this condition. The objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the effect of beta-blockers on CR in patients with acute MI.

METHODS

An extensive search of the PUBMED, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science, MEDLINE and Cochrane was performed to retrieve the studies of beta-blockers treatment in patients with acute MI. Data were combined using a random effects model. A meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.3.

RESULTS

Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 68, 842 patients, 603 of whom occurred CR, were met criteria. Meta analysis showed that beta-blockers caused a statistically and clinically significant decrease in the incidence of CR of 32% (RR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.47 to 0.99, P=0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this meta-analysis confirmed that the early use of beta-blockers is associated with decreased incidence of CR, suggesting some beneficial effects of beta-blockers on infarct healing after acute MI.

Chronic β1-adrenoceptor blockade impairs ischaemic tolerance and preconditioning in murine myocardium

β-adrenoceptor antagonists are commonly used in ischaemic heart disease (IHD) patients, yet may impair signalling and efficacy of 'cardioprotective' interventions. We assessed effects of chronic β1-adrenoceptor antagonism on myocardial resistance to ischaemia-reperfusion (IR) injury and the ability of cardioprotective interventions [classic ischaemic preconditioning (IPC); novel sustained ligand-activated preconditioning (SLP)] to reduce IR injury in murine hearts. Young male C57Bl/6 mice were untreated or received atenolol (0.5g/l in drinking water) for 4 weeks. Subsequently, two cardioprotective stimuli were evaluated: morphine pellets implanted (to induce SLP, controls received placebo) 5 days prior to Langendorff heart perfusion, and IPC in perfused hearts (3×1.5min ischaemia/2min reperfusion). Atenolol significantly reduced in vivo heart rate. Untreated control hearts exhibited substantial left ventricular dysfunction (~50% pressure development recovery, ~20mmHg diastolic pressure rise) with significant release of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH, tissue injury indicator) after 25min ischaemia/45min reperfusion. Contractile dysfunction and elevated LDH were reduced >50% with IPC and SLP. While atenolol treatment did not modify baseline contractile function, post-ischaemic function was significantly depressed compared to untreated hearts. Atenolol pre-treatment abolished beneficial effects of IPC, whereas SLP protection was preserved. These data indicate that chronic β1-adrenoceptor blockade can exert negative effects on functional IR tolerance and negate conventional IPC (implicating β1-adrenoceptors in IR injury and IPC signalling). However, novel morphine-induced SLP is resistant to inhibition by β1-adrenoceptor antagonism.

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.

Influence of trial sample size on treatment effect estimates: meta-epidemiological study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the influence of trial sample size on treatment effect estimates within meta-analyses.

DESIGN

Meta-epidemiological study.

DATA SOURCES

93 meta-analyses (735 randomised controlled trials) assessing therapeutic interventions with binary outcomes, published in the 10 leading journals of each medical subject category of the Journal Citation Reports or in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.

DATA EXTRACTION

Sample size, outcome data, and risk of bias extracted from each trial.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Trials within each meta-analysis were sorted by their sample size: using quarters within each meta-analysis (from quarter 1 with 25% of the smallest trials, to quarter 4 with 25% of the largest trials), and using size groups across meta-analyses (ranging from <50 to ≥ 1000 patients). Treatment effects were compared within each meta-analysis between quarters or between size groups by average ratios of odds ratios (where a ratio of odds ratios less than 1 indicates larger effects in smaller trials).

RESULTS

Treatment effect estimates were significantly larger in smaller trials, regardless of sample size. Compared with quarter 4 (which included the largest trials), treatment effects were, on average, 32% larger in trials in quarter 1 (which included the smallest trials; ratio of odds ratios 0.68, 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 0.82), 17% larger in trials in quarter 2 (0.83, 0.75 to 0.91), and 12% larger in trials in quarter 3 (0.88, 0.82 to 0.95). Similar results were obtained when comparing treatment effect estimates between different size groups. Compared with trials of 1000 patients or more, treatment effects were, on average, 48% larger in trials with fewer than 50 patients (0.52, 0.41 to 0.66) and 10% larger in trials with 500-999 patients (0.90, 0.82 to 1.00).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment effect estimates differed within meta-analyses solely based on trial sample size, with stronger effect estimates seen in small to moderately sized trials than in the largest trials.

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.

A review and meta-analysis of studies on the effect and timing of β-blocker administration in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

The utility of β-blockers during an evolving ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has substantial theoretic physiological backing. This coupled with early successes using β-blockers in STEMI promulgated multiple guidelines expanding the use of this class of medication to all patients with acute coronary syndromes. However, recent studies have questioned the utility of β-blockers in the emergency department in these patients. The purpose of this article is to review the evidence behind the use of β-blockers in the emergency department for STEMI patients.