The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2020
Long-term efficacy of vasodilating β-blocker in patients with acute myocardial infarction: nationwide multicenter prospective registry.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Chung Jaehoon, Han Jung-Kyu, Yang Han-Mo, Park Kyung-Woo, Kang Hyun-Jae, Koo Bon-Kwon, Jeong Myung Ho, Kim Hyo-Soo, investigators for Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry (KAMIR)
Аннотация
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Long-term benefit of vasodilating β-blockers is unknown. This study aimed to investigate the long-term benefit of vasodilating β-blockers over conventional β-blockers in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI).
METHODS: Using nationwide prospective multicenter Korean Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry data, we analyzed 3-year clinical outcomes of 7,269 patients with AMI who received percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and β-blocker therapy. Patients were classified according to treatment strategy (vasodilating β-blockers vs. conventional β-blockers). The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), and hospitalization for heart failure (HF) at 3 years. Secondary outcomes were each component of the primary outcome. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for differences of baseline characteristics.
RESULTS: In 3,079 pairs (6,158 patients) of propensity score-matched patients, the primary outcome occurred significantly less in the vasodilating β-blockers group compared with the conventional β-blockers group (7.6% vs. 9.8%, p = 0.003). Among the secondary outcomes, cardiac death occurred significantly less in the vasodilating β-blockers group than in the conventional group (3.5% vs. 4.8%, p = 0.015). The incidence rates of MI (2.4% vs. 3.0%, p = 0.160) or hospitalization for HF (2.6% vs. 3.2%, p = 0.192) were not significantly different between the two groups.
CONCLUSION: Vasodilating β-blocker therapy was associated with better clinical outcomes compared with conventional β-blocker therapy in AMI patients undergoing PCI during 3 years follow-up. Vasodilating β-blockers could be recommended preferentially for these patients.
METHODS: Using nationwide prospective multicenter Korean Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry data, we analyzed 3-year clinical outcomes of 7,269 patients with AMI who received percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and β-blocker therapy. Patients were classified according to treatment strategy (vasodilating β-blockers vs. conventional β-blockers). The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), and hospitalization for heart failure (HF) at 3 years. Secondary outcomes were each component of the primary outcome. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for differences of baseline characteristics.
RESULTS: In 3,079 pairs (6,158 patients) of propensity score-matched patients, the primary outcome occurred significantly less in the vasodilating β-blockers group compared with the conventional β-blockers group (7.6% vs. 9.8%, p = 0.003). Among the secondary outcomes, cardiac death occurred significantly less in the vasodilating β-blockers group than in the conventional group (3.5% vs. 4.8%, p = 0.015). The incidence rates of MI (2.4% vs. 3.0%, p = 0.160) or hospitalization for HF (2.6% vs. 3.2%, p = 0.192) were not significantly different between the two groups.
CONCLUSION: Vasodilating β-blocker therapy was associated with better clinical outcomes compared with conventional β-blocker therapy in AMI patients undergoing PCI during 3 years follow-up. Vasodilating β-blockers could be recommended preferentially for these patients.