-
Medicine Feb 2016Beta (β)-blockers are under-prescribed in patients with heart failure (HF) and concurrent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) due to concerns about adverse... (Observational Study)
Observational Study
Beta (β)-blockers are under-prescribed in patients with heart failure (HF) and concurrent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) due to concerns about adverse pulmonary effects and a poor understanding of the effects of these drugs. We aimed to evaluate the survival effects of β-blockers in patients with coexistent HF and COPD. Using the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database, we conducted a nationwide population-based study. Patients with coexistent HF and COPD diagnosed between 2000 and 2009 were enrolled. Doses of the 3 β-blockers proven to be beneficial to HF (carvedilol, bisoprolol, and metoprolol) during the study period were extracted. The primary endpoint was cumulative survival. Patients were followed until December 31, 2009. The study included 11,558 subjects, with a mean follow-up period of 4.07 years. After adjustment for age, sex, comorbidities, and severity of HF and COPD, bisoprolol use showed a dose-response survival benefit [low dose: adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 0.76, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.59-0.97, P = 0.030; high dose: adjusted HR = 0.40, 95% CI = 0.26-0.63, P < 0.001] compared with nonusers, whereas no survival difference was observed for carvedilol or metoprolol. Compared with patients with HF alone, this special HF + COPD cohort received significantly fewer targeted β-blockers (108.8 vs 137.3 defined daily doses (DDDs)/person-year, P < 0.001) and bisoprolol (57.9 vs 70.8 DDDs/person-year, P < 0.001). In patients with coexisting HF and COPD, this study demonstrated a dose-response survival benefit of bisoprolol use, but not of carvedilol or metoprolol use.
Topics: Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Bisoprolol; Carbazoles; Carvedilol; Contraindications; Female; Heart Failure; Humans; Male; Metoprolol; Middle Aged; Propanolamines; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Retrospective Studies; Taiwan; Young Adult
PubMed: 26844454
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000002427 -
MedComm Feb 2023In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness and safety of bisoprolol, metoprolol, carvedilol, and nebivolol in the treatment of chronic heart failure. The results...
In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness and safety of bisoprolol, metoprolol, carvedilol, and nebivolol in the treatment of chronic heart failure. The results demonstrated that bisoprolol improved the prognosis of chronic heart failure in comparison with carvedilol, and carvedilol exerted similar effects as metoprolol succinate and nebivolol and better effect than metoprolol tartrate (evidence levels: bisoprolol > carvedilol = metoprolol succinate = nebivolol > metoprolol tartrate; " > " means "prior to").
PubMed: 36628295
DOI: 10.1002/mco2.199 -
Advances in Therapy Jan 2024The present real-world analysis aims to compare the drug utilization, hospitalizations and direct healthcare costs related to the use of single-pill combination (SPC) or... (Observational Study)
Observational Study
A Retrospective Observational Real-Word Analysis of the Adherence, Healthcare Resource Consumption and Costs in Patients Treated with Bisoprolol/Perindopril as Single-Pill or Free Combination.
INTRODUCTION
The present real-world analysis aims to compare the drug utilization, hospitalizations and direct healthcare costs related to the use of single-pill combination (SPC) or free-equivalent combination (FEC) of perindopril and bisoprolol (PER/BIS) in a large Italian population.
METHODS
This observational retrospective analysis was based on administrative databases covering approximately 7 million subjects across Italy. All adult subjects receiving PER/BIS as SPC or FEC between January 2017-June 2020 were included. Subjects were followed for 1 year after the first prescription of PER/BIS as FEC (± 1 month) or SPC. Before comparing the SPC and FEC cohorts, propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to balance the baseline characteristics. Drug utilization was investigated as adherence (defined by the proportion of days covered, PDC) and persistence (evaluated by Kaplan-Meier curves). Hospitalizations and mean annual direct healthcare costs (due to drug prescriptions, hospitalizations and use of outpatient services) were analyzed during follow-up.
RESULTS
The original cohort included 11,440 and 6521 patients taking the SPC and FEC PER/BIS combination, respectively. After PSM, two balanced SPC and FEC cohorts of 4688 patients were obtained (mean age 70 years, approximately 50% male, 24% in secondary prevention). The proportion of adherent patients (PDC ≥ 80%) was higher for those on SPC (45.5%) than those on FEC (38.6%), p < 0.001. The PER/BIS combination was discontinued by 35.8% of patients in the SPC cohort and 41.7% in the FEC cohort (p < 0.001). The SPC cohort had fewer cardiovascular (CV) hospitalizations (5.3%) than the free-combination cohort (7.4%), p < 0.001. Mean annual total healthcare costs were lower in the SPC (1999€) than in the FEC (2359€) cohort (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION
In a real-world setting, patients treated with PER/BIS SPC showed higher adherence, lower risk of drug discontinuation, reduced risk of CV hospitalization, and lower healthcare costs than those on FEC of the same drugs.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Male; Aged; Female; Perindopril; Antihypertensive Agents; Hypertension; Bisoprolol; Retrospective Studies; Delivery of Health Care; Medication Adherence
PubMed: 37864626
DOI: 10.1007/s12325-023-02707-7 -
Indian Journal of Anaesthesia Feb 2021Appropriate premedication can optimise haemodynamics and hence surgical field visibility during endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). This study aimed to compare the...
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Appropriate premedication can optimise haemodynamics and hence surgical field visibility during endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). This study aimed to compare the intraoperative effect of gabapentin 1200 mg versus bisoprolol 2.5 mg, given 2 hours before ESS.
METHODS
Patients were assigned into one of three groups. Patients of gabapentin group received preoperative oral gabapentin 1200 mg while, patients of bisoprolol and control groups received oral bisoprolol 2.5 mg and placebo respectively 2 hours before ESS. Primary outcome: reduction of blood loss and surgical field quality. Secondary outcome: haemodynamic control. mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) were recorded as baseline, before and after induction of anaesthesia, at 1, 5, 10, 15 minutes after intubation and then every 15 minutes until the end of surgery. Data also included Fromm and Boezaart category scale (assessed every 15 min), intraoperative blood loss, surgeon satisfaction score, intraoperative anaesthetic/analgesic and vasoactive medications requirements.
RESULTS
Out of 66 eligible patients, 60 patients completed the study. Intraoperative MAP and HR were significantly lower and more stable in gabapentin and bisoprolol groups compared to control group (p < 0.05). The volume of blood loss was significantly lower (p 0.000) and operative field was more visible in gabapentin and bisoprolol groups than those in control group (p 0.000).
CONCLUSION
The beneficial effect of gabapentin 1200 mg on intraoperative haemodynamic control and surgical field visibility is comparable to that of bisoprolol 2.5 mg when either of them is given as a single oral dose 2 hours before ESS.
PubMed: 33776086
DOI: 10.4103/ija.IJA_619_20 -
Journal of the American Heart... Feb 2019Background Many hospitalized patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction ( HF r EF ) have a slow heart rate at discharge, and the effect of β-blockers may...
Background Many hospitalized patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction ( HF r EF ) have a slow heart rate at discharge, and the effect of β-blockers may be reduced in those patients. We sought to examine the variable effect of β-blockers on clinical outcomes according to the discharge heart rate of hospitalized HF r EF patients. Methods and Results The KorAHF (Korean Acute Heart Failure) registry consecutively enrolled 5625 patients hospitalized for acute heart failure. In this analysis, we included patients with HF r EF (left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40%). Slow heart rate was defined as <70 beats per minute regardless of the use of β-blockers. The primary outcome was 1-year all-cause postdischarge death according to heart rate. Among 2932 patients with HF r EF , 840 (29%) had a slow heart rate and 56% received β-blockers at discharge. Patients with slow heart rates were older and had lower 1-year mortality than those with high heart rates ( P<0.001). A significant interaction between discharge heart rate and β-blocker use was observed ( P<0.001 for interaction). When stratified, only patients without a β-blocker prescription and with a high heart rate showed higher 1-year mortality. In a Cox-proportional hazards regression analysis, β-blocker prescription at discharge was associated with 24% reduced risk for 1-year mortality in patients with high heart rates (hazard ratio: 0.76; 95% CI, 0.61-0.95) but not in those with slow heart rates (hazard ratio: 1.02; 95% CI, 0.68-1.55). Conclusions Many patients with acute heart failure have slow discharge heart rates, and β-blockers may have a limited effect on HF r EF and slow discharge heart rate. Clinical Trial Registration URL : http://www.clinicaltrial.gov . Unique identifier: NCT 01389843.
Topics: Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; Aged; Bisoprolol; Carvedilol; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Heart Failure; Heart Rate; Humans; Male; Metoprolol; Nebivolol; Patient Discharge; Prospective Studies; Republic of Korea; Stroke Volume; Survival Rate; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30755071
DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.118.011121 -
Chonnam Medical Journal May 2021Following acute myocardial infarction (AMI), early use of beta-blockers (BBs) reduced the incidences of ventricular arrhythmia (VA) and death in the pre reperfusion era....
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.
PubMed: 34123741
DOI: 10.4068/cmj.2021.57.2.132 -
Pulse (Basel, Switzerland) Apr 2016The effects of β-blockers on arterial properties are not well investigated. In our recent study, we compared the effects of the two β-blockers celiprolol and... (Review)
Review
The effects of β-blockers on arterial properties are not well investigated. In our recent study, we compared the effects of the two β-blockers celiprolol and bisoprolol on blood pressure, baroreflex sensitivity (BRS), flow-mediated vasodilatation, and vascular stiffness. We found that bisoprolol achieved a greater reduction in the pulse rate and improved BRS and vascular stiffness, whereas celiprolol reduced the central blood pressure level. In this review, the mechanisms of different types of β-blockers and their effects on arteries are discussed, and the appropriate use of β-blockers in hypertensive subjects will be proposed.
PubMed: 27195240
DOI: 10.1159/000443615 -
Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer... Sep 2021Anthracyclines are a class of chemotherapeutic agents that are used to treat many different cancers, including breast cancer. Although anthracyclines remain an effective... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
Anthracyclines are a class of chemotherapeutic agents that are used to treat many different cancers, including breast cancer. Although anthracyclines remain an effective and commonly used therapy, their use is limited by cardiotoxicity. Heart failure and left ventricular (LV) dysfunction are the short and long-term complications of anthracyline exposure occurring in 5% to 23% of patients. Recent prospective studies have investigated the prophylactic role of ACE inhibitors and beta-blockers as cardioprotective agents. This study aimed to evaluate whether the addition of lisinopril and bisoprolol could prevent anthracycline induced cardiotoxicity.
METHODS
In this randomized, controlled trial, 74 subjects with locally advanced breast cancer were randomly assigned to a group receiving lisinopril and bisoprolol (n=37) or to a control group (n=37). Lisinopril and bisoprolol was started simultaneously 24 h before the first cycle of chemotherapy. The initial dose was 2.5 mg each, once daily, and was increased gradually under close supervision to 10 mg if SBP persistently remained >90 mmHg and HR >60 bpm. Echocardiographic studies were performed before and after the 6th cycle of neoadjuvant anthracycline-based chemotherapy (FAC). The primary endpoint was the change from baseline LVEF.
RESULTS
There was no difference in baseline LVEF between intervention and control group (65.77 ± 4.56 % v 65.64 ± 455 %, p = 0.92). There was also no difference in total anthracycline doses between 2 groups (579.48 ± 65.10 mg vs 557.50 ± 47.76 mg, p = 0.18). However, after 6 cycles of FAC, the rate of decline in LVEF was greater in control group (-5.52 ± 8,90 %) than in the intervention group (-0.27 ± 5.73 %) with p = 0.017. No severe adverse effects occurred in the intervention group related to the treatment with lisinopril and bisoprolol.
CONCLUSION
Combined treatment with lisinopril and bisoprolol may prevent anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity in patients with locally advanced breast cancer treated with anthracycline-based chemotherapy. The clinical relevance of this study should be confirmed in larger studies with longer follow up time.
Topics: Adult; Anthracyclines; Bisoprolol; Breast Neoplasms; Cardiotoxicity; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Humans; Lisinopril; Middle Aged; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34582653
DOI: 10.31557/APJCP.2021.22.9.2847 -
Circulation Journal : Official Journal... May 2019The comparative tolerability, efficacy, and safety of bisoprolol and carvedilol have not been established in Japanese patients with heart failure and reduced ejection... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
The comparative tolerability, efficacy, and safety of bisoprolol and carvedilol have not been established in Japanese patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Methods and Results: The CIBIS-J trial is a multicenter, open-label, non-inferiority randomized controlled trial of bisoprolol vs. carvedilol in 217 patients with HFrEF (EF ≤40%). The primary endpoint was tolerability, defined as reaching and maintaining the maximum maintenance dose (bisoprolol 5 mg/day or carvedilol 20 mg/day) during 48 weeks of treatment. The primary endpoint was achieved in 41.4% of patients in bisoprolol (n=111) and 42.5% in carvedilol (n=106) groups. The non-inferiority of tolerability of bisoprolol compared with carvedilol was not supported, however, neither β-blocker was superior with regard to tolerability. Heart rate (HR) decreased in both groups and its decrease from baseline was significantly greater in the bisoprolol group (20.3 vs. 15.4 beats/min at 24 week, P<0.05). Plasma B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels decreased in both groups and the decrease was significantly greater in the carvedilol group (12.4 vs. 39.0 % at 24 weeks, P<0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
There were no significant differences between bisoprolol and carvedilol in the tolerability of target doses in Japanese HFrEF patients. The clinical efficacy and safety were also similar despite the greater reduction in HR by bisoprolol and plasma BNP by carvedilol.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Bisoprolol; Carvedilol; Heart Failure; Heart Rate; Humans; Japan; Middle Aged; Natriuretic Peptide, Brain; Stroke Volume; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30956267
DOI: 10.1253/circj.CJ-18-1199 -
Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine Feb 2020Hyperglycemia caused by diabetes mellitus could increase the risk of diabetic cardiomyopathy. However, to the best of our knowledge, the underlying mechanism of this...
Hyperglycemia caused by diabetes mellitus could increase the risk of diabetic cardiomyopathy. However, to the best of our knowledge, the underlying mechanism of this process is still not fully explored. Thus, developing ways to prevent hyperglycemia can be beneficial for diabetic patients. The present study was designed to investigate the influence of metoprolol and bisoprolol on the cardiomyocytic hypertrophy of neonatal rat cardiomyocytes. Cardiomyocytes were cultured in two types of media: One with low glucose levels and one with high glucose levels. Cardiomyocytes cultured in high glucose were further treated with the following: A protein kinase C (PKC) inhibitor, an NF-κB inhibitor, metoprolol or bisoprolol. The pulsatile frequency, cellular diameter and surface area of cardiomyocytes were measured. Protein content and [H]-leucine incorporation were determined, atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP), α-myosin heavy chain (α-MHC) and β-myosin heavy chain (β-MHC) mRNA levels were calculated by reverse transcription-quantitative PCR, while the expression and activation of PKC-α, PKC-β, NF-κB, tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), and c-fos were detected by western blotting. Metoprolol or bisoprolol were also used in combination with PKC inhibitor or NF-κB inhibitor to determine whether the hypertrophic response would be attenuated to a lower extent compared with metroprolol or bisoprolol alone. Cardiomyocytes cultured in high glucose presented increased pulsatile frequency, cellular diameter, surface area, and protein content and synthesis, higher expression of ANP and β-MHC, and lower α-MHC expression. High glucose levels also upregulated the expression and activation of PKC-α, PKC-β, NF-κB, TNF-α and c-fos. Metoprolol and bisoprolol partly reversed the above changes, while combined use of metoprolol or bisoprolol with PKC inhibitor or NF-κB inhibitor further ameliorated the hypertrophic response mentioned above to lower levels compared with using metroprolol or bisoprolol alone. In conclusion, metoprolol and bisoprolol could prevent hypertrophy of cardiomyocytes cultured in high glucose by the inhibition of the total and phospho-PKC-α, which could further influence the PKC-α/NF-κB/c-fos signaling pathway.
PubMed: 32010247
DOI: 10.3892/etm.2019.8312