Must Post MI Patients Use B Blockers for Life?

Long-term use of B blockers after myocardial infarction has been questioned for a while now; in fact, admittedly, beyond the three year follow up its benefits remain unclear. It is particularly controversial in elderly patients and this recent study published in Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes sheds some light on the matter.

B Blockers

The study followed 6893 CRUSADE registry patients ≥65 with a history of MI using B blockers, alive 3 years after discharge with no new MI, to assess the use of B blockers and its dose (with no use of B blockers, <50% and ≥50% of recommended target).

At 3 years, 72.2% continued to use B blockers and 43% of these patients were being treated with ≥50% of the recommended target dose.

The use of B blockers was not associated to a significant difference in combined end point (all-cause mortality, hospitalization for recurrent MI, stroke or cardiac failure) over the subsequent 5 years (52.4% vs 55.4%, HR 0.95; CI 95%, 0.88–1.03; p=0.23). Neither the low doses (<50% recommended target) nor the high doses (≥50 of recommended target) were associated with a significant difference compared against no use of B blockers. These results were consistent in patients with and without cardiac failure or systolic dysfunction (p for interaction=0.3).


Read also: Mechanisms of Post PCI Persistent Angina.


Conclusion

In this observational study, the use of B blockers beyond 3 years after MI, regardless achieved dose, was not associated with reduced adverse events rate. The role of prolonged use of B blockers, particularly in the elderly, calls for further research.

Original Title: Comparative Effectiveness of β-Blocker Use Beyond 3 Years After Myocardial Infarction and Long-Term Outcomes Among Elderly Patients.

Reference: Jay S. Shavadia et al. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2019 Jul;12(7):e005103.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

We are interested in your opinion. Please, leave your comments, thoughts, questions, etc., below. They will be most welcome.

More articles by this author

How real are the adverse effects of statins? Evidence from randomized clinical trials

The safety of statins continues to be a subject of debate, partly due to the extensive list of adverse effects included in prescribing information,...

ESC 2025 | BETAMI-DANBLOCK: Randomized Discontinuation of Beta-Blockers after MI

The routine use of beta-blockers after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) has been a historical recommendation based on studies prior to the era of percutaneous...

AHA 2024 | SUMMIT

It has been previously shown that the pharmacological treatment of obesity (semaglutide) can reduce cardiovascular events in patients with cardiac failure (CF) and preserved...

AHA 2023 | SELECT Trial: Semaglutide in Patients Without Diabetes

Given the obesity pandemic projected for the year 2035, it is imperative to address this disease as a priority, through well-known hygienic-dietary measures and...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

OCT- and IVUS-Guided Coronary Angioplasty in Acute Coronary Syndrome: Long-Term Clinical Outcomes

Percutaneous coronary angioplasty (PCI) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) has reduced mortality in the acute phase. However, recurrent ACS and target vessel...

One-Year Results of ENCIRCLE: Percutaneous Mitral Valve Replacement in Patients Ineligible for Surgery or TEER

Symptomatic mitral regurgitation (MR) in patients who are not candidates for surgery or transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) remains a highly complex clinical scenario associated...

Can Coronary CT Angiography Replace Invasive Coronary Angiography in Pre-TAVI Coronary Assessment?

Coronary artery disease coexists in approximately half of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation, making coronary assessment prior to the procedure essential. Invasive coronary...