Parker Emily D, Margolis Karen L, Trower Nicole K, Magid David J, Tavel Heather M, Shetterly Susan M, Ho P Michael, Swain Bix E, O'Connor Patrick J
HealthPartners Institute for Education and Research, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440-1524, USA.
Arch Intern Med. 2012 Oct 8;172(18):1406-12. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2012.4276.
Randomized controlled trials have demonstrated the efficacy of selected β-blockers for preventing cardiovascular (CV) events in patients following myocardial infarction (MI) or with heart failure (HF). However, the effectiveness of β-blockers for preventing CV events in patients with hypertension has been questioned recently, but it is unclear whether this is a class effect.
Using electronic medical record and health plan data from the Cardiovascular Research Network Hypertension Registry, we compared incident MI, HF, and stroke in patients who were new β-blocker users between 2000 and 2009. Patients had no history of CV disease and had not previously filled a prescription for a β-blocker. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to examine the associations of atenolol and metoprolol tartrate with incident CV events using both standard covariate adjustment (n = 120,978) and propensity score-matching methods (n = 22,352).
During follow-up (median, 5.2 years), there were 3517 incident MI, 3272 incident HF, and 3664 incident stroke events. Hazard ratios for MI, HF, and stroke in metoprolol tartrate users were 0.99 (95% CI, 0.97-1.02), 0.99 (95% CI, 0.96-1.01), and 0.99 (95% CI, 0.97-1.02), respectively. An alternative approach using propensity score matching yielded similar results in 11,176 new metoprolol tartrate users, who were similar to 11,176 new atenolol users with regard to demographic and clinical characteristics.
There were no statistically significant differences in incident CV events between atenolol and metoprolol tartrate users with hypertension. Large registries similar to the one used in this analysis may be useful for addressing comparative effectiveness questions that are unlikely to be resolved by randomized trials.
随机对照试验已证明某些β受体阻滞剂在预防心肌梗死(MI)后或心力衰竭(HF)患者心血管(CV)事件方面的疗效。然而,β受体阻滞剂在预防高血压患者CV事件方面的有效性最近受到质疑,但尚不清楚这是否为类效应。
利用心血管研究网络高血压登记处的电子病历和健康计划数据,我们比较了2000年至2009年间新使用β受体阻滞剂患者的新发MI、HF和中风情况。患者无CV疾病史,且此前未开过β受体阻滞剂处方。使用Cox比例风险回归,采用标准协变量调整(n = 120,978)和倾向评分匹配方法(n = 22,352)来检验阿替洛尔和酒石酸美托洛尔与新发CV事件的关联。
在随访期间(中位数为5.2年),有3517例新发MI、3272例新发HF和3664例新发中风事件。酒石酸美托洛尔使用者发生MI、HF和中风的风险比分别为0.99(95%CI,0.97 - 1.02)、0.99(95%CI,0.96 - 1.01)和0.99(95%CI,0.97 - 1.02)。另一种使用倾向评分匹配的方法在11,176名新的酒石酸美托洛尔使用者中得出了类似结果,这些使用者在人口统计学和临床特征方面与11,176名新的阿替洛尔使用者相似。
高血压患者中,阿替洛尔使用者和酒石酸美托洛尔使用者在新发CV事件方面无统计学显著差异。类似于本分析中使用的大型登记处可能有助于解决随机试验不太可能解决的比较有效性问题。