Long-term impact of β-blocker in elderly patients without myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention.

AIMS

Little is known about the long-term outcomes of β-blockers use in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) without myocardial infarction (MI) and reduced ejection fraction (rEF). However, more attention should be paid to the oral administration of β-blockers in elderly patients who are susceptible to heart failure (HF), sinus node dysfunction, or rate response insufficiency. We aimed to evaluate the long-term impact of β-blockers in elderly patients with CAD without MI or systolic HF who have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 1018 consecutive elderly patients with CAD (mean age, 72 ± 7 years; 77% men) who underwent their first intervention between 2010 and 2018 were included in this study. According to the presence or absence of the use of β-blockers, 514 patients (50.5%) were allocated to the β-blocker group, and 504 (49.5%) to the non-β-blocker group. We evaluated the incidence of 4-point major adverse cardiovascular events (4P-MACE), including cardiovascular death, non-fatal MI, non-fatal stroke, admission for HF, target vessel revascularization (TVR), and all-cause death. We focused on the association between chronotropic incompetence of β-blockers and incidence of a new HF and analysed the results using an exercise electrocardiogram regularly performed in the outpatient department after percutaneous coronary intervention. During a median follow-up duration of 5.1 years, 83 patients (8.3%) developed 4P-MACE, including cardiovascular death in 17, non-fatal MI in 13, non-fatal stroke in 25, and admission for HF in 39 patients. Additionally, 124 patients (12.2%) had a TVR and 104 (10.2%) died of other causes. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that the cumulative incidence rate of 4P-MACE in the β-blocker group was significantly higher than that in the non-β-blocker group (15.4% vs. 10.0%, log-rank test, P = 0.015). Above all, the cumulative incidence rate of admission for HF in the β-blocker group was significantly higher (8.8% vs. 3.2%, log-rank test, P < 0.001). The β-blocker group had significantly lower resting heart rate, stress heart rate, and stress-rest Δ heart rate on exercise electrocardiogram. Multivariate Cox hazard analysis revealed that EF, β-blocker use, stress-rest Δ heart rate, and CKD were strong independent predictors of admission for HF.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term β-blocker use was significantly associated with an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events in elderly patients with CAD without MI or systolic HF. In particular, the chronotropic incompetence action of β-blockers could increase the risk of admission for HF in elderly patients with CAD without MI and systolic HF, and the present findings warrant further investigation.