Sanderson J E, Chan S K, Yu C M, Yeung L Y, Chan W M, Raymond K, Chan K W, Woo K S
Department of Medicine, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital.
Heart. 1998 Jan;79(1):86-92. doi: 10.1136/hrt.79.1.86.
To determine whether a third generation vasodilating beta blocker (celiprolol) has long term clinical advantages over metoprolol in patients with chronic heart failure.
A double blind placebo controlled randomised trial.
University teaching Hospital.
50 patients with stable chronic heart failure (NYHA class II-IV) due to idiopathic dilated, ischaemic, or hypertensive cardiomyopathy, with left ventricular ejection fraction < 0.45.
Celiprolol 200 mg daily (n = 21), metoprolol 50 mg twice daily (n = 19), or placebo (n = 10) for three months with a four week dose titration period. After the double blind period, patients entered an open label study (with placebo group receiving beta blockers) and were assessed after one year.
Clinical response, efficacy, and tolerance were assessed by the Minnesota heart failure symptom questionnaire six minute walk test, Doppler echocardiography (systolic and diastolic function), radionuclide ventriculography, and atrial and brain natriuretic peptides measured at baseline and after three months.
In the metoprolol group at 12 weeks v baseline there was a 47% reduction in symptom score (p < 0.001), improvement of NYHA class (mean (SEM), 2.6 (0.12) to 1.9 (0.13), p = 0.001), exercise distance (1246 (54) to 1402 (52) feet, p < 0.001), and left ventricular ejection fraction (26.9(3.1)% to 31(3.0)%, p = 0.016), and a fall in heart rate (resting, 79 (3) to 62 (3) beats/min, p < 0.001). In the celiprolol group there was a 38% reduction in symptom score (p = 0.02), less improvement in exercise distance (1191 (55) to 1256 (61) feet, p = 0.05), and no significant changes in NYHA class, left ventricular ejection fraction, or heart rate. Mortality at one year was 11% in metoprolol and 19% in the celiprolol group, and symptomatic improvement was maintained in the survivors.
Both drugs were well tolerated but the vasodilator properties of celiprolol do not seem to provide any obvious additional benefit in the long term treatment of heart failure.
确定第三代血管舒张性β受体阻滞剂(塞利洛尔)在慢性心力衰竭患者中是否比美托洛尔具有长期临床优势。
双盲安慰剂对照随机试验。
大学教学医院。
50例因特发性扩张型、缺血性或高血压性心肌病导致的稳定慢性心力衰竭(纽约心脏协会II-IV级)患者,左心室射血分数<0.45。
塞利洛尔每日200mg(n = 21)、美托洛尔每日两次,每次50mg(n = 19)或安慰剂(n = 10),为期三个月,有四周的剂量滴定期。双盲期结束后,患者进入开放标签研究(安慰剂组接受β受体阻滞剂),并在一年后进行评估。
通过明尼苏达心力衰竭症状问卷、六分钟步行试验、多普勒超声心动图(收缩和舒张功能)、放射性核素心室造影以及在基线和三个月后测量的心房和脑利钠肽评估临床反应、疗效和耐受性。
在美托洛尔组,与基线相比,12周时症状评分降低47%(p<0.001),纽约心脏协会分级改善(平均值(标准误),从2.6(0.12)降至1.9(0.13),p = 0.001),运动距离增加(从1246(54)英尺增至1402(52)英尺,p<0.001),左心室射血分数提高(从26.9(3.1)%增至31(3.0)%,p = 0.016),心率下降(静息时,从79(3)次/分钟降至62(3)次/分钟,p<0.001)。在塞利洛尔组,症状评分降低38%(p = 0.02),运动距离改善较少(从1191(55)英尺增至1256(61)英尺,p = 0.05),纽约心脏协会分级、左心室射血分数或心率无显著变化。美托洛尔组一年死亡率为11%,塞利洛尔组为19%,幸存者症状持续改善。
两种药物耐受性均良好,但塞利洛尔的血管舒张特性在心力衰竭的长期治疗中似乎未提供任何明显的额外益处。