Suppr超能文献

心力衰竭中的β受体阻滞剂:一种血管舒张性β受体阻滞剂与美托洛尔的比较。

Beta blockers in heart failure: a comparison of a vasodilating beta blocker with metoprolol.

作者信息

Sanderson J E, Chan S K, Yu C M, Yeung L Y, Chan W M, Raymond K, Chan K W, Woo K S

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital.

出版信息

Heart. 1998 Jan;79(1):86-92. doi: 10.1136/hrt.79.1.86.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether a third generation vasodilating beta blocker (celiprolol) has long term clinical advantages over metoprolol in patients with chronic heart failure.

DESIGN

A double blind placebo controlled randomised trial.

SETTING

University teaching Hospital.

PATIENTS

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.

INTERVENTIONS

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.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

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.

RESULTS

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.

CONCLUSIONS

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.

摘要

目的

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。

设计

双盲安慰剂对照随机试验。

地点

大学教学医院。

患者

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。

干预措施

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。

主要观察指标

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。

结果

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。

结论

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。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

8
Beta-blockers and spironolactone in heart failure.
Curr Cardiol Rep. 2000 Mar;2(2):87-9. doi: 10.1007/s11886-000-0003-8.

本文引用的文献

3
Analysis of left ventricular diastolic function.左心室舒张功能分析
Heart. 1996 Jun;75(6 Suppl 2):27-35. doi: 10.1136/hrt.75.6_suppl_2.27.
9
Beta-adrenergic blockers and survival in heart failure.
N Engl J Med. 1996 May 23;334(21):1396-7. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199605233342109.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验