European Heart Journal

European Heart Journal Advance Access originally published online on November 2, 2007
European Heart Journal 2007 28(24):3012-3019; doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehm489

This Article Abstract FREE Full Text (PDF) Supplementary Data All Versions of this Article: 28/24/3012    most recent ehm489v1 E-letters: Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when E-letters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to My Personal Archive Download to citation manager Search for citing articles in: ISI Web of Science (24) Request Permissions Disclaimer Google Scholar Articles by Cucherat, M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Cucherat, M. Social Bookmarking          What's this?

Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2007. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Quantitative relationship between resting heart rate reduction and magnitude of clinical benefits in post-myocardial infarction: a meta-regression of randomized clinical trials

Michel Cucherat

Faculté de médecine Laennec, EA3736—Université Lyon 1, 11 rue Guillaume Paradin, 69008 Lyon France

Received 12 June 2007; revised 13 September 2007; accepted 26 September 2007; online publish-ahead-of-print 2 November 2007.

Corresponding author. Tel: +33 4 78 78 57 71; fax: +33 4 78 77 69 17. E-mail address: mcu{at}upcl.univ-lyon1.fr

	Abstract

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion Supplementary material Funding Acknowledgement References

 
Aims: The impact on mortality outcomes of beta-blockers and calcium blockers in post-myocardial infarction (MI) has been suggested to be related to resting heart rate (HR) reduction. A meta-regression of randomized clinical trials was carried out to assess this relationship using weighted meta-regression of logarithm of odds ratio against absolute HR reduction.

Methods and results: Twenty-five controlled randomized trials (21 with beta-blockers and four with calcium channel blockers) involving a total of 30 904 patients meet eligibility criteria, but only 17 documented changes in resting HR (14 with beta-blockers and three with calcium channel blockers).

A statistically significant relationship was found between resting HR reduction and the clinical benefit including reduction in cardiac death (P < 0.001), all-cause death (P = 0.008), sudden death (P = 0.015), and non-fatal MI recurrence (P = 0.024). Each 10 b.p.m. reduction in the HR is estimated to reduce the relative risk of cardiac death by 30%.

Conclusion: The meta-regression of the randomized clinical trials strongly suggest that the beneficial effect of beta-blockers and calcium channel blockers in post-MI patients is proportionally related to resting HR reduction. Furthermore, the absence of residual heterogeneity indicated that resting HR reduction could be a major determinant of the clinical benefit.

Key Words: Meta-regression • Resting heart rate reduction • Beta-blockers • Calcium channel blockers • Meta-analysis • Mortality

	Introduction

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion Supplementary material Funding Acknowledgement References

 
Epidemiological studies suggest that lower resting heart rate (HR) is associated with decreased cardiovascular and all-cause mortality.^1–9 HR has also been reported to be an independent predictor of bad outcome after myocardial infarction (MI)^10,11 and a determinant of infarct size in acute MI.^12,13

A relationship between the resting HR reduction and the mortality has also been observed in post-MI patients with beta-blockers. In the Norwegian timolol study,¹³ logistic regression analysis of the total death relative to the HR at 1 month after the start of treatment (with timolol or placebo) remove the difference in outcome observed between the timolol group and the placebo group. On the basis of the results of 10 randomized controlled trials, Kjekshus¹⁴ had observed that a correlation may exist between beta-blocker-induced reduction in resting HR and reduction in total mortality. So a growing body of evidence also suggests that pharmacological reduction in resting HR could decrease morbidity and mortality in cardiovascular patients.¹⁰

We sought to address this issue by meta-regression. Meta-regression aims to investigate whether particular covariates (potential effect modifier) explain any of the difference in treatment effects between multiple studies.¹⁵ A meta-regression was performed to determine to which extent resting HR reduction induced by the various drugs modifying HR affects the reduction of mortality and morbidity observed in randomized placebo-controlled trials with these drugs in post-MI.

	Methods

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion Supplementary material Funding Acknowledgement References

 
The meta-regression was performed according to pre-defined selection criteria for trial search and data analysis. QUOROM standards were followed¹⁶ during all phases of the design and implementation of this meta-regression.

Study identification
I identified relevant published and unpublished unconfounded randomized trials that compared beta-blockers and calcium blockers with placebo in post MI. I searched electronic databases (PubMed, Embase) from 1966 to 1 January 2006 and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL Issue 4, 2005). The broad strategy described by Haynes¹⁷ was used for PubMed (search strategies are described in the Supplementary material online).

I also reviewed the bibliographic references of the retrieved studies, review and meta-analysis articles obtained from the initial search. Conference proceedings of the following conferences were hand searched: AHA, ACC, ESC from 1995 to 2005.

I also searched the WEB with the same keywords and trial registers (www.clinicaltrialresults.org and ISRCTN register).

I included trials published only in abstract form, to limit the influence of possible publication bias.

Study selection
I assessed all potentially relevant published articles and abstracts for inclusion. To be included, trials had to meet the following criteria: (i) randomized placebo controlled (with or without allocation concealment); (ii) double-blind design; (iii) with <10% attrition; (iv) patient followed-up for 1 year or more. Trials initially planned for 1 year follow-up or more but stopped prematurely for efficacy reasons were also considered; (v) patients with a history of MI regardless of the period of treatment initiation. Trials with intravenous treatment initiated during the acute phase of MI were also included; (vi) trials had to be conducted with a beta-blocker, including those with partial beta-1 agonist activity or with a calcium channel blocker.

Data collection and assessment of quality
All qualifying trials were assessed for adequate blinding of randomization, completeness of follow-up, and description of withdrawals using Jadad score.¹⁸

The absolute HR reduction was calculated by subtracting the mean change from baseline observed in the placebo group from the corresponding change observed in the active treatment group. Changes in resting HR were determined between baseline resting HR and resting HR after about 1 month on treatment, the exact time of measure varying across trials. One month is the best compromise between the stabilization of the HR reduction and the number of patients at risk and under treatment. Over this time, occurrence of death and withdrawals decreased the number of patients contributing towards the HR mean.

Statistical methods
An initial robust analysis was performed to search if a relationship between resting HR reduction and clinical benefit exists. Clinical benefit refers to the estimation of the treatment effect on the clinically relevant endpoints of mortality and morbidity. Odds ratio between the active treatment and placebo group was used to estimate the clinical benefit on these endpoints. The trials were split in three subgroups according to according to tertiles of HR reduction. For each variable of clinical benefit, a pooled odds ratio was calculated in every subgroup of resting HR reduction using a fixed model, given an estimate of the effect of treatment for the higher, average and lower resting HR reductions. Then the three estimates were compared with the ² test for trend.¹⁹

In the second step, the analysis used a weighted meta-regression by the inverse of variance,^15,20 modelling the logarithm of odds ratio as a linear function of the absolute resting HR reduction. In this meta-regression, we used additive component of residual heterogeneity in order to take into account the diversity between trials regarding drugs, regimen and patients. Restricted maximum likelihood (REML) estimators were used.²¹ See online supplementary data for model details.

Slope estimates were used to predict the relative risk reduction potentially induced by 10 b.p.m. reduction in resting HR.

The robustness of the relationship was tested by sensitivity analyses where REML estimates were computed after exclusion of trials with the lowest and largest resting HR reduction (one each time). Subgroup analyses were planned to explore separately beta-blockers and calcium blockers.

As a complementary analysis (planned in the protocol), we performed also the meta-regression using the relative risk. Publication bias was assessed graphically using a funnel plot of the logarithm of effect size vs. the standard error for each trial.

The meta-regression methods were implemented with the R software.²² The code was validated with running examples reported in the methodological papers.

Statistical test were two-tailed with P < 0.05 chosen at the level of significance.

	Results

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion Supplementary material Funding Acknowledgement References

 
Study selection
The process of study selection is outlined in Figures 1 and 2. After selection, 21 trials with beta-blockers were included and nine excluded, whereas four trials with calcium channel blockers were included and 15 excluded. The more frequent reason for exclusion was an insufficient follow-up duration of <1 year. (The lists of excluded trials are given in the Supplementary material online.) Resting HR reduction was reported in 14 of the 21 trials with beta-blockers and in three of the four trials with calcium channel blockers giving a total of 17 studies applicable for the meta-regression.

View larger version (13K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 1 Process of beta-blockers trials selection.

 

View larger version (13K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 2 Process of calcium channel blockers trials selection.

 
The data concerning the HR reduction being not available for all trials, we undertook a subgroup meta-analysis to compare trials reporting HR reduction to the others in terms of treatment effects using the relative risk and a fixed effect model. No statistically significant heterogeneity was found between trials reporting the HR reduction value and those not reporting this data.

Included trials
Beta-blockers and calcium channel blockers used in analysed trials are shown in Table 1.

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]   Table 1 Characteristics of the trials included in the meta-regression

 
Inclusion criteria of all the trials specified that enrolled patients had definite or suspected MI. Depending of the protocol of the trial, MI was diagnosed using clinical, electrical signs and enzyme elevation (alone or in combination). The enzymatic definition of MI varied across time and therefore across the trials.

Beta-blockers trials were quite well conducted with random allocation of treatment, masking of treatment assignment, and patient follow-up rates of >95% except for one trial (Wilhelmsson 1974 in which 7% of patients were lost to follow-up). However, six trials had a Jadad score less than 4, mainly due to insufficient description of randomization or double-blind, preventing the evaluation of their appropriateness (allocation concealment in particular) or due to absence of withdrawals description. The calcium channel blockers trials were also well conducted and obtained all a Jadad score of 4 or 5.

Effects of resting heart rate reduction on clinical benefit
According to the availability of resting HR reduction and endpoints data, 16 trials contributed to the meta-regression for all-cause death, 12 for cardiac death, 7 for cardiovascular death, 13 for non-fatal MI recurrence and 6 for sudden death.

Subgroups analysis by resting HR reduction tertiles (Table 2 and Figures 3–6) showed that larger resting HR reduction, compared with lower resting HR reduction, were associated with an increased mortality reduction for cardiac death (P = 0.0015), all-cause death (P = 0.017) and sudden death (P = 0.005). Similar relationship was found for non-fatal MI recurrence (P = 0.033). No significant relationship was found between resting HR reduction and the treatment effect on cardiovascular deaths (P = 0.09) and on fatal and non-fatal MI (P = 0.36). Cardiac events were available in only three trials and did not allow any reliable estimate of the relationship.

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]   Table 2 Result summary of the analysis by subgroup and meta-regression

 

View larger version (17K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 3 By tertiles subgroup analysis and meta-regression for all-cause death. Odds ratios represented are comparing odds between the active treatment and placebo group.

 

View larger version (17K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 4 By tertiles subgroup analysis and meta-regression for cardiac death. Odds ratios represented are comparing odds between the active treatment and placebo group.

 

View larger version (16K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 5 By tertiles subgroup analysis and meta-regression for sudden death. Odds ratios represented are comparing odds between the active treatment and placebo group. There were no data available for sudden death in the calcium blockers trials.

 
These results were all confirmed by the meta-regression (Table 2 and Figures 3–6) which showed the same type of relationship.

View larger version (17K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 6 By tertiles subgroup analysis and meta-regression for non-fatal myocardial infarction recurrence. Odds ratios represented are comparing odds between the active treatment and placebo group.

 
No residual heterogeneity was detected, except for the cardiovascular death where a marginal heterogeneity appeared.

In the sensitivity analysis, the results for cardiac death remained statistically significant after the exclusion of trials with highest or lowest resting HR reduction. For all-cause mortality, sudden death, and recurrence of MI, results remain significant after removing the trial with the smallest resting HR reduction. Results on the same endpoints became statistically non-significant after removing the trial with the largest resting HR reduction but the results overall remain qualitatively unchanged.

The meta-regression using log-relative risk (in place of log odds ratio) led to very similar results (Table 3).

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]   Table 3 Comparison of the results given by the meta-regression with the odds ratio and the relative risk

 
When analysis is restricted to the beta-blockers trials, a statistically significant relationship was found between HR reduction and log odds ratio for cardiac death (P = 0.02, meta-regression slope=0.039), sudden death (P < 0.01) and non-fatal MI recurrence (P < 0.01). A similar but non-statistically significant relationship (P = 0.17, meta-regression slope=0.21) was found with all-cause mortality. Given the small number of available data (3 points), meta-regression restricted to the calcium blocker trials was not performed.

Funnel plots did not suggest the possibility of publication bias.

	Discussion

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion Supplementary material Funding Acknowledgement References

 
The present meta-regression shows a relationship between the clinical benefit and the resting HR reduction observed with drugs modifying HR in post-MI patients. These findings provide firm evidence that the clinical benefit on cardiac death, all-cause mortality, sudden death and non-fatal recurrence of MI is proportional to the extent of resting HR reduction.

For all these endpoints, the residual heterogeneity is estimated at zero, showing that the differences between trials can be completely explained by resting HR reduction and within-trial variability (sampling fluctuations). This result is compatible with the assumption that the resting HR reduction explains all the benefit of these drugs. From this meta-regression, there is no evidence of a drug/class specific part in the benefit. The lack of mortality reduction observed with calcium antagonists could be totally explained by the absence of resting HR reduction with the tested drugs without need to take into account a specificity of the calcium blockers. After adjustment on resting HR reduction, there is no residual heterogeneity to be explained by other factors between the trials. Thus, resting HR reduction appears to be the major determinant of the clinical benefit induced by the drugs modifying resting HR in post MI patients.

For cardiovascular deaths, no statistically significant relationship was found most probably due to the small number of trials available for this endpoint, seven in place of 12 for cardiac deaths. The value of the slope for this endpoint –0.0204 is similar to the one observed with the cardiac deaths –0.0396. Moreover, the relationship could have been weakened by the adding of the vascular deaths (including among others fatal stroke) not influenced by the HR.

The meta-regression was undertaken using the odds ratio for statistical reasons. The odds ratio has symmetric properties that the relative risk does not have; therefore, odds ratio is more appropriate to use for a meta-regression than the relative risk. However, in practice, it appears that the relative risk is more relevant for clinicians (among others) than odds ratio.^23,24 The analyses carried out on relative risk gave consistent results with analyses performed on odds ratio. For the sake of simplicity, the relative risk can be used to report the findings for this meta-regression.

Our results are consistent with those obtained by Kjekshus^14,25 in 1986 (updated in 1999) when considering only beta-blockers. Our results are not simply the replication of these previous ones, given that five additional beta-blocker trials were added and that the focus was widened to the other drugs modifying HR.

In previous meta-analyses, only the intrinsic sympathomimetic activity has been identified as a potential effect modifier of the beta-blockers benefit^26,27 and could be, thereby, a confounding factor for the relation between resting HR reduction and benefit. However, a main consequence of the intrinsic sympathomimetic activity is a low reduction in resting HR. In fact, the relation between resting HR reduction and benefit could explain the trend towards a decreased benefit with drugs with intrinsic sympathomimetic activity.

Some potential limitations must be discussed. Data dredging is the main pitfall in reaching reliable conclusion from meta-regression.²⁸ Here, it can be discarded because the covariate was pre-specified. Clearly, this work is hypothesis testing and not exploratory like an intensive search among a large collection of candidate covariables would be.

These results are quite robust. The relationship is found with robust subgroup analysis that did not require strong statistical assumptions. Moreover, the validity of these observations is strengthened by the robustness of the sensitivity analyses and by the very good fitting with the absence of residual heterogeneity.

The relationship with resting HR lowering may be potentially confounded by other trials, drugs, or patients characteristics. Given the relatively small number of trials reporting resting HR reduction, multivariate analyses are not feasible in this analysis based on summary data for each considered trials. Blood pressure reduction is a candidate confounding factor as it is probable that blood pressure lowering induced by these drugs is in part correlated with the induced resting HR reduction. Despite that statistical adjustment was not feasible, it is improbable that the found relationships were confounded by blood pressure change. In randomized trials, clinical benefit of blood pressure lowering needed several years to appear and mortality reductions were smaller than those observed in the present post-MI trials.²⁹ Moreover, in the trials used in this meta-regression, patients were included irrespective to the presence of a hypertension.

The between trial heterogeneity concerning drugs and patients is taken into account with the use of a random effect model. The absence of heterogeneity does not resolve by itself the confounding concern but gives some reassurance that the extent of resting HR lowering is a strong marker of clinical benefit in the trials.

An interesting result of this meta-regression is the absence of residual heterogeneity that could be interpreted as all the benefit is brought by resting HR reduction without any other mechanism. This attractive interpretation is limited as it derives from non-statistically significant results. However, it is at least reasonable to conclude that the available data do not permit to exclude that the HR reduction is the major determinant of the benefit of drugs like beta-blockers or calcium blockers in post-MI.

In conclusion, in post-MI condition, this meta-regression of randomized clinical trials robustly suggests that the benefit of drugs modifying HR is strongly related to the magnitude of reduction in resting HR. This implies that whatever the mechanism leading to the decrease in resting HR, a same reduction could result in the same morbidity and mortality reduction. Each 10 b.p.m. reduction in resting HR is estimated to reduce the relative risk of cardiac death by about 30%, the risk of sudden death by 39%, leading to a reduction in the relative risk of all-cause mortality of 20%.

	Supplementary material

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion Supplementary material Funding Acknowledgement References

 
Supplementary material is available at European Heart Journal online.

	Funding

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion Supplementary material Funding Acknowledgement References

 
This study was supported by an unrestricted grant from Servier, Inc. The sponsor of the study had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or in the writing of the report.

	Acknowledgement

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion Supplementary material Funding Acknowledgement References

 
We thank D. Lebrasseur, I.R.I.S and the scientific documentation department of I.R.I.S. for their help in bibliographic searching.

Conflict of interest: M.C. has received research support from and is a consultant to Servier.

	References

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion Supplementary material Funding Acknowledgement References

 

1. Benetos A, Rudnichi A, Thomas F, Safar M, Guize L. Influence of heart rate on mortality in a French population: role of age, gender, and blood pressure. Hypertension (1999) 33:44–52.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
2. Dyer AR, Persky V, Stamler J, Paul O, Shekelle RB, Berkson DM, Lepper M, Schoenberger JA, Lindberg HA. Heart rate as a prognostic factor for coronary heart disease and mortality: findings in three Chicago epidemiologic studies. Am J Epidemiol (1980) 112:736–749.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
3. Gillum RF, Makuc DM, Feldman JJ. Pulse rate, coronary heart disease, and death: the NHANES I Epidemiologic Follow-up Study. Am Heart J (1991) 121:172–177.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
4. Greenland P, Daviglus ML, Dyer AR, Liu K, Huang CF, Goldberger JJ, Stamler J. Resting heart rate is a risk factor for cardiovascular and noncardiovascular mortality: the Chicago Heart Association Detection Project in Industry. Am J Epidemiol (1999) 149:853–862.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
5. Kannel WB, Kannel C, Paffenbarger RS Jr, Cupples LA. Heart rate and cardiovascular mortality: the Framingham Study. Am Heart J (1987) 113:1489–1494.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
6. Mensink GB, Hoffmeister H. The relationship between resting heart rate and all-cause, cardiovascular and cancer mortality. Eur Heart J (1997) 18:1404–1410.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
7. Palatini P, Casiglia E, Julius S, Pessina AC. High heart rate: a risk factor for cardiovascular death in elderly men. Arch Intern Med (1999) 159:585–592.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
8. Seccareccia F, Pannozzo F, Dima F, Minoprio A, Menditto A, Lo Noce C, Giampaoli S. Heart rate as a predictor of mortality: the MATISS project. Am J Public Health (2001) 91:1258–1263.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
9. Shaper AG, Wannamethee G, Macfarlane PW, Walker M. Heart rate, ischaemic heart disease, and sudden cardiac death in middle-aged British men. Br Heart J (1993) 70:49–55.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
10. Hjalmarson A. Significance of reduction in heart rate in cardiovascular disease. Clin Cardiol (1998) 21:II3–II7.[Web of Science][Medline]
11. Hjalmarson A, Gilpin EA, Kjekshus J, Schieman G, Nicod P, Henning H, Ross J Jr. Influence of heart rate on mortality after acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol (1990) 65:547–553.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
12. Stangeland L, Grong K, Vik-Mo H, Andersen KS, Lekven J. Is reduced cardiac performance the only mechanism for myocardial infarct size reduction during beta adrenergic blockade? Cardiovasc Res (1986) 20:322–330.[Web of Science][Medline]
13. Gundersen T, Grottum P, Pedersen T, Kjekshus JK. Effect of timolol on mortality and reinfarction after acute myocardial infarction: prognostic importance of heart rate at rest. Am J Cardiol (1986) 58:20–24.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
14. Kjekshus JK. Importance of heart rate in determining beta-blocker efficacy in acute and long-term acute myocardial infarction intervention trials. Am J Cardiol (1986) 57:43F–49F.[CrossRef][Medline]
15. van Houwelingen HC, Arends LR, Stijnen T. Advanced methods in meta-analysis: multivariate approach and meta-regression. Stat Med (2002) 21:589–624.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
16. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of reporting of meta-analyses. Lancet (1999) 354:1896–1900.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
17. Haynes RB, McKibbon KA, Wilczynski NL, Walter SD, Werre SR. Optimal search strategies for retrieving scientifically strong studies of treatment from Medline: analytical survey. BMJ (2005) 330:1179.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
18. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ, McQuay HJ. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials (1996) 17:1–12.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
19. Hansteen V, Moinichen E, Lorentsen E, Andersen A, Strom O, Soiland K, Dyrbekk D, Refsum AM, Tromsdal A, Knudsen K, Eika C, Bakken J Jr, Smith P, Hoff PI. One year’s treatment with propranolol after myocardial infarction: preliminary report of Norwegian multicentre trial. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) (1982) 284:155–160.[Medline]
20. Thompson SG, Higgins JP. How should meta-regression analyses be undertaken and interpreted? Stat Med (2002) 21:1559–1573.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
21. Thompson SG, Sharp SJ. Explaining heterogeneity in meta-analysis: a comparison of methods. Stat Med (1999) 18:2693–2708.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
22. R Development Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing [Program] (2006) Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
23. Deeks J. When can odds ratios mislead? Odds ratios should be used only in case-control studies and logistic regression analyses. BMJ (1998) 317:1155–1156. author reply 1156–1157.[Free Full Text]
24. Sackett DL, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Down with odds ratios! Evidence-Based Med (1996) 1:164–166.
25. Kjekshus J, Gullestad L. Heart rate as therapeutic target in heart failure. Eur Heart J (1999) 1:H64–H69.
26. Yusuf S, Peto R, Lewis J, Collins R, Sleight P. Beta blockade during and after myocardial infarction: an overview of the randomized trials. Prog Cardiovasc Dis (1985) 27:335–371.[Web of Science][Medline]
27. Freemantle N, Cleland J, Young P, Mason J, Harrison J. Beta blockade after myocardial infarction: systematic review and meta regression analysis. BMJ (1999) 318:1730–1737.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
28. Higgins JP, Thompson SG. Controlling the risk of spurious findings from meta-regression. Stat Med (2004) 23:1663–1682.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
29. Turnbull F. Effects of different blood-pressure-lowering regimens on major cardiovascular events: results of prospectively-designed overviews of randomised trials. Lancet (2003) 362:1527–1535.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
30. Andersen MP, Bechsgaard P, Frederiksen J, Hansen DA, Jurgensen HJ, Nielsen B, Pedersen F, Pedersen-Bjergaard O, Rasmussen SL. Effect of alprenolol on mortality among patients with definite or suspected acute myocardial infarction. Preliminary results. Lancet (1979) 2:865–868.[Web of Science][Medline]
31. Boissel JP, Leizorovicz A, Picolet H, Ducruet T. Efficacy of acebutolol after acute myocardial infarction (the APSI trial). The APSI Investigators. Am J Cardiol (1990) 66:24C–31C.[CrossRef][Medline]
32. Aronow WS, Ahn C, Kronzon I. Effect of propranolol versus no propranolol on total mortality plus nonfatal myocardial infarction in older patients with prior myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, and left ventricular ejection fraction >or=40% treated with diuretics plus angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. Am J Cardiol (1997) 80:207–209.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
33. The effect of pindolol on the two years mortality after complicated myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J (1983) 4:367–375.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
34. Baber NS, Evans DW, Howitt G, Thomas M, Wilson T, Lewis JA, Dawes PM, Handler K, Tuson R. Multicentre post-infarction trial of propranolol in 49 hospitals in the United Kingdom, Italy, and Yugoslavia. Br Heart J (1980) 44:96–100.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
35. Basu S, Senior R, Raval U, van der Does R, Bruckner T, Lahiri A. Beneficial effects of intravenous and oral carvedilol treatment in acute myocardial infarction. A placebo-controlled, randomized trial. Circulation (1997) 96:183–191.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
36. Lampert R, Ickovics JR, Viscoli CJ, Horwitz RI, Lee FA. Effects of propranolol on recovery of heart rate variability following acute myocardial infarction and relation to outcome in the Beta-Blocker Heart Attack Trial. Am J Cardiol (2003) 91:137–142.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
37. A randomized trial of propranolol in patients with acute myocardial infarction. II. Morbidity results. JAMA (1983) 250:2814–2819.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
38. A randomized trial of propranolol in patients with acute myocardial infarction. I. Mortality results. JAMA (1982) 247:1707–1714.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
39. European Infarction Study (EIS). A secondary prevention study with slow release oxprenolol after myocardial infarction: morbidity and mortality. Eur Heart J (1984) 5:189–202.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
40. Bethge KP, Andresen D, Boissel JP, von Leitner ER, Peyrieux JC, Schroder R, Tietze U. Effect of oxprenolol on ventricular arrhythmias: the European Infarction Study experience. J Am Coll Cardiol (1985) 6:963–972.[Abstract]
41. Hjalmarson A, Elmfeldt D, Herlitz J, Holmberg S, Malek I, Nyberg G, Ryden L, Swedberg K, Vedin A, Waagstein F, Waldenstrom A, Waldenstrom J, Wedel H, Wilhelmsen L, Wilhelmsson C. Effect on mortality of metoprolol in acute myocardial infarction. A double-blind randomised trial. Lancet (1981) 2:823–827.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
42. Julian DG, Prescott RJ, Jackson FS, Szekely P. Controlled trial of sotalol for one year after myocardial infarction. Lancet (1982) 1:1142–1147.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
43. Lopressor Intervention Trial Research Group. The Lopressor Intervention Trial: multicentre study of metoprolol in survivors of acute myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J (1987) 8:1056–1064.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
44. Cats Manger V, van Capelle FJL, Lie KI, Durrer Dnregist. Effect of treatment with 2 x 100 mg metoprolol on mortality in a single-center study with low placebo mortality rate after infarction. Circulation (1983) 68((Suppl. 3)):181.
45. Improvement in prognosis of myocardial infarction by long-term beta-adrenoreceptor blockade using practolol. A multicentre international study. Br Med J (1975) 3:735–740.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
46. Timolol-induced reduction in mortality and reinfarction in patients surviving acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med (1981) 304:801–807.[Abstract]
47. Rehnqvist N, Olsson G. Influence on ventricular arrhythmias by chronic post infarction treatment with metoprolol. Circulation (1983) 68((Suppl. 3)):69.
48. Salathia KS, Barber JM, McIlmoyle EL, Nicholas J, Evans AE, Elwood JH, Cran G, Shanks RG, Boyle DM. Very early intervention with metoprolol in suspected acute myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J (1985) 6:190–198.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
49. Schwartz PJ, Motolese M, Pollavini G, Lotto A, Ruberti U, Trazzi R. Prevention of sudden cardiac death after a first myocardial infarction by pharmacologic or surgical antiadrenergic interventions. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol (1992) 3:2–16.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
50. Taylor SH, Silke B, Ebbutt A, Sutton GC, Prout BJ, Burley DM. A long-term prevention study with oxprenolol in coronary heart disease. N Engl J Med (1982) 307:1293–1301.[Abstract]
51. Wilcox RG, Roland JM, Banks DC, Hampton JR, Mitchell JR. Randomised trial comparing propranolol with atenolol in immediate treatment of suspected myocardial infarction. Br Med J (1980) 280:885–888.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
52. Wilhelmsson C, Vedin JA, Wilhelmsen L, Tibblin G, Werko L. Reduction of sudden deaths after myocardial infarction by treatment with alprenolol. Preliminary results. Lancet (1974) 2:1157–1160.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
53. The Multicenter Diltiazem Postinfarction Trial Research Group. The effect of diltiazem on mortality reinfarction after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med (1988) 319:385–392.[Abstract]
54. Rengo F, Carbonin P, Pahor M, DeCaprio L, Bernabei R, Ferrara N, Carosella L, Acanfora D, Parlati S, Vitale D. A controlled trial of verapamil in patients after acute myocardial infarction: results of the calcium antagonist reinfarction Italian study (CRIS). Am J Cardiol (1996) 77:365–369.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
55. Effect of verapamil on mortality major events after acute myocardial infarction (the Danish Verapamil Infarction Trial II—DAVIT II). Am J Cardiol (1990) 66:779–785.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
56. Secondary Prevention Reinfarction Israeli Nifedipine Trial (SPRINT). A randomized intervention trial of nifedipine in patients with acute myocardial infarction. The Israeli Sprint Study Group. Eur Heart J (1988) 9:354–364.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. T. La Rovere Heart rate and arrhythmic risk: old markers never die Europace, February 1, 2010; 12(2): 155 - 157. [Full Text] [PDF]

				American College of Cardiology Foundation, American Heart Association Task Force on Practice, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Rhythm Society, Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interve, Society for Vascular Medicine, Society for Vascular Surgery, L. A. Fleisher, et al. 2009 ACCF/AHA Focused Update on Perioperative Beta Blockade Incorporated Into the ACC/AHA 2007 Guidelines on Perioperative Cardiovascular Evaluation and Care for Noncardiac Surgery J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., November 24, 2009; 54(22): e13 - e118. [Full Text] [PDF]

				American College of Cardiology Foundation, American Heart Association Task Force on Practice, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Rhythm Society, Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interve, Society for Vascular Medicine, Society for Vascular Surgery, K. E. Fleischmann, et al. 2009 ACCF/AHA Focused Update on Perioperative Beta Blockade J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., November 24, 2009; 54(22): 2102 - 2128. [Full Text] [PDF]

				2009 WRITING GROUP TO REVIEW NEW EVIDENCE AND UPDA, K. E. Fleischmann, J. A. Beckman, C. E. Buller, H. Calkins, L. A. Fleisher, W. K. Freeman, J. B. Froehlich, E. K. Kasper, J. R. Kersten, et al. 2009 ACCF/AHA Focused Update on Perioperative Beta Blockade: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines Circulation, November 24, 2009; 120(21): 2123 - 2151. [Full Text] [PDF]

				2007 WRITING COMMITTEE MEMBERS, L. A. Fleisher, J. A. Beckman, K. A. Brown, H. Calkins, E. L. Chaikof, K. E. Fleischmann, W. K. Freeman, J. B. Froehlich, E. K. Kasper, et al. 2009 ACCF/AHA Focused Update on Perioperative Beta Blockade Incorporated Into the ACC/AHA 2007 Guidelines on Perioperative Cardiovascular Evaluation and Care for Noncardiac Surgery: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines Circulation, November 24, 2009; 120(21): e169 - e276. [Full Text] [PDF]

				J.-C. Tardif Heart rate and atherosclerosis Eur. Heart J. Suppl., August 1, 2009; 11(suppl_D): D8 - D12. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. G. Steg Heart rate management in coronary artery disease: the CLARIFY registry Eur. Heart J. Suppl., August 1, 2009; 11(suppl_D): D13 - D18. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. A. McAlister, N. Wiebe, J. A. Ezekowitz, A. A. Leung, and P. W. Armstrong Meta-analysis: {beta}-Blocker Dose, Heart Rate Reduction, and Death in Patients With Heart Failure Ann Intern Med, June 2, 2009; 150(11): 784 - 794. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J.-C. Tardif Heart rate as a treatable cardiovascular risk factor Br. Med. Bull., June 1, 2009; 90(1): 71 - 84. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. S. Maurer, J. D. Sackner-Bernstein, L. El-Khoury Rumbarger, M. Yushak, D. L. King, and D. Burkhoff Mechanisms Underlying Improvements in Ejection Fraction With Carvedilol in Heart Failure Circ Heart Fail, May 1, 2009; 2(3): 189 - 196. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. L. Zamorano Heart rate management: a therapeutic goal throughout the cardiovascular continuum Eur. Heart J. Suppl., August 1, 2008; 10(suppl_F): F17 - F21. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. Palatini Is there benefit of cardiac slowing drugs in the treatment of hypertensive patients with elevated heart rate? Eur. Heart J., May 2, 2008; 29(10): 1218 - 1220. [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Abstract FREE Full Text (PDF) Supplementary Data All Versions of this Article: 28/24/3012    most recent ehm489v1 E-letters: Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when E-letters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to My Personal Archive Download to citation manager Search for citing articles in: ISI Web of Science (24) Request Permissions Disclaimer Google Scholar Articles by Cucherat, M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Cucherat, M. Social Bookmarking          What's this?

Online ISSN 1522-9645 - Print ISSN 0195-668x

Copyright © 2010 European Society of Cardiology

Oxford Journals Oxford University Press

• Site Map
• Privacy Policy
• Frequently Asked Questions

Other Oxford University Press sites: Oxford University Press Oxford Journals China Oxford Journals Japan American National Biography Booksellers' Information Service Children's Fiction and Poetry Children's Reference Corporate & Special Sales Dictionaries Dictionary of National Biography Digital Reference English Language Teaching Higher Education Textbooks Humanities International Education Unit Law Medicine Music Online Products Oxford English Dictionary Reference Rights and Permissions Science School Books Social Sciences Very Short Introductions World's Classics