ArticleCurrent cardiology reports2011
Should β blockers no longer be considered first-line therapy for the treatment of essential hypertension without comorbidities?
Article in Current cardiology reports, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Acute effects of device-guided slow breathing on sympathetic nerve activity and baroreflex sensitivity in posttraumatic stress disorder.American journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology · 2018Trial
- Central hemodynamics in prehypertension: effect of the β-adrenergic antagonist nebivolol.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2013Trial
- Current and Emerging Classes of Pharmacological Agents for the Management of Hypertension.American journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions · 2022Review
- The current status of beta blockers' use in the management of hypertension.Saudi medical journal · 2014Review
- Central blood pressure: current evidence and clinical importance.European heart journal · 2014Review
- Beta-Blockers in the Management of Hypertension and/or Chronic Kidney Disease.International journal of hypertension · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although most guidelines committees historically recommended initial diuretics and/or β blockers for uncomplicated hypertension, clinical trial outcomes analyzed in the last 5 to 7 years have been suboptimal with atenolol, the world's most popular β blocker. Several meta-analyses have suggested that despite lowering blood pressure, any and all β blockers inadequately protect hypertensive patients from cardiovascular events. These phenomena have been attributed to ineffective lowering of central aortic or inter-visit blood pressures, or adverse metabolic effects (particularly when combined with diuretics). Although there has never been a head-to-head comparison of atenolol with any other β blocker in hypertensive patients, indirect comparisons can be done with network and Bayesian meta-analyses, which suggest that heterogeneity of β-blockers' pharmacology also extends to outcomes. Although once-daily atenolol as initial antihypertensive therapy may be unwise, whether initial β blockers newer than atenolol reduce cardiovascular risk to the same extent as other antihypertensive drugs should be answered with more clinical trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.