Trial reportScientific reports2020
Beta-blockers and Short-Term Cardiovascular Outcomes In Patients Hospitalized For Acute Coronary Syndrome and a Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ≥40.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Beta-blockers in acute decompensated heart failure with and without cardiogenic shock: Should we initiate, continue, or withdraw? A systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Pooled it
- The Long-Term Prognostic Role of Nighttime Resting Heart Rate in Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome.Journal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis · 2024Article
- Beta-blockers after percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction and non-reduced left ventricular ejection fraction.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Beta-blockers (BB) have been traditionally associated with improvement in cardiovascular disease outcomes in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. Whether they're still efficacious in the post-reperfusion era is currently debated in the light of recent controversial reports. In-hospital, 6-month and 12-month mortality were studied in the GULF-COAST, a prospective multicenter cohort of acute coronary syndrome (ACS), in relation to BB use: prior to admission, 24-hour post-admission and on discharge in patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥ 40%. On admission, 50.9% of the cohort participants had a LVEF ≥ 40%, of whom 1203 (55.4%) were on BB whilst 905 (44.6%) were not. Mean age was 60 (13) years old and 66% were males. Prior BB use or its administration in 24 hours decreased in-hospital mortality (OR = 0.25, 95% CI [0.09-0.67]; OR = 0.16, 95% CI [0.08-0.35]; respectively). BB on discharge lowered 1-month mortality (OR = 0.28, 95% CI [0.11-0.72]), but had a neutral effect on mortality, reinfarction and stroke at 6 and 12 months. Results were unchanged after multivariable adjustments and further sensitivity analysis. In this retrospective cohort of ACS, BB improved in-hospital and 1-month mortality in patients with a LVEF ≥ 40% but had a neutral effect on longer-term outcome.
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.