Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33621525›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of cardiology2021

Comparison of Metoprolol Versus Carvedilol After Acute Myocardial Infarction.

Ghaith Zaatari, Dan J Fintel, Haris Subacius, Joseph J Germano, Jacob Shani, Jeffrey J Goldberger, Outcomes of Beta-blocker Therapy After myocardial INfarction (OBTAIN) Investigators

Abstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of cardiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Carvedilol versus Metoprolol in Patients with Ventricular Tachyarrhythmias.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Ghaith ZaatariUniversity of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Cardiovascular Division, Miami, Florida.
Dan J FintelFeinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Chicago, Illinois.
Haris SubaciusDivision of Research and Optimal Patient Care, American College of Surgeons, Chicago, Illinois.
Joseph J GermanoLong Island School of Medicine, New York University, Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, New York, New York.
Jacob ShaniMaimonides Medical Center, Department of Cardiology, Brooklyn, New York.
Jeffrey J GoldbergerUniversity of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Cardiovascular Division, Miami, Florida. Electronic address: j-goldberger@miami.edu.
Outcomes of Beta-blocker Therapy After myocardial INfarction (OBTAIN) Investigators

Funding

PACEmaker & Beta-Blocker Therapy Post-Myocardial InfarctU01HL080416 · NHLBI · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY AT CHICAGO · PI GOLDBERGER, JEFFREY J · 2006 to 2013
$6.2M
NHLBI NIH HHS U01 HL080416
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Beta-blockers are typically prescribed following myocardial infarction (MI), but no specific beta-blocker is recommended. Of 7,057 patients enrolled in the OBTAIN multi-center registry of patients with acute MI, 4142 were discharged on metoprolol and 1487 on carvedilol. Beta-blocker dose was indexed to the target daily dose used in randomized clinical trials (metoprolol-200 mg; carvedilol-50 mg), reported as %. Beta-blocker dosage groups were >0% to12.5% (n = 1,428), >12.5% to 25% (n = 2113), >25% to 50% (n = 1,392), and >50% (n = 696). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate 3-year survival. Correction for baseline differences was achieved by multivariable adjustment. Patients treated with carvedilol were older (64.4 vs 63.3 years) and had more comorbidities: hypertension, diabetes, prior MI, congestive heart failure, reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, and a longer length of stay. Mean doses for metoprolol and carvedilol did not significantly differ (37.2 ± 27.8% and 35.8 ± 31.0%, respectively). The 3-year survival estimates were 88.2% and 83.5% for metoprolol and carvedilol, respectively, with an unadjusted HR = 0.72 (p <0.0001), but after multivariable adjustment HR = 1.073 (p = 0.43). Patients in the >12.5% to 25% dose category had improved survival compared with other dose categories. Subgroup analysis of patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40%, showed worse survival with metoprolol versus carvedilol (adjusted HR = 1.281; 95% CI: 1.024 to 1.602, p = 0.03). In patients with left ventricular ejection fraction >40%, there were no differences in survival with carvedilol versus metoprolol. In conclusion, overall survival after acute MI was similar for patients treated with metoprolol or carvedilol, but may be superior for carvedilol in patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40%.

Indexed as

Adrenergic alpha-1 Receptor AntagonistsAgedCarvedilolFemaleHospitalizationHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMetoprololMiddle AgedMyocardial InfarctionRegistriesStroke VolumeSurvival RateTreatment OutcomeAdrenergic alpha-1 Receptor AntagonistsCarvedilolMetoprolol

Identifiers

PMID33621525
PMCPMC8500344

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.