ArticleNaunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology2025
Comparison of nebivolol, carvedilol, and bisoprolol for adverse clinical outcomes among patients with heart failure-a real-world nationwide investigation.
Article in Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The authors report a retrospective cohort study based on a national dataset that explores the association between the prescription of three beta-blockers (BB) and a diagnosis of heart failure (HF) readmission, cardiovascular (CV) death, and all-cause death. Patients with HF who received nebivolol, carvedilol, and bisoprolol between 2016 and 2020 were identified. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression analyses were employed to assess and examine the crude and adjusted hazard ratio of the outcomes associated with the three BBs, demographics, comorbidities, and concomitant medications. We further performed Cox proportional hazards regression analyses for the three BBs stratified by age. A total of 109,466 BB patients including 85,166 bisoprolol patients, 19,741 carvedilol patients, 4559 nebivolol patients, and 109,466 non-BB patients were enrolled in our study. Both carvedilol and bisoprolol cohorts had a higher risk of readmission for HF than the non-BB cohort (carvedilol: adjusted HR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.10-1.15; bisoprolol: adjusted HR = 1.17, 95% CI = 1.16-1.19). Nebivolol cohorts had a lower risk of readmission for HF than the non-BB cohort (adjusted HR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.74-0.83). There were higher risks of CV (carvedilol: adjusted HR = 1.31, 95% CI = 1.26-1.36; bisoprolol: adjusted HR = 1.17, 95% CI = 1.14-1.2) and all-cause (carvedilol: adjusted HR = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.23-1.29; bisoprolol: adjusted HR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.17-1.20) deaths in the carvedilol and bisoprolol cohorts in contrast to the non-BB nebivolol cohort. Nebivolol cohorts had a lower risk of CV deaths and all-cause deaths than the non-BB cohort (adjusted HR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.69-0.85; adjusted HR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.73-0.83). The authors concluded that the use of nebivolol was associated with better outcomes in patients with HF.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39969604What 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.