ArticleScientific reports2025
Beta blockers linked to reduced 1-Year mortality in critically ill congestive heart failure patients with differential benefits across subgroups.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association of anti-catecholaminergic antiarrhythmic drugs with survival in sepsis-associated new-onset atrial fibrillation.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Molecular Interplay between hypertension and dyslipidemia in cardiovascular pathogenesis: toward precision-based therapeutic strategies.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Blood-brain barrier penetration determines link between beta blockers and reduced mortality in patients with sepsis-associated encephalopathy: A multicenter cohort study and an effect heterogeneity tool.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2026Article
- Heart Rate Recovery Index as a Novel Marker in Heart Failure Assessment: A Comparative Analysis of Heart Rate Deceleration During Exercise Testing.International journal of general medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The efficacy of beta (β) blockers in critically ill patients with congestive heart failure (CHF) remains uncertain. This study investigated the association of β blockers use with 1-year all-cause mortality in these patients. Utilizing a retrospective cohort, the Medical Information Mart in Intensive Care-Ⅳ database, we identified critically ill CHF patients between 2008 and 2022. Stratified by β blockers use, Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox models examined the association. Subgroup analyses investigated its effect across various patient characteristics. It comprised 13,908 eligible patients, of whom 74.3% received β blockers. β blockers use was associated with a reduction in mortality (HR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.49-0.54, p < 0.001). Subgroup analyses revealed more benefits in non-elderly, male, hypertensive, diabetic or sepsis patients, as well as those undergoing mechanical ventilation or continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). Patients with elevated baseline heart rates or reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) experienced greater benefits (p for interaction < 0.001). Additionally, selective β1 blockers offered superior survival benefits than non-selective β blockers in patients with LVEF of 50% or higher, and these benefits were pronounced in those with elevated baseline white blood cell counts (p for interaction = 0.022). The use of β blockers was linked to a reduction of all-cause mortality in critically ill patients with CHF, particularly in subgroups characterized by younger age, male gender, hypertension, diabetes, sepsis, undergoing CRRT or mechanical ventilation, and those exhibiting elevated baseline heart rates or reduced LVEF. These findings are potentially influenced by unmeasured confounders and need to be confirmed by prospective randomized controlled 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.