慢性充血性心力衰竭时β受体阻滞剂的应用

对β受体阻滞剂治疗慢性充血性心力衰竭一直存在争议，本文就近年来对β受体阻滞剂治疗慢性充血性心力衰竭的机制，临床试验结果，适应症，禁忌症以及使用剂量等的研究结果作一综述。     

卡维地洛、美托洛尔治疗慢性心力衰竭临床疗效的比较研究

慢性心力衰竭应用β受体阻滞剂治疗取得较好疗效,已被大量临床观察证实。本文通过对非选择性β受体阻滞剂卡维地洛和选择性β受体阻滞剂美托洛尔(倍他乐克)治疗慢性心力衰竭的对比研究,观察了两种药物的临床疗效及耐受性,为临床合理用药提供参考。     

静脉注射艾司洛尔治疗不稳定型心绞痛并发急性左心衰竭的疗效观察

β受体阻滞剂用于治疗慢性心力衰竭已经得到循证医学的肯定,并已在临床广泛应用。β受体阻滞剂的传统用法是在心力衰竭血流动力学稳定基础上小剂量开始口服,并逐渐加量至靶剂量。但是,对于急性心力衰竭患者,使用静脉注射β受体阻滞剂尚缺乏足够的临床证据。本文对不稳定型心绞痛发生急性左心衰竭的患者,在常规治疗基础上尝试静脉注射艾司洛尔,观察其临床疗效及安全性。     

β受体阻滞剂治疗慢性心力衰竭的目标剂量问题

β受体阻滞剂治疗慢性心力衰竭的疗效已经得到肯定.CIBIS Ⅱ、MERIT-HF和COPERNICUS三项大规模随机临床试验证实,在血管紧张素转换酶(ACE)抑制剂和利尿剂等药物治疗的基础上,加用比索洛尔、美托洛尔或卡维地洛能够使心力衰竭患者的总死亡率进一步降低34%～35%[1～3].因此,除非有禁忌证或不能耐受,所有慢性收缩性心力衰竭患者均必须从上述3种β受体阻滞剂中选用一种[4～6].β受体阻滞剂的用法是"从极小剂量开始,缓慢递增剂量,达到目标剂量(或最大耐受剂量)后长期维持使用".     

糖尿病自主神经病变——胃轻瘫发病机制及诊治研究进展

随着循证医学的发展,β受体阻滞剂在缺血性心脏病、慢性收缩性心力衰竭、高血压等疾病中改善预后的重要临床价值已被确立,目前已成为心血管领域最常用的药物之一。然而,临床实践中,β受体阻滞剂应用仍很不够,并且使用剂量也太小。1999年在我国近2 000家医院进行的一项调查〔1〕显示,β受体阻滞剂在急性心肌梗死(AMI)和随后二级预防的使用率分别仅为43%和35%,且平均剂量仅相当于有效剂量的1/4左右。这大多源于医生对β受体阻滞剂副作用的顾虑。本文就β受体阻滞剂在AMI中的应用进行讨论。     

β受体阻滞剂在急性心肌梗死中的应用

随着循证医学的发展,β受体阻滞剂在缺血性心脏病、慢性收缩性心力衰竭、高血压等疾病中改善预后的重要临床价值已被确立,目前已成为心血管领域最常用的药物之一。然而,临床实践中,β受体阻滞剂应用仍很不够,并且使用剂量也太小。1999年在我国近2 000家医院进行的一项调查〔1〕显示,β受体阻滞剂在急性心肌梗死(AMI)和随后二级预防的使用率分别仅为43%和35%,且平均剂量仅相当于有效剂量的1/4左右。这大多源于医生对β受体阻滞剂副作用的顾虑。本文就β受体阻滞剂在AMI中的应用进行讨论。     

靶剂量卡维地洛治疗慢性心力衰竭的临床研究

随着大规模的临床试验证实了β受体阻滞剂可明显降低慢性心力衰竭（CHF）患者的病死率,在长期应用的过程中可改善心脏功能和临床预后。但是在临床使用中对β受体阻滞剂的应用仍显过于谨慎,所用剂量明显偏小,多数治疗未到达到靶剂量,主要担心用量较大时可能导致心力衰竭加重。特别是基层医院,而它又是解决大量慢性心衰的医疗机构,所以急需改变认识,落实标准治疗方案显得尤为重要。本研究旨在探讨以达到预计目标心率剂量（靶剂量）的卡维地洛对缺血性心脏病CHF患者的安全性及临床疗效。     

水脂双溶β受体阻滞剂可能带来的临床益处

β受体阻滞剂与肾上腺素能β受体特异性结合,竞争性、可逆性地阻断各器官中肾上腺素能β受体的作用,在心血管病的治疗中起着主要作用.多年来被广泛用于抗心肌缺血、心律失常和治疗高血压.近年,在慢性心力衰竭治疗中显示出明显疗效,成为慢性心力衰竭治疗的基石.但是,不同的β受体阻滞剂在疗效和不良反应等方面具有明显差别.例如,1964...     

慢性收缩性心力衰竭的药物治疗

慢性收缩性心力衰竭患者的急性期或失代偿期需要积极改善血液动力学,缓解症状;在稳定期,从防止、延缓和逆转心肌重构的机制出发,口服神经内分泌拮抗剂是慢性收缩性心力衰竭治疗的基石[1].2012年欧洲急/慢性心力衰竭诊断和治疗指南纳入了一些基于循证医学的新的药物治疗观点[2].图l显示了慢性收缩性心力衰竭患者的治疗策略,其中盐皮质激素受体拮抗剂(MRA)在慢性收缩性心力衰竭治疗中的地位明显提高,成为关键的神经激素受体阻滞剂之一[2].此外,在有症状的收缩性心力衰竭患者中,对经最佳剂量β-受体阻滞剂治疗后心率仍≥70次/分的患者,建议在应用血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂(ACEI)、β-受体阻滞剂和MRA的基础上加用超极化激活通道阻滞剂伊伐布雷定[3].我们对目前慢性收缩性心力衰竭的主要治疗药物作一概述.     

卡维地洛:治疗慢性心力衰竭的新药

卡维地洛是具有扩张血管和抗氧化反应的新一代β－受体阻滞剂，阻滞三种肾上腺素能受体。在治疗慢性心力衰竭上能调解儿茶酚胺对心脏的不利影响，减少心肌耗氧量，改善心肌缺血状态，减轻心脏前、后负荷。与其它β－受体阻滞剂相比，改善左心室功能，抑制左心室重构，降低心力衰竭恶化的发病率和死亡率，提高生活质量更为突出。在安全剂量下治疗，易耐受，不良反应轻微，是治疗慢性心力衰竭有前途的药物。     

Early beta-blocker therapy for acute myocardial infarction in elderly patients

BACKGROUND: Despite the evidence supporting the importance of early beta-blocker therapy, this intervention has received little attention as an indicator of quality of care. OBJECTIVES: To determine how often beta-blockers are administered as early treatment of acute myocardial infarction in patients 65 years of age or older, to identify predictors of the decision to use beta-blockers, and to evaluate the association between the early use of beta-blockers and in-hospital mortality. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Nongovernment, acute care hospitals in the United States. PATIENTS: Medicare beneficiaries who were 65 years of age or older, were hospitalized with an acute myocardial infarction in 1994 and 1995, and did not have a contraindication to beta-blocker therapy. MEASUREMENTS: Medical chart review to obtain information about the use of beta-blockers, contraindications to these drugs, patient demographics, and clinical factors. RESULTS: Of the 58 165 patients (from a total of 4414 hospitals), 28 256 (49%) received early beta-blocker therapy. Patients with the highest risk for in-hospital death were the least likely to receive therapy. Patients who received beta-blockers had a lower in-hospital mortality rate than patients who did not receive beta-blockers (odds ratio, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.75 to 0.87]), even after adjustment for baseline differences in demographic, clinical, and treatment characteristics between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Early beta-blocker therapy was not used for 51% of elderly patients who were hospitalized with an acute myocardial infarction and did not have a contraindication to this therapy. Increasing the early use of beta-blockers for these patients would provide an excellent opportunity to improve their care and outcomes.     

beta-Blocker therapy in heart failure

Heart failure is an important public health problem and one for which morbidity and mortality remain high despite treatment with angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors. A large number of clinical trials examining the effects of beta-blockers in the treatment of heart failure have now been performed. Two large-scale clinical trials have recently confirmed significant survival benefits with these agents, with effects that are additive to those achieved with ACE inhibitor therapy. These trials have now established beta-blocker therapy as an important part of standard heart failure treatment. The clinical use of beta-blockers in patients with heart failure requires careful translation of the randomized controlled trials into everyday clinical practice. Patient selection is key to the safe use of beta-blockers. Patients who may be suitable for beta-blockade therapy include those with mild-moderate heart failure due to left ventricular systolic impairment, those who are receiving adequate dose of diuretics and ACE inhibitors and those whose clinical condition is stable at the time of initiation of the beta-blocker. Survival benefits have been demonstrated with bisoprolol, carvedilol and metoprolol. Whether different beta-blockers have important clinical differences with regard to clinical end-points is as yet uncertain. beta-Blockers should be initiated at low dose, with titration of dose over several weeks and careful clinical monitoring for potential adverse effects, such as hypotension or worsening congestion. This careful application of the clinical trials into clinical practice will allow the safe use of this effective treatment for patients with chronic heart failure.     

Long-term clinical effect of calcium inhibitors in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy compared to the effect of beta-blocking agents. A preliminary report with special reference to the beneficial effect of nifedipine on angina pectoris

Long-term clinical effects of beta-blockers (propranolol in most cases) and calcium inhibitors (nifedipine in most cases) were studied in 16 patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. On overall subjective symptoms, beta-blockers were effective in 50% of symptomatic patients, while calcium inhibitors were effective in only 33%. On angina pectoris, however, calcium inhibitors were superior to beta-blockers in our patients. Blood pressure decreased with each drug, and the decrease was significant with nifedipine. Otherwise there was no change in physical findings with either drug. Long-term (more than 6 months) use of beta-blockers resulted in an increase in cardiothoracic ratio on chest X-ray, a decrease in left ventricular ejection fraction on echocardiogram and more pronounced ST-T change on electrocardiogram. Prolonged use of nifedipine resulted in a slight decrease in cardiothoracic ratio, but no systematic change on echocardiogram and on electrocardiogram.     

Beta-blockers in the treatment of chronic heart failure

The authors discuss in the submitted review the problem of therapeutic use of beta-blockers in the treatment of cardiac failure. n the introduction they emphasize the medical and societal consequences of this disease with emphasis on necessary prevention. In the subsequent part they present a review of the most important clinical studies (completed and under way) focused on the mentioned problem. In the discussion they analyze the role of the sympathetic nervous system in the pathogenesis of cardiac failure and the theoretical basis of the use of beta-blockers in its treatment. In the conclusion they present a summary of practical principles for the use of beta-blockers in this indication.     

A continued role for beta-blocker therapy in heart failure

The number of patients with newly diagnosed heart failure continues to grow worldwide, to some extent reflecting the increase in survival after acute coronary syndromes and the aging of the population. The search for new and effective therapies for this condition remains a priority in the 21st century. The use of beta-blockers is now well established in the clinical context of mild and moderate systolic heart failure. The effects of beta-blockade on mortality are additive to those with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor therapy. Recently completed, large, randomized trials provided strong evidence for the use of beta-blockers in severe (NYHA functional class IV) heart failure and in asymptomatic patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction and recent myocardial infarction. Obviously, patient selection still remains the key to the safe use of beta-blockers in patients with heart failure. Further data from clinical trials have emerged to support similar benefits in terms of mortality and morbidity, a good safety record, and tolerability in patients at extremes of age (children and adults >70 years of age) and in specific clinical circumstances (including diabetes, chronic obstructive airways disease, renal failure, and atrial fibrillation). Recent use of beta-blockers with vasodilatory properties in patients with heart failure and preserved systolic function (so-called diastolic heart failure) appears promising but will require large-scale, long-term trials prior to widespread clinical use.     

Efficacy of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and beta-blockers in the management of left ventricular systolic dysfunction according to race,gender, and diabetic status: a meta-analysis of major clinical trials

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess the effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and beta-blockers on all-cause mortality in patients with left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction according to gender, race, and the presence of diabetes. BACKGROUND: Major randomized clinical trials have established that ACE inhibitors and beta-blockers have life-saving benefits in patients with LV systolic dysfunction. Most patients enrolled in these trials were Caucasian men. Whether an equal effect is achieved in women, non-Caucasians, and patients with major comorbidities has not been established. METHODS: The authors performed a meta-analysis of published and individual patient data from the 12 largest randomized clinical trials of ACE inhibitors and beta-blockers to produce random effects estimates of mortality for subgroups. RESULTS: Data support beneficial reductions in all-cause mortality for the use of beta-blockers in men and women, the use of ACE inhibitors and some beta-blockers in black and white patients, and the use of ACE inhibitors and beta-blockers in patients with or without diabetes. Women with symptomatic LV systolic dysfunction probably benefit from ACE inhibitors, but women with asymptomatic LV systolic dysfunction may not have reduced mortality when treated with ACE inhibitors (pooled relative risk = 0.96; 95% confidence interval: 0.75 to 1.22). The pooled estimate of three beta-blocker studies supports a beneficial effect in black patients with heart failure, but one study assessing bucindolol reported a nonsignificant increase in mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and beta-blockers provide life-saving benefits in most of the subpopulations assessed. Women with asymptomatic LV systolic dysfunction may not achieve a mortality benefit when treated with ACE inhibitors.     

β-blockers: No longer an option for uncomplicated hypertension

Traditionally, beta-blockers, used as first-line agents to treat uncomplicated hypertension, were recommended by national and international guidelines despite a paucity of evidence regarding their cardiovascular benefit. However, evidence from recent trials and meta-analyses has questioned the use of beta-blockers as preferred agents. This article reviews the data available from clinical trials and argues that beta-blockers are less efficacious than other currently available antihypertensive agents for patients with uncomplicated hypertension.     

A study on the cardiodepressant action of a beta-blocking agent carteolol in heart-lung preparation of the dog

Direct cardiodepressant activities of three beta-blockers, carteolol, pindolol and propranolol, were estimated using heart-lung preparation of the dog. Beta-blocking doses of these drugs to inhibit the positive chronotropic effect of isoproterenol by 50% were 2.2 micrograms for carteolol, 4.0 micrograms for pindolol and 21 micrograms for propranolol. Cardiac performance of the preparation was not influenced by up to 1 mg of these three beta-blockers. After 10 mg of these drugs, the cardiac function curves were shifted rightward and downward indicating the heart failure. It was doubtful, however, that this result indicated the cardiodepressant action of beta-blockers, for the preparation showed spontaneous deterioration without beta-blocker treatment. The influences of these beta-blockers on the compromised heart-lung preparations showed essentially similar results. In conclusion, direct cardiodepressant activity of the beta-blocker, if any, was exerted with far more large doses than their beta-blocking doses. The implication of the results in clinical use of beta-blockers, especially in relation to heart failure, was discussed.     

Forecasting the impact of a clinical practice guideline for perioperative beta-blockers to reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.

BACKGROUND: Beta-blockers reduce morbidity and mortality when administered to high-risk patients undergoing major noncardiac surgery, yet little is known about how often they are being prescribed. Clinical practice guidelines are tools that can be used to speed the translation of research into practice and may be one method to improve the use of beta-blockers. Before implementing any guideline, it is important to forecast its potential clinical and financial impact. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study, using administrative and medical record review data, of all adult patients undergoing major noncardiac surgery at Baystate Medical Center, Springfield, Mass, during a 1-month period in 1999. Patients with 2 or more cardiac risk factors or with documented coronary artery disease were classified as high risk and were considered eligible for treatment with a beta-blocker if they had no obvious contraindications to its use. We estimated the potential clinical benefit of treating eligible patients with a beta-blocker by extrapolating the treatment effect observed in a previously reported randomized clinical trial. RESULTS: Of 158 patients undergoing major noncardiac surgery, 67 (42.4%) seemed to be ideal candidates for treatment with perioperative beta-blockers. Of these 67 patients, 25 (37%) received a beta-blocker at some time perioperatively. During the course of a year, we estimate that between 560 and 801 patients who do not receive beta-blockers might benefit from treatment with these medications. Full use of beta-blockers among eligible patients at our institution could result in 62 to 89 fewer deaths each year at an overall cost of $33 661 to $40 210. CONCLUSIONS: There seems to be a large opportunity to improve the quality of care of patients undergoing major noncardiac surgery by increasing the use of beta-blockers in the perioperative period. A clinical practice guideline may be one method to achieve these goals at little cost.