Secondary prevention after high-risk acute myocardial infarction with low-dose acebutolol

doi:10.1016/0002-9149(90)90831-K

The American Journal of Cardiology

Volume 66, Issue 3, 1 August 1990, Pages 251-260

https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9149(90)90831-K Get rights and content

Abstract

Acebutolol et Prévention Secondaire de l'Infarctus (APSI), a randomized, placebo-controlled trial, was designed to test long-term acebutolol, 200 mg twice daily, a β blocker with mild intrinsic sympathomimetic activity, in the prevention of late death in high-risk postacute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients. APSI was planned because patients with a death rate >20% have not been enrolled in significant numbers in previous trials and in such high-risk patients, it remained to be proven that β blockers have a beneficial effect. Patients with an expected average risk of >20% were to be selected based on clinical criteria. At the time of the second interim analysis, the placebo group 1-year mortality was much lower than expected (12%). The ethical board recommended to stop the trial: 309 patients had been allocated to placebo, 298 to acebutolol. The average delay between onset of symptoms and inclusion was 10.5 days. The average follow-up was 318 days after inclusion. About the same number of patients were discontinued from study treatment in both groups. All patients were included in the analysis. There were 17 deaths in the acebutolol group and 34 in the placebo group, a 48% decrease (p = 0.019). The vascular mortality decreased by 58% (p = 0.006), the highest ever observed with a β blocker. All cardiovascular causes of death, including congestive heart failure, were less frequent in the acebutolol group. Although the objective was not achieved, APSI patients were at a higher risk than the average of the 9 previous trials with β blockers (12% instead of 7%). In addition, the total mortality reduction did not decrease in 9 subgroups with increasing mortality risk from 2 to 23%. APSI shows that moderately severe postAMI patients can benefit from a β-blocking treatment and a β-blocker with mild intrinsic sympathomimetic activity can be effective.

References (20)

DG Julian et al.
Controlled trial of sotalol for one year after myocardial infarction
Lancet
(1982)
G Olsson et al.
Long-term treatment with metoprolol after myocardial infarction: effect on 3 year mortality and morbidity
JACC
(1985)
S Yusuf et al.
Beta-blockade during and after myocardial: an overview of the randomized trials
Prog Cardiovasc Dis
(1985)
GS May et al.
Secondary prevention after myocardial infarction: a review of long-term trials
Prog Cardiovasc Dis
(1982)
Improvement in prognosis of myocardial infarction by long-term beta-adrenoreceptor blockade using practolol
Br Med J
(1975)
Reduction in mortality after myocardial infarction with long-term beta-adrenoreceptor blockade
Br Med J
(1977)
The effects of pindolol on the two years mortality after complicated myocardial infarction
Eur Heart J
(1983)
NS Baber et al.
Multicentre post-infarction trial of propranolol in 49 hospitals in the United Kingdom, Italy and Yugoslavia
Br Heart J
(1980)
A randomized trial of propranolol in patients with acute myocardial infarction
JAMA
(1982)
A secondary prevention study with slow release oxprenolol after myocardial infarction: morbidity and mortality
Eur Heart J
(1984)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (114)

CIBIS studies: Story of Academic with Pharmaceutical company collaborative work
2021, Archives des Maladies du Coeur et des Vaisseaux - Pratique
Beta-blockers use from the general to the hemodialysis population
2019, Nephrologie et Therapeutique
Citation Excerpt :
The new ESC guidelines 2017 have recommended adding a beta-blocker as a long-term therapy following an ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) with a level of evidence B [17]. In patients with a non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), a beta-blocker is also recommended with a level of evidence B for it has shown to decrease the risk of reinfarction and prevents future AMI [18–20]. Regarding unstable angina, beta-blockers did not show any significant effect on mortality but are recommended on the long-term in chronic stable ischemic heart disease patients [20].
Beta-blockers have numerous indications in the general population and are strongly recommended in heart failure, post-myocardial infarction and arrhythmias. In hemodialysis patients, their use is based on weak evidence because of the lack of a sufficient number of randomized clinical trials. The strongest evidence is based on two trials. The first showed better survival with carvedilol in hemodialysis patients with four sessions per week and systolic heart failure. The second found reduced cardiovascular morbidity with atenolol compared to lisinopril in mostly black hypertensive hemodialysis patients. No clinical trials exist regarding myocardial infarction. Large retrospective studies have assessed the benefits of beta-blockers in hemodialysis. A large cohort of hemodialysis patients with new-onset heart failure showed better survival when treated with carvedilol, bisoprolol or metoprolol. Another recent one of 20,064 patients found out that metoprolol compared to carvedilol was associated with less all-cause mortality. There is still uncertainty also regarding the impact of dialysability of beta-blockers on patient's survival. On top of that, many observations suggested that beta-blockers were associated with a reduced rate of sudden cardiac death in hemodialysis patients but recent data show a link between bradycardia and sudden cardiac death questioning the benefit of beta-blockade in this population. Finally, what we know for sure so far is that beta-blockers should be avoided in patients with intradialytic hypotension associated with bradycardia.
New insights on the relation between untreated and treated outcomes for a given therapy effect model is not necessarily linear
2008, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
A relation between the size of treatment efficacy and severity of the disease has been postulated and observed as linear for a few therapies. We have called this relation the effect model. Our objectives were to demonstrate that the relation is general and not necessarily linear.
We extend the number of observed effect model. Then we established three numerical models of treatment activity corresponding to the three modes of action we have identified. Using these models, we simulated the relation.
Empirical evidence confirms the effect model and suggests that it may be linear over a short range of event frequency. However, it provides an incomplete understanding of the phenomenon because of the inescapable limitations of data from randomized clinical trials. Numerical modeling and simulation show that the real effect model is likely to be more complicated. It is probably linear only in rare instances. The effect model is general. It depends on factors related to the individual, disease and outcome.
Contrarily to common, assumption, since the effect model is often curvilinear, the relative risk cannot be granted as constant. The effect model should be taken into account when discovering and developing new therapies, when making, health care policy decisions or adjusting clinical decisions to the patient risk profile.
Resting Heart Rate in Cardiovascular Disease
2007, Journal of the American College of Cardiology
Citation Excerpt :
In logistic regression analysis, HR remained predictive but treatment did not, indicating that the major effect of timolol on mortality could be attributed to its effect on HR. By contrast, the APSI (Acebutolol et Prévention Secondaire de l’Infarctus) study in high-risk patients with AMI suggested that low-dose treatment with acebutolol produced large reductions in all-cause and cardiovascular mortality (of 48% and 58%, respectively) in spite of only a modest effect on HR (19). When HR-lowering drugs have been used, angina reduction is related to HR reduction in patients with chronic coronary artery disease (20,21).
The importance of resting heart rate (HR) as a prognostic factor and potential therapeutic target is not yet generally accepted. Recent large epidemiologic studies have confirmed earlier studies that showed resting HR to be an independent predictor of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality in men and women with and without diagnosed cardiovascular disease. Clinical trial data suggest that HR reduction itself is an important mechanism of benefit of beta-blockers and other heart-rate lowering drugs used after acute myocardial infarction, in chronic heart failure, and in stable angina pectoris. Pathophysiological studies indicate that a relatively high HR has direct detrimental effects on the progression of coronary atherosclerosis, on the occurrence of myocardial ischemia and ventricular arrhythmias, and on left ventricular function. Studies have found a continuous increase in risk with HR above 60 beats/min. Although it may be difficult to define an optimal HR for a given individual, it seems desirable to maintain resting HR substantially below the traditionally defined tachycardia threshold of 90 or 100 beats/min. These findings suggest that the potential role of HR and its modulation should be considered in future cardiovascular guidance documents.
Meta-analysis of clinical trials: Uses and pitfalls
2007, Bulletin de l'Academie Nationale de Medecine
La méta-analyse des essais cliniques est l’instrument qui permet de faire une synthèse quantitative des informations disponibles sur l’efficacité d’une thérapeutique. A ce titre, elle est indispensable. Elle procède d’un pilier de l’activité scientifique, la synthèse critique des connaissances toujours mise à jour.
Meta-analysis of clinical trials allows all available quantitative evidence on therapeutic efficacy to be condensed. Critical appraisal of all available evidence is a pillar of clinical science.
What is the place of beta-adrenergic blockade therapy in coronary syndromes in the modern management era?
2006, Therapie
Cet article se propose d’examiner les bénéfices du traitement bêta-bloquant dans le syndrome coronaire aigu à travers les principaux essais cliniques ayant évalué cette thérapeutique. Le bénéfice de l’utilisation précoce du traitement bêta-bloquant intra-veineux à la phase aiguë de l’infarctus du myocarde (IDM) apparaît désormais mince. Le bénéfice substantiel du traitement bêta-bloquant prescrit à long-terme dans le post-infarctus du myocarde a été démontré essentiellement par des essais cliniques menés avant l’ère de la reperfusion et dans tous les cas avant l’introduction de l’angioplastie primaire associée aux puissants traitements antiagrégants plaquettaires. Son bénéfice et par conséquent sa prescription à long-terme peuvent être raisonnablement remis en question chez les patients revascularisés et ayant une fonction ventriculaire gauche conservée, d’autant plus si des effets secondaires apparaissent.
This paper shows the eventual benefits of treatment with beta-blockers in post-myocardial infarction. An overview of main clinical trials that have been conducted to test this therapeutic in acute coronary syndrome. In patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction, the early use of intravenous beta-blockers had shown a modest and non significant reduction in mortality. Substantial reductions in mortality and reinfarction have been demonstrated when beta-blockers have been used soon after an acute myocardial infarction and continued long-term. However, these benefits were observed in randomised clinical trials conducted in the 1970s and 1980s, prior to the widespread use of reperfusion therapies and antiplatelet agents, It appears obvious that the long-term use of beta-blockers may be questionable after any acute coronary syndrome especially if complete reperfusion has been achieved and left ventricular function is preserved.

View all citing articles on Scopus

^∗: See Appendix.

View full text

Secondary prevention after high-risk acute myocardial infarction with low-dose acebutolol

Abstract

Lancet

JACC

Prog Cardiovasc Dis

Prog Cardiovasc Dis

Improvement in prognosis of myocardial infarction by long-term beta-adrenoreceptor blockade using practolol

Br Med J

Reduction in mortality after myocardial infarction with long-term beta-adrenoreceptor blockade

Br Med J

The effects of pindolol on the two years mortality after complicated myocardial infarction

Eur Heart J

Multicentre post-infarction trial of propranolol in 49 hospitals in the United Kingdom, Italy and Yugoslavia

Br Heart J

A randomized trial of propranolol in patients with acute myocardial infarction

JAMA

A secondary prevention study with slow release oxprenolol after myocardial infarction: morbidity and mortality

Eur Heart J