Effects of Bisoprolol Are Comparable with Carvedilol in Secondary Prevention of Acute Myocardial Infarction in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.
10.4068/cmj.2018.54.2.121
- Author:
Seung Jin JUN
1
;
Kyung Hwan KIM
;
Myung Ho JEONG
;
Min Chul KIM
;
Doo Sun SIM
;
Young Joon HONG
;
Ju Han KIM
;
Myeong Chan CHO
;
Jei Keon CHAE
;
Hun Sik PARK
;
Jong Sun PARK
;
Young Keun AHN
Author Information
1. Department of Cardiology, Gunsan Medical Center, Gunsan, Korea.
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Bisoprolol;
Carvedilol;
Myocardial Infarction;
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention;
Secondary Prevention
- MeSH:
Bisoprolol*;
Coronary Artery Bypass;
Death;
Humans;
Incidence;
Mortality;
Myocardial Infarction*;
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention*;
Propensity Score;
Secondary Prevention*;
Survival Rate
- From:Chonnam Medical Journal
2018;54(2):121-128
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
Although the benefits of carvedilol have been demonstrated in the era of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), very few studies have evaluated the efficacy of bisoprolol in the secondary prevention of acute myocardial infarction (MI) in patients treated with PCI. We hypothesized that the effect of bisoprolol would not be different from carvedilol in post-MI patients. A total of 13,813 patients who underwent PCI were treated either with carvedilol or bisoprolol at the time of discharge. They were enrolled from the Korean Acute MI Registry (KAMIR). After 1:2 propensity score matching, 1,806 patients were enrolled in the bisoprolol group and 3,612 patients in the carvedilol group. The primary end point was the composite of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), which was defined as cardiac death, nonfatal MI, target vessel revascularization, and coronary artery bypass surgery. The secondary end point was defined as all-cause mortality, cardiac death, nonfatal MI, any revascularization, or target vessel revascularization. After adjustment for differences in baseline characteristics by propensity score matching, the MACE-free survival rate was not different between the groups (HR=0.815, 95% CI:0.614–1.081, p=0.156). In the subgroup analysis, the cumulative incidence of MACEs was lower in the bisoprolol group in patients having a Killip class of III or IV than in the carvedilol group (HR=0.512, 95% CI: 0.263–0.998, p=0.049). The incidence of secondary end points was similar between the two beta-blocker groups. In conclusion, the benefits of bisoprolol were comparable with those of carvedilol in the secondary prevention of acute MI.
