Journals / The Anatolian Journal of Cardiology / 2021 / Cilt: 25 - Sayı: 11

Revisiting the clinical evidence of heart rate target in patients with heart failure treated with beta-blockers

Pages
762–773
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In patients with HFrEF, the purpose of beta-blockers is to control the heart rate to 65–70 beats min.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: On evaluating the guidelines from previous studies, we found no randomized controlled trials on the use of beta-blockers for heart failure (HF) that employed as evidence for heart rate targets of 60 or 70 beats/min.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study, we aimed to assess the target heart rate in patients with HF treated with beta-blockers.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In patients with HFrEF, the purpose of beta-blockers is to control the heart rate to 65–70 beats min.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2021 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Objective: On evaluating the guidelines from previous studies, we found no randomized controlled trials on the use of beta-blockers for heart failure (HF) that employed as evidence for heart rate targets of 60 or 70 beats/min. In this study, we aimed to assess the target heart rate in patients with HF treated with beta-blockers. Methods: We used the keywords, “heart failure” and “beta-blocker” to search PubMed, Ovid, EMBASE, and Cochrane from 1966 to June 2021. Two authors independently reviewed the results of the search strategy and selected all the studies that reported the effect of beta-blockers on all-cause mortality in patients with HFrEF. We conducted analyses using Review Manager, version 5.0 and Stata version 12.0. Risk of bias was assessed regarding randomization, allocation sequence concealment, blinding, incomplete outcome data, and other biases. Sensitivity analysis was carried out to compare the results of fixed effect model with the results of random effect. Results: No clinical trial supported the optimal heart rate of 60 beats/min. Risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were 0.77 (0.71, 0.83) and 0.86 (0.76, 0.97) in the subgroup with a baseline heart rate >80 beats/min and subgroup with baseline of ≤80 beats/min, respectively. RR and 95% CI were 0.92 (0.82, 1.02) and 0.77 (0.65, 0.92) in 2 subgroups with heart rate controlled ≥70 beats/min and 60–70 beats/min, respectively. Accumulated to MOCHA 1 trial (heart rate controlled 70 beats/min), there was no significant difference in mortality between the experimental group and the control group (RR=0.91, 95% CI 0.82–1.02). Accumulated to SENIORS trial (heart rate controlled 68.8 beats/min), there was a difference in mortality between the experimental and the control groups (RR=0.90, 95% CI 0.82–0.99). Conclusion: The main effect of beta-blockers in the treatment of HF is achieved by lowering heart rate. The use of beta-blockers did not benefit in people with HFrEF whose heart rate was 77 beats/min before they started the treatment regimen. In patients with HFrEF, the purpose of beta-blockers is to control the heart rate to 65–70 beats min.

🔖

Cite This Article

GENG, X., ZHANG, J., ZHANG, Y., HU, H., YANG, J., CUİ, W. (2021). Revisiting the clinical evidence of heart rate target in patients with heart failure treated with beta-blockers. The Anatolian Journal of Cardiology, Cilt: 25 - Sayı: 11, 762–773. https://ajindex.com/articles/365091

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Brophy JM, Joseph L, Rouleau JL. Beta-blockers in congestive heart failure. A Bayesian meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 2001
  2. [Crossref] 2. Lee HY, Baek SH. Optimal Use of Beta-Blockers for Congestive Heart Failure. Circ J 2016
  3. [Crossref] 3. Yancy CW, Jessup M, Bozkurt B, Butler J, Casey DE Jr, Colvin MM, et al. 2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Heart Failure Society of America. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017
  4. [Crossref] 4. Yancy CW, Januzzi JL Jr, Allen LA, Butler J, Davis LL, Fonarow GC, et al. 2017 ACC Expert Consensus Decision Pathway for Optimization of Heart Failure Treatment: Answers to 10 Pivotal Issues About Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Task Force on Expert Consensus Decision Pathways. J Am Coll Cardiol 2018
  5. [Crossref] 5. Ponikowski P, Voors AA, Anker SD, Bueno H, Cleland JG, Coats AJ, et al.
  6. Authors/Task Force Members
  7. Document Reviewers. 2016 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure: The Task Force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Developed with the special contribution of the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC. Eur J Heart Fail 2016
  8. [Crossref] 6. Vazir A, Claggett B, Jhund P, Castagno D, Skali H, Yusuf S, et al. Prognostic importance of temporal changes in resting heart rate in heart failure patients: an analysis of the CHARM program. Eur Heart J 2015
  9. [Crossref] 7. Woodward M, Webster R, Murakami Y, Barzi F, Lam TH, Fang X, et al.
  10. from the Asia Pacific Cohort Studies Collaboration. The association between resting heart rate, cardiovascular disease and mortality: evidence from 112,680 men and women in 12 cohorts. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2014
  11. [Crossref] 8. Bui AL, Grau-Sepulveda MV, Hernandez AF, Peterson ED, Yancy CW, Bhatt DL, et al. Admission heart rate and in-hospital outcomes in patients hospitalized for heart failure in sinus rhythm and in atrial fibrillation. Am Heart J 2013
  12. [Crossref] 9. Writing Committee Members, Yancy CW, Jessup M, Bozkurt B, Butler J, Casey DE Jr, et al.
  13. American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Gui