Study
N
Drug
Onset and duration
Surgery
Results
Mangano/1966
200
Atenolol 50–100 mg
Before induction—7-d postop
Noncardiac surgery
Reduced mortality at 6 m (0 vs. 8 %, p < 0.001), at 1 y (3 vs. 14 %, p = 0.005), and at 2 y (10 vs. 21 % p = 0.019)
DECREASE1/1999
112
Bisoprolol 5–10 mg
1-w preop—30 d postop
Major vascular surgery
Decreased cardiac mortality (3.4 vs. 17 %, p = 0.02) and nonfatal MI (0 vs. 17 %, p < 0.001) in the BB group
Lindenauer/2005
122,338
Undetermined
Hospital day 2
Major noncardiac surgery
With RCRI score 0 or 1, there is no benefit and possible harm. With RCRI score 2, 3, and 4 or more, the adjusted OR for inhospital death is 0.88, 0.71, and 0.58, respectively
POBBLE/2005
103
Metoprolol 50 mg BID
1 d before surgery—7-d postop
Infrarenal vascular surgery
No difference in 30-d CV events (32 vs. 34 %) in the BB and placebo group, respectively
MAVS/2006
496
Metoprolol 25–100 mg
2-h preop—5 d or discharge
Vascular surgery
No significant difference in primary outcomea at 30 d (10.2 vs. 12.0 %) in BB and placebo groups, respectively, (p = 0.57) and at 6 m (p = 0.81)
DIPOM/2006
921
Metoprolol 100 mg ER
1-d preop—8-d postop
Major noncardiac surgery
Primary outcomeb occurred in 21 and 20 % in BB and placebo, respectively (CI 0.80–1.41). All-cause mortality was 16 % in both groups (CI 0.74–1.42 p = 0.88)
BBSA/2007
219
Bisoprolol 5 mg
3-h preop—10 d or discharge
Surgery with spinal block
Primary outcomec was 22.7 vs. 22.0 % in BB and placebo group, respectively, at 1 y (p = 0.90)
POISE/2008
8,331
Metoprolol ER 200 mg
2–4-h preop—30-d postop
Noncardiac surgery
MI occurred in 4.2 vs. 5.7 % in BB and placebo, respectively, p = 0.017. Mortality was higher in the metoprolol group (3.1 vs. 2.3 %, p = 0.0317). Stroke was more in the metoprolol group (1 vs. 0.5 %, p = 0.0053)
9.2.2 AHA and ESC Guideline Controversies
The conflicting results of these major BB trials and especially the POISE led to several controversies between the ESC [9] and AHA [10] guidelines on perioperative beta blockade. These guidelines were updated after the POISE trial showed increased all-cause mortality and the risk of disabling stroke. Table 9.2 lists the differences in guideline recommendation between the ESC and the AHA. As evident, the AHA adapted a more restrictive approach in contrast to the ESC, which has been more liberal with the administration of perioperative BB. Below is a summary of the main similarities and differences between both societies.
Table 9.2
Summary of recommendations on perioperative β-blockers by the ESC and the AHA
ESC guideline (August 2009) | ACC/AHA guideline (November 2009) | |
---|---|---|
Class I | BB recommended in patients -with known IHD or myocardial ischemia on preoperative testing (I B) -Undergoing high-risk surgery (I B) -Who were previously treated with BB for IHD, arrhythmias, or hypertension (I C) | BB recommended in patients -Who are receiving BB for treatment of conditions with ACC/AHA Class I indication for the drug (I C) |
Class II | BB should be considered in patients -Undergoing intermediate-risk surgery (IIa B) -Previously treated with BB because of chronic heart failure with systolic dysfunction (IIa C) -Scheduled for low-risk surgery with risk factor(s) (IIb B) | BB are probably recommended in patients -Undergoing vascular surgery who suffer from IHD or show ischemia on preoperative testing (IIa B) -In the presence of CAD or high cardiac risk (more than one risk factor) who are undergoing intermediate-risk surgery (IIa B) -Where preoperative assessment for vascular surgery identifies high cardiac risk (more than one risk factor; IIa C) The usefulness of BB is uncertain in patients -Undergoing vascular surgery with no risk factors who are not currently taking BB (IIb B) –Undergoing either intermediate-risk procedures or vascular surgery with a single clinical risk factor in the absence of CAD (IIb C) |
Class III
Full access? Get Clinical TreeGet Clinical Tree app for offline access |