Nationwide analysis reveals increased side-effects in patients on beta-blockers compared to calcium-channel blockers, suggesting important considerations for treatment decisions.
Concerns regarding side-effects of beta-blockers (BBs) are frequent but data regarding the incidence of side-effects are conflicting and real-world data are sparse. Hence, we aimed to investigate the absolute and relative risks of BB side-effects in clinical practice. Using Danish nationwide registers, we included Danish hypertensive patients initiating anti-hypertensive treatment with a BB or calcium-channel blocker (CCB). We computed crude as well as standardized one-year risks and adjusted risk ratios of BB side-effects (depression, anxiety/insomnia, gastrointestinal side-effects, erectile dysfunction, and dizziness/fainting) compared with CCB treatment. We included 64,722 patients initiating treatment with a BB and 181,880 patients initiating treatment with a CCB. In patients initiated on BB, the standardized one-year risk of any outcome, erectile dysfunction exempt, was 13.7% (95% CI: 13.4%-13.9%). The one-year risk of specific BB side-effects was the highest for anxiety/insomnia (6.2%, 95% CI: 6.0%-6.3%), gastrointestinal side-effects (4.6%, 95% CI: 4.4%-4.7%), and erectile dysfunction (4.7%, 95% CI: 4.5%-4.9%). The risk of side-effects was consistently increased when comparing BB treatment with CCBs including depression (Risk Ratio [RR] 1.48, 95% CI 1.41-1.55), anxiety/insomnia (RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.47-1.59), gastrointestinal side-effects (1.31, 95% CI 1.25-1.36), and dizziness/fainting (RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.38-1.61), but not erectile dysfunction (RR 0.91, 95% CI, 0.85-0.96). In a large nationwide cohort, the incidence of BB side-effects was clinically relevant and consistently increased compared with CCBs with the exception of erectile dysfunction, which carried similar risks for both treatments.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rasmussen et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: