Why the study?
No previous study had reported the effect of age on cardiac performance, motor function, and quality of life in Chinese chronic heart failure patients.
Does age affect the improvement in cardiac performance, motor function, and QoL in Chinese CHF patients treated with metoprolol?
Does age affect the improvement in cardiac performance, motor function, and QoL in Chinese CHF patients treated with metoprolol?
Metoprolol improves cardiac performance, motor function, and QoL in Chinese CHF patients with RHR > 80 bpm, with older patients showing greater EF/CI improvements and younger patients showing greater QoL improvements.
May support age-informed counseling on metoprolol expectations in CHF; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation before practice change.
No previous study reports the effect of age on cardiac performance, motor function and quality of life (QoL) in Chinese chronic heart failure (CHF) patients. This single-center, prospective study enrolled CHF patients with resting heart rate (RHR) > 80 bpm, who were treated with metoprolol and were followed up at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. Changes in cardiac, motor, and QoL parameters between patients aged ≥60 years and those aged <60 years were compared at all time points. P < 0.05 was considered significant. A total of 154 patients were enrolled (median age: 66.39 years; 116 aged ≥60 years, 38 aged <60 years; 95% New York Heart Association class III-IV). RHR decreased significantly in both patient groups ( P < 0.0001 for both groups). Patients aged ≥60 years had a significant improvement in both ejection fraction (EF) at 6 and 12 months and in cardiac index (CI) at 3, 6, and 12 months. However, no major difference was observed in motor function in both groups. Significantly higher SF-8 scores showed greater improvement in QoL in the <60 age group at 12 months ( P = 0.0008). Metoprolol demonstrated improvement in cardiac performance, motor function, QoL, and anxiety with increase in depression and burnout in both genders; however, the findings were independent of age.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shu et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: