Key result
Atenolol was inferior to metoprolol succinate in improving left ventricular ejection fraction in dogs with heart failure (change in EF 0.8% vs 6.0%, p<0.05).
Why the study?
Does atenolol or metoprolol succinate improve left ventricular function and prevent remodeling in dogs with heart failure?
RCT (n=20)
randomized
Does atenolol or metoprolol succinate improve left ventricular function and prevent remodeling in dogs with heart failure?
Absolute Event Rate: 0.8% vs 6%
p-value: p=<0.05
In a canine model of heart failure, metoprolol succinate was superior to atenolol in improving left ventricular ejection fraction and reversing remodeling.
Does not inform human heart failure management; hypothesis-generating for differential beta-blocker effects on remodeling.
OBJECTIVES: beta-Blockers are standard therapy for patients with heart failure (HF). This study compared the effects of chronic monotherapy with 2 different beta(1)-selective adrenoceptor blockers, namely atenolol and metoprolol succinate, on left ventricular (LV) function and remodeling in dogs with coronary microembolization-induced HF [LV ejection fraction (EF) 30-40%]. METHODS: Twenty HF dogs were randomized to 3 months of therapy with atenolol (50 mg once daily, n = 6), metoprolol succinate (100 mg, once daily, n = 7) or to no therapy (control, n = 7). LV EF and volumes were measured before initiating therapy and after 3 months of therapy. The change (Delta) in EF and volumes between measurements before and after therapy was calculated and compared among study groups. RESULTS: In controls, EF decreased and end-systolic volume increased. Atenolol prevented the decrease in EF and the increase in ESV. In contrast, metoprolol succinate significantly increased EF and decreased end-systolic volume. DeltaEF was significantly higher and Deltaend-systolic volume significantly lower in metoprolol succinate-treated dogs compared to atenolol-treated dogs (EF: 6.0 +/- 0.86% vs. 0.8 +/- 0.85%, p < 0.05; end-systolic volume: -4.3 +/- 0.81 ml vs. -1 +/- 0.52 ml, p <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In HF dogs, chronic therapy with atenolol does not elicit the same LV function and remodeling benefits as those achieved with metoprolol succinate.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zacà et al. (2008) conducted an RCT in heart failure (n=20). atenolol vs. metoprolol succinate (100 mg once daily) and no therapy was evaluated on change in left ventricular ejection fraction (p=<0.05). Atenolol was inferior to metoprolol succinate in improving left ventricular ejection fraction in dogs with heart failure (change in EF 0.8% vs 6.0%, p<0.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: