Although labetalol achieved target blood pressure more rapidly than nitroglycerin (25.14 vs 30.38 minutes), nitroglycerin provided greater blood pressure reductions, fewer bradycardic events, and shorter hospital stays in CAD patients with hypertensive emergencies.
Cohort (n=563)
No
Does intravenous nitroglycerin compared to labetalol improve blood pressure control and clinical outcomes in CAD patients with hypertensive emergency?
In CAD patients with hypertensive emergency, IV labetalol achieves target blood pressure faster, but IV nitroglycerin provides greater absolute blood pressure reductions and is associated with shorter hospital stays and fewer readmissions.
Tasa de eventos absoluta: 30.38% vs 25.14%
valor p: p=< 0.0001
BACKGROUND Hypertensive emergencies, characterized by severe blood pressure elevation (> 180/120 mmHg) with end-organ damage, pose significant risks in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD), where rapid yet safe reduction is crucial to prevent ischemia and complications. Nitroglycerin and labetalol are common intravenous agents, but comparative data in CAD are limited. AIM To compare efficacy and safety of nitroglycerin vs labetalol in hypertensive emergencies among CAD patients, assessing blood pressure control, reductions, adverse events, outcomes, and utilization. METHODS Retrospective cohort of 563 CAD patients with hypertensive emergency (2018-2024) receiving IV nitroglycerin (n = 282) or labetalol (n = 281). Primary: Time to target blood pressure systolic blood pressure (SBP) < 160 mmHg, diastolic blood pressure < 100 mmHg. Secondary: Blood pressure reductions, major adverse cardiovascular event, safety, utilization. Analyzed via t -tests, χ 2, multivariable logistic regression adjusting for age, gender, myocardial infarction/heart failure history, diabetes, baseline SBP, chest pain. RESULTS Baseline characteristics were balanced. Labetalol achieved target blood pressure faster (25.14 ± 4.92 minutes vs 30.38 ± 5.16 minutes; P < 0.0001), but nitroglycerin yielded greater SBP (50.78 ± 9.45 mmHg vs 45.20 ± 10.46 mmHg; P < 0.0001) and diastolic blood pressure reductions (29.86 ± 8.63 mmHg vs 28.02 ± 7.74 mmHg; P = 0.0079). Nitroglycerin showed trends toward lower major adverse cardiovascular event adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 0.72; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.42-1.24, reduced bradycardia (AOR: 0.14; 95%CI: 0.05-0.38), shorter intensive care unit (2.99 ± 1.04 days vs 3.54 ± 1.02 days; P < 0.0001) and hospital stays (6.92 ± 1.93 days vs 7.99 ± 2.06 days; P < 0.0001), lower 30-day readmissions (AOR: 0.49; 95%CI: 0.27-0.88), and smaller biomarker increases (delta troponin: 0.10 ± 0.05 ng/mL vs 0.21 ± 0.10 ng/mL; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION While labetalol offers faster blood pressure control, nitroglycerin is associated with greater reductions, fewer adverse events like bradycardia, and improved utilization (shorter stays, fewer readmissions) in CAD-associated hypertensive emergencies, supporting its use in ischemic contexts.
Chaudhary et al. (Mon,) conducted a cohort in Hypertensive emergency with a history of coronary artery disease (n=563). Nitroglycerin vs. Labetalol was evaluated on Time to achieve target blood pressure (SBP < 160 mmHg and DBP < 100 mmHg) in minutes (p=< 0.0001). Although labetalol achieved target blood pressure more rapidly than nitroglycerin (25.14 vs 30.38 minutes), nitroglycerin provided greater blood pressure reductions, fewer bradycardic events, and shorter hospital stays in CAD patients with hypertensive emergencies.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: