Key result
Nebivolol was as effective as metoprolol in patients with intermittent claudication and hypertension, increasing initial claudication distance by 33.9% versus 16.6% over 48 weeks.
Why the study?
Does nebivolol improve claudication distance and endothelial function compared to metoprolol in patients with intermittent claudication and essential hypertension?
Population
128 patients with intermittent claudication and essential hypertension
Comparison
Nebivolol 5 mg once daily vs Metoprolol 95 mg once daily
Design
RCT, randomized, double-blind
Follow-up
48 weeks
Authors
Loading...
Supports either agent in hypertensive claudicants; confirms comparable walking-distance gains with nebivolol and metoprolol.
RCT (n=128)
double-blind
randomized
Does nebivolol improve claudication distance and endothelial function compared to metoprolol in patients with intermittent claudication and essential hypertension?
Absolute Event Rate: 33.9% vs 16.6%
Nebivolol and metoprolol are both well-tolerated and equally effective in improving absolute claudication distance and lowering blood pressure in patients with intermittent claudication and hypertension.
Espinola–Klein et al. (2011) conducted an RCT in intermittent claudication and essential hypertension (n=128). nebivolol vs. metoprolol 95 mg once daily was evaluated on changes in ankle-brachial index, initial and absolute claudication distance, endothelial function assessed by flow-mediated dilatation of the brachial artery, blood pressure, and quality of life. Nebivolol was as effective as metoprolol in patients with intermittent claudication and hypertension, increasing initial claudication distance by 33.9% versus 16.6% over 48 weeks.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: