Key result
Oral practolol significantly reduced the percentage of studied hours with salvos of ventricular premature beats (P<0.025), but did not reduce the incidence of other ventricular arrhythmias.
Why the study?
Does oral practolol reduce the incidence of ventricular arrhythmias in patients with recent acute myocardial infarction?
RCT (n=55)
Single-blind
Does oral practolol reduce the incidence of ventricular arrhythmias in patients with recent acute myocardial infarction?
p-value: p=<0.025
Oral practolol reduced the duration of salvos of ventricular premature beats but did not reduce the overall incidence of ventricular arrhythmias in the first year post-myocardial infarction.
Does not reduce overall ventricular arrhythmia incidence post-MI; challenges expectations for practolol while confirming limited effect on salvos.
Fifty-five patients with recent acute myocardial infarction entered a single-blind cross-over trial to assess the effect of oral practolol 200 mg twice daily on the incidence and nature of ventricular arrhythmias in the first year following myocardial infarction. Patients had 24-hour Holter electrocardiogram tape monitoring at two weeks following infarction and at three-monthly intervals for one year. Twenty-six patients completed the full year of the trial with 12% of tape recordings technically unsatisfactory. A total of 46 periods of comparison of the action of practolol versus placebo therapy were available in thirty patients. Whilst receiving the selective beta adrenergic blocking agent, practolol, there was a significant reduction in the percentage of studied hours during which salvos of ventricular premature beats occurred (P < 0.025), however the percentage of patients in whom salvos were recorded was unchanged. The incidence of all other ventricular arrhythmias was not reduced in the practolol group. When the effect of practolol was related to the site of infarction, anterior or inferior, there was no significant reduction in the incidence of ventricular arrhythmias.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Federman et al. (1980) conducted an RCT in acute myocardial infarction (n=55). practolol vs. placebo was evaluated on incidence and nature of ventricular arrhythmias (p=<0.025). Oral practolol significantly reduced the percentage of studied hours with salvos of ventricular premature beats (P<0.025), but did not reduce the incidence of other ventricular arrhythmias.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: