Key result
In patients with acute myocardial infarction and preserved ejection fraction, the annual rate of new myocardial infarction or death was 2.5% in the no beta-blocker group, which was approximately one third of that predicted.
Why the study?
Does beta-blocker therapy reduce new acute myocardial infarction or death from any cause in patients with acute myocardial infarction and LVEF ≥50% who had undergone coronary revascularization?
Does beta-blocker therapy reduce new acute myocardial infarction or death from any cause in patients with acute myocardial infarction and LVEF ≥50% who had undergone coronary revascularization?
This letter discusses the REDUCE-AMI trial, highlighting that the primary endpoint rate in the control group was substantially lower than predicted.
To the Editor: In the REDUCE-AMI (Randomized Evaluation of Decreased Usage of Beta-Blockers after Acute Myocardial Infarction) trial reported by Yndigegn et al. (April 18 issue), 1 5020 patients with an acute myocardial infarction and a left ventricular ejection fraction of at least 50% who had undergone coronary revascularization were randomly assigned to receive a beta-blocker or no beta-blocker. The annual rate for the primary end point (new acute myocardial infarction or death from any cause) was 2.5% for patients assigned to no beta-blocker, approximately one third of that predicted. Enrollment was predominantly from the SWEDEHEART (Swedish Web System for Enhancement . . .
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
John J.V. McMurray (2024) conducted a letter in Acute myocardial infarction with preserved ejection fraction (n=5,020). Beta-blocker vs. No beta-blocker was evaluated on New acute myocardial infarction or death from any cause. In patients with acute myocardial infarction and preserved ejection fraction, the annual rate of new myocardial infarction or death was 2.5% in the no beta-blocker group, which was approximately one third of that predicted.