Key result
Beta-blockers post-MI with preserved LVEF yield ~15% lower risk of angina-related hospital contacts or testing.
Why the study?
The effect of beta-blockers initiated after myocardial infarction on subsequent angina burden remained uncertain.
Does beta-blocker therapy initiated after myocardial infarction reduce subsequent angina burden (angina-related hospital contacts/diagnostic ischemia tests, revascularization, anti-anginal medication use, and patient-reported symptoms) in patients with LVEF ≥40%?
RCT (n=5,574)
Randomized to beta-blockers or no beta-blockers
Does beta-blocker therapy initiated after myocardial infarction reduce subsequent angina burden (angina-related hospital contacts/diagnostic ischemia tests, revascularization, anti-anginal medication use, and patient-reported symptoms) in patients with LVEF ≥40%?
In post-MI patients with LVEF ≥40%, moderate-dose beta-blockers modestly reduced angina-related hospital contacts/ischemia testing and calcium-channel blocker use, without affecting coronary revascularization, nitrate use, or patient-reported angina symptoms.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Reduces angina-related contacts post-MI with preserved LVEF; extends RCT evidence on beta-blocker effects for symptom burden.
AIMS: The effect of beta-blockers initiated after myocardial infarction (MI) on subsequent angina burden remains uncertain. METHODS AND RESULTS: This pre-specified BETAMI-DANBLOCK substudy included patients with MI and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)≥40% randomized to beta-blockers or no beta-blockers. Endpoints comprised angina-related hospital contacts/diagnostic ischemia tests, coronary revascularization, anti-anginal medications (≥2 prescriptions for calcium-channel blockers/nitrates), and patient-reported angina symptoms [Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) class 0-4]. Subdistribution hazard ratios (SHR) were estimated by Fine-Gray models. Anti-anginal prescriptions were compared using 95% confidence intervals (CI) for differences in proportions.A total of 5574 patients were randomized to beta-blockers (n=2783, median dose 50 mg metoprolol) or no beta-blockers (n=2791). During median 3.5 years follow-up, an angina-related hospital contact/diagnostic ischemia test occurred in 724 patients (26.0%) in the beta-blocker group vs. 834 (29.9%) in the no beta-blocker group (SHR 0.85; 95% CI, 0.77-0.94). Coronary revascularization occurred in 108 (3.9%) vs. 110 patients (3.9%)(SHR 0.99; 95% CI 0.76-1.29). Fewer patients in the beta-blocker group were treated with calcium-channel blockers [630(22.7%) vs. 738(26.6%); -3.9 percentage points (95% CI, -6.2 to -1.6)], whereas nitrate use [342(12.3%) vs. 356(12.8%); -0.5 (95% CI, -2.2 to 1.2)] and CCS-scores were similar between groups (difference in change at 12-months, -0.04; 95% CI, -0.14-0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with MI and LVEF≥40%, a moderate dose of beta-blockers was associated with a lower incidence of first angina-related hospital contact/diagnostic ischemia testing, and lower use of calcium-channel blockers. The absence of differences in coronary revascularization, nitrate use and patient-reported angina symptoms suggests that the overall benefit on angina is limited.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kristensen et al. (2026) conducted an RCT in Myocardial infarction with LVEF ≥40% (n=5,574). Beta-blockers (metoprolol) vs. No beta-blockers was evaluated on Angina-related hospital contacts/diagnostic ischemia tests (SHR 0.85, 95% CI 0.77-0.94). Beta-blocker therapy after MI with LVEF ≥40% reduced angina-related hospital contacts/diagnostic ischemia testing vs no beta-blockers.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: