3.8 Article

beta-Blocker Prescription and Outcomes in Hemodialysis Patients from The Japan Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study

Journal

NEPHRON CLINICAL PRACTICE
Volume 113, Issue 3, Pages C132-C139

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000232593

Keywords

beta-Blockers; Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study; Hemodialysis; All-cause mortality

Funding

  1. DOPPS

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background/Aims: Given the clear benefits of mortality reduction observed for most beta-blockers in clinical trials, they are relatively underused in hemodialysis patients. Since the outcomes associated with the use of beta-blockers are not fully known, we investigated their effect on mortality among a cohort of hemodialysis patients. Methods: Data were analyzed from the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study phase II for 2,286 randomly selected patients on hemodialysis in Japan. Treatment with beta-blockers was the major predictor variable. The main outcome measure was all-cause mortality. Cox regression analysis was used to assess an association between treatment with beta-blockers and the risk of death. Results: 247 patients (11.9%) were administered beta-blockers and 1,828 patients (88.1%) were not. Whereas patients treated with beta-blockers had a higher prevalence of hypertension and coronary heart disease, Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that all-cause mortality rates were significantly (p < 0.007) decreased in patients treated with beta-blockers compared to those without. In multivariable, fully adjusted models, treatment with beta-blockers was also independently associated with reduced all-cause mortality (hazard ratio = 0.48; p = 0.02). Conclusion: This study indicated a possible association between the use of beta-blockers and reduced risk of mortality in hemodialysis patients. These results should be confirmed in further randomized controlled trials. Copyright (C) 2009 S. Karger AG, Basel

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available