4.4 Article

Optimal β-blocker for prevention of atrial fibrillation after on-pump coronary artery bypass graft surgery:: Carvedilol versus metoprolol

期刊

HEART RHYTHM
卷 4, 期 9, 页码 1170-1174

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2007.04.022

关键词

atrial fibrillation; beta-blocker; Coronary artery bypass graft surgery; postoperative; prevention

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. It has been shown that prophylactic oral beta-bLocker administration reduces the incidence of post-CABG AF. However, the optimal beta-blocker has not been identified. OBJECTIVE This study sought to determine whether oral carvedilol (with its unique anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties) is more effective than oral metoprotol for prevention of AF after CABG surgery. METHODS Between April 2006 and December 2006, 120 patients (63 men, mean age 61 +/- 9.4 years) who were scheduled to undergo their first on-pump CABG were enrolled in this study. The patients were randomized in a prospective 1:1 manner to receive either oral carvedilol (n = 60) or oral metoprolol (n = 60). The end point of the study was the occurrence of the new-onset AF during the first 5 days after CABG. RESULTS AF occurred in 29 of 120 patients (24.0%). The incidence of postoperative AF was 15.0% (9 of 60) in the carvedilol group and 33% (20 of 60) in the metoprolol group (P = .022). The carveditol group was treated with mean daily dose of 46 +/- 9 mg and metoprolol group with mean daily dose of 93 11 mg. There were no differences between the study groups regarding any known preoperative, peri-operative, or postoperative characteristics (all values were P >.05). No significant adverse effect was observed in either group. CONCLUSION This prospective study suggested that oral carvedilol is more effective than oral metoprolol in the prevention of AF after on-pump CABG. It is well tolerated when started before and continued after the surgery. However, further prospective studies are needed to clarify this issue.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据