Qualification of In Vitro Dissolution Absorption System 2 (IDAS2) with Caco-2 and MDCK Cell Monolayers: Dose Sensitivity Study Using BCS Class I and III Drugs.

This study aimed to validate the In vitro Dissolution Absorption System 2 (IDAS2) containing a biological barrier of Caco-2 or Madin-Darby canine kidney (MDCK) cell monolayer through dose sensitivity studies. Metoprolol and propranolol were selected as Biopharmaceutics Classification System (BCS) Class I model drugs, and atenolol as a Class III model drug. The IDAS2 is comprised of a dissolution vessel (500 mL) and two permeation chambers (2 × 8.0 mL) mounted with Caco-2 or MDCK cell monolayer. One or two immediate-release tablet(s) of the model drug were added to the dissolution vessel, and the time profiles of dissolution and permeation were observed. Greater than 85% of metoprolol and propranolol (tested at two dosing concentrations) were dissolved by 15 min, and all drugs were fully dissolved by 30 min. All three drugs were more permeable across Caco-2 cells than MDCK cells with a linear increase in permeation across both cells at both dose concentrations. Thus, the dose sensitivity of the IDAS2 was demonstrated using both cell barriers. These results indicate a successful qualification of IDAS2 for the development/optimization of oral formulations and that MDCK cells can be utilized as a surrogate for Caco-2 cells.

Serious Bleeding in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Using Diltiazem With Apixaban or Rivaroxaban.

Importance: Diltiazem, a commonly prescribed ventricular rate-control medication for patients with atrial fibrillation, inhibits apixaban and rivaroxaban elimination, possibly causing overanticoagulation. Objective: To compare serious bleeding risk for new users of apixaban or rivaroxaban with atrial fibrillation treated with diltiazem or metoprolol. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older with atrial fibrillation who initiated apixaban or rivaroxaban use and also began treatment with diltiazem or metoprolol between January 1, 2012, and November 29, 2020. Patients were followed up to 365 days through November 30, 2020. Data were analyzed from August 2023 to February 2024. Exposures: Diltiazem and metoprolol. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a composite of bleeding-related hospitalization and death with recent evidence of bleeding. Secondary outcomes were ischemic stroke or systemic embolism, major ischemic or hemorrhagic events (ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, intracranial or fatal extracranial bleeding, or death with recent evidence of bleeding), and death without recent evidence of bleeding. Hazard ratios (HRs) and rate differences (RDs) were adjusted for covariate differences with overlap weighting. Results: The study included 204 155 US Medicare beneficiaries, of whom 53 275 received diltiazem and 150 880 received metoprolol. Study patients (mean [SD] age, 76.9 [7.0] years; 52.7% female) had 90 927 person-years (PY) of follow-up (median, 120 [IQR, 59-281] days). Patients receiving diltiazem treatment had increased risk for the primary outcome (RD, 10.6 [95% CI, 7.0-14.2] per 1000 PY; HR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.13-1.29]) and its components of bleeding-related hospitalization (RD, 8.2 [95% CI, 5.1-11.4] per 1000 PY; HR, 1.22 [95% CI, 1.13-1.31]) and death with recent evidence of bleeding (RD, 2.4 [95% CI, 0.6-4.2] per 1000 PY; HR, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.05-1.34]) compared with patients receiving metoprolol. Risk for the primary outcome with initial diltiazem doses exceeding 120 mg/d (RD, 15.1 [95% CI, 10.2-20.1] per 1000 PY; HR, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.19-1.39]) was greater than that for lower doses (RD, 6.7 [95% CI, 2.0-11.4] per 1000 PY; HR, 1.13 [95% CI, 1.04-1.24]). For doses exceeding 120 mg/d, the risk of major ischemic or hemorrhagic events was increased (HR, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.02-1.27]). Neither dose group had significant changes in the risk for ischemic stroke or systemic embolism or death without recent evidence of bleeding. When patients receiving high- and low-dose diltiazem treatment were directly compared, the HR for the primary outcome was 1.14 (95% CI, 1.02-1.26). Conclusions and Relevance: In Medicare patients with atrial fibrillation receiving apixaban or rivaroxaban, diltiazem was associated with greater risk of serious bleeding than metoprolol, particularly for diltiazem doses exceeding 120 mg/d.

[Calcium Dibutyryl Adenosine Cyclophosphate Enhances the Effect of Metoprolol in Treating Older Adults With Heart Failure Combined With Arrhythmia]. / äºŒä¸é °çŽ¯ç£·è ºè‹·é’™å¯å¢žå¼ºç¾Žæ‰˜æ´›å°”å¯¹è€å¹´å¿ƒåŠ›è¡°ç«­åˆå¹¶å¿ƒå¾‹å¤±å¸¸æ‚£è€ çš„æ²»ç–—æ•ˆæžœ.

Objective: To explore the effect and safety of calcium dibutyryl adenosine cyclophosphate (dbcAMP-Ca) combined with metoprolol in the treatment of older adults with heart failure combined with arrhythmia. Methods: A total of 102 elderly patients with heart failure combined with arrhythmia were enrolled in our hospital between February 2021 and April 2023. The list of patients enrolled was entered into a random database by independent staffs not involved in the study and random assignment sequences were generated by the SAS9.4 software. Then, the 102 elderly patients were divided into a control group ( n=51) and an experimental group ( n=51). Patients in the control group were given metoprolol at an initial dose of 6.25 mg/d, which was gradually increased to the target dose of 25 mg/d. Patients in the experimental group were given 40 mg of dbcAMP-Ca once a day via intravenous drip in addition to the treatment given to the control group. Both groups were treated for 4 weeks. The rate of effective response to clinical treatment (the number of cases achieving significant effects and those achieving some effects divided by the total number of cases in the group) was defined as the main outcome index. Secondary indexes included cardiac function, heart rate variability, exercise ability, hemorheology, myocardial injury indexes, inflammatory indexes, and the occurrence of adverse reactions. Results: The rate of effective response to clinical treatment was higher in the experimental group than that in the control group (94.12% [48/51] vs. 78.43% [40/51], P<0.05). After treatment, the left ventricular end-diastolic and end-systolic dimensions (LVEDD and LVESD) and the interventricular septal thickness (IVS) were lower in the experimental group than those in the control group, while the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and the stroke volume (SV) were higher in the experimental group than those in the control group ( P<0.05). In terms of heart rate variability after treatment, the standard deviation of all the normal-to-normal intervals/the average of all the normal-to-normal intervals (SDNN/SDANN), the percentage of NN50 in the total number of normal-to-normal intervals (PNN50%), and the root mean square of the differences between adjacent normal-to-normal intervals/root mean square differences of successive R-R intervals (RMSSD) were higher in the experimental group than those in the control group ( P<0.05). In terms of exercise capacity after treatment, the subjects in the experimental group covered more distance in the 6-min walk test than those in the control group did ( P<0.05). In terms of the hemorheology indexes after treatment, the levels of platelet aggregation rate (PAgT), fibrinogen (FIB), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and whole blood viscosity (ηb) were lower in the experimental group than those in the control group ( P<0.05). In terms of the myocardial injury indexes after treatment, the levels of serum N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-pro BNP) and cardiac troponin I (cTnI) were lower in the experimental group than those in the control group, while the levels of insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) and cardiotrophin 1 (CT-1) were higher in the experimental group than those in the control group ( P<0.05). In terms of the inflammatory indexes after treatment, the levels of interleukin-6 (IL-6), high-sensitive C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) were lower in the experimental group than those in the control group ( P<0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions in the experimental group (9.80%) and that in the control group (7.84%) were comparable ( P>0.05). Conclusion: The use of dbcAMP-Ca in addition to metoprolol can effectively improve cardiac function, heart rate variability, and exercise tolerance, while inhibiting inflammatory response in elderly patients with heart failure combined with arrhythmia, with high medication safety. The combination medication shows better safety and therapeutic effects than those of metoprolol used alone.

The Effect of Intravenous and Oral Beta-Blocker Use in Patients with Type B Thoracic Aortic Dissection.

BACKGROUND: Beta-blockers have become the cornerstone for medical management in patients with chronic type B aortic dissection (TBAD). However, the effect of being on and/or receiving intravenous beta-blockers during hospitalization on outcomes of surgical repair of TBAD is not fully described. We sought to investigate this association during open surgical repair (OSR) and endovascular (Endo) intervention for nontraumatic TBAD. METHODS: The Premier Healthcare Database was inquired (June/2009-March/2015). Patients with nontraumatic isolated TBAD were identified via ICD-9-CM diagnosis and procedural codes. Patients with codes that indicated TAAD were excluded. In-hospital mortality, cardiac complications (CHF, MI, arrythmia) and stroke were evaluated. Log binomial regression analyses with bootstrapping were performed to assess the relative risk of adverse outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 1,752 were admitted for OSR (54.3%) and Endo (45.7%) TBAD repair. Use of oral beta blocker (BB) was 16.0% in OSR and 56.4% in Endo groups. In each arm, patients on BB were more likely to be diabetic, on aspirin or statin and more likely to receive additional IV BB than nonBB patients. There was no significant difference in age, sex, race, or prior history of CHF between BB and nonBB groups. Mortality was proportionally lower in patients on BB in OSR group (7.9% vs. 16.7%; P = 0.006) and Endo (3.3% vs. 9.2%; P < 0.001). The adjusted relative risk for mortality and stroke were significantly lower in oral BB recipients compared with none [aRR (95% CI): 0.53 (0.32-0.90) and 0.46 (0.25-0.87); both P ≤ 0.02]. IV metoprolol was the only IV BB that reduced mortality [aRR (95% CI): 0.62 (0.46-0.85); P = 0.003]. A dose of ≤10 mg was associated with significant mortality reduction: 6.3% (3.0-9.5%) compared with 8.1% (4.6-11.6%) in no IV BB group. Cardiac complications were not affected by BB use. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with nontraumatic TBAD, use of oral BB was associated with significant protection against in-hospital mortality and stroke following repair. Metoprolol was the only Intravenous BB type associated with improved survival. Further research is warranted to elucidate the effect of beta-blockers on the long-term surgical outcomes of TBAD.

Intravenous diltiazem versus metoprolol for atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular rate: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous diltiazem and metoprolol are both commonly used to treat atrial fibrillation (AF) with rapid ventricular rate (RVR) in the emergency department (ED), but the advantages and disadvantages of these drugs cannot be verified. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of intravenous diltiazem versus metoprolol for AF with RVR. METHOD: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane library, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, China Biology Medicine disc (CBM) and the WeiPu (VIP). Meta-analysis was performed using weighted mean difference (WMD), relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4.1. RESULTS: Seventeen studies involving 1214 patients in nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and eight cohort studies were included in meta-analysis, including 643 patients in the intravenous diltiazem group and 571 patients group in the intravenous metoprolol. The results of the meta-analysis showed that compared with intravenous metoprolol, intravenous diltiazem was found higher efficacy (RR =1.11; 95% CI = 1.06 to 1.16, p < 0.00001), shorter average onset time (RR = -1.13; 95% CI = -1.97 to -0.28, p = 0.009), lower ventricular rate (RR = -9.48; 95% CI = -12.13 to -6.82, p<0.00001), less impact on systolic blood pressure (WMD = 3.76; 95% CI: 0.20 to 7.33, P = 0.04), and no significant difference in adverse events (RR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.55 to 1.14, P = 0.22) and diastolic blood pressure (WMD = -1.20; 95% CI: -3.43 to 1.04, P = 0.29) was found between intravenous diltiazem and metoprolol. CONCLUSION: Intravenous diltiazem has higher efficacy, shorter average onset time, lower ventricular rate, less impact on blood pressure, and with no increase in adverse events compared to intravenous metoprolol.

Prospective Clinical Trial Comparing IV Esmolol to IV Metoprolol in CT Coronary Angiography: Effect on Hemodynamic, Technical Parameters and Cost.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous [IV] esmolol, an alternative to IV metoprolol for coronary computed tomography angiography [CCTA], has shorter half-life that decreases the risk of prolonged hypotension. The primary aim was to prospectively compare IV esmolol alone to IV metoprolol alone for effectiveness in achieving heart rate [HR] of 60 beats per minute[bpm] during CCTA. The secondary aim was to compare hemodynamic response, image quality, radiation dose and cost. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional Review Board approved prospective randomized study of 28 CCTA patients medicated in a 1:1 blinded match with IV esmolol or IV metoprolol to achieve HR of 60 bpm. Serial hemodynamic response was measured at 6 specified times. Two cardiac radiologists independently scored the image quality. RESULTS: Both IV esmolol and IV metoprolol achieved the target HR. IV esmolol resulted in significantly less profound and shorter duration of reduction in systolic blood pressure [BP] than IV metoprolol with a difference of -10, -14 and -9 mm Hg compared to -20, -26 and -25 mmHg at 2, 15 & 30 min respectively. No significant difference in HR at image acquisition, exposure window, radiation dose and image quality. Although IV esmolol was expensive, the overall cost of care was comparable to IV metoprolol due to shortened post CCTA observation period consequent to faster restoration of hemodynamic status. CONCLUSION: Comparison of IV esmolol and IV metoprolol demonstrate that both are effective in achieving the target HR but significantly faster recovery of HR and BP in patients who receive IV esmolol was found.

Metoprolol Impairs ß1-Adrenergic Receptor-Mediated Vasodilation in Rat Cerebral Arteries: Implications for ß-Blocker Therapy.

The practice of prescribing ß-blockers to lower blood pressure and mitigate perioperative cardiovascular events has been questioned because of reports of an increased risk of stroke. The benefit of ß-blocker therapy primarily relies on preventing activation of cardiac ß1-adrenergic receptors (ARs). However, we reported that ß1ARs also mediate vasodilator responses of rat cerebral arteries (CAs), implying that ß-blockers may impair cerebral blood flow under some conditions. Here, we defined the impact of metoprolol (MET), a widely prescribed ß1AR-selective antagonist, on adrenergic-elicited diameter responses of rat CAs ex vivo and in vivo. MET (1-10 µmol/l) prevented ß1AR-mediated increases in diameter elicited by dobutamine in cannulated rat CAs. The ß1AR-mediated dilation elicited by the endogenous adrenergic agonist norepinephrine (NE) was reversed to a sustained constriction by MET. Acute oral administration of MET (30 mg/kg) to rats in doses that attenuated resting heart rate and dobutamine-induced tachycardia also blunted ß1AR-mediated dilation of CAs. In the same animals, NE-induced dilation of CAs was reversed to sustained constriction. Administration of MET for 2 weeks in drinking water (2 mg/ml) or subcutaneously (15 mg/kg per day) also resulted in NE-induced constriction of CAs in vivo. Thus, doses of MET that protect the heart from adrenergic stimulation also prevent ß1AR-mediated dilation of CAs and favor anomalous adrenergic constriction. Our findings raise the possibility that the increased risk of ischemic stroke in patients on ß-blockers relates in part to adrenergic dysregulation of cerebrovascular tone. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: ß-Blocker therapy using second-generation, cardioselective ß-blockers is associated with an increased risk of stroke, but the responsible mechanisms are unclear. Here, we report that either acute or chronic systemic administration of a cardioselective ß-blocker, metoprolol, mitigates adrenergic stimulation of the heart as an intended beneficial action. However, metoprolol concomitantly eliminates vasodilator responses to adrenergic stimuli of rat cerebral arteries in vivo as a potential cause of dysregulated cerebral blood flow predisposing to ischemic stroke.

Comparison of sustained rate control in atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular rate: Metoprolol vs. Diltiazem.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare sustained rate control with intravenous (IV) diltiazem vs. IV metoprolol in acute treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) with rapid ventricular rate (RVR) in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: This retrospective chart review at a large, academic medical center identified patients with AF with RVR diagnosis who received IV diltiazem or IV metoprolol in the ED. The primary outcome was sustained rate control defined as heart rate (HR) < 100 beats per minute without need for rescue IV medication for 3 h following initial rate control attainment. Secondary outcomes included time to initial rate control, HR at initial control and 3 h, time to oral dose, admission rates, and safety outcomes. RESULTS: Between January 1, 2016 and November 1, 2018, 51 patients met inclusion criteria (diltiazem n = 32, metoprolol n = 19). No difference in sustained rate control was found (diltiazem 87.5% vs. metoprolol 78.9%, p = 0.45). Time to rate control was significantly shorter with diltiazem compared to metoprolol (15 min vs. 30 min, respectively, p = 0.04). Neither hypotension nor bradycardia were significantly different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Choice of rate control agent for acute management of AF with RVR did not significantly influence sustained rate control success. Safety outcomes did not differ between treatment groups.

Metoprolol blunts the time-dependent progression of infarct size.

Early metoprolol administration protects against myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury, but its effect on infarct size progression (ischemic injury) is unknown. Eight groups of pigs (total n = 122) underwent coronary artery occlusion of varying duration (20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, or 60 min) followed by reperfusion. In each group, pigs were randomized to i.v. metoprolol (0.75 mg/kg) or vehicle (saline) 20 min after ischemia onset. The primary outcome measure was infarct size (IS) on day7 cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) normalized to area at risk (AAR, measured by perfusion computed tomography [CT] during ischemia). Metoprolol treatment reduced overall mortality (10% vs 26%, p = 0.03) and the incidence and number of primary ventricular fibrillations during infarct induction. In controls, IS after 20-min ischemia was ≈ 5% of the area AAR. Thereafter, IS progressed exponentially, occupying almost all the AAR after 35 min of ischemia. Metoprolol injection significantly reduced the slope of IS progression (p = 0.004 for final IS). Head-to-head comparison (metoprolol treated vs vehicle treated) showed statistically significant reductions in IS at 30, 35, 40, and 50-min reperfusion. At 60-min reperfusion, IS was 100% of AAR in both groups. Despite more prolonged ischemia, metoprolol-treated pigs reperfused at 50 min had smaller infarcts than control pigs undergoing ischemia for 40 or 45 min and similar-sized infarcts to those undergoing 35-min ischemia. Day-45 LVEF was higher in metoprolol-treated vs vehicle-treated pigs (41.6% vs 36.5%, p = 0.008). In summary, metoprolol administration early during ischemia attenuates IS progression and reduces the incidence of primary ventricular fibrillation. These data identify metoprolol as an intervention ideally suited to the treatment of STEMI patients identified early in the course of infarction and requiring long transport times before primary angioplasty.

Effect of eliglustat on the pharmacokinetics of digoxin, metoprolol, and oral contraceptives and absorption of eliglustat when coadministered with acid-reducing agents.

Eliglustat is an oral substrate reduction therapy indicated for patients with Gaucher disease type 1. Based on in vitro data, clinical trials were conducted to assess the potential for drug-drug interactions between eliglustat and digoxin (P-glycoprotein substrate), metoprolol (sensitive CYP2D6 substrate), a combined oral contraceptive (CYP3A substrate), and acid-reducing agents. Healthy subjects were enrolled in four Phase 1 clinical studies to evaluate the effect of eliglustat on the pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of digoxin (N = 28), metoprolol (N = 14), and a combined oral contraceptive (N = 30) and the effect of acid-reducing agents on eliglustat pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability (N = 24). Coadministration resulted in increased exposure to digoxin (1.49-fold) and metoprolol (2-fold) with eliglustat, negligible effects on oral contraceptive pharmacokinetics with eliglustat, and a negligible effect of acid-reducing agents on eliglustat pharmacokinetics. Across all studies, eliglustat was well-tolerated. One serious adverse event (spontaneous abortion) and one discontinuation due to an adverse event (urinary tract infection) were reported, both during the acid-reducing agents study. When eliglustat is coadministered with medications that are P-glycoprotein or CYP2D6 substrates, lower doses of these concomitant medications may be required. Eliglustat may be coadministered with oral contraceptives and acid-reducing agents without dose modifications for either drug.

Pulmonary Delivery of Metoprolol Reduces Ventricular Rate During Atrial Fibrillation and Accelerates Conversion to Sinus Rhythm.

BACKGROUND: Safe, effective pulmonary delivery of cardioactive agents in humans is under development. OBJECTIVES: We examined whether intratracheal delivery of metoprolol can reduce ventricular rate during atrial fibrillation (AF) and accelerate conversion to sinus rhythm. METHODS: In 7 closed-chest, anesthetized Yorkshire pigs, AF was induced by intrapericardial infusion of acetylcholine (1 mL of 102.5-mM solution) followed by atrial burst pacing and was allowed to continue for 2 minutes before intratracheal instillation of sterile water or metoprolol (0.2-mg/kg bolus) using a catheter positioned at the bifurcation of the main bronchi. High-resolution electrograms were obtained from catheters fluoroscopically positioned in the right atrium and left ventricle. RESULTS: Rapid intratracheal instillation of metoprolol caused a 32-beat/min reduction in ventricular rate during AF (from 272 ± 13.7 to 240 ± 12.6 beats/min, P = 0.008) and a 2.3-minute reduction in AF duration (from 10.3 ± 2.0 to 8.0 ± 1.4 minutes, P = 0.018) compared with sterile water control. Conversion of AF to sinus rhythm was associated with rapid restoration (5-6 minutes) of heart rate and arterial blood pressure toward control values. Intratracheal metoprolol reduced AF dominant frequency by 31% (from 8.7 ± 0.9 to 6.0 ± 1.1 Hz, P = 0.04) compared with control and resulted in a trend toward a 5% increase in PR interval (from 174 ± 11.2 to 182 ± 11.4 ms, P = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: Intratracheal delivery of metoprolol effectively reduces ventricular rate during AF and accelerates conversion to normal sinus rhythm in a pig model of acetylcholine-induced AF.

Pulmonary Delivery of Antiarrhythmic Drugs for Rapid Conversion of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation.

Pharmacologic management of atrial fibrillation (AF) is a pressing problem. This arrhythmia afflicts >5 million individuals in the United States and prevalence is estimated to rise to 12 million by 2050. Although the pill-in-the-pocket regimen for self-administered AF cardioversion introduced over a decade ago has proven useful, significant drawbacks exist. Among these are the relatively long latency of effects in the range of hours along with potential for hypotension and other adverse effects. This experience prompted development of a new strategy for increasing plasma concentrations of antiarrhythmic drugs rapidly and for a limited time, namely, pulmonary delivery. In preclinical studies in Yorkshire pigs, intratracheal administration of flecainide was shown to cause a rapid, reproducible increase in plasma drug levels. Moreover, pulmonary delivery of flecainide converted AF to normal sinus rhythm by prolonging atrial depolarization, which slows intra-atrial conduction and seems to be directly correlated with efficacy in converting AF. The rapid rise in plasma flecainide levels optimizes its anti-AF effects while minimizing adverse influences on ventricular depolarization and contractility. A more concentrated and soluble formulation of flecainide using a novel cyclodextrin complex excipient reduced net drug delivery for AF conversion when compared to the acetate formulation. Inhalation of the beta-adrenergic blocking agent metoprolol slows ventricular rate and can also terminate AF. In human subjects, oral inhalation of flecainide acetate with a hand-held, breath-actuated nebulizer results in signature prolongation of the QRS complex without serious adverse events. Thus, pulmonary delivery is a promising advance in pharmacologic approach to management of AF.

Left ventricular functional recovery of infarcted and remote myocardium after ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (METOCARD-CNIC randomized clinical trial substudy).

BACKGROUND: We aimed to evaluate the effect of early intravenous metoprolol treatment, microvascular obstruction (MVO), intramyocardial hemorrhage (IMH) and adverse left ventricular (LV) remodeling on the evolution of infarct and remote zone circumferential strain after acute anterior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) with feature-tracking cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR). METHODS: A total of 191 patients with acute anterior STEMI enrolled in the METOCARD-CNIC randomized clinical trial were evaluated. LV infarct zone and remote zone circumferential strain were measured with feature-tracking CMR at 1 week and 6 months after STEMI. RESULTS: In the overall population, the infarct zone circumferential strain significantly improved from 1 week to 6 months after STEMI (- 8.6 ± 9.0% to - 14.5 ± 8.0%; P < 0.001), while no changes in the remote zone strain were observed (- 19.5 ± 5.9% to - 19.2 ± 3.9%; P = 0.466). Patients who received early intravenous metoprolol had significantly more preserved infarct zone circumferential strain compared to the controls at 1 week (P = 0.038) and at 6 months (P = 0.033) after STEMI, while no differences in remote zone strain were observed. The infarct zone circumferential strain was significantly impaired in patients with MVO and IMH compared to those without (P < 0.001 at 1 week and 6 months), however it improved between both time points regardless of the presence of MVO or IMH (P < 0.001). In patients who developed adverse LV remodeling (defined as ≥ 20% increase in LV end-diastolic volume) remote zone circumferential strain worsened between 1 week and 6 months after STEMI (P = 0.036), while in the absence of adverse LV remodeling no significant changes in remote zone strain were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Regional LV circumferential strain with feature-tracking CMR allowed comprehensive evaluation of the sequelae of an acute STEMI treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention and demonstrated long-lasting cardioprotective effects of early intravenous metoprolol. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01311700. Registered 8 March 2011 - Retrospectively registered.

Metoprolol prevents neuronal dendrite remodeling in a canine model of chronic obstructive sleep apnea.

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is closely associated with central nervous system diseases and could lead to autonomic nerve dysfunction, which is often seen in neurodegenerative diseases. Previous studies have shown that metoprolol prevents several chronic OSA-induced cardiovascular diseases through inhibiting autonomic nerve hyperactivity. It remains unclear whether chronic OSA can lead to dendritic remodeling in the brain, and whether metoprolol affects the dendritic remodeling. In this study we investigated the effect of metoprolol on dendrite morphology in a canine model of chronic OSA, which was established in beagles through clamping and reopening the endotracheal tube for 4 h every other day for 12 weeks. OSA beagles were administered metoprolol (5 mg· kg-1· d-1). The dendritic number, length, crossings and spine density of neurons in hippocampi and prefrontal cortices were assessed by Golgi staining. And the protein levels of hypoxia-inducible factor-1α (HIF-1α) and brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) were measured by Western blotting. We showed that chronic OSA successfully induced significant brain hypoxia evidenced by increased HIF-1α levels in CA1 region and dentate gyrus of hippocampi, as well as in prefrontal cortex. Furthermore, OSA led to markedly decreased dendrite number, length and intersections, spine loss as well as reduced BDNF levels. Administration of metoprolol effectively prevented the dendritic remodeling and spine loss induced by chronic OSA. In addition, administration of metoprolol reversed the decreased BDNF, which might be associated with the metoprolol-induced neuronal protection. In conclusion, metoprolol protects against neuronal dendritic remodeling in hippocampi and prefrontal cortices induced by chronic OSA in canine.

Hemodynamic comparison of intravenous push diltiazem versus metoprolol for atrial fibrillation rate control.

OBJECTIVE: Intravenous push (IVP) diltiazem and metoprolol are commonly used for management of atrial fibrillation (AF) with rapid ventricular rate (RVR) in the emergency department (ED). This study's objective was to determine if there was a significant difference in blood pressure reduction between agents. METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective study of adult patients initially treated with IVP diltiazem or metoprolol in the ED from 2008 to 2018. Primary endpoint was mean reduction in systolic blood pressure (SBP) from baseline to nadir during the study period. Study period was defined as time from first dose of IVP intervention to 30 min after last dose of IVP intervention or first dose of maintenance therapy, whichever came first. RESULTS: A total of 63 diltiazem patients and 45 metoprolol patients met eligibility criteria. Baseline characteristics were similar except for initial ventricular rate (VR) and home beta-blocker use. Median dose of initial intervention was 10 [10-20] mg and 5 [5-5] mg for diltiazem and metoprolol respectively. Mean SBP reduction was 18 ± 22 mmHg for diltiazem compared to 14 ± 15 mmHg for metoprolol (p = .33). Clinically relevant hypotension was similar between groups 14% vs. 16% (p = .86). Rate control was achieved in 35 (56%) of the diltiazem group and 16 (36%) of the metoprolol group (p = .04). CONCLUSION: IVP diltiazem and metoprolol caused similar SBP reduction and hypotension when used for initial management of AF with RVR in the ED. However, rate control was achieved more often with diltiazem.

The effects of intraperitoneal metoprolol administration on healing of bone defects in rat tibia: a pilot study.

OBJECTIVES: Metoprolol is a cardioselective competitive beta-1 adrenergic receptor antagonist with antihypertensive properties, devoid of intrinsic sympathomimetic activity. Various studies have suggested the effect of beta-blockers on bone remodeling. We aimed to investigate whether metoprolol affects bone remodeling by altering anti-inflammatory and pro-inflammatory cytokines. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Surgical defects of 3 mm diameter were created in tibiae of 72 Sprague-Dawley rats. Rats were randomly assigned to a control group without metoprolol treatment (n = 36), and a test group treated with 0.1 mg/kg/day metoprolol (n = 36). Six rats from each group were sacrificed at days 0, 1, 3, 5, 7, and 14. The percentages of cells, which showed positive immunohistochemical staining for IL-1ß, IL-6, IL-10, and RANKL, were assessed in the defect area. Differences in percentages of stained cells within each of the test and control groups over various time intervals were tested using one-way ANOVA test. A P value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: No significant differences in IL-1ß, IL-10, IL-6, and RANKL expressions were found between test and control groups at the same interval. Significant reduction was observed at different time intervals in the same group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Metoprolol did not reduce bone-active cytokine: IL-1ß, IL-6, and RANKL. It also did not elevate IL-10 expression levels. Thus, it does not appear to decrease osteoclastogenesis. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results from this animal model help us understand any effect of metoprolol on bone healing by potential contribution to different real-world clinical research.

Assessing Drug Release from Manipulated Abuse Deterrent Formulations.

There is a need to develop in vitro dissolution methods that discriminate for particle size of the manipulated abuse deterrent formulation (ADF) and that can be used for in vivo predictive models since dissolution methods developed for intact formulation might not be suitable for manipulated ones. A vertical diffusion cell (VDC) and United States Pharmacopeia (USP) Apparatus 1, 2, and 4 were evaluated for measuring the dissolution of intact and manipulated metoprolol succinate tablets with abuse deterrent-like properties. These tablets were physically manipulated to produce fine (106-500 µm) and coarse (500-1000 µm) powder samples. The VDC method was not able to discriminate the effect of particle size on drug release with varied stirring rate (200 to 800 rpm), molecular weight cut-off (MWCO, 3-5 kDa to 12-14 kDa) of the diffusion membrane, or composition and ionic strength (0.45% and 0.9%) of receiver medium. Standard and modified USP Apparatus 1 and 2 methods were assessed; however, large variations (RSD > 20%) were observed with USP Apparatus 1 for manipulated product dissolution and floating powder samples caused failure of auto-sampling when using standard USP Apparatus 2. For the USP Apparatus 4 dissolution method, packing configuration (1, 3, 8 layers and blend), ionic strength of dissolution medium (0.017, 0.077, and 0.154 M additional NaCl), and flow rate (4, 8, 16 mL/min) were studied to discriminate the effect of particle size on release. The USP Apparatus 4 dissolution method was optimized by using a packaging configuration of 8 layers with 8 mL/min flow rate which exhibited low variability and complete drug release and it could be used for in vivo predictive models. The dissolution method variables can be optimized for a specific product for desirable reproducibility and discriminatory power when using USP Apparatus 4.

The effect of the CYP2D6 genotype on the maintenance dose of metoprolol in a chronic Dutch patient population.

Metoprolol is among the most frequently prescribed ß-blockers for the treatment of various cardiovascular diseases. Genetic polymorphism within CYP2D6 has been shown to affect the rate of metabolism of metoprolol. Whether metoprolol dose adjustments are indicated in CYP2D6 poor metabolizers (PMs) has thus far not well been studied. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of the CYP2D6 genotype on the metoprolol maintenance dose in a chronic Dutch patient population. Patients were included if they were treated with metoprolol and in whom CYP2D6 genotype status was known. Patient and treatment characteristics were obtained retrospectively from the electronic healthcare records. Metoprolol maintenance dose was the primary endpoint and was defined as the last known dose that the patients had been treated with. Genotype data were categorized into four phenotypes, that is, PMs, intermediate metabolizers, extensive metabolizers, and ultra-rapid metabolizers (UMs). The endpoints were analyzed as PM versus non-PM. A total of 105 patients were included. The mean ± SD maintenance dose in PMs (n = 12) was significantly lower compared with non-PMs (n = 93), that is, 48 ± 20 versus 84 ± 53 mg, respectively (P = 0.019). No association of the CYP2D6 genotype with the incidence of side effects was observed, although there was a trend for increased risk of drowsiness (P = 0.053). The results of this study show that the CYP2D6 genotype is associated with the maintenance dose of metoprolol. Patients with the CYP2D6 PM phenotype may benefit from a lower metoprolol starting dose, followed by further dose titration to provide patient-tailored therapy and thereby increase the effectiveness of treatment.

Effect of beta blocker use and type on hypoglycemia risk among hospitalized insulin requiring patients.

BACKGROUND: Although beta blockers could increase the risk of hypoglycemia, the difference between subtypes on hypoglycemia and mortality have not been studied. This study sought to determine the relationship between type of beta blocker and incidence of hypoglycemia and mortality in hospitalized patients. METHODS: We retrospectively identified non-critically ill hospitalized insulin requiring patients who were undergoing bedside glucose monitoring and received either carvedilol or a selective beta blocker (metoprolol or atenolol). Patients receiving other beta blockers were excluded. Hypoglycemia was defined as any glucose < 3.9 mmol/L within 24 h of admission (Hypo1day) or throughout hospitalization (HypoT) and any glucose < 2.2 mmol/L throughout hospitalization (Hyposevere). RESULTS: There were 1020 patients on carvedilol, 886 on selective beta blockers, and 10,216 on no beta blocker at admission. After controlling for other variables, the odds of Hypo1day, HypoT and Hyposevere were higher for carvedilol and selective beta blocker recipients than non-recipients, but only in basal insulin nonusers. The odds of Hypo1day (odds ratio [OR] 1.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28, 3.09, p = 0.0002) and HypoT (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.02, 1.86, p = 0.03) but not Hyposevere (OR 1.90, 95% CI 0.90, 4.02, p = 0.09) were greater for selective beta blocker vs. carvedilol recipients in basal insulin nonusers. Hypo1day, HypoT, and Hyposevere were all associated with increased mortality in adjusted models among non-beta blocker and selective beta blocker recipients, but not among carvedilol recipients. CONCLUSIONS: Beta blocker use is associated with increased odds of hypoglycemia among hospitalized patients not requiring basal insulin, and odds are greater for selective beta blockers than for carvedilol. The odds of hypoglycemia-associated mortality are increased with selective beta blocker use or nonusers but not in carvedilol users, warranting further study.

Metoprolol vs. diltiazem in the acute management of atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine the effects of metoprolol versus diltiazem in the acute management of atrial fibrillation (AF) with rapid ventricular response (RVR) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study of patients with HFrEF in AF with RVR receiving either intravenous push (IVP) doses of metoprolol or diltiazem was conducted between January 2012 and September 2016. The primary outcome was successful rate control within 30 min of medication administration, defined as a heart rate (HR) < 100 beats per minute or a HR reduction ≥ 20%. Secondary outcomes included rate control at 60 min, maximum median change in HR, and incidence of hypotension, bradycardia, or conversion to normal sinus rhythm within 30 min. Signs of worsening heart failure were also evaluated. RESULTS: Of the 48 patients included, 14 received metoprolol and 34 received diltiazem. The primary outcome, successful rate control within 30 min, occurred in 62% of the metoprolol group and 50% of the diltiazem group (p = 0.49). There was no difference in HR control at predefined time points or incidence of hypotension, bradycardia, or conversion. Although baseline HR varied between groups, maximum median change in HR did not differ. Signs of worsening heart failure were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: For the acute management of AF with RVR in patients with HFrEF, IVP diltiazem achieved similar rate control with no increase in adverse events when compared to IVP metoprolol.