Different Cardio-Selective ß-Blockers and the Prevention of Exaggerated Blood Pressure Response During Exercise: A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to analyze the role of various ß-blockers in managing exercise-induced blood pressure escalations, referred to as exaggerated blood pressure response (eBPR). Despite the importance of this phenomenon, there is limited data on the efficacy of ß-blockers in controlling eBPR. METHOD: Our retrospective cohort for this study comprised 2,803 individuals who underwent treadmill tests from January 2016 to February 2018. A further subgroup analysis of 1,258 patients receiving ß-blocker treatment was performed to evaluate the influence of different ß-blockers on eBPR. RESULTS: The results demonstrated that ß-blockers play a significant role in mitigating the occurrence of eBPR (P = 0.026), irrespective of the specific type of ß-blocker. Additionally, no significant variance was observed in the development of eBPR among the different ß-blocker groups (P = 0.532 for systolic blood pressure (BP); P = 0.068 for diastolic BP). This finding remained consistent even among the 992 hypertensive patients, where no notable association was found between the type of ß-blocker and the development of eBPR (P = 0.736 for systolic BP; P = 0.349 for diastolic BP). It is noteworthy that patients using ß-blockers had unique clinical and demographic attributes. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that ß-blockers can potentially deter the development of eBPR during physical activity, a benefit that is consistent across all types of ß-blockers. The study sheds light on prospective randomized studies on the use of eBPR as a new treatment target.

Pre-Procedural Right Atrial Diameter May Predict the Development of Typical Atrial Flutter in Patients Undergoing Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Some patients undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation may develop typical atrial flutter on follow-up, and a second procedure for typical atrial flutter is often required in such patients. In this study, we aimed to define the variables associated with the development of typical atrial flutter after ablation. METHODS: One hundred fifty-nine patients who underwent catheter ablation for the first time due to atrial fibrillation and who did not have a previously documented atrial flutter were included in the study. Before ablation, baseline clinical features and echocardiographic parameters were recorded. At the 1st, 3rd, 6th, and 12th months after the procedure, and then annually, the patients were followed up for typical atrial flutter development. RESULTS: At a mean follow-up of 34.0 (14.0-50.0) months, typical atrial flutter developed in 21 (13.2%) patients. During the follow-up, right atrial diameter was greater in those who developed typical atrial flutter than those who did not [39.0 (38.0-43.0) vs. 36.0 (34.0-39.0) mm, P <.001]. A multiple Cox regression analysis showed that the right atrial diameter was the only independent predictor of typical atrial flutter development (hazard ratio = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.02-1.23, P =.021). A receiver operating characteristic analysis showed that the best cutoff for the right atrial diameter was 38.5 mm to predict typical atrial flutter development (area under the curve = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.67-0.86, sensitivity = 62%, specificity = 75%, P <.001). CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation, a pre-procedural right atrial diameter measurement may predict typical atrial flutter development at follow-up. In particular, patients with a pre-procedural right atrial diameter ≥39 mm may be at a higher risk for developing typical atrial flutter in the future.