Beta-Blockers after Myocardial Infarction and Preserved Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: Most trials that have shown a benefit of beta-blocker treatment after myocardial infarction included patients with large myocardial infarctions and were conducted in an era before modern biomarker-based diagnosis of myocardial infarction and treatment with percutaneous coronary intervention, antithrombotic agents, high-intensity statins, and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system antagonists. METHODS: In a parallel-group, open-label trial performed at 45 centers in Sweden, Estonia, and New Zealand, we randomly assigned patients with an acute myocardial infarction who had undergone coronary angiography and had a left ventricular ejection fraction of at least 50% to receive either long-term treatment with a beta-blocker (metoprolol or bisoprolol) or no beta-blocker treatment. The primary end point was a composite of death from any cause or new myocardial infarction. RESULTS: From September 2017 through May 2023, a total of 5020 patients were enrolled (95.4% of whom were from Sweden). The median follow-up was 3.5 years (interquartile range, 2.2 to 4.7). A primary end-point event occurred in 199 of 2508 patients (7.9%) in the beta-blocker group and in 208 of 2512 patients (8.3%) in the no-beta-blocker group (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.79 to 1.16; P = 0.64). Beta-blocker treatment did not appear to lead to a lower cumulative incidence of the secondary end points (death from any cause, 3.9% in the beta-blocker group and 4.1% in the no-beta-blocker group; death from cardiovascular causes, 1.5% and 1.3%, respectively; myocardial infarction, 4.5% and 4.7%; hospitalization for atrial fibrillation, 1.1% and 1.4%; and hospitalization for heart failure, 0.8% and 0.9%). With regard to safety end points, hospitalization for bradycardia, second- or third-degree atrioventricular block, hypotension, syncope, or implantation of a pacemaker occurred in 3.4% of the patients in the beta-blocker group and in 3.2% of those in the no-beta-blocker group; hospitalization for asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in 0.6% and 0.6%, respectively; and hospitalization for stroke in 1.4% and 1.8%. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with acute myocardial infarction who underwent early coronary angiography and had a preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (≥50%), long-term beta-blocker treatment did not lead to a lower risk of the composite primary end point of death from any cause or new myocardial infarction than no beta-blocker use. (Funded by the Swedish Research Council and others; REDUCE-AMI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03278509.).

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management of chronic heart failure.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is an unprecedented challenge. Meeting this has resulted in changes to working practices and the impact on the management of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is largely unknown. We performed a retrospective, observational study contrasting patients diagnosed with HFrEF attending specialist heart failure clinics at a UK hospital, whose subsequent period of optimisation of medical therapy was during the COVID-19 pandemic, with patients diagnosed the previous year. The primary outcome was the change in equivalent dosing of ramipril and bisoprolol at 6-months. Secondary outcomes were the number and type of follow-up consultations, hospitalisation for heart failure and all-cause mortality. In total, 60 patients were diagnosed with HFrEF between 1 December 2019 and 30 April 2020, compared to 54 during the same period of the previous year. The absolute number of consultations was higher (390 vs 270; p = 0.69), driven by increases in telephone consultations, with a reduction in appointments with hospital nurse specialists. After 6-months, we observed lower equivalent dosing of ramipril (3.1 ± 3.0 mg vs 4.4 ± 0.5 mg; p = 0.035) and similar dosing of bisoprolol (4.1 ± 0.5 mg vs 4.9 ± 0.5 mg; p = 0.27), which persisted for ramipril (mean difference 1.0 mg, 95% CI 0.018-2.09; p = 0.046) and bisoprolol (mean difference 0.52 mg, 95% CI -0.23-1.28; p = 0.17) after adjustment for baseline dosing. We observed no differences in the proportion of patients who died (5.0% vs 7.4%; p = 0.59) or were hospitalised with heart failure (13.3% vs 9.3%; p = 0.49). Our study suggests the transition to telephone appointments and re-deployment of heart failure nurse specialists was associated with less successful optimisation of medical therapy, especially renin-angiotensin inhibitors, compared with usual care.

Effects of Bisoprolol Transdermal Patches for Prevention of Perioperative Myocardial Injury in High-Risk Patients Undergoing Non-Cardiac Surgery　- Multicenter Randomized Controlled Study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of transdermal ß-blocker patches, which offer stable blood concentration and easy availability during operation, for prevention of perioperative myocardial injury (PMI) in high-risk patients.Methods and Results:In this randomized controlled trial, patients aged >60 years with hypertension and high revised cardiac risk index (≥2) undergoing non-cardiac surgery were randomly assigned to a bisoprolol patch or control group. Primary efficacy outcome was incidence of PMI, defined as postoperative high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) >0.014ng/mL and relative hs-cTnT change ≥20%. Secondary efficacy outcomes were number of cardiovascular events and 30-day mortality. From November 2014 to February 2019, 240 patients from 5 hospitals were enrolled in this study. The incidence of PMI was 35.7% in the bisoprolol patch group and 44.5% in the control group (P=0.18). Incidence of major adverse cardiac events including non-critical myocardial infarction, strokes, decompensated heart failure and tachyarrhythmia was similar between the 2 groups. Tachyarrhythmia tended to be higher in the control group. There were no significant differences in safety outcomes including significant hypotension and bradycardia requiring any treatment between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Bisoprolol patches do not influence the incidence of PMI and cardiovascular events in high-risk patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery, but perioperative use of these patches is safe.

Effect of Bisoprolol on the Level of Dabigatran.

BACKGROUND: Many patients receiving dabigatran treatment might also require bisoprolol therapy. However, there is a possibility that bisoprolol as significant P-glycoprotein inhibitor might interact with dabigatran. STUDY QUESTION: To investigate the impact of concomitant bisoprolol therapy on dabigatran plasma level in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. STUDY DESIGN: A pilot drug interaction study in 29 patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation on dabigatran therapy. Bisoprolol was administrated in 18 patients. Blood samples were collected at baseline (in the morning, before any medication was administered) and at hour 2 (2 hours after administration of dabigatran and bisoprolol). RESULTS: The dabigatran plasma level was significantly higher at baseline and at hour 2 in patients treated with bisoprolol compared with patients without bisoprolol therapy. In addition, we have shown that this increase is affected by dabigatran dosage and concomitant treatment with proton-pump inhibitor and digoxin. The impact of bisoprolol on dabigatran concentration was still significant despite these confounders. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the interaction between dabigatran and bisoprolol, which is modulated with dabigatran dosage and concomitant treatment with proton-pump inhibitor and digoxin.

Effect of Digoxin vs Bisoprolol for Heart Rate Control in Atrial Fibrillation on Patient-Reported Quality of Life: The RATE-AF Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: There is little evidence to support selection of heart rate control therapy in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation, in particular those with coexisting heart failure. Objective: To compare low-dose digoxin with bisoprolol (a ß-blocker). Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized, open-label, blinded end-point clinical trial including 160 patients aged 60 years or older with permanent atrial fibrillation (defined as no plan to restore sinus rhythm) and dyspnea classified as New York Heart Association class II or higher. Patients were recruited from 3 hospitals and primary care practices in England from 2016 through 2018; last follow-up occurred in October 2019. Interventions: Digoxin (n = 80; dose range, 62.5-250 µg/d; mean dose, 161 µg/d) or bisoprolol (n = 80; dose range, 1.25-15 mg/d; mean dose, 3.2 mg/d). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was patient-reported quality of life using the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey physical component summary score (SF-36 PCS) at 6 months (higher scores are better; range, 0-100), with a minimal clinically important difference of 0.5 SD. There were 17 secondary end points (including resting heart rate, modified European Heart Rhythm Association [EHRA] symptom classification, and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide [NT-proBNP] level) at 6 months, 20 end points at 12 months, and adverse event (AE) reporting. Results: Among 160 patients (mean age, 76 [SD, 8] years; 74 [46%] women; mean baseline heart rate, 100/min [SD, 18/min]), 145 (91%) completed the trial and 150 (94%) were included in the analysis for the primary outcome. There was no significant difference in the primary outcome of normalized SF-36 PCS at 6 months (mean, 31.9 [SD, 11.7] for digoxin vs 29.7 [11.4] for bisoprolol; adjusted mean difference, 1.4 [95% CI, -1.1 to 3.8]; P = .28). Of the 17 secondary outcomes at 6 months, there were no significant between-group differences for 16 outcomes, including resting heart rate (a mean of 76.9/min [SD, 12.1/min] with digoxin vs a mean of 74.8/min [SD, 11.6/min] with bisoprolol; difference, 1.5/min [95% CI, -2.0 to 5.1/min]; P = .40). The modified EHRA class was significantly different between groups at 6 months; 53% of patients in the digoxin group reported a 2-class improvement vs 9% of patients in the bisoprolol group (adjusted odds ratio, 10.3 [95% CI, 4.0 to 26.6]; P < .001). At 12 months, 8 of 20 outcomes were significantly different (all favoring digoxin), with a median NT-proBNP level of 960 pg/mL (interquartile range, 626 to 1531 pg/mL) in the digoxin group vs 1250 pg/mL (interquartile range, 847 to 1890 pg/mL) in the bisoprolol group (ratio of geometric means, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.64 to 0.92]; P = .005). Adverse events were less common with digoxin; 20 patients (25%) in the digoxin group had at least 1 AE vs 51 patients (64%) in the bisoprolol group (P < .001). There were 29 treatment-related AEs and 16 serious AEs in the digoxin group vs 142 and 37, respectively, in the bisoprolol group. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with permanent atrial fibrillation and symptoms of heart failure treated with low-dose digoxin or bisoprolol, there was no statistically significant difference in quality of life at 6 months. These findings support potentially basing decisions about treatment on other end points. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02391337 and clinicaltrialsregister.eu Identifier: 2015-005043-13.

Bisoprolol transdermal patch for perioperative care of non-cardiac surgery in patients with hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy.

BACKGROUND: Non-cardiac surgery for hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy (HOCM) is considered to require meticulous perioperative care. ß-blockers are considered the first-line drugs for patients with HOCM, and they play a key role in preventing cardiovascular complications in perioperative care. The bisoprolol transdermal patch has recently become available in Japan, and it is useful for patients who are unable to take oral medication during perioperative care. The aim of this case series was to assess the hemodynamic features of patients with HOCM who used the bisoprolol transdermal patch during perioperative care for non-cardiac surgery. METHODS: Between August 2016 and August 2018, we retrospectively analyzed 10 consecutive cases of HOCM with the patients using the bisoprolol transdermal patch during perioperative care. Hemodynamic and echocardiographic features were evaluated before and after patients were switched from oral bisoprolol to transdermal patch therapy or started transdermal patch therapy as a new ß-blocker medication. In addition, cardiovascular complications (all-cause death, cardiac death, heart failure, ventricular tachycardia, and ventricular fibrillation) during the perioperative period were evaluated. RESULTS: There was no significant change in the patients' heart rate, blood pressure, ejection fraction, and pressure gradient in the left ventricle after switching from oral bisoprolol to the transdermal patch therapy. On the other hand, patients who started using the bisoprolol transdermal patch as a new ß-blocker medication tended to have a decreased heart rate and pressure gradient thereafter, but there was no significant difference in blood pressure or ejection fraction. No cardiovascular complications occurred during the perioperative period. CONCLUSIONS: We described the utilization of the bisoprolol transdermal patch during perioperative care for non-cardiac surgery in patients with HOCM. We determined that the hemodynamic features of these patients did not change significantly after switching to patch therapy. Further, initiation of the bisoprolol transdermal patch as a new ß-blocker medication sufficiently tended to decrease the pressure gradient. This unique approach can be an alternate treatment option for HOCM. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The registry was registered in the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000036703). The date of registration was 10/5/2019 and it was "Retrospectively registered".

Tolerability of Bisoprolol on Domiciliary Spirometry in COPD.

We investigated if serial domiciliary measures of spirometry were sensitive at detecting subtle effects of beta-2 blockade associated with bisoprolol in (n = 17) patients with COPD. After a two-week run in on inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and long acting beta-2 agonist (LABA): beclometasone/formoterol 100/6 µg, patients' started additional a long acting muscarinic receptor antagonist: (LAMA) Tiotropium 18 µg, with concomitant weekly dose titration of bisoprolol: 1.25-2.5-5 mg. After a further week of bisoprolol 5 mg, they were stepped back down to (ICS/LABA) for one week. Mean age was 64 years, mean FEV1 52% predicted, and mean FEV1/FVC ratio of 0.46. Compared to baseline am FEV1 of 1.38 L (95% CI 1.14-1.61 L), both ICS/LABA/LAMA and ICS/LABA in conjunction with bisoprolol showed statistically significant mean falls of 100 ml (1.28 L, 95% CI 1.03-1.53 L), and 120 ml, respectively (1.26 L, 95% CI 1.01-1.51 L); equalling and exceeding the MCID of 100 ml, respectively. These changes were disconnected from symptoms, reliever use and oxygen saturation.

Bisoprolol-induced thrombocytopenia: A case report.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Thrombocytopenia, not associated with bone marrow primary disease, is a common clinical problem. The possibility of drug-induced thrombocytopenia must be considered, especially in hospitalized patients. Drugs can cause thrombocytopenia by several mechanisms including direct bone marrow or other organ toxicity, and immune reactions. CASE DESCRIPTION: We describe a patient presenting with thrombocytopenia likely related to bisoprolol. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: We report a case of bisoprolol-induced thrombocytopenia which resolved with drug discontinuation and steroid therapy. We review the mechanisms involved in drug-induced immune thrombocytopenia.

Analysis of Clinical Efficacy and Adverse Effects of ß-Blocking Agents Used Clinically for Chronic Heart Failure.

Clinical efficacy and adverse effects of the ß-blocking agents, carvedilol, bisoprolol, and metoprolol were analyzed theoretically, and then compared quantitatively, for the purpose of determining their proper use for chronic heart failure. Initially, we evaluated occupancy binding to the ß1 and ß2 receptors (Фssß1 and Фssß2) by these drugs. Thereafter, we examined the relationship between Фssß1 values and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) increase rate to determine efficacy. The result showed that the efficacy with carvedilol could be attained with a lower Фssß1 value than the others. Therefore, we constructed a model under the assumption that ß-blocking agents exert both indirect action of LVEF increase through the ß1 receptor and direct action on ryanodine receptor 2. Using the model, it was suggested that these drugs have no differences in regard to the efficacy, while it was clarified theoretically that only carvedilol produces an effect that directly involves ryanodine receptor 2 at clinical doses. We also investigated decreases in heart rate and forced expiratory volume in 1 s as adverse effects of ß-blocking agents using a ternary complex model. It was indicated that carvedilol is less likely to induce a heart rate decrease. Meanwhile, it was also suggested that the risk of an asthmatic attack was higher for carvedilol at clinical doses. Our results are considered useful for selection of a proper ß-blocking agent and its administration at a reasonable dose for successful heart failure therapy.

Atrial Fibrillation After Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery: Can Ivabradine Reduce Its Occurrence?

INTRODUCTION: We compared the efficacy of perioperative ivabradine, bisoprolol, or both for prevention of postoperative atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). METHODS AND RESULTS: We enrolled 740 consecutive patients scheduled for elective CABG with/without valve surgery. Patients were assigned to 1 of 3 protocols: ivabradine given perioperatively (48 hours preoperatively, then 1 week postoperatively) 5 mg bid for 24 hours, then 7.5 mg bid thereafter in patients who can tolerate (group 1, n = 212); bisoprolol given perioperatively 5 mg bid (group 2, n = 288); or both drugs given perioperatively (ivabradine as before + bisoprolol 5 mg once daily) (group 3, n = 240). Cardiac rhythm was continuously monitored for 15 days postoperatively by ambulatory event recorder. Clinical follow-up for the occurrence of arrhythmias was performed for the next 15 days. The primary endpoint was the incidence of AF at 30-day follow-up. Mean age was 56.5 ± 8.9 years (30.5% females). All patients completed 30-day follow-up. AF occurred in 10.4%. The 3 groups were matched for most baseline characteristics, echocardiographic and angiographic data (P > 0.05 for all). The incidence of AF was significantly lower in group 3 (4.2%), compared with group 1 (15.5%), and group 2 (12.2%), (P < 0.001 both). The duration of stay in the intensive care unit was shorter in group 3 versus group 1 and 2 (P < 0.001 both). CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing elective CABG, adding ivabradine to ß-blockers during the perioperative period was associated with reduced incidence of AF at 30-day follow-up, compared with either medication alone.

Two Cases of LQT Syndrome with Malignant Syncope after Switch from Propranolol to Bisoprolol.

Propranolol in slow-release form has been the first-line treatment in long QT (LQT) until it was withdrawn from the market. We describe two cases where a switch to bisoprolol resulted in worsening of arrhythmia control: A man with LQT2, asymptomatic on propranolol, experienced syncope after switching to bisoprolol 5 mg daily. He switched back to propranolol and has remained asymptomatic during subsequent 12 months. A man with classical Jervell Lange-Nielsen syndrome, previous gangliectomy, and ICD implantation, switched to bisoprolol 5 mg daily. Four months later he experienced a tachycardia storm. He switched back to propranolol and has remained free from arrhythmias during subsequent 12 months.

[The evaluation of the prevalence of constipation at the Centre of clinical gerontology]. / Zhodnocení výskytu zácpy na oddeleních LDN.

UNLABELLED: Constipation is a disease which increases in the senior population and is a common complication for hospitalised patients. Among the risk factors are age, female gender, immobility, diet, fluid intake and polypharmacotherapy. The aim of the study was to analyse the prevalence of constipation according to the used drugs and known risk factors in a population with a high prevalence of constipation. In the department of clinical gerontology, observational prevalence point study was performed using a questionnaire involving 100 patients based on the patients subjective perception of constipation. Prevalence of constipation was determined according to the drug categories and individual drugs, gender, age, mobility, diagnosis, diet and fluid intake. There were 59 patients who suffered from constipation. A high prevalence of constipation was associated with the diet, the principal diagnosis, and mainly the use of drugs. Among the drugs associated with constipation were the calcium channel blockers of 21 patients out of 28, HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors of 22 patients out of 30, drugs for the treatment of increased urinary frequency and incontinence of 6 patients out of 6 and bisoprolol of 10 patients out of 11. Hospitalisation of seniors is connected with the high prevalence of constipation that is increased by the use of drugs that influence constipation. A change in the therapeutic value of drugs should be taken into consideration during the pharmacotherapy of this group of patients. KEY WORDS: constipation risks factors for constipation drug-induced constipation.

[Triple antianginal combinations in the treatment of elderly and senile patients with stable angina]. / Trekhkomponentnye kombinatsii antianginal'nykh preparatov v lechenii bol'nykh pozhilogo i starcheskogo vozrasta so stabil'noi stenokardiei napryazheniya.

AIM: To compare the efficiency and safety of antianginal therapy (AAT) using a combination of bisoprolol, ivabradine, and trimetazidine or ranolazine in elderly and senile patients with stable angina. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The study enrolled 107 patients aged 60 to 79 years with coronary heart disease and Functional Class II and III angina. When the patients taking bisoprolol 1.25-2.5 mg once daily and ivabradine 2.5-7.5 mg twice daily continued to have angina and/or silent myocardial ischemia, after randomization 54 patients received an additional 35 mg of trimetazidine twice a day and 53 patients had ranolazine 500 mg twice daily. A comprehensive clinical and instrumental study was conducted prior to randomization and after 6 months of triple AAT. RESULTS: The patients tolerated well both treatments that substantially improved the results of a treadmill exercise test. Trimetazidine reduced to a greater extent the duration of silent ST-segment depression, as evidenced by Holter monitoring. Trimetazidine and ranolazine comparably improved left ventricular systolic and diastolic function, large arterial structure and function, and quality of life in the patients. CONCLUSION: The combinations of the low-dose ß-blocker with ivabradine and trimetazidine or ranolazine may be used to treat refractory stable angina in elderly and senile patients. Trimetazidine is preferred due to its higher efficacy in treating silent myocardial ischemia and to its lower cost.

Efficacy and safety of bisoprolol fumarate compared with carvedilol in Japanese patients with chronic heart failure: results of the randomized, controlled, double-blind, Multistep Administration of bisoprolol IN Chronic Heart Failure II (MAIN-CHF II) study.

Bisoprolol fumarate (bisoprolol) is a ß-blocker widely used to treat chronic heart failure (CHF). However, few studies have compared its efficacy and safety with those of the widely used ß-blocker carvedilol in Japanese patients with CHF. We designed a confirmatory trial of bisoprolol using carvedilol as a control drug; however, the trial was discontinued after an off-label use of bisoprolol was approved during the study. Bisoprolol and carvedilol were administered for 32 weeks in 31 and 28 patients, respectively. The mean maintenance doses of bisoprolol and carvedilol were 3.3 and 13.6 mg/day, respectively, and the mean durations of treatment were 188.2 and 172.9 days, respectively. Heart-rate changes were similar in both groups. The mean changes from baseline to Week 32 in left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF) (bisoprolol vs carvedilol groups; 11.7 % ± 8.6 % vs 10.1 % ± 10.5 %), LV end-diastolic volume (-37.5 ± 48.7 vs -24.7 ± 29.4 ml), and LV end-systolic volume (-41.9 ± 43.0 vs -29.3 ± 25.9 ml) revealed a decrease in LV volume and an increase in LVEF in both groups. The cumulative event-free rate for a composite of cardiovascular death or admissions to hospital for worsening of CHF was 92.4 % and 94.7 % in the bisoprolol and carvedilol groups, respectively. Overall, 90.3 % and 85.7 % of patients were titrated up to the maintenance doses of bisoprolol and carvedilol, respectively. Bisoprolol, at half the dose used in other countries, is well tolerated and is as effective as carvedilol for treating Japanese patients with mild to moderate CHF.

Takotsubo cardiomyopathy after bisoprolol withdrawal and open appendectomy.

Takotsubo cardiomyopathy (TTC) is an acute cardiac syndrome characterized by transient regional wall motion abnormalities of the left ventricular apex or midventricle. Patients often present with chest pain or dyspnea, ST-segment elevation, and minor elevation of cardiac enzyme levels. TTC has been associated with severe emotional or physical stress such as severe burns, spinal cord injury, subarachnoid hemorrhage, multiple traumas, and surgery. We report a case of TTC in a 45-year-old woman who had undergone appendectomy 2 days before presenting to our institution.

[Efficacy and safety of bisoprololal in hypertensive patients with cardiovascular disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease].

Efficacy and safety of bisoprolol in hypertensive patients with cardiovascular disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. A comparative study on the efficacy and safety of bisoprolol and sustained release metoprolol succinate in patients with arterial hypertension (AH), cardiovascular disease (CVD) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) was conducted. High antihypertensive efficacy and good tolerability of bisoprolol and metoprolol succinate sustained release was shown in hypertensive patients with CVD and COPD. Bisoprolol versus metoprolol succinate sustained release was more effective in reducing the number of PVCs in hypertensive patients with CVD and COPD. After 12 weeks of therapy of bisoprolol there was a trend to reduce the number of patients with concentric left ventricular hypertrophy by 16.6 % (from 83.3% at baseline vs 66.7% after 12 weeks of treatment, p < 0.1). Despite the fact that the identified changes in respiratory function (ERF) in both groups did not reach certainty bisoprolol versus metoprolol succinate sustained-release was a lesser extent influenced the performance of ERF and more - to reduce dyspnea to the evaluation scales Borg and mMRC (delta% = -7.1 in fixed vs delta% = -3.8 in control groups and delta% = -5.6 vs delta% = 0 respectively) in patients with AH, CVD and COPD.

[Possible applications bisoprolol for heart rate control in young patients with connective tissue dysplasia].

To assess the efficacy and safety of bisoprolol to monitor heart rate (HR) in young patients with connective tissue dysplasia (CTD) examined 58 patients (22,3 + 3,47 years, 38 men). Bisoprolol drug was administered at an initial dose of 1.25 mg/day, with a further increase to 2.5 mg/day in 2 weeks, etc. to achieve the level of heart rate 59-69 beats/min. Average effective dose was 7.27 ± 2.08 mg/day. Target heart rate,improvement of health and the pumping function of the heart, reducing the activation of the sympathetic nervous system and of anxiety achieved the absolute majority of patients. During treatment unit observed transient manifestations of general weakness, headache, episodes of vertigo in the selection of the dose, cases of bradycardia and hypotension pathological registered for the time of ingestion. Thus, the use of mandatory bisoprolol gradual careful titration, starting with 1.25 mg/day as a means to control the heart rate in young patients with CTD with sinus tachycardia, the manifestations of autonomic nervous system dysfunction, safely and effectively in relation to adverse orthostatic reactions.

[Evaluating the effectiveness of a fixed combination of amlodipine and bisoprolol in ambulatory patients with arterial hypertension and ischemic heart disease].

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a fixed-term combination of ß-blocker bisoprolol and the calcium antagonist amlodipine in the outpatient treatment of patients with arterial hypertension (AH) and coronary heart disease (CHD). The study involved 100 patients with hypertension 1-3 first degree and CHD, which previous antihypertensive therapy was ineffective or irregular. Inclusion in the treatment regimen of amlodipine was associated with significant decrease in blood pressure (BP) with the achievement of the target level of systolic blood pressure of 90%, diastolic blood pressure--in 97% of cases after 4 weeks treatment. Analysis of the dynamics of the heart rate during the visits to the doctor and the patient diary data revealed a significant slowing on the background of the therapy, which is important for patients with coronary artery disease. In carrying out daily monitoring of ECG Holter dynamics observed a decrease in the average duration of episodes of depression segment ST on 50.5% (p < 0.05) and the number of ischemic episodes at 54.8% (p < 0.05). The use of fixed-dose combination of bisoprolol and amlodipine allowed to increase the compliance of patients with treatment 2.2 times.

Immediate Reaction to Propranolol: An Extremely Rare but Important Condition. A Case Report.

INTRODUCTION: Beta-blockers involve a group of drugs widely used nowadays. Propranolol was the first beta-blocker available in the market. It is the most prescribed first-generation betablocker and is commonly used. Beta-blocker allergy is extremely unusual. Only an isolated case of an urticaria reaction to propranolol has been published in 1975. CASE PRESENTATION: We present a 44-year-old man. In 2016, he was treated with a daily dose of 5 mg of propranolol prescribed for a diagnosis of essential tremor. On the third day of medical treatment, he experienced an episode of generalized urticaria directly related to the administration of propranolol. He continued with his habitual treatment and he had no other urticaria episodes. A drug provocation test was carried out with gradually increasing doses of the culprit drug. Thirty minutes after a total cumulative dose of 5 mg, the patient had several hives on the chest, abdominal region and arms. Two weeks later, a new drug provocation test was performed to bisoprolol as an alternative beta-blocker, with good tolerance. CONCLUSION: We describe a new case of urticaria secondary to propranolol, presenting as an immediate hypersensitivity reaction. Bisoprolol has been succesfully proved to be a safe option. Bisoprolol is a second-generation beta-blocker, it is available and commercialized worldwide, which makes it a good alternative.