Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Nebivolol for the Treatment of Essential Systemic Arterial Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

  • Systematic Review
  • Published:
American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Cardiovascular diseases are the main cause of mortality worldwide, and systemic arterial hypertension is associated with a large number of these cases. The objective of health professionals and health policies should be searching for the best therapeutics to control this disease. A recent consensus indicated that β-blockers have recently lost their place in initial indications for the treatment of systemic arterial hypertension and are now more indicated for the treatment of hypertension in association with other clinical situations such as angina, heart failure and arrhythmia; however, it is known that this approach was based on studies that evaluated older β-blockers such as atenolol.

Objective

The main objective of this study was to perform a systematic review with subsequent meta-analysis on the use of nebivolol for hypertensive disease treatment, comparing it with drugs of the main antihypertensive classes.

Methods

This systematic review was based on a search of the MEDLINE (via Pubmed), Scopus, Cochrane, International Pharmaceuticals Abstracts (IPA), and Lilacs databases for randomized and double-blind clinical trials. In addition, we also searched for gray literature studies, to 31 July 2015. Next, a cumulative meta-analysis was performed, with studies being added in a sequential manner, evaluating their impact on the combined effect. For this project, we only meta-analyzed direct comparisons of random effect.

Results

Overall, 981 clinical trials were included in this systematic review. After careful analysis, 34 randomized and double-blind clinical trials were included to investigate the efficacy of nebivolol on systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) control and adverse effects. The study population comprised 12,465 patients with systemic arterial hypertension (SAH) aged between 18 and 85 years; 17% of subjects were of Black ethnicity, approximately 55% were men, and almost 10% had diabetes. In SBP management, nebivolol was superior to other β-blockers and diuretics and showed no difference in efficacy when compared with angiotensin receptor blockers or calcium channel blockers. There were insufficient studies on angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors for adequate comparison of both SBP and DBP control. For DBP control, nebivolol was more efficient than other β-blockers, angiotensin receptor blockers, diuretics, and calcium channel blockers.

Discussion

Nebivolol is a third-generation β-blocker with additional capabilities to improve blood pressure levels in patients with arterial hypertension, because it acts by additional mechanisms such as endothelium-dependent vasodilation associated with l-arginine and oxide nitric acid, nitric oxide activity on smooth muscle cells, decreasing platelet aggregation, and leukocyte adhesion in the endothelium, decreasing oxidative stress. Although nebivolol has shown good results in controlling hypertension in this study (with few adverse events when compared with placebo treatment) and has an unquestionable benefit in individuals with heart failure (mainly with reduced ejection fraction), there is a lack of studies proving the benefit of this drug for controlling hypertension and reducing clinical outcomes such as cardiovascular (or general) mortality, acute myocardial infarction, or stroke.

Conclusions

Nebivolol demonstrated at least similar control of blood pressure levels in hypertensive individuals when compared with drugs of the most used classes. In addition, in relation to the control of arterial hypertension, studies with clinical outcomes should be performed to ensure the use of this drug in detriment to others with these well-established results.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Malachias MVB, Souza WKSB, Plavnik FL, Rodrigues CIS, Brandão AA, Neves MFT, et al. 7th Brazilian guidelines of hypertension. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2016;107:1–83.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Simão AF, Simão AF, Precoma DB, Andrade JP, Correa FH, Saraiva JF, Sociedade Brasileira de Cardiologia, et al. Brazilian guideline for cardiovascular prevention [in Portuguese]. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2013;101:1–63.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. James PA, Oparil S, Carter BL, Cushman WC, Dennison-Himmelfarb C, Handler J, et al. 2014 Evidence-based guideline for the management of high blood pressure in adults: report from the panel members appointed to the Eighth Joint National Committee (JNC-8). JAMA. 2014;311:507–20.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Abdulle A, Al-Junaibi, Nagelkerke N. High blood pressure and its association with body weight among children and adolescents in the United Arab Emirates. PLoS One. 2014;9:85129.

    Google Scholar 

  5. World Health Organization. 2018. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/the-top-10-causes-of-death. Accessed 9 July 2020.

  6. Holas O, Ezzo D. Nebivolol (bystolic), a novel beta blocker for hypertension. Drug Forecast. 2009;34:188–92.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Adeloye D, Basquill C. Estimating the prevalence and awareness rates of hypertension in Africa: a systematic analysis. PLoS One. 2014;9:1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Leung AA, Daskalopoulou SS, Dasgupta K, McBrien K, Butalia S, Zarnke KB, et al. Hypertension Canada. Hypertension Canada’s 2017 guidelines for diagnosis, risk assessment, prevention and treatment of hypertension in adults. Can J Cardiol. 2017;33:557–76.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ahn J, Kim HJ, Choi JI, Lee KN, Shim J, Ahn HS, et al. Effectiveness of beta-blockers depending on the genotype of congenital long-QT syndrome: a meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2017;12:1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Chrysant SG, Chrysant GS, Dimas B. Current and future status of beta-blockers in the treatment of hypertension. Clin Cardiol. 2008;31:249–52.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Cruikshank JM. The role of beta-blockers in the treatment of hypertension. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2017;956:149–66.

    Google Scholar 

  12. De Caterina AR, Leone AM. Why beta-blockers should not be used as first choice in uncomplicated hypertension. Am J Cardiol. 2010;105:1433–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Richard JR. Beta blockers and the cardiac complications of methamphetamine. Heart Lung Circ. 2017;26:416–7.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ibanez B, Raposeiras-Roubin S, Garcia-Ruiz JM. The swing of beta-blockers: time for a system reboot. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;69:2721–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bell V, Mitchell GF. Influence of vascular function and pulsatile hemodynamics on cardiac function. Curr Hypertens Rep. 2015;17:1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Cockcroft J. A review of the safety and efficacy of nebivolol in the mildly hypertensive patient. Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2007;3:909–17.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. George LB, Jerome DC, Edgar RG. The changing landscape of hypertension and the evolving role of vasodilatory beta-blockers. J Manag Care Pharm. 2007;13:2–24.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Marketou M, Gupta Y, Jain S, Vardas P. Differential metabolic effects of beta-blockers: an updated systematic review of nebivolol. Curr Hypertens Rep. 2017;19:1–10.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. Copenhagen: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Int J Surg. 2010;8:336–41.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Rotta I. Development and evaluation of a system for the characterization of clinical pharmaceutical services: DEPICT project. Curitiba: Clinics Hospital Library’s from Parana Federal’s University; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Ursini F, Leporini C, Bene F, D’Angelo S, Mauro D, Russo E, et al. Anti-TNF-alpha agents and endothelial function in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep. 2017;7:5346.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Rotta I. Comparative efficacy and safety of the use of topical antifungal agents in the treatment of dermatomycosis—meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Curitiba: Clinics Hospital Library’s from Parana Federal’s University; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JPT, Rothstein HR. Introduction to meta-analysis. Hoboken: Wiley; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Dal Negro RW, Tognella S, Mechelleto C. Pharmacokinetics of the effect of nebivolol 5 mg on airway patency in patients with mild to moderate bronchial asthma and arterial hypertension: a randomized, placebo-controlled study. Clin Drug Investig. 2002;22:197–204.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Dal Negro RW, Tognella S, Pomari C. Once-daily nebivolol 5 mg does not reduce airway patency in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and arterial hypertension. Clin Drug Investig. 2002;22:361–7.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Dhakam YZ, McEniery CM, Burton T, Brown MJ, Wilkinson IBA. A comparison of atenolol and nebivolol in isolated systolic hypertension. J Hypertens. 2008;26:351–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Greathouse M. Nebivolol efficacy and safety in patients with stage I–II hypertension. Clin Cardiol. 2010;33:E20–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Neutel JM, Smith DHG, Gradman AH. Adding nebivolol to ongoing antihypertensive therapy improves blood pressure and response rates in patients with uncontrolled stage I–II hypertension. J Hum Hypertens. 2010;24:64–73.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Punzi H, Lewin A, Lukíc T, Goodin T, Chen W. Efficacy and safety of nebivolol in Hispanics with stage I-II hypertension: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Ther Adv Cardiovasc Dis. 2010;4:349–57.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Saunders E, Smith WB, DeSalvo KB, Sullivan WA. The efficacy and tolerability of nebivolol in hypertensive African American patients. J Clin Hypertens. 2007;9:866–75.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Weiss RJ, Stapff M, Lin Y. Placebo effect and efficacy of nebivolol in patients with hypertension not controlled with lisinopril or losartan: a phase IV, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs. 2013;13:129–40.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Weiss RJ, Weber MA, Carr AA, Sullivan WA. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel-group study to assess the efficacy and safety of nebivolol, a novel beta-blocker, in patients with mild to moderate hypertension. J Clin Hypertens. 2007;9:667–76.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Deedwania P, Shea J, Chen W, Brener L. Effects of add-on nebivolol on blood pressure and glucose parameters in hypertensive patients with prediabetes. J Clin Hypertens. 2013;15:270–8.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Giles TD, Khan BV, Lato J, Brener L, Ma Y, Lukic T. Nebivolol monotherapy in younger adults (younger than 55 years) with hypertension: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial. J Clin Hypertens. 2013;15:687–93.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Lewin A, Punzy H, Luo X, Stapff M. Nebivolol monotherapy for patients with systolic stage II Hypertension: results of randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Clin Ther. 2013;35:142–52.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Stears AJ, Woods SH, Watts MM, Burton TJ, Graggaber J, Mir FA, et al. A double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial comparing the effects of amiloride and hydrochlorothiazide on glucose tolerance in patients with essential hypertension. Hypertension. 2012;59:934–42.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Weber MA, Basile J, Stapff M, Khan B, Zhou D. Blood pressure effects of combined beta-blocker and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor therapy compared with the individual agents: a placebo-controlled study with nebivolol and lisinopril. J Clin Hypertens. 2012;14:588–92.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Bhosale VV, Inamdar SC, Karande VB, Burute SR, Murthy MB, Ghatak A. Beneficial effects of nebivolol in comparison with atenolol with atenolol on safety and tolerability in essential hypertension. J Clin Diagn Res. 2014;8:HCO1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Grassi G, Trevano FQ, Facchini A, Toutouzas T, Chanu B, Mancia G. Efficacy and tolerability profile of nebivolol vs atenolol in mild-to-moderate essential hypertension: results of a double-blind randomized multicenter trial. Blood Press Suppl. 2003;12:35–40.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Kamp O, Sieswerda GT, Visser CA. Comparison of effects on systolic and diastolic left ventricular function of nebivolol versus atenolol in patients with uncomplicated essential hypertension. Am J Cardiol. 2003;92:344–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Pasini AF, Garbin U, Nava MC, Stranieri C, Davoli A, Sawamura T, et al. Nebivolol decreases oxidative stress in essential hypertensive patients and increases nitric oxide by reducing its oxidative inactivation. J Hypertens. 2005;23:589–96.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Pasini AF, Garbin U, Stranieri C, Boccioletti V, Mozzini C, Manfro S, et al. Nebivolol treatment reduces serum levels of asymmetric dimethylarginine and improves endothelial dysfunction in essential hypertensive patients. Am J Hypertens. 2008;21:1251–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Susmitha V, Naganjani CV. Comparative study of nebivolol versus atenolol in the treatment of mild and moderate essential hypertension. Int J Pharm Bio Sci. 2013;4:334–8.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Espinola-Klein C, Weisser G, Jagodzinski A, Savvidis S, Warnholtz A, Ostad MA, et al. Beta-blockers in patients with intermittent claudication and arterial hypertension: results from the nebivolol or metoprolol in arterial occlusive disease trial. Hypertension. 2011;58:148–54.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Fici F, Celik T, Balta S, Iyisoy A, Unlu M, Demitkol S, et al. Comparative effects of nebivolol and metoprolol on red cell distribution width and neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio in patients with newly diagnosed essential hypertension. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 2013;62:388–93.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Hayek SS, Poole JC, Neuman R, Morris AA, Khayata M, Kavtaradze N, et al. Differential effects of nebivolol and metoprolol on arterial stiffness, circulating progenitor cells, and oxidative stress. J Am Soc Hypertens. 2015;9:206–13.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Kampus P, Serg M, Kals J, Zagura M, Muda P, Karu K, et al. Differential effects of nebivolol and metoprolol on central aortic pressure and left ventricular wall thickness. Hypertension. 2011;57:1122–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Sayin MR, Aydin M, Dogan SM, Karabag T, Cetiner MA, Aktop Z. Aortic elastic properties: effects of carvedilol versus nebivolol. Herz. 2012;38:299–305.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Serg M, Kampus P, Kals J, Zagura M, Zilmer M, Zilmer K, et al. Nebivolol and metoprolol: long-term effects on inflammation and oxidative stress in essential hypertension. Scand J Clin Lab Investig. 2012;72:427–32.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Heitmann J, Greulich T, Reinke C, Koehler U, Vogelmeier C, Becker HF, et al. Comparison of the effects of nebivolol and valsartan on BP reduction and sleep apnea activity in patients with essential hypertension and OSA. Curr Med Res Opin. 2010;26:1925–32.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Izzo JL, Khan SU, Saleem O, Osmond PJ. Ambulatory 24-hour cardiac oxygen consumption and blood pressure-heart rate variability: effects of nebivolol and valsartan alone and in combination. J Am Soc Hypertens. 2015;9(7):526–35.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Van Bortel LM, Bulpitt CJ, Fici F. Quality of life and antihypertensive effect with nebivolol and losartan. Am J Hypertens. 2005;18:1060–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Diehm C, Pittrow D, Lawall H. Effect of nebivolol vs. hydrochrolothiazide on the walking capacity in hypertensive patients with intermittent claudication. J Hypertens. 2011;29:1448–56.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Giles TD, Weber MA, Basile J, Gradman AH, Bharucha DB, Chen W, NAC-MD-01 Study Investigators, et al. Efficacy and safety of nebivolol and valsartan as fixed-dose combination in hypertension: a randomized, multicenter study. Lancet. 2014;383:1889–98.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Lacourciere Y, Poirier L, Lefebvre J, Provencher P, Arnott W. Comparative effects of a new cardioselective beta-blocker nebivolol and nifedipine sustained-release on 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure and plasma lipoproteins. J Clin Pharmacol. 1992;32:660–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. van Merode T, van Bortel LM, Smeets FA, Mooij JM, Bohm RO, Rahn KH, et al. Verapamil and nebivolol improve carotid artery distensibility in hypertensive patients. J Hypertens. 1989;7:S262–3.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Rosei EA, Rizzoni D, Comini S, Boari G, Nebivolol-Lisinopril Study Group. Evaluation of the efficacy and tolerability of nebivolol versus lisinopril in the treatment of essential arterial hypertension: a randomized, multicenter, double-blind study. Blood Press Suppl. 2003;1:30–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Messerli FH, Grossman E, Glodbourt U. Are beta-blockers efficacious as first-line therapy for hypertension in the elderly? JAMA. 1998;279:903–7.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Larochelle P, Tobe SW, Lacourciere Y. Beta-blocker in hypertension: studies and meta-analysis over the years. Can J Cardiol. 2014;30:S16–22.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Wiysonge CS, Bradley HA, Volmink J, Mayosi BM, Mbewu A, Opie LH. Beta-blockers for hypertension. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;(11):CD002003.

  62. Khan N, Mcalister FA. Re-examining the efficacy of beta-blockers for the treatment of hypertension: a meta-analysis. CMAJ. 2006;174:1737–42.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Law MR, Morris JK, Wald DS. Use of blood pressure-lowering drugs in the prevention of cardiovascular disease: meta-analysis of randomized trials in the context of expectations from prospective epidemiological studies. BJM. 2009;338:1665–84.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Evangelista S, Garbin U, Pasini AF, Stranieri C, Boccioletti V, Cominacini L. Effect of dl-nebivolol, its enantiomers and metabolites on the intracellular production of superoxide and nitric oxide in human endothelial cells. Pharmacol Res. 2007;55:303–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Uhlíř O, Fejfuša M, Havránek K, Lefflerová K, Vojáček J, Widimský J, Winterová J, Zeman K. Nebivolol Versus Metoprolol in the Treatment of Hypertension. Drug Investigation. 1991;3(S1):107–10.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank their families for their support, and are always grateful to the Department of Pos Graduation in Internal Medicine and the Department of Cardiology Department of HC/UFPR.

Funding

No external funding was used in the preparation of this review.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cardiology-Arterial Hypertension Department, Hospital de Clinicas from Universidade Federal do Parana (HC/UFPR), General Carneiro, 181, Curitiba, Paraná, 80060-900, Brazil

    Vinícius Bocchino Seleme, Gustavo Lenci Marques, Antonio Eduardo Matoso Mendes, Inajara Rotta, Emilton Lima Júnior & Claudio L. Pereira da Cunha

  2. Department of Cardiology, Hospital Nossa Senhora das Graças, Alcides Munhoz, 433, Curitiba, Paraná, 80810-040, Brazil

    Milena Pereira

  3. Positivo University, R. Prof. Pedro Viriato Parigot de Souza, 5300, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil

    Vinícius Bocchino Seleme

Authors
  1. Vinícius Bocchino Seleme
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gustavo Lenci Marques
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Antonio Eduardo Matoso Mendes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Inajara Rotta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Milena Pereira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Emilton Lima Júnior
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Claudio L. Pereira da Cunha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vinícius Bocchino Seleme.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Vinícius Bocchino Seleme, Gustavo Lenci Marques, Antonio Eduardo Matoso Mendes, Inajara Rotta, Milena Pereira, Emilton Lima Júnior, and Claudio L. Pereira da Cunha declare they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with humans or animals subjects performed by any of the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Seleme, V.B., Marques, G.L., Mendes, A.E.M. et al. Nebivolol for the Treatment of Essential Systemic Arterial Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs 21, 165–180 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40256-020-00422-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40256-020-00422-0

Search

Navigation