Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Choosing the Right β-Blocker

A Guide to Selection

  • Practical Therapeutics
  • Published:
Drugs Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

β-Blockers have been in clinical use for 30 years, and have an accepted role in (among others) the treatment of high blood pressure, the secondary prevention of myocardial infarction and the treatment of arrhythmias. Their place in the treatment of heart failure is currently under investigation. The drugs available in the 1970s and early 1980s were subjected to intense investigation. A new generation of β-blockers, including some such as carvedilol and bucindolol, with vas-odilating properties, is now appearing. As yet these later agents have not been the subject of large clinical trials.

Clinical practice involves the treatment of individual patients with defined dosages of particular drugs. It is, therefore, not acceptable to base practice on theories derived from the clinical pharmacology of a particular drug, on the results of small trials or on a meta-analysis of results from a number of trials that were individually inadequate. Clinical practice must follow the results of large-scale trials in defined populations.

The major trials in hypertension, myocardial infarction, arrhythmias and heart failure provide the best evidence for the use of individual β-blockers in each of these clinical situations. In patients with high blood pressure, β-blockers do not seem to have any particular advantage over other hypotensive agents. In myocardial infarction, relatively late use of a β-blocker undoubtedly reduces fatality, though the value of early treatment is less clear. β-Blockers are not powerful antiarrhythmics, but they do appear to prevent sudden death. Their possible role in heart failure is perhaps the most interesting current field of β-blocker research.

There are very few comparative studies of β-blockers, and it is difficult to make precise recommendations. None of the new generation of β-blockers has yet been used in a trial that is large enough trial for any of them to be accepted for routine use in preference to older drugs. The use of individual β-blockers, as with any drug, should follow the results of clinical trials. Propranolol and atenolol have been studied most intensely in hypertension. For secondary prevention of myocardial infarction, the evidence is best for timolol. Sotalol is probably the best antiarrhythmic among the β-blockers. Whether any individual β-blocker is best for heart failure remains to be seen.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Black JW, Crowther AF, Shanks RG, et al. A new adrenergic beta-receptor antagonist. Lancet 1964; 1: 1080

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Black JW, Stephenson JS. Pharmacology of a new adrenergic beta-receptor-blocking compound (nethalide). Lancet 1962; 2: 311

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Prichard BNC. Hypotensive action of pronethalol. BMJ 1964; 1: 1227–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Prichard BNC, Gillam GM. Use of propranolol in treatment of hypertension. Drugs 1983; 25 Suppl. 2: 5–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Gillam PMS, Prichard BNC. Use of propranolol in angina pectoris. BMJ 1965; 2: 337–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Snow PJD. Effect of propranolol in myocardial infarction. Lancet 1965; 2: 551–3

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Turner P. Which ancillary properties of beta-adrenoceptor blocking drugs influence their therapeutic or adverse effects?: a review. J R Soc Med 1991; 84: 672–4

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Yedinak KC. Formulary considerations in selection of beta-blockers. PharmacoEconomics 1993; 4(2): 104–21

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. McAreavey D, Vermeulen R, Robertson JIS. Newer beta blockers and the treatment of hypertension. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther 1991; 5: 577–88

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Prichard BNC. Beta-blocking agents with vasodilating action. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1992; 19 Suppl. 1: S1–S4

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. German and Austrian Xamoterol Study Group. Double-blind placebo-controlled comparison of digoxin and xamoterol in chronic heart failure. Lancet 1988; 1: 489–93

    Google Scholar 

  12. McTavish D, Campoli-Richards D, Sorkin EM. Carvedilol: a review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmokinetic properties, and therapeutic efficacy. Drugs 1993; 45(2); 232–58

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Yue T-L, Cheng H-Y, Lysko PG, et al. Carvedilol, a new vasodilator and beta adrenoceptor antagonist, is an antioxidant and free radical scavenger. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1992; 263(1): 92–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Sung C-P, Arleth AJ, Ohlstein EH. Carvedilol inhibits vascular smooth muscle cell proliferation. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1993; 21: 221–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Hamburger SA, Barone FC, Feuerstein GZ, et al. Carvedilol (Kredex) reduces infarct size in a canine model of acute myocardial infarction. Pharmacology 1991; 43: 113–20

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Young PH, on behalf of the INT-CAR-07 (UK) Study Group. A comparison of carvedilol with atenolol in the treatment of mild-to-moderate essential hypertension. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1992; 19 Suppl. l: S82–5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Omvik P, Lund-Johansen P. Long-term hemodynamic effects at rest and during exercise of newer antihypertensive agents and salt restriction in essential hypertension: review of epanolol, doxazosin, amlodipine, feldopine, diltiazem, lisinopril, dilevalol, carvedilol, and ketanserin. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther 1993; 7: 193–206

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Ruf G, Trenk D, Jahnchen E, et al. Determination of the anti-ischemic activity of nebivolol in comparison with atenolol. Int J Cardiol 1994; 43: 279–85

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Frishman WH, Flenbaum W, Schoenberger J, et al. Celiprolol in systemic hypertension. Am J Cardiol 1989; 63: 839–42

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Lamon KD. Clinical safety and efficacy of celiprolol. Am Heart J 1991; 121: 683–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Veterans Administration Cooperative Study Group on Antihypertensive Agents. Effects of treatment on morbidity in hypertension, II: results in patients with diastolic blood pressure averaging 90 through 114 mmHg. JAMA 1970; 213: 1143–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Veterans Administration Cooperative Study Group on Antihypertensive Agents. Effects of treatment on morbidity in hypertension: results in patients with diastolic blood pressures averaging 115 though 129 mmHg. JAMA 1979; 202: 1028–34

    Google Scholar 

  23. Hypertension Detection and Follow-up Program Cooperative Group. Five-year findings of the Hypertension Detection and Follow-up Program, 1: reduction in mortality of persons with high blood pressure, including mild hypertension. JAMA 1979; 242: 2562–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Helgeland A. The Oslo Study — treatment of mild hypertension: a five year controlled drug trial. Am J Med 1980; 69: 725–32

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. The Australian Therapeutic Trial in Mild Hypertension. Report by the Management Committee. Lancet 1980; 1: 1261–7

    Google Scholar 

  26. Grimm RH, Cohen JD, Smith W McF, et al. and the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial Research Group. Hypertension management in the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial (MRFIT): six-year intervention results for men in special intervention and usual care groups. Arch Intern Med 1985; 145: 1191–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. European Working Party on High Blood Pressure in the Elderly. Mortality and morbidity results from the European Working Party on High Blood Pressure in the Elderly Trial. Lancet 1985; 1: 1349–54

    Google Scholar 

  28. The IPPPSH Collaborative Group. Cardiovascular risk and risk factors in a randomized trial of treatment based on the beta-blocker oxprenolol: the International Prospective Primary Prevention Study in Hypertension (IPPPSH). J Hypertens 1985; 3: 379–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Medical Research Council Working Party. MRC trial of treatment of mild hypertension: principal results. BMJ 1985; 291: 97–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Coope J, Warrender TS. Randomised trial of treatment of hypertension in the elderly in primary care. BMJ 1985; 293: 1145–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Wilhelmsen L, Berglund G, Elmfeldt D. Beta blockers versus diuretics in hypertensive men: main results from the HAP-PHY Trial. J Hypertens 1987; 5: 561–72

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. SHEP Cooperative Research Group. Prevention of stroke by antihypertensive drug treatment in older persons with isolated systolic hypertension: final results of the Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program (SHEP). JAMA 1991; 265: 3255–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Dahlof B, Lindholm LH, Hansson L, et al. Morbidity and mortality in the Swedish Trial in Old Patients with Hypertension (STOP-Hypertension). Lancet 1991; 338: 1281–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. MRC Working Party. Medical Research Council trial of treatment of hypertension in older adults: principal results. BMJ 1992; 304: 405–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Report of Medical Research Council. Working Party on Mild to Moderate Hypertension: adverse reactions to bendrofluazide and propranolol for the treatment of mild hypertension. Lancet 1981; 2: 539–43

    Google Scholar 

  36. Yusuf S, Peto R, Lewis J, et al. Beta blockade during and after myocardial infarction: an overview of the randomized trials. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 1985; 27: 335–71

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Norris RM, Caughey DE, Scott PJ. Trial of propranolol in acute myocardial infarction. BMJ 1968; 1: 398–400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Barber JM, Boyle D McC, Chaturvedi NC, et al. Practolol in acute myocardial infarction. Acta Med Scand 1976; 199 Suppl. 587: 213–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Andersen MP, Bechsgaard P, Frederiksen J, et al. Effect of al-prenolol on mortality among patients with definite or suspected acute myocardial infarction: preliminary results. Lancet 1979; 2: 865–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Wilcox RG, Rowley JM, Hampton JR, et al. Randomised placebo-controlled trial comparing oxprenolol with disopyramide phosphate in immediate treatment of suspected myocardial infarction. Lancet 1980; 2: 765–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Wilcox RG, Roland JM, Banks DC, et al. Randomised trial comparing propranolol with atenolol in immediate treatment of suspected myocardial infarction. BMJ 1980; 1: 885–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Hjalmarson A, Elmfeldt D, Herlitz J, et al. Effect on mortality of metoprolol in acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 1981; 2: 823–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. The MIAMI Trial Research Group. Metoprolol in acute myocardial infarction (MIAMI): a randomised placebo-controlled international trial. Eur Heart J 1985; 6: 199–226

    Google Scholar 

  44. ISIS-1 (First International Study of Infarct Survival) Collaborative Group. Randomised trial of intravenous atenolol among 16 027 cases of suspected acute myocardial infarction: ISIS-1. Lancet 1986; 2: 57–66

    Google Scholar 

  45. Wilhelmsson C, Vedin JA, Wilhelmsen I, et al. Reduction of sudden deaths after myocardial infarction by treatment with alprenolol. Lancet 1974; 92: 1157–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. A Multicentre International Study. Improvement in prognosis of myocardial infarction by long-term beta-adrenoreceptor blockade using practolol. BMJ 1975; 3: 735–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Baber NS, Evans DW, Howitt G, et al. Multicentre post-infarction trial of propranolol in 49 hospitals in the United Kingdom, Italy and Yugoslavia. Br Heart J 1980; 44: 96–100

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. The Norwegian Multicenter Study Group. Timolol-induced reduction in mortality and reinfarction in patients surviving acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1981; 304: 801–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Beta-Blocker Heart Attack Trial Research Group. Arandomized trial of propranolol in patients with acute myocardial infarction. JAMA 1982; 247: 1707–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Coronary Prevention Research Group. An early intervention secondary prevention study with oxprenolol following myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J 1981; 2: 389–93

    Google Scholar 

  51. Taylor SH, Silke B, Ebbutt A, et al. A long-term prevention study with oxprenolol in coronary heart disease. N Engl J Med 1982; 307: 1293–1301

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Julian DG, Prescott RJ, Jackson FS, et al. Controlled trial of sotalol for one year after myocardial infarction. Lancet 1982; 1: 1142–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Hansteen V, Moinichen E, Lorentsen, et al. One year’s treatment with propranolol after myocardial infarction: preliminary report of Norwegian multicentre trial. BMJ 1982; 284: 155–60

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. The European Infarction Study Group. A secondary prevention study with slow release oxprenolol after myocardial infarction: morbidity and mortality. Eur Heart J 1984; 5; 189–202

    Google Scholar 

  55. Olsson G, Rehnqvist N, Sjorgren A, et al. Long-term treatment with metoprolol after myocardial infarction: effect on 3 year mortality and morbidity. J Am Coll Cardiol 1984; 5: 1428–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Australian and Swedish Pindolol Study Group: the effect of pindolol on the two years mortality after complicated myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J 1983; 4: 367–375

    Google Scholar 

  57. Poissel J-P, Leizorovicz A, Picolet H, et al., for the APSI Investigators. Secondary prevention after high-risk acute myocardial infarction with low dose acebutolol. Am J Cardiol 1990; 66: 251–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. The TIMI Study Group. Comparison of invasive and conservative strategies after treatment with intravenous tissue plasminogen activator in acute myocardial infarction: results of the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) Phase II Trial. N Engl J Med 1989; 320: 618–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Van de Werf F, Janssens L, Brzostek T, et al. Short term effects of early intravenous treatment with a beta-adrenergic blocking agent or a specific bradycardiac agent in patients with acute myocardial infarction receiving thrombolytic therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993; 22: 407–16

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. ISIS-2 (Second International Study of Infarct Survival) Collaborative Group. Randomised trial of intravenous streptokinase, oral aspirin, both, or neither among 17 187 cases of suspected acute myocardial infarction: ISIS-a2. Lancet 1988; 2: 349–60

    Google Scholar 

  61. Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio Delia Streptochinasi Nell’Infarto Miocardico (GISSI). Effectiveness of intravenous thrombolytic treatment in acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 1986; 1: 397–401

    Google Scholar 

  62. Wilcox RG, Von der Lippe G, Olsson CG, et al., for the Anglo-Scandinavian Study of Early Thrombolysis. Effects of al-teplase in acute myocardial infarction: 6-month results from the ASSET study. Lancet 1990; 335: 1175–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. GISSI-2: a factorial randomised trial of alteplase versus strep-tokinase and heparin versus no heparin among 12 490 patients with acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 1990; 336: 65–71

    Google Scholar 

  64. The GUSTO Investigators. An international randomized trial comparing four thrombolytic strategies for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 673–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial (CAST) Investigators. Preliminary report: effect of encainide and flecainide on mortality in a randomized trial of arrhythmia suppression after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1989; 321: 406–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Olsson G, Rehnqvist N, Sjogren A, et al. Long-term treatment with metoprolol after myocardial infarction: effect on 3 year mortality and morbidity. J Am Coll Cardiol 1985; 5: 1428–37

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Bigger JT, Coromilas J. How do beta-blockers protect after myocardial infarction? Ann Intern Med 1984; 101(2): 256–8

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Steinbeck G, Andresen D, Bach P, et al. A comparison of electro-physiologically guided antiarrhythmic drug therapy with beta-blocker therapy in patients with symptomatic, sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias. N Engl J Med 1992; 327: 987–92

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Yusuf S, Sleight P, Rossi P, et al. Reduction in infarct size, arrhythmias and chest pain by early intravenous beta blockade in suspected acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 1983; 67 Suppl. 1: I-32–I-35

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Rossi PR, Yusuf S, Ramsdale D, et al. Reduction of ventricular arrhythmias by early intravenous atenolol in suspected acute myocardial infarction. BMJ 1983; 286: 506–10

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Murray DP, Murray RG, Littler WA. The effects of metoprolol given early in acute myocardial infarction on ventricular arrhythmias. Eur Heart J 1986; 7: 217–22

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Ryden L, Ariniego R, Amman K, et al. A double-blind trial of metoprolol in acute myocardial infarction: effects on ventricular tachyarrhythmias. N Engl J Med 1983; 308: 614–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Roland JM, Wilcox RG, Banks DC, et al. Effect of beta blockers on arrhythmias during six weeks after suspected myocardial infarction. BMJ 1979; 2: 518–21

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Bethge K-P, Andresen D, Boissel J-P, et al., for the European Infarction Study Group. Effect of oxprenolol on ventricular arrhythmias: the European Infarction Study experience. J Am Coll Cardiol 1985; 6: 963–72

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Leibowitz D. Sotalol: a novel beta-blocker with class III anti-arrhythmic activity. J Clin Pharmacol 1993; 33: 508–12

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Edvardsson N. Comparison of class I and class III action in atrial fibrillation. Eur Heart J 1993; 14 Suppl. H: 62–6

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Murgatroyd FD, Camm AJ. Atrial arrhythmias. Lancet 1993; 341: 1317–22

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Scott Millar RN. Efficacy of sotalol in controlling reentrant supraventricular tachycardias. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther 1990; 4: 625–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Mason JW, for the Electrophysiologic Study versus Electrocar-diographic Monitoring Investigators. A comparison of seven antiarrhythmic drugs in patients with ventricular tachyarrhythmias. N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 452–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Shenasa M, Borggrefe M, Haverkamp W, et al. Ventricular tachycardia. Lancet 1993; 342: 1512–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Ben-David J, Zipes DP. Torsades de pointes and proarrhythmia. Lancet 1993; 341: 1578–82

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Hohnloser SH, Zabel M, van de Loo A, et al. Efficacy and safety of sotalol in patients with complex ventricular arrhythmias. Int J Cardiol 1992; 37: 283–91

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  83. Waagstein F, Hjalmarson A, Varnauskas E, et al. Effect of chronic beta-adrenergic receptor blockade in congestive car-diomyopathy. Br Heart J 1975; 37: 1022–36

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  84. Packer M, Carver JR, Rodeheffer RJ, et al., for the PROMISE Study Research Group. Effect of oral milrinone on mortality in severe chronic heart failure. N Engl J Med 1991; 325: 1468–75

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Bristow MR, Ginsburg R, Minobe W, et al. Decreased catechol-amine sensitivity and beta-adrenergic-receptor density in failing human hearts. N Engl J Med 1982; 307: 205–11

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Swedberg K, Hjalmarson A, Waagstein F, et al. Adverse effects of beta-blockade withdrawal in patients with congestive car-diomyopathy. Br Heart J 1980; 44: 134–42

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  87. Meinertz T, Hofmann T, Zehender M, et al. Beta-blocking agents vs. antiarrhythmic interventions in heart failure complicated by arrhythmias. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1990; 16 Suppl. 5: S-151–S-157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Gilbert EM, Anderson JL, Deitchman D, et al. Long-term beta-blocker vasodilator therapy improves cardiac function in idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy: a double-blind, randomized study of bucindolol versus placebo. Am J Med 1990; 88: 223–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. Clarkson P, Wheeldon NM, McDonald TM. Left ventricular diastolic dysfunction. Q J Med 1994; 87: 142–8

    Google Scholar 

  90. Chadda K, Goldstein S, Byrington R, et al. Effect of propranolol after acute myocardial infarction in patients with congestive heart failure. Circulation 1986; 73: 503–10

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. Ikram H, Fitzpatrick D. Double-blind trial of chronic oral beta blockade in congestive cardiomyopathy. Lancet 1981; 2: 490–2

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  92. Currie PJ, Kelly MJ, McKenzie A, et al. Oral beta-adrenergic blockade with metoprolol in chronic severe dilated cardiomyopathy. J Am Coll Cardiol 1984; 3: 203–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  93. Engelmeier RS, O’Connel JB, Walsh R, et al. Improvement in symptoms and exercise tolerance by metoprolol in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Circulation 1985; 72(3): 536–46

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  94. Anderson JL, Lutz JR, Gilbert EM, et al. A randomized trial of low-dose beta-blockade therapy for idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy. Am J Cardiol 1984; 55: 471–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Pollock SG, Lystash J, Tedesco C, et al. Usefulness of bucindolol in congestive heart failure. Am J Cardiol 1990; 66: 603–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Leung WH, Lau CP, Wong CK, et al. Improvement in exercise performance and hemodynamics by labetolol in patients with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy. Am Heart J 1990; 119: 884–90

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. Woodley SL, Gilbert EM, Anderson JL, et al. Beta blockade with bucindolol in heart failure caused by ischemic versus idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy. Circulation 1991; 84: 2426–41

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  98. Fisher ML, Gottlieb SS, Hamilton B, et al. Beneficial effects of metoprolol in congestive heart failure associated with coronary artery disease: a randomized trial [abstract]. Circulation 1991; 84 Suppl. II: II312

    Google Scholar 

  99. Paolisso G, Gambardella A, Marrazzo G, et al. Metabolic and cardiovascular benefits deriving from beta-adrenergic blockade in chronic congestive heart failure. Am Heart J 1992; 123: 103–10

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  100. Olsen SL, Yanowitz FG, Gilbert AM, et al. Beta-blocker related improvement in submaximal exercise tolerance in heart failure from idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy [abstract]. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992; 19: 146

    Google Scholar 

  101. Waagstein F, Bristow MR, Swedberg K, et al., for the Metoprolol in Dilated Cardiomyopathy (MDC) Trial Study Group. Beneficial effects of metoprolol in idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy. Lancet 1993; 342: 1441–56

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  102. Wisenbaugh T, Katz I, Davis J, et al. Long-term (3 month) effects of a new beta-blocker (nebivolol) on cardiac performance in dilated cardiomyopathy. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993; 21: 1094–1100

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  103. Waagstein F. Beta blockers in heart failure. Cardiology 1993; 82 Suppl. 3: 13–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Doughty RN, MacMahon S, Sharpe N. Beta-blockers in heart failure: promising or proved? J Am Coll Cardiol 1994; 23: 814–21

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  105. Waagstein F, Caidahl K, Wallentin I, et al. Long-term beta-blockade in dilated cardiomyopathy: effects of short- and long-term metoprolol treatment followed by withdrawal and readministration of metoprolol. Circulation 1989; 80: 551–63

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  106. DasGupta P, Broadhurst P, Lahiri A. The effects of intravenous carvedilol, a new multiple action vasodilatory beta-blocker, in congestive heart failure. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1991; 18 Suppl. 4: S12–6

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Bristow MR, Olsen S, Larrabee P, et al. The acute effects of carvedilol and metoprolol in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy. [abstract]. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993; 21: 314A

    Google Scholar 

  108. The Xamoterol in Severe Heart Failure Study Group. Xamoterol in severe heart failure. Lancet 1990; 336: 1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cardiovascular Medicine, Queen’s Medical Centre, University Hospital, Nottingham, NG7 2UH, England

    John R. Hampton (Professor of Cardiology)

Authors
  1. John R. Hampton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hampton, J.R. Choosing the Right β-Blocker. Drugs 48, 549–568 (1994). https://doi.org/10.2165/00003495-199448040-00005

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00003495-199448040-00005

Keywords

Search

Navigation