Summary
In a randomized, blind crossover study in 14 hypertensive patients with asthma, involving placebo and chronically administered (3 weeks) equipotent beta1-blocking doses of atenolol 100 mg once daily and metoprolol 100 mg bid, atenolol and metoprolol produced a similar fall in blood pressure. Atenolol caused significantly (p<0.05) less bronchospasm in terms of fewer asthmatic attacks, more asthma-free days, less frequent sensations of moderate to very severe, wheeziness and less effect on the evening peak flow rate. It was concluded that, in patients with asthma who require beta blockade, atenolol is the preferred agent, co-prescribed with a beta2 stimulant.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Wale JL, Fitzgerald JD (1977) Assessment and clinical implications of cardioselectivity. Proc R Soc Med 70 (Suppl 5): 45–47
Benson MK, Berrill WT, Cruickshank JM, Sterling GS (1978) A comparison of four β-adrenoceptor antagonists in patients with asthma. Br J Clin Pharmacol 5: 415–419
Decalmer PBS, Chatterjee SS, Cruickshank JM, Benson MK, Sterling GM (1978) Beta-blockers and asthma. Br Heart J 40: 184–189
Vilsvik JS, Schaanning J (1976) Effect of atenolol on ventilatory and cardiac function in asthma. Br Med J 2: 453–455
Astrom H, Vallin H (1974) Effect of a new beta-adrenergic blocking agent, ICI 66082, on exercise haemodynamics and airway resistance on angina pectoris. Br Heart J 36: 1194–1200
Simpson WT (1977) Nature and incidence of unwanted effects with atenolol. Postgrad Med J 53 (Suppl 3): 162–167
Hansson L, Henningsen NC, Karlberg BE, Aberg H, Westerlund A, Gudbrandsson T, Jameson S (1977) Long-term trial of atenolol in hypertension. Curr Ther Res 22 (6): 839–845
Kendall MJ, John VA, Quarterman CP, Welling PG (1980) A single and multiple dose pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic comparison of conventional and slow-release metoprolol. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 17: 87–92
Harry JD, Cruickshank JM, Young J (1979) Once-daily beta-blockers and blood-pressure response to exercise. Lancet 2: 250
McDevitt DG (1977) The assessment of beta-adrenoceptor blocking drugs in man. Br J Clin Pharmacol 4: 413–425
Barber JH (1978) Relative activity of atenolol and metoprolol. Br Med J 3: 357
Comerford MB, Besterman EMM (1977) Relative activity of atenolol and metoprolol. Br Med J 3: 260
Lyngstam O, Ryden L (1979) Metoprolol or atenolol for mild-to-moderate hypertension. Lancet 2: 634
Douglas-Jones AP, Cruickshank JM (1976) Once-daily dosing with atenolol in patients with mild or moderate hypertension. Br Med J 1: 990–991
Jeffers TA, Webster J, Petrie JC, et al (1977) Atenolol once-daily in hypertension. Br J Clin Pharmacol 4: 523–527
Majid PA, van der Vijgh WJF, de Feijter PJ, Wardeh R, van der Wall EE, Roos JP (1979) Once-daily atenolol (‘Tenormin’) in the treatment of angina pectoris. Observations on clinical efficacy, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Eur J Cardiol 9 (6): 419–435
Jackson G, Schwartz J, Kates RE, Winchester M, Harrison DC (1980) Atenolol: Once-daily cardioselectiva beta blockade for angina pectoris. Circulation 61 (3): 555–560
Kendall MJ, Brown D, Grieve A, John VA (1977) Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies of single oral doses of metoprolol in normal volunteers. Elr J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet 2: 73–80
Harry JD, Shields AG (1978) Relative activity of atenolol and metoprolol. Br Med J 2: 128
Astrom H (1975) Comparison of the effects on airway conductance of a new selective beta-adrenergic blocking drug, atenolol, and propranolol in asthmatic subjects. Scand J Respir Dis 56: 292–296
Johnsson G, Svedmyr N, Thiringer G (1975) Effects of intravenous propranolol and metoprolol and their interaction with isoprenaline on pulmonary function, heart rate and blood pressure in asthmatics. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 6: 175–180
Ormerod LP, Stableforth DE (1980) Asthma mortality in Birmingham 1975–79, 53 deaths. Br Med J 687–690
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lawrence, D.S., Sahay, J.N., Chatterjee, S.S. et al. Asthma and beta-blockers. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 22, 501–509 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00609622
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00609622