Latest & greatest articles for metoprolol

The Trip Database is a leading resource to help health professionals find trustworthy answers to their clinical questions. Users can access the latest research evidence and guidance to answer their clinical questions. We have a large collection of systematic reviews, clinical guidelines, regulatory guidance, clinical trials and many other forms of evidence. If you wanted the latest trusted evidence on metoprolol or other clinical topics then use Trip today.

This page lists the very latest high quality evidence on metoprolol and also the most popular articles. Popularity measured by the number of times the articles have been clicked on by fellow users in the last twelve months.

What is Trip?

Trip is a clinical search engine designed to allow users to quickly and easily find and use high-quality research evidence to support their practice and/or care.

Trip has been online since 1997 and in that time has developed into the internet’s premier source of evidence-based content. Our motto is ‘Find evidence fast’ and this is something we aim to deliver for every single search.

As well as research evidence we also allow clinicians to search across other content types including images, videos, patient information leaflets, educational courses and news.

For further information on Trip click on any of the questions/sections on the left-hand side of this page. But if you still have questions please contact us via jon.brassey@tripdatabase.com

Top results for metoprolol

1. Effect on Mortality of Higher Versus Lower β-Blocker (Metoprolol Succinate or Carvedilol) Dose in Patients With Heart Failure. Full Text available with Trip Pro

Effect on Mortality of Higher Versus Lower β-Blocker (Metoprolol Succinate or Carvedilol) Dose in Patients With Heart Failure. This study aimed to compare the effect of β-blocker dose and heart rate (HR) on mortality in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). The Veteran Affairs databases were queried to identify all patients diagnosed with HFrEF based on International Classification of Diseases Ninth Revision codes from 2007 to 2015 and β-blocker (carvedilol (...) or metoprolol succinate) use. 36,168 patients on low dose β blocker were then matched with 36,168 patients on high dose β-blocker using propensity score matching. The impact of β-blocker dose and HR was assessed on overall mortality using Cox proportional hazard model. After dividing average HR into separate quartiles and adjusting for patient characteristics, high β-blocker dose was associated with lower overall mortality as compared with a low dose of β blocker (hazard ratio 0.75, 95% confidence interval

2018 American Journal of Cardiology

2. Effect of carvedilol vs metoprolol succinate on mortality in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Full Text available with Trip Pro

Effect of carvedilol vs metoprolol succinate on mortality in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Beta blocker therapy is indicated in all patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) as per current guidelines. The relative benefit of carvedilol to metoprolol succinate remains unknown. This study aimed to compare survival benefit of carvedilol to metoprolol succinate.The VA's databases were queried to identify 114,745 patients diagnosed with HFrEF from 2007 (...) to 2015 who were prescribed carvedilol and metoprolol succinate. The study estimated the survival probability and hazard ratio by comparing the carvedilol and metoprolol patients using propensity score matching with replacement techniques on observed covariates. Sub-group analyses were performed separately for men, women, elderly, duration of therapy of more than 3 months, and diabetic patients.A total of 43,941 metoprolol patients were matched with as many carvedilol patients. The adjusted hazard

2018 American Heart Journal

3. Effects of metoprolol and carvedilol on cause-specific mortality and morbidity in patients with chronic heart failure--COMET. (Abstract)

Effects of metoprolol and carvedilol on cause-specific mortality and morbidity in patients with chronic heart failure--COMET. Beta-blockers with different receptor bindings reduce mortality in patients with chronic heart failure. We compared the effects of the beta1-blocker metoprolol tartrate and the beta1-, beta2-, and alpha1-blocker carvedilol.In a randomized double-blind design, 3029 patients with chronic congestive heart failure requiring diuretic therapy and with left ventricular (...) dysfunction were randomized to treatment with carvedilol (n = 1511) or metoprolol tartrate (n = 1518) and titrated to target doses of 25 mg of carvedilol twice daily or 50 mg of metoprolol tartrate twice daily. The main outcome measures were total mortality and the combination of mortality or hospitalization for any cause. Secondary end points were cardiovascular death, combinations of morbidity and mortality, New York Heart Association class, worsening of heart failure, hospitalizations

2005 American heart journal Controlled trial quality: predicted high

4. Carvedilol was more effective than metoprolol tartrate for lowering mortality in chronic heart failure Full Text available with Trip Pro

Carvedilol was more effective than metoprolol tartrate for lowering mortality in chronic heart failure Carvedilol was more effective than metoprolol tartrate for lowering mortality in chronic heart failure | BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine We use cookies to improve our service and to tailor our content and advertising to you. You can manage your cookie settings via your browser at any time. To learn more about how we use cookies, please see our . Log in using your username and password For personal (...) accounts OR managers of institutional accounts Username * Password * your user name or password? Search for this keyword Search for this keyword Main menu Log in using your username and password For personal accounts OR managers of institutional accounts Username * Password * your user name or password? You are here Carvedilol was more effective than metoprolol tartrate for lowering mortality in chronic heart failure Article Text Therapeutics Carvedilol was more effective than metoprolol tartrate

2005 Evidence-Based Medicine

5. Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Carvedilol Versus Metoprolol on All-Cause Mortality and Hospitalizations in Patients With Heart Failure. (Abstract)

Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Carvedilol Versus Metoprolol on All-Cause Mortality and Hospitalizations in Patients With Heart Failure. Long-term treatment with appropriate doses of carvedilol or metoprolol is currently recommended for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) to decrease the risk of death, hospitalizations, and patients' symptoms. It remains unclear if the β blockers used in patients with HFrEF are equal or carvedilol is superior to metoprolol types (...) . We performed a meta-analysis of the comparative effects of carvedilol versus metoprolol tartrate and succinate on all-cause mortality and/or hospitalization. We conducted an Embase and MEDLINE search for prospective controlled trials and cohort studies of patients with HFrEF who were received to treatment with carvedilol versus metoprolol. We identified 4 prospective controlled and 6 cohort studies with 30,943 patients who received carvedilol and 69,925 patients on metoprolol types (tartrate

2015 The American journal of cardiology

6. A comparison of the effects of carvedilol and metoprolol on well-being, morbidity, and mortality (the "patient journey") in patients with heart failure: a report from the Carvedilol Or Metoprolol European Trial (COMET). Full Text available with Trip Pro

A comparison of the effects of carvedilol and metoprolol on well-being, morbidity, and mortality (the "patient journey") in patients with heart failure: a report from the Carvedilol Or Metoprolol European Trial (COMET). This study was designed to investigate the loss of well-being, in terms of life-years, overall and in patients randomized to metoprolol versus carvedilol in the Carvedilol Or Metoprolol European Trial (COMET).The ultimate objectives of treating patients with heart failure (...) of diuretic therapy. Scores ranged from 0% (dead or hospitalized) to 100% (feeling very well).Over 48 months, 17% of all days were lost through death, 1% through hospitalization, 23% through impaired well-being, and 2% through the need for intensified therapy. Compared with metoprolol, carvedilol was associated with fewer days lost to death, with no increase in days lost due to impaired well-being or days in hospital. The "patient journey" score improved from a mean of 54.8% (SD 26.0) to 57.4% (SD 26.3

2006 Journal of the American College of Cardiology Controlled trial quality: uncertain

7. Metoprolol

Metoprolol Top results for metoprolol - Trip Database or use your Google+ account Find evidence fast ALL of these words: Title only Anywhere in the document ANY of these words: Title only Anywhere in the document This EXACT phrase: Title only Anywhere in the document EXCLUDING words: Title only Anywhere in the document Timeframe: to: Combine searches by placing the search numbers in the top search box and pressing the search button. An example search might look like (#1 or #2) and (#3 or #4 (...) ) Loading history... Population: Intervention: Comparison: Outcome: Population: Intervention: Latest & greatest articles for metoprolol The Trip Database is a leading resource to help health professionals find trustworthy answers to their clinical questions. Users can access the latest research evidence and guidance to answer their clinical questions. We have a large collection of systematic reviews, clinical guidelines, regulatory guidance, clinical trials and many other forms of evidence. If you

2018 Trip Latest and Greatest

8. Carvedilol Compared to Metoprolol Succinate in the Treatment and Prognosis of Patients With Stable Chronic Heart Failure: The Carvedilol or Metoprolol Evaluation Study (COMES). Full Text available with Trip Pro

Carvedilol Compared to Metoprolol Succinate in the Treatment and Prognosis of Patients With Stable Chronic Heart Failure: The Carvedilol or Metoprolol Evaluation Study (COMES). β-Blockers exert a prognostic benefit in the treatment of chronic heart failure. Their pharmacological properties vary. The only substantial comparative trial to date-the Carvedilol or Metoprolol European Trial-has compared carvedilol with short-acting metoprolol tartrate at different dose equivalents. We therefore (...) addressed the relative efficacy of equal doses of carvedilol and metoprolol succinate on survival in multicenter hospital outpatients with chronic heart failure.Four thousand sixteen patients with stable systolic chronic heart failure who were using either carvedilol or metoprolol succinate were identified in the Norwegian Heart Failure Registry and The Heart Failure Registry of the University of Heidelberg, Germany. Patients were individually matched on both the dose equivalents and the respective

2015 Circulation. Heart failure Controlled trial quality: uncertain

9. Meta-Analysis of Carvedilol Versus Beta 1 Selective Beta-Blockers (Atenolol, Bisoprolol, Metoprolol, and Nebivolol) (Abstract)

Meta-Analysis of Carvedilol Versus Beta 1 Selective Beta-Blockers (Atenolol, Bisoprolol, Metoprolol, and Nebivolol) Because carvedilol is a unique vasodilating β blocker (BB) exerting antioxidant activity and pleiotropic effects, it was theorized that it may confer more potent beneficial effects on cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and heart failure (HF) settings. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed of randomized, controlled, direct (...) -comparison trials that included adults receiving atenolol, bisoprolol, metoprolol, nebivolol, or carvedilol to evaluate the effects of carvedilol compared to other BBs on mortality, cardiovascular events, and hospital readmissions in the setting of AMI or systolic HF. Compared to β(1)-selective BBs used in HF (8 trials, n = 4,563), carvedilol significantly reduced all-cause mortality (risk ratio 0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.78 to 0.93, p = 0.0006). In 3 trials of patients with AMI (n = 644

2013 EvidenceUpdates

10. Effect of atenolol vs metoprolol succinate on vascular function in patients with hypertension. Full Text available with Trip Pro

Effect of atenolol vs metoprolol succinate on vascular function in patients with hypertension. We evaluated the effect of atenolol vs metoprolol succinate on vascular function in patients with essential hypertension.Given intrinsic differences between these agents, we hypothesized that atenolol and metoprolol succinate would have disparate effects on vascular function.This study included 24 patients with hypertension (age 56 ± 2 years, 8 female, body mass index 28 ± 1) and featured a randomized (...) , double-blind, crossover design. Each β-blocker (atenolol or metoprolol succinate) was taken by patients once daily for a 4-week period. Measures of vascular function included peripheral augmentation index (AIx) and pulse wave amplitude reactive hyperemia index from peripheral arterial tonometry, and brachial artery flow-mediated dilation from ultrasound.There were similar reductions in mean arterial pressure following treatment with atenolol and metoprolol succinate. Compared with metoprolol

2011 Clinical cardiology Controlled trial quality: uncertain

11. Comparison of carvedilol and metoprolol on clinical outcomes in patients with chronic heart failure in the Carvedilol Or Metoprolol European Trial (COMET): randomised controlled trial. Full Text available with Trip Pro

Comparison of carvedilol and metoprolol on clinical outcomes in patients with chronic heart failure in the Carvedilol Or Metoprolol European Trial (COMET): randomised controlled trial. Beta blockers reduce mortality in patients who have chronic heart failure, systolic dysfunction, and are on background treatment with diuretics and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. We aimed to compare the effects of carvedilol and metoprolol on clinical outcome.In a multicentre, double-blind (...) , and randomised parallel group trial, we assigned 1511 patients with chronic heart failure to treatment with carvedilol (target dose 25 mg twice daily) and 1518 to metoprolol (metoprolol tartrate, target dose 50 mg twice daily). Patients were required to have chronic heart failure (NYHA II-IV), previous admission for a cardiovascular reason, an ejection fraction of less than 0.35, and to have been treated optimally with diuretics and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors unless not tolerated. The primary

2003 Lancet Controlled trial quality: predicted high

12. Effect of carvedilol and metoprolol on the mode of death in patients with heart failure. Full Text available with Trip Pro

Effect of carvedilol and metoprolol on the mode of death in patients with heart failure. In the COMET study, carvedilol improved survival compared to metoprolol tartrate in 3029 patients with NYHA II-IV heart failure and EF <35%, followed for an average of 58 months.To evaluate whether the effect on overall mortality was specific for a particular mode of death. This may help to identify the mechanism of the observed difference.Of the 1112 total deaths, 972 were adjudicated as cardiovascular (...) , including 480 sudden, 365 circulatory failure (CF) and 51 stroke deaths. For each mode of death, the effect of pre-specified baseline variables was assessed, including sex, age, NYHA class, aetiology, heart rate, systolic blood pressure, EF, atrial fibrillation, previous myocardial infarction or hypertension, renal function, concomitant medication, and study treatment allocation.In multivariate Cox regression analyses, compared to metoprolol, carvedilol reduced cardiovascular (RR 0.80, CI 0.7-0.91, p

2007 European journal of heart failure Controlled trial quality: uncertain

13. Metoprolol

Metoprolol USE OF METOPROLOL IN PREGNANCY 0344 892 0909 USE OF METOPROLOL IN PREGNANCY (Date of issue: March 2016 , Version: 2 ) This is a UKTIS monograph for use by health care professionals. For case-specific advice please contact UKTIS on 0344 892 0909. To report an exposure please download and complete a . Please encourage all women to complete an . Summary Metoprolol is a cardioselective (beta1 selective) beta-adrenoceptor blocking drug licensed for the treatment of hypertension, angina (...) pectoris, cardiac arrhythmias, myocardial infarction, adjunctive management of thyrotoxicosis, and prophylaxis of migraine. There are no published data on overall rates of congenital malformation following metoprolol use in pregnancy. A single case-control study found no association between first trimester metoprolol exposure and posterior cleft palate. A further case-control study found no association between gestational metoprolol use and hypospadias in male infants. Both findings require

2014 UK Teratology Information Service

14. A Comparative Study of Carvedilol Versus Metoprolol Initiation and 1-Year Mortality Among Individuals Receiving Maintenance Hemodialysis. Full Text available with Trip Pro

A Comparative Study of Carvedilol Versus Metoprolol Initiation and 1-Year Mortality Among Individuals Receiving Maintenance Hemodialysis. Carvedilol and metoprolol are the β-blockers most commonly prescribed to US hemodialysis patients, accounting for ∼80% of β-blocker prescriptions. Despite well-established pharmacologic and pharmacokinetic differences between the 2 medications, little is known about their relative safety and efficacy in the hemodialysis population.A retrospective cohort study (...) using a new-user design.Medicare-enrolled hemodialysis patients treated at a large US dialysis organization who initiated carvedilol or metoprolol therapy from January 1, 2007, through December 30, 2012.Carvedilol versus metoprolol initiation.All-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and intradialytic hypotension (systolic blood pressure decrease ≥ 20mmHg during hemodialysis plus intradialytic saline solution administration) during a 1-year follow-up period.Survival models were used to estimate

2018 American Journal of Kidney Diseases

15. Acupuncture versus metoprolol in migraine prophylaxis: a randomized trial of trigger point inactivation. (Abstract)

Acupuncture versus metoprolol in migraine prophylaxis: a randomized trial of trigger point inactivation. To compare the effects of dry needling of myofascial trigger points in the neck region to metoprolol in migraine prophylaxis.Randomized, group comparative study. patients, investigator and statistician were blinded as to treatment, the therapist was blinded as to results.Outpatient pain clinic in the northern Copenhagen area. Patients were referred by general practitioners or respondents (...) and metoprolol 100 mg daily.Both groups exhibited significant reduction in attack frequency (P < 0.01). No difference was found between the groups regarding frequency (P > 0.20) or duration (P > 0.10) of attacks, whereas we found a significant difference in global rating of attacks in favour of metoprolol (P < 0.05).Trigger point inactivation by dry needling is a valuable supplement to the list of migraine prophylactic tools, being equipotent to metoprolol in the influence on frequency and duration

1994 Journal of internal medicine Controlled trial quality: uncertain

16. Rate Control in Atrial Fibrillation: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Crossover Comparison of Carvedilol and Metoprolol Tartrate

Rate Control in Atrial Fibrillation: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Crossover Comparison of Carvedilol and Metoprolol Tartrate Rate Control in Atrial Fibrillation - Full Text View - ClinicalTrials.gov Hide glossary Glossary Study record managers: refer to the if submitting registration or results information. Search for terms x × Study Record Detail Saved Studies Save this study Warning You have reached the maximum number of saved studies (100). Please remove one or more studies before adding more (...) University Information provided by (Responsible Party): Creighton University Study Details Study Description Go to Brief Summary: This study will evaluate the efficacy of metoprolol tartrate compared to carvedilol on heart rate control in patients with atrial fibrillation and a rapid ventricular rate. Condition or disease Intervention/treatment Phase Atrial Fibrillation Drug: Carvedilol Drug: Metoprolol tartrate Phase 4 Study Design Go to Layout table for study information Study Type : Interventional

2014 Clinical Trials

17. Impact of Carvedilol Versus β<sub>1</sub>-Selective β Blockers (Bisoprolol, Metoprolol, and Nebivolol) in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. (Abstract)

Impact of Carvedilol Versus β1-Selective β Blockers (Bisoprolol, Metoprolol, and Nebivolol) in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. Although β blocker (BB) has constituted one of the mainstays of evidence-based therapy for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), the comparative efficacy of different BBs remains uncertain. We sought to determine the comparative effectiveness of nonselective BB carvedilol and the most (...) frequently prescribed β1-selective BBs (bisoprolol, metoprolol, and nebivolol) in patients with AMI undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). A total of 7,863 patients were selected from the prospective national AMI registry, and patients were divided into carvedilol group (n = 6,231) and β1-selective BB group (n = 1,632) at hospital discharge. The primary end point was all-cause death or MI during follow-up. During a mean follow-up of 243 ± 144 days, all-cause death or MI occurred in 94

2015 American Journal of Cardiology

18. A double-blind crossover comparison of pindolol, metoprolol, atenolol and labetalol in mild to moderate hypertension. Full Text available with Trip Pro

A double-blind crossover comparison of pindolol, metoprolol, atenolol and labetalol in mild to moderate hypertension. 1 This study was designed to compare in a double-blind randomized crossover trial, atenolol, labetalol, metoprolol and pindolol. Considerable differences in dose (atenolol 138 +/- 13 mg daily; labetalol 308 +/- 34 mg daily; metoprolol 234 +/- 22 mg daily; and pindolol 24 +/-2 mg daily were required to produce similar antihypertensive effects. 3 The overall incidence of side (...) -effects was similar with atenolol, metoprolol and pindolol but was slightly less with labetalol. Sleep disturbances and abnormal dreaming patterns were most frequent with pindolol. 4 There was a significantly greater fall in pulse rate during atenolol and metoprolol treatment periods. 1979 The British Pharmacological Society.

2015 British journal of clinical pharmacology Controlled trial quality: uncertain

19. Metoprolol vs. diltiazem in the acute management of atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Full Text available with Trip Pro

Metoprolol vs. diltiazem in the acute management of atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. The objective of this study was to examine the effects of metoprolol versus diltiazem in the acute management of atrial fibrillation (AF) with rapid ventricular response (RVR) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).This retrospective cohort study of patients with HFrEF in AF with RVR receiving either intravenous push (IVP) doses (...) of metoprolol or diltiazem was conducted between January 2012 and September 2016. The primary outcome was successful rate control within 30 min of medication administration, defined as a heart rate (HR) < 100 beats per minute or a HR reduction ≥ 20%. Secondary outcomes included rate control at 60 min, maximum median change in HR, and incidence of hypotension, bradycardia, or conversion to normal sinus rhythm within 30 min. Signs of worsening heart failure were also evaluated.Of the 48 patients included, 14

2018 American Journal of Emergency Medicine

20. Randomized Trial Comparing Diltiazem and Metoprolol For Atrial Fibrillation Rate Control

Randomized Trial Comparing Diltiazem and Metoprolol For Atrial Fibrillation Rate Control Randomized Trial Comparing Diltiazem and Metoprolol For Atrial Fibrillation Rate Control - Full Text View - ClinicalTrials.gov Hide glossary Glossary Study record managers: refer to the if submitting registration or results information. Search for terms x × Study Record Detail Saved Studies Save this study Warning You have reached the maximum number of saved studies (100). Please remove one or more studies (...) before adding more. Randomized Trial Comparing Diltiazem and Metoprolol For Atrial Fibrillation Rate Control The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. of clinical studies and talk to your health care provider before participating. Read our for details. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02025465 Recruitment Status : Recruiting First Posted : January 1

2013 Clinical Trials