Cited by 3,205Acute Myocardial Infarction ResearchCardiac Health and Mental HealthCardiac Ischemia and Reperfusion

Beta blockade during and after myocardial infarction: An overview of the randomized trials

Yusuf, Salim, Peto, Richard, Lewis, John, Collins, Rory, Sleight, Peter·1985·Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases

Abstract

Long-term beta blockade for perhaps a year or so following discharge after an MI is now of proven value, and for many such patients mortality reductions of about 25% can be achieved. No important differences are clearly apparent among the benefits of different beta blockers, although some are more convenient than others (or have slightly fewer side effects), and it appears that those with appreciable intrinsic sympathomimetic activity may confer less benefit. If monitored, the side effects of long-term therapy are not a major problem, as when they occur they are easily reversible by changing the beta blocker or by discontinuation of treatment. By contrast, although very early IV short-term beta blockade can definitely limit infarct size, more reliable information about the effects of such treatment on mortality will not be available until a large trial (ISIS) reports later this year, with data on some thousands of patients entered within less than 4 hours of the onset of pain. Our aim has been not only to review the 65-odd randomized beta blocker trials but also to demonstrate that when many randomized trials have all applied one general approach to treatment, it is often not appropriate to base inference on individual trial results. Although there will usually be important differences from one trial to another (in eligibility, treatment, end-point assessment, and so on), physicians who wish to decide whether to adopt a particular treatment policy should try to make their dec…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0033-0620(85)80003-7

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Log-rank methods were used to conduct intention-to-treat comparisons in time-to-event analyses of the first occurrence of each type of event of interest among participants in the aspirin group as compared with those in the placebo group.

    “We used log-rank methods to conduct intention-to-treat comparisons in time-to-event analyses of the first occurrence of each type of event of interest among participants in the aspirin group as compared with those in the placebo group. 17,18”

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 137 · Cited by 3,205

Authors
Yusuf, S., Peto, R., Lewis, J., Collins, R., & Sleight, P.
Corresponding author
Yusuf, Salim
Venue
Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1985-03
Volume
27
Issue
5
Pages
335-371
ISSN
0033-0620 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1966953116
Cited by
3,205
References
137
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 42 · 2021: 46 · 2020: 59 · 2019: 45 · 2018: 66 · 2017: 59 · 2016: 66 · 2015: 70 · 2014: 79 · 2013: 82 · 2012: 78
FWCI
64.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Health and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Cardiac Ischemia and Reperfusion
Keywords
beta-blockers, myocardial infarction, mortality reduction, infarct size, intrinsic sympathomimetic activity, beta-blocker side effects
MeSH terms
Adrenergic beta-Antagonists, Arrhythmias, Cardiac, Clinical Trials as Topic, Coronary Disease, Humans, Long-Term Care, Methods, Myocardial Infarction, Random Allocation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review