The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Metoprolol in acute myocardial infarction (MIAMI). A randomised placebo-controlled international trial
Abstract
The effect of metoprolol on mortality and morbidity after 15 days, was compared with that of placebo in a double-blind randomised international trial (the MIAMI trial) in patients with definite or suspected acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Treatment with intravenous metoprolol (15mg) or placebo was started shortly after the patient's arrival in hospital within 24 h of the onset of symptoms, and then oral treatment (200 mg daily) was continued for the study period (15 days). Of the 5778 patients included, 2901 were allocated to placebo and 2877 to metoprolol. Definite AMI was confirmed in 4127 patients. There were 142 deaths in the placebo group (4.9%) and 123 deaths in the metoprolol group (4.3%), a difference of 13 per cent with 95 per cent confidence limits of −8 to +33 per cent, not statistically significant (P=0.29). Previously recorded risk indicators of mortality were analysed in retrospect. These indicated that there was a category which showed higher risk which contained approximately 30% of all randomized patients. In these, the mortality rate in the metoprolol treated group was 29% less than in the placebo group. In the remaining lower risk categories there was no difference between the treatment groups. This subset analysis must be interpreted with caution in view of the findings from other similar studies. Positive effects were observed on the incidence of definite AMI and on serum enzyme activity in patients treated early ( <7h). There was no significant effect on ventricular fibrillation but the number of episodes tended to be lower in the metoprolol treated patients during the later phase (6–15 days; 24 vs 54 episodes). The incidence of supraventricular tachyarrhythmias, the use of cardiac glycosides and other antiarrhythmics, and the need for pain-relieving treatment were significantly diminished by metoprolol amongst all randomised patients. Adverse events associated with metoprolol were infrequent, expected, and relatively mild.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Roffi, M., Patrono, C., Collet, J.-P., Mueller, C., Valgimigli, M., Andreotti, F., Bax, J. J., Borger, M. A., Brotons, C., Chew, D. P., et al. (2016) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehv320 · Cited by 8,261
Clinical Outcomes with β-Blockers for Myocardial Infarction: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials
Bangalore, S., Makani, H., Radford, M., Thakur, K., Toklu, B., Katz, S. D., DiNicolantonio, J. J., Devereaux, P. J., Alexander, K. P., Wetterslev, J., et al. (2014) · The American Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2014.05.032 · Cited by 315
Cardiovascular Protection Using Beta-Blockers
Bangalore, S., Messerli, F. H., Kostis, J. B., & Pepine, C. J. (2007) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2007.04.060 · Cited by 233
Aerobic exercise conditioning: a nonpharmacological antiarrhythmic intervention
Billman, G. E. (2002) · Journal of Applied Physiology · doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.00874.2001 · Cited by 185
McAlister, F. A., Taylor, L., Teo, K. K., Tsuyuki, R. T., Ackman, M. L., Yim, R., Montague, T. J., & The Clinical Quality Improvement Network (CQIN) Investigators (1999) · Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.1999.tb03837.x · Cited by 39
Metadata
- Authors
- THE MIAMI TRIAL RESEARCH GROUP
- Venue
- European Heart Journal
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1985-03-01
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 199-226
- ISSN
- 0195-668X (ISSN-L)
- 1522-9645
- OpenAlex
- W186946926
- Cited by
- 614
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 21.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.