Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 424

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Immediate versus deferred beta-blockade following thrombolytic therapy in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Results of the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) II-B Study.

Roberts, R, Rogers, W J, Mueller, H S, Lambrew, C T, Diver, D J, Smith, H C, Willerson, J T, Knatterud, G L, Forman, S, Passamani, E·1991·Circulation

Abstract

In the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) Phase II trial, patients received intravenous recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator (rt-PA) and were randomized to either a conservative or an invasive strategy. Within this study, the effects of immediate versus deferred beta-blocker therapy were also assessed in patients eligible for beta-blocker therapy, a group of 1,434 patients of which 720 were randomized to the immediate intravenous group and 714 to the deferred group. In the immediate intravenous group, within 2 hours of initiating rt-PA metoprolol was given (5 mg intravenously at 2-minute intervals over 6 minutes, for a total intravenous dose of 15 mg, followed by 50 mg orally every 12 hours in the first 24 hours and 100 mg orally every 12 hours thereafter). The patients assigned to the deferred group received metoprolol, 50 mg orally twice on day 6, followed by 100 mg orally twice a day thereafter. The therapy was tolerated well in both groups and the primary end point, resting global ejection fraction at hospital discharge, averaged 50.5% and was virtually identical in the two groups. The regional ventricular function was also similar in the two groups. Overall, there was no difference in mortality between the immediate intravenous and deferred groups, but in the subgroup defined as low risk there were no deaths at 6 weeks among those receiving immediate beta-blocker therapy in contrast to seven deaths among those in whom beta-blocker therapy was deferred. These findings for a secondary end point in a subgroup were not considered sufficient to warrant a recommendation regarding clinical use. There was a lower incidence of reinfarction (2.7% versus 5.1%, p = 0.02) and recurrent chest pain (18.8% versus 24.1%, p less than 0.02) at 6 days in the immediate intravenous group. Thus, in appropriate postinfarction patients, beta-blockers are safe when given early after thrombolytic therapy and are associated with decreased myocardial ischemia and reinfarction in the first week but offer no benefit over late administration in improving ventricular function or reducing mortality.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/01.cir.83.2.422

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Roberts, R., Rogers, W. J., Mueller, H. S., Lambrew, C. T., Diver, D. J., Smith, H. C., Willerson, J. T., Knatterud, G. L., Forman, S., & Passamani, E.
Venue
Circulation
Published
1991-02
Volume
83
Issue
2
Pages
422-437
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2061429289
Cited by
424
References
1
FWCI
11.90
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.