Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,056

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A randomized trial of beta-blockade in heart failure. The Cardiac Insufficiency Bisoprolol Study (CIBIS). CIBIS Investigators and Committees.

·1994·Circulation

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Functional benefit in heart failure due to idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy has been observed after beta-blockade, but improvement in survival has not been established in a large-scale randomized trial. This was the main objective of the Cardiac Insufficiency Bisoprolol Study (CIBIS). METHODS AND RESULTS: Six hundred forty-one patients with chronic heart failure of various etiologies and a left ventricular ejection fraction of < 40% entered this placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind study. Patients were in New York Heart Association functional class III (95%) or IV (5%) at inclusion. All received background diuretic and vasodilator therapy (an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor in 90% of cases). A total of 320 patients was randomized to bisoprolol and 321 to placebo. Mean follow-up was 1.9 years. Bisoprolol was well tolerated without between group difference in premature treatment withdrawals (82 on placebo, 75 on bisoprolol; NS). The observed difference in mortality between groups did not reach statistical significance: 67 patients died on placebo, 53 on bisoprolol (P = .22; relative risk, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.56 to 1.15). No significant difference was observed in sudden death rate (17 on placebo, 15 on bisoprolol) or death related to documented ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation (7 on placebo, 4 on bisoprolol). Bisoprolol significantly improved the functional status of the patients; fewer patients in the bisoprolol group required hospitalization for cardiac decompensation (90 on placebo versus 61 on bisoprolol, P < .01), and more patients improved by at least one New York Heart Association functional class (48 on placebo versus 68 on bisoprolol, P = .04) by the end of follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: These results confirm previous trials evidence that a progressively increasing dose of beta-blocker in severe heart failure confers functional benefit. Subgroup analysis suggested that benefit from beta-blockade therapy was greater for those with nonischemic cardiomyopathy. However, improvement in survival while on beta-blockade remains to be demonstrated.

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.90.4.1765

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.

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

Cited by

See all 1,056

Metadata

Venue
Circulation
Published
1994-10
Volume
90
Issue
4
Pages
1765-1773
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2516430170
Cited by
1,056
References
0
FWCI
44.93
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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A randomized trial of beta-blockade in heart failure. The Cardiac Insufficiency Bisoprolol Study (CIBIS). CIBIS Investigators and Committees. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.cir.90.4.1765
The paper
A randomized trial of beta-blockade in heart failure. The Cardiac Insufficiency Bisoprolol Study (CIBIS). CIBIS Investigators and Committees. (1994). Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.90.4.1765

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.