SynthesisEuropean journal of preventive cardiology2025
Beta-blockers for secondary prevention following myocardial infarction in patients without reduced ejection fraction or heart failure: an updated meta-analysis.
Synthesis in European journal of preventive cardiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Baseline Ejection Fraction as a Modifier of Beta-Blocker Therapeutic Effects in Post-Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients With Non-Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cardiovascular therapeutics · 2026Pooled it
- Beta-Blockers in Stable Coronary Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Effect of beta blockers in acute and chronic coronary syndromes without reduced ejection fraction: a landmark analysis from the REBOOT trial.European heart journal. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy · 2026Trial
- Beta-Blocker Discontinuation After Myocardial Infarction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JACC. Advances · 2026Article
- Review
- Beta-blocker therapy after myocardial infarction: an umbrella review.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Beta-blocker therapy after myocardial infarction with preserved LVEF (≥50%): a systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis with time-to-event reconstruction.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2026Review
- Impact of β-blocker therapy after acute myocardial infarction in patients with preserved ejection fraction: a meta-analysis.Archives of medical sciences. Atherosclerotic diseases · 2026Review
- Beta-blockers after myocardial infarction with preserved or mildly reduced ejection fraction: existing evidence, knowledge gaps, and an EF-stratified framework.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Article
- Atypical Presentation of Non-dominant Right Coronary Artery Occlusion: Precordial ST-Segment Elevation.Cureus · 2025Article
- Impact of Lifestyle Modifications Along With Pharmacological Treatment of Heart Failure: A Narrative Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- Reconsidering the role of beta-blockers in post-myocardial infarction patients with preserved ejection fraction.Future cardiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsThe 2023 ESC guidelines for acute coronary syndrome note that contemporary data are heterogenous regarding beta-blocker (BB) use post-myocardial infarction (MI) in patients without reduced ejection fraction (EF) or heart failure (HF). We aimed to address the heterogeneity in contemporary data around BB post-MI in this population. METHODS AND
resultsWe searched six databases from 1 January 2000 to 1 September 2024 to identify contemporary studies enrolling MI patients without reduced EF (≤40%) or history of HF receiving BB at index MI and comparing outcomes between BB users and non-users. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and cardiovascular (CV) mortality. Random-effects meta-analysis was conducted using the restricted maximum likelihood method. There were 24 studies including 290 349 patients enrolled in the contemporary era. Overall, BB use was associated with a significant 11% reduction in all-cause mortality [hazard ratio (HR), 0.89; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.81-0.97; I2 = 40], however with moderate-to-high statistical heterogeneity. Pre-specified subgroup analyses demonstrate comparable all-cause mortality (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.94-1.06; I2 = 0%), CV mortality (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.85-1.15; I2 = 0%), and MACCE (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.01-1.52; I2 = 0%) in patients with a 1-year event-free period, defined as no death, recurrent MI, or HF while on BB following index MI. In patients with no event-free period, meta-regression revealed that BB mortality benefits were modified by the study inclusion period (P = 0.01), reflecting a temporal trend of decreasing BB mortality benefits over time. Based on the temporal trend, in patients with preserved EF post-2010, BB exhibited no reduction in all-cause mortality (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.90-1.04; I2 = 0%), but a non-significant trend towards increased CV mortality (HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.96-1.72; I2 = 0%) and a significant increase in MACCE (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.01-1.52; I2 = 0%).
conclusionIn the contemporary reperfusion era, BB may not confer additional mortality benefits beyond a 1-year event-free period post-MI in patients without reduced EF. Moreover, post-MI BB use was associated with detrimental effects in patients with preserved EF.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.