 |
|
Dr Philip J Devereaux
|
Orlando, FL - A landmark trial presented at the American Heart Association (AHA) 2007 Scientific Sessions of the continued-release (CR) beta blocker metoprolol (Toprol XL, AstraZeneca) in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery has shown that although the drug reduced the risk of MI, it increased the risk of severe stroke and overall death. The POISE study suggests that for every 1000 patients treated, metoprolol CR would prevent 15 MIs, but there would be an excess of eight deaths and five severe disabling strokes.
Lead investigator of the late-breaking study, Dr Philip J Devereaux (McMaster University, Hamilton, ON), said that physicians should weigh the potential risks and benefits before deciding whether to use beta blockers perioperatively. He admitted to heartwire that his team was unable to pinpoint who would be at risk and who would benefit from perioperative beta-blocker use at this stage, but added, "I certainly would not recommend it to my mother."
I certainly would not recommend it to my mother.
A discussant of the study, Dr Judith Hochman (Cardiovascular Clinical Research Center at the New York University School of Medicine), said, "POISE is the first robust randomized trial to look at this subject." She added that American College of Cardiology (ACC)/AHA guidelines for beta-blocker use in noncardiac surgery are based on previous studies that were inconclusive and small and showed conflicting results. "I believe POISE will change practice. In my opinion, beta-blocker therapy should not be initiated perioperatively as routine therapy to reduce cardiac events," she stated.
POISE divides experts
Other experts agreed with Hochman. Dr Mariell Jessup (University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia) told heartwire that "the POISE trial was very surprising, because people routinely use beta blockers in the noncardiac-surgery setting. I think I'd really give pause in this general population of just routinely giving beta blockers, which has been the recommendation. I think this is potentially going to change the guidelines. It's really big news. Very unexpected." Chair of the AHA Scientific Sessions program committee, Dr Gordon Tomaselli (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD), said that "unless someone comes in on a beta blocker, I don't think you can increase the level of assurance that this is the right thing to do based on this trial."
The POISE trial was very surprising. It's really big news. Very unexpected.
However, others were concerned that people would take these results to mean that they should not use beta blockers perioperatively at all. "That would be premature. There are national practice guidelines on this," Dr Raymond Gibbons (Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN) told heartwire. Gibbons is troubled about a number of issues related to the POISE trial. "I'm worried about titration going in, the dose selection, and the parameters to discontinue the drug, and I believe they will have to provide details about the deaths."
Dr Roger Blumenthal (Johns Hopkins University) concurred: "Perhaps they gave too high a dose two hours beforehand and within six hours after surgery, particularly in susceptible people. It will be interesting to see what post hoc analysis shows. This may dim enthusiasm for giving beta blockers to everyone who undergoes surgery, but people with known risk factorsfor example, those with known vascular disease and a positive stress testwill still benefit."
The moderator of the Forum on theheart.org, Dr Melissa Walton-Shirley (TJ Samson Community Hospital, Glasgow, KY), said that "the take-home message from this study is clearly that we should not treat these patients to the point of hypotension."
Despite her overall conclusion, Hochman also stressed that there was much information still to be gleaned from POISE that might shed more light on the issues involved.
Ying and yang: MIs down, strokes up
By way of background, Devereaux explained that 100 million adults worldwide undergo noncardiac surgery annually, and one million of these suffer a major perioperative cardiovascular event. The 2006 ACC/AHA guidelines for beta blocker use in noncardiac surgery suggest that beta blockers be started before elective surgeryparticularly in high-risk patientswith the dose titrated to achieve a resting heart rate between 50 and 60 bpm.
POISE randomized 8351 patients 45 years or older undergoing noncardiac surgery with or at risk of atherosclerotic disease. Patients had to have a history of coronary artery disease, peripheral artery disease, stroke, or congestive heart failure within the last three years; be undergoing major vascular surgery; or have three of the following seven risk factors: undergoing high-risk surgery, having a history of CHF, having diabetes mellitus, having renal insufficiency, being 70 years of age or older, having a history of transient ischemic attack, or undergoing urgent/emergent surgery.
Patients were recruited from 193 centers in 23 countries and randomized to receive either metoprolol CR or placebo started two to four hours preoperatively and continued for 30 days. The dose of metoprolol given was 100 mg in the preoperative period, 100 mg in the six-hour postoperative period, 200 mg 12 hours later, and 200 mg daily thereafter out to 30 days. Doses were not titrated, and the drug was stopped only if blood pressure dipped below 100 mm Hg.
The primary outcome was a composite outcome of cardiovascular death, nonfatal MI, and nonfatal cardiac arrest at 30 days after randomization. Secondary outcomes included total mortality, cardiovascular death, MI, cardiac revascularization, clinically significant atrial fibrillation, clinically significant bradycardia, clinically significant hypotension, and stroke.
"The cumulative evidence of POISE suggests a clear reduction in MI and a decrease in coronary revascularization and atrial fibrillation, but an accompanying increase in death and stroke and an increase in hypotension and bradycardia," said Devereaux
He noted that the reduction in MI with metoprolol drove the reduction in the primary outcome and that most people who suffered an MI had one in the first few days after surgery. The majority of strokes also occurred in these first few postoperative days, "and stroke was a strong determinant of death," he noted, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 12.74. Clinical hypotension was another robust indicator of mortality, with a HR of 4.32. There were also twice as many deaths in metoprolol-treated patients who had sepsis or infection as in those with sepsis who received placebo.
Primary outcome and major secondary outcomes
Outcome
|
Metoprolol (n=4174),
n (%)
|
Placebo (n=4177),
n (%)
|
Hazard ratio
|
p
|
Primary composite
|
243 (5.8)
|
290 (6.9)
|
0.83
|
0.04
|
Nonfatal MI
|
151 (3.6)
|
215 (5.1)
|
0.70
|
0.0007
|
Total mortality
|
129 (3.1)
|
97 (2.3)
|
1.33
|
0.03
|
Stroke
|
41 (1.0)
|
19 (0.5)
|
2.17
|
0.005
|
Secondary outcomes
Outcome
|
Metoprolol (n=4174),
n (%)
|
Placebo (n=4177),
n (%)
|
Hazard ratio
|
p
|
Revascularization
|
11 (0.3)
|
27 (0.6)
|
0.41
|
0.01
|
Atrial fibrillation
|
91 (2.2)
|
120 (2.9)
|
0.76
|
0.04
|
Significant hypotension
|
626 (15.0)
|
404 (9.7)
|
1.55
|
<0.0001
|
Significant bradycardia
|
274 (6.6)
|
101 (2.4)
|
2.71
|
<0.0001
|
To download tables as slides, click on slide logo below
Results do not apply to those already on beta blockers
Hochman said it is important to clarify that these results do not apply to patients already taking beta blockers undergoing surgery (such patients were excluded from POISE) or to patients in whom a physician had planned to prescribe a beta blocker within 30 days of surgery.
Jessup stressed this too: "It doesn't mean that we should stop beta blockers in patients who are already on them." Tomaselli concurred: "This study does not say you should stop beta blockers in those patients if they come into surgery on them. In fact, I would say that is absolutely the wrong thing to do."
Dose too high and titration omitted
Hochman said a number of issues still need to be addressed, including dosing and titration. The full fixed dose of metoprolol CR used in POISE is at the upper range of those used in previous trials, she said. She also stated that "perhaps a systolic pressure of a 100 mm Hg is too low for hypertensive patients, the elderly, and those with a critical carotid or coronary stenosis."
There are established national practice guidelines. Before we say they are wrong, this study really needs to provide more details.
Gibbons agrees. "I need to see more details. All the issues in my mind have not been addressed. There are established national practice guidelines. Before we say they are wrong, this study really needs to provide more details."
"It does not appear that there was a period of any titration of the dose, which the guidelines show is specifically called for because the serum levels of beta blockers at a given dose are very variable in a given population. And in elderly patients, we wouldn't start at this dose of 100 mg. The titration issue needs to be addressed; this is supported by the heart rates recorded," he continued.
Hypotension allowed to spiral
Gibbons also pointed out that "they only stopped beta blockers for a BP of less than 100 mm Hgmost of us would view that criteria as not strict enough in an elderly patient with [transient ischemic attack] TIA. I would argue that the threshold for stopping the drug should be higher; they are going to get in trouble."
More details about the deaths are also needed, he noted. "If the deaths are related to hypotension, because the drug was continued and then led to a stroke, that raises some questions about whether the guidelines need to be changed. Also, the mortality diverged after nine days, and this raises a whole bunch of separate issues in my mind. Is it really perioperative?"
More information and more studies needed
Jessup said, "We are going to have to look at the details of the study. There was no signal as to who benefited and who did notif they couldn't really identify a profile, it's really difficult to know who to recommend beta blockers for anymore. We'll have to see how everybody else slices and dices the patient population."
Hochman concluded: "We await information as to whether we can accurately identify those at risk for hypotension and adverse events based on baseline characteristics and hemodynamic response to dosing. Further randomized trial data are needed. Is there a better beta-blocker dosing regimen? What about genetic polymorphisms? And are there other therapies to reduce perioperative risk, such as statins or antithrombotics?"
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
November 9, 2007 09:49 (EST)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
choosing perioperative drug dosage In the firsr 24 hours perioperatively these patients received a total of 400 mg of sustained release metoprolol. One of the principles we as surgeons appreciate is that early after operation, the sensible choice is always to use short acting drugs that effect hemodynamics at a dose that is safe for nearly all patients and give them frequently enough to give smooth control but be prepared to lower the dose or stop the drug if hemodynamics are adversely effected. This adverse outcome of the POISEd study should be interpreted strictly for the treatment used -- which was likely the result of non-surgeons ( or surgeons without adequate perspective on perioperative management) choosing a treatment plan that was destined to be harmful in a substantial proportion of patients. |
|
 |
 |
|
|
November 9, 2007 10:30 (EST)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Agree...... Vincent
I have never walked into a preop or a post op setting and started 200 mg of anything with negative chronotropic effects in an elderly person. The design of this study was set to fail and the subset analysis incomplete before presentation. It caused quite a stir around me as I exited the press presentation. I was appauled at the potential for harm from the misinterpretation of this trial. On the other hand, the message is strong about avoiding post op hypotension.
Melissa |
|
 |
 |
|
|
November 9, 2007 10:39 (EST)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
I will not change my practice based upon POISE Let us discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the study with the data at hand.
Strength:
1)Randomized Placebo Controlled design
Weaknesses:
1) Impossible to blind patients to beta-blockers perioperatively because of the dramatic HR reductions seen with the doses used in the trial. There is no question that the investigators knew the placebo from the beta-blocker arms in almost every patient....you can interpret the results for yourself
2) Trial included emergency surgery patients: Even though the numbers in each category are not available to me, beta-blockers have NEVER been tested in the patient undergoing emergency surgery. These patients have a higher risk of periop infections, hypotension, bradycardia, sepsis and non-ACS troponin release, therefor an inflated number of MIs. The population selected had a high background incidence of PAD and prior CVA, setting them up for stroke with significant BP drops, not unexpected with the extremely aggressive beta-blocker discontinuation regimen (SBP and HR cutoff too low for elderly and those with prior CVAs and PAD (who have high incidence of coronary and carotid disease))
3) No preop dose titration was done....It is not just HR, otherwise we can use clonidine and CCBs (verapamil or diltiazem perioperatively), but we don't...Clonidine has been beneficial in some small perioperative studies because it may block the central sympathetic outflow, somewhat akin to a beta-blocker but quite distinct from a CCB
4) Post-op dose of PO and IV BB excessive
So let us not jump to any conclusions about perioperative beta-blockers basec on this study...It has serious methodological flaws and the findings should be interpreted with a mountain of salt.
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
November 9, 2007 11:29 (EST)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
bisoprolol or atenolol Two evidence-based choices (relatively speaking, since the trials themselves had many flaws) are bisoprolol and atenolol.
Long-acting drugs (just as in heart failure) clearly are better in a setting where doses are frequently missed (eg, patient has gone down for an x-ray, nursing staff distracted by family). My mentor in Toronto published an analysis in which atenolol beat short-acting BID metoprolol in this very setting - albeit it was observational, but confounding would have been sucked out by the comparison of two active agents for the same indication (rather than versus "no therapy at all" as a control).
Titration to heart rate seems to be the key, seeing the patients well in advance, and going with agents that have been proven to work. Perhaps there is just something about long-acting metoprolol? (after all, it did not work in DIPOM, POBBLE, or MVaS study either in this setting). |
|
 |
 |
|
|
November 9, 2007 12:31 (EST)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Wow those are big doses Poise maybe showed with beta-blockers, there can be too much of a good thing. I never prescribe these massive doses perioperatively.
Metoprolol-xl 100 mg in the preoperative period, 100 mg in the six-hour postoperative period, 200 mg 12 hours later, and 200 mg daily thereafter out to 30 days. Doses were not titrated, and the drug was stopped only if blood pressure dipped below 100 mm Hg
The full fixed dose of metoprolol used in POISE is at the upper range of those used in previous trials. Also stated that "perhaps a systolic pressure of a 100 mm Hg is too low for hypertensive patients, the elderly, and those with a critical carotid or coronary stenosis."
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
November 10, 2007 09:34 (EST)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
I'm not agree I think that the guidelines shouldn't be changed because POISEd study is not clear about dose titration, the patients weren't beta-blocked in an individual basis, they just received a standard high dose.
I will not change my practice based upon this study, I will continue using it on a controlled basis. |
|
 |
 |
|
|
November 11, 2007 07:38 (EST)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Take a lemon and make lemonade The care of the post op patient is a carefully orchestrated dance that is difficult to choreograph for the masses. We certainly should never stop trying to categorize, study and report on practices, but we need to be very careful to represent as much as possible real world practice in our studies and this one DID NOT.
Borne out of prior perioperative trials have been the implementation of excellent and simple changes such as post op monitoring on the surgical floors, continuing beta blockers in those already on them and waiting for evidence of absorption of medication (i.e. controlled heart rate) p.o. prior to moving a patient off of telemetry.
So we definitely moved forward for a while.
With this trial, we've gone a bit backwards. 200 mg of a long acting beta blocker in an elderly "beta- blocker naive" patient? More guts than glory here. A more appropriate acronym for this trial would have been POISEn instead of POISEd.
And there are ways to beta block an elderly tachycardic patient post op . It starts with knowing the EF, valvular regurgitation issues and how far out from anesthesia and type of anesthesia the patient is. Look at the blood loss record, (even their pre op TSH is a hint on an occasion of the types of problems and the type and amount of beta blocker that may be required). The BUN/CR. are hints and the I and O for the surgery are critical.
I saw a classic example of a tachycardic hypotensive patient once who had been receiving lasix to get the urine output up. They were awake and alert so I asked him to stick out his tongue--if I had flicked it with my finger, it would have broken and crumbled into dust. The echo? Ef about 80%, empty ventricle. About a litre of saline later, urine output up and heart rate down. If I had added 200 mg of metroprolol , he would have looked like a beaten up POISE patient.
The triad of stethoscope/echo/common sense review of baseline and post op labs thrown in with respect for low GFR are usually enough to support any patient through a rocky post op period. And, even though it's not great for adrenergic discharge, sometimes for pts who develop AFib with marginal BP's, you have to load with digitalis.
As I stated previously, reporting this trial without subset analysis of who actually did poorly, what level of BP paired with age, EF/and degree of valvular regurgitation was a more of a disservice than a help. One cannot manage a complicated post operative patient as well without this knowledge, beta blocker or no beta blocker.
And you usually can't give a gazillion mgs of anything to anyone within the first 24 hours of starting it. I would have sharply reprimanded any medical student for doing such.
About the only good thing I can say about this trial is that it got folks talking about and paying more attention to the post op patient. And for that reason, I guess we should be grateful. That's called taking a lemon and making lemonade.
Melissa |
|
 |
 |
|
|
November 11, 2007 08:51 (EST)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
question to Melissa "And, even though it's not great for adrenergic discharge, sometimes for pts who develop AFib with marginal BP's, you have to load with digitalis. "
What are your thoughts on the use of intravenous amiodarone for rapid atrial fibrillation in hospital patients? I have heard diverse opinions on this. Particularly when the LV function is unknown. As a 'youth' I always preferred a lick of IV diltiazem in such situations as an unknown LV. I found digoxin not to work (though we always gave it). |
|
 |
 |
|
|
November 12, 2007 12:47 (EST)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Nope Dear all,
POISE didnt give us the answer we wanted, probably because it looked in all the wrong places. It would seem trials where B blockers were started close to the time of surgery failed - MaVS, DiPOM, POBBLE etc because of inadequate titration in individual patients. The Dutch guys have always taken the path of close titiration to HR weeks before surgery; this is my practice.
Blood pressure in emergency surgery is like money in the bank - once it is spent there may not be any more, and as such beta blockers in emergency surgery was always likely to be an inherently risky strategy. I guess the subgroup analysis will give us the answer to this one.
The NNT in most patients with beta blockers is likely to remain high (ie patients with HOPE like criteria who are having surgery), and as such implementation should be individualised. I still think high risk surgery and those with CAD are the ones who should still get beta blockers (and statins).
Does anyone what to do this trial??? |
|
 |
 |
|
|
November 12, 2007 08:29 (EST)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Dig.....a little better than nothing. Dan,
Digoxin is better than nothing. If you have BP to spare, diltiazem IV bales me out on many occasions too. I usually wind up with a digoxin and beta blocker combination with afib post op. Sometimes triple therapy cautiously because elderlies love to become part of the brady bunch on this regimen. If tachy/hypotensive with Afib post op I just cardiovert.
I don't utilize amiodarone IV much in any other setting than codes or refractory V tach. You can get into Brady issues there too. Plus, you have to be careful of liver function issues which can come into play in the post op population anyway sometimes.
Tim, I agree with you. Maybe Dan would like to do that trial. He's Mr. Statin!
Melissa |
|
 |
 |
|
|
November 12, 2007 12:04 (EST)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
DECREASE VI TRIAL American Heart Journal
Volume 148, Issue 6, December 2004, Pages 1047-1052
Clinical investigations: Trial design
Fluvastatin and bisoprolol for the reduction of perioperative cardiac mortality and morbidity in high-risk patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery: Rationale and design of the DECREASE-IV study
Olaf Schouten MDa, Don Poldermans MD, PhD, , b, Loes Visser MDb, Miklos D. Kertai MDc, Jan Klein MD, PhDb, Hero van Urk MD, PhDa, Maarten L. Simoons MD, PhDc, Louis L. van de Ven MD, PhDc, Maarten Vermeulen MScc, Jeroen J. Bax MD, PhDd, Thomas W. Lameris MD, PhDc and Eric Boersma PhDc
What will the DECREASE-IV trial teach us?
The DECREASE-IV trial has been designed to teach us critical new insights into the best pharmaceutical prevention of perioperative cardiovascular complications in surgical patients. This issue is of significant importance since cardiovascular complications are the main cause of death among patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery, accounting for an approximate death rate of 3–6% in moderate and high-risk patients. Apart from mortality, cardiovascular-caused perioperative complications necessitate a prolonged hospital stay in a substantial number of patients. As a consequence, a positive finding of the DECREASE-IV trial will have a major beneficial effect on perioperative mortality, morbidity and costs. It would provide us a clear indication for the routine use of statins, β-blockers or a combination of both in the perioperative period.
Initial recruitment of patients at the Erasmus Medical Center will begin in early 2004. The end of patient recruitment and the results of this trial are to be expected in the spring of 2008. Further information on the DECREASE-IV trial can be obtained at www.erasmusmc.nl or by calling +31 10 4634613.
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
November 12, 2007 05:41 (EST)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
GREAT! thanks for the information Dan. We'll be on the look out for it!
Melissa |
|
 |
 |
|
|
November 13, 2007 01:15 (EST)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Dutch Agreed re DECREASE. Happy to provide patients for Dan to do a trial on. We are lucky enough to have Don Poldermans coming to Western Australia in 2008. Hopefully he can give us the answer.
We are also looking at CPEX again as some of the data on this is very encouraging.
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
November 13, 2007 07:14 (EST)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
another idea How about a trial with pre op cardiac ultrasound evaluation vs. none? That would be interesting as well.
Melissa |
|
 |
 |
|
|
November 13, 2007 07:41 (EST)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
no trial for me I agree DECREASE IV will be interesting. According to the trial design report, the data will be available in early '08 (I hope this means ACC), but you never know. |
|
 |
 |
|
|
November 13, 2007 11:52 (EST)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Flawed Design went unnoticed Dan Poldermans and Boersma are perhaps the most knowledgeable group in the world when it comes to perioperative beta-blockers. They have repeatedly demonstrated the importance of gradual preoperative titration of beta-blockers, started way ahead of the surgical date. This was my practice at the Cleveland Clinic because we had the luxury of seeing patients in a perioperative clinic. POISE sacrificed this important aspect of perioperative management for the convenience of conducting a large simple trial and instead wantonly used dangerously high doses of beta-blockers post-op. I can almost guarantee that most of the deaths occurred in patients with watershed zone ischemic cerebral infarcts due to poor cerebral perfusion. Let us not forget that a substantial number if these patients had suffered a prior stroke and had PVD. Bob Wachter, the Chief of Hospital Medicine at UCSF, mentions in his blog that this is the final answer to the perioperative beta-blocker issue. I maintain that we must steer clear from such uninformed conclusions. I think we must all read the design paper published in the AHJ. My interpretation of the design paper makes me wonder how this design made it through IRBs. |
|
 |
 |
|
|
November 13, 2007 11:59 (EST)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Pre-op Echos One can make a case for a preop echo in very high risk individuals, especially those with a prior diagnosis of CHF but the routine performance of these procedures preop to assess the EF probably does not make a big impact on outcomes, as has been shown in studies. |
|
 |
 |
|
|
November 13, 2007 12:03 (EST)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Please check this paper for proper beta-blocker use Feringa HH, Bax JJ, Boersma E, Kertai MD, Meij SH, Galal W, Schouten O,
Thomson IR, Klootwijk P, van Sambeek MR, Klein J, Poldermans D.
High-dose beta-blockers and tight heart rate control reduce myocardial ischemia
and troponin T release in vascular surgery patients.
Circulation. 2006 Jul 4;114(1 Suppl):I344-9.
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
November 13, 2007 03:14 (EST)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
DOse of beta-blocker used In practice who starts the kind of doses they used in the study. The prudent physician will use lower initial starting doses and titrate more slowly when starting beta-blockade. Perhaps the trial should be redone with beta-blocker titration starting 2-4 weeks before surgery. |
|
 |
 |
|
|
December 16, 2007 03:45 (EST)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Not ready for prime time I think it would be a mistake to stop using beta-blockers peri-op based on this study in patients not on beta-blockers pre-op.
Certainly the reduction in BP/HR should be tailored to the individual patient.
Certainly this study should remind us to stop putting all patients on beta-blockers peri-op. |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |