Clinical Efficacy of Beta-1 Selective Beta-Blockers Versus Propranolol in Patients With Thyroid Storm: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

IF 7.7 1区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Critical Care Medicine Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-29 DOI:10.1097/CCM.0000000000006285
Yuichiro Matsuo, Taisuke Jo, Hideaki Watanabe, Hiroki Matsui, Kiyohide Fushimi, Hideo Yasunaga
{"title":"Clinical Efficacy of Beta-1 Selective Beta-Blockers Versus Propranolol in Patients With Thyroid Storm: A Retrospective Cohort Study.","authors":"Yuichiro Matsuo, Taisuke Jo, Hideaki Watanabe, Hiroki Matsui, Kiyohide Fushimi, Hideo Yasunaga","doi":"10.1097/CCM.0000000000006285","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Thyroid storm is the most severe manifestation of thyrotoxicosis. Beta-blockers are among the standard treatment regimens for this condition, with propranolol being the historically preferred option. However, 2016 guidelines issued by the Japan Thyroid Association and the Japan Endocrine Society recommend the use of beta-1 selective beta-blockers over nonselective beta-blockers, such as propranolol. Nevertheless, evidence supporting this recommendation is limited. Herein, we aimed to investigate the in-hospital mortality of patients with thyroid storms based on the choice of beta-blockers.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>The Diagnosis Procedure Combination database, a national inpatient database in Japan.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>Patients hospitalized with thyroid storm between April 2010 and March 2022.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Propensity-score overlap weighting was performed to compare in-hospital mortality between patients who received beta-1 selective beta-blockers and those who received propranolol. Subgroup analysis was also conducted, considering the presence or absence of acute heart failure.</p><p><strong>Measurements and main results: </strong>Among the 2462 eligible patients, 1452 received beta-1 selective beta-blockers and 1010 received propranolol. The crude in-hospital mortality rates were 9.3% for the beta-1 selective beta-blocker group and 6.2% for the propranolol group. After adjusting for baseline variables, the use of beta-1 selective beta-blockers was not associated with lower in-hospital mortality (6.3% vs. 7.4%; odds ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.57-1.26). Furthermore, no significant difference in in-hospital mortality was observed in patients with acute heart failure.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In patients with thyroid storm, the choice between beta-1 selective beta-blockers and propranolol did not affect in-hospital mortality, regardless of the presence of acute heart failure. Therefore, both beta-1 selective beta-blockers and propranolol can be regarded as viable treatment options for beta-blocker therapy in cases of thyroid storm, contingent upon the clinical context.</p>","PeriodicalId":10765,"journal":{"name":"Critical Care Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Care Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000006285","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Thyroid storm is the most severe manifestation of thyrotoxicosis. Beta-blockers are among the standard treatment regimens for this condition, with propranolol being the historically preferred option. However, 2016 guidelines issued by the Japan Thyroid Association and the Japan Endocrine Society recommend the use of beta-1 selective beta-blockers over nonselective beta-blockers, such as propranolol. Nevertheless, evidence supporting this recommendation is limited. Herein, we aimed to investigate the in-hospital mortality of patients with thyroid storms based on the choice of beta-blockers.

Design: Retrospective cohort study.

Setting: The Diagnosis Procedure Combination database, a national inpatient database in Japan.

Patients: Patients hospitalized with thyroid storm between April 2010 and March 2022.

Interventions: Propensity-score overlap weighting was performed to compare in-hospital mortality between patients who received beta-1 selective beta-blockers and those who received propranolol. Subgroup analysis was also conducted, considering the presence or absence of acute heart failure.

Measurements and main results: Among the 2462 eligible patients, 1452 received beta-1 selective beta-blockers and 1010 received propranolol. The crude in-hospital mortality rates were 9.3% for the beta-1 selective beta-blocker group and 6.2% for the propranolol group. After adjusting for baseline variables, the use of beta-1 selective beta-blockers was not associated with lower in-hospital mortality (6.3% vs. 7.4%; odds ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.57-1.26). Furthermore, no significant difference in in-hospital mortality was observed in patients with acute heart failure.

Conclusions: In patients with thyroid storm, the choice between beta-1 selective beta-blockers and propranolol did not affect in-hospital mortality, regardless of the presence of acute heart failure. Therefore, both beta-1 selective beta-blockers and propranolol can be regarded as viable treatment options for beta-blocker therapy in cases of thyroid storm, contingent upon the clinical context.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
甲状腺风暴患者使用 Beta-1 选择性 Beta-受体阻滞剂与普萘洛尔的临床疗效:回顾性队列研究
目的:甲状腺风暴是甲状腺毒症最严重的表现。β-受体阻滞剂是治疗这种疾病的标准方案之一,普萘洛尔是历来的首选。然而,日本甲状腺协会和日本内分泌学会发布的2016年指南建议使用β-1选择性β-受体阻滞剂,而不是普萘洛尔等非选择性β-受体阻滞剂。然而,支持这一建议的证据却很有限。在此,我们旨在根据β-受体阻滞剂的选择来调查甲状腺风暴患者的院内死亡率:设计:回顾性队列研究:患者:日本全国住院患者数据库 "诊断程序组合数据库 "中的患者:患者:2010年4月至2022年3月期间因甲状腺风暴住院的患者:对接受β-1选择性β-受体阻滞剂治疗的患者和接受普萘洛尔治疗的患者的院内死亡率进行倾向分数重叠加权比较。此外,还进行了分组分析,考虑是否存在急性心力衰竭:在2462名符合条件的患者中,1452人接受了β-1选择性β-受体阻滞剂治疗,1010人接受了普萘洛尔治疗。β-1选择性β-受体阻滞剂组的院内粗死亡率为9.3%,普萘洛尔组为6.2%。调整基线变量后,使用β-1选择性β-受体阻滞剂与较低的院内死亡率无关(6.3%对7.4%;几率比0.85;95% CI,0.57-1.26)。此外,急性心力衰竭患者的院内死亡率也没有明显差异:结论:在甲状腺风暴患者中,无论是否存在急性心力衰竭,选择β-1选择性β-受体阻滞剂和普萘洛尔不会影响院内死亡率。因此,根据临床情况,β-1选择性β-受体阻滞剂和普萘洛尔都可被视为甲状腺风暴患者β-受体阻滞剂治疗的可行选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Critical Care Medicine
Critical Care Medicine 医学-危重病医学
CiteScore
16.30
自引率
5.70%
发文量
728
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Critical Care Medicine is the premier peer-reviewed, scientific publication in critical care medicine. Directed to those specialists who treat patients in the ICU and CCU, including chest physicians, surgeons, pediatricians, pharmacists/pharmacologists, anesthesiologists, critical care nurses, and other healthcare professionals, Critical Care Medicine covers all aspects of acute and emergency care for the critically ill or injured patient. Each issue presents critical care practitioners with clinical breakthroughs that lead to better patient care, the latest news on promising research, and advances in equipment and techniques.
期刊最新文献
Time Controlled Adaptive Ventilation/Airway Pressure Release Ventilation Can be Used Effectively in Patients With or at High Risk of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome "Time is the Soul of the World" Pythagoras. Caution-Do Not Attempt This at Home. Airway Pressure Release Ventilation Should Not Routinely Be Used in Patients With or at Risk of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Outside of a Clinical Trial. Resuscitation for Donation After Brain Death: Respecting Autonomy and Maximizing Utility. Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for Organ Preservation After Death Risks Public Trust and Requires Explicit Consent. Two Weeks Versus One Week of Maximal Patient-Intensivist Continuity for Adult Medical Intensive Care Patients: A Two-Center Target Trial Emulation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1