Hemodynamic comparison of twice daily metoprolol tartrate with once daily metoprolol succinate in congestive heart failure.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the hemodynamic effects of twice daily metoprolol tartrate (MT) and once daily metoprolol succinate (MS) in congestive heart failure patients. BACKGROUND: Adverse hemodynamic effects with MT demonstrated during initiation persist with drug readministration during chronic therapy. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to 6.25 mg MT or 25 mg MS orally and the dose was gradually increased to a target of 50 mg twice a day or 100 mg once a day, respectively. Hemodynamic measurements were obtained at baseline and after three months of therapy--both before and after drug readministration. RESULTS: Long term metoprolol therapy produced significant functional, exercise and hemodynamic benefits with no difference in response between either metoprolol preparation in the 27 patients (MT [14], MS [13]). When full dose metoprolol was readministered during chronic therapy, there were parallel adverse hemodynamic effects in both drug groups. Cardiac index decreased by 0.6 liters/min/m2 (p \u3c 0.0001) with MT and by 0.5 liters/min/m2 (p \u3c 0.0001) with MS. Systematic vascular resistance increased by 253 dyne-sec-cm(-5) (p \u3c 0.001) with MT and by 267 dyne-sec-cm(-5) (p \u3c 0.0005) with MS. Stroke volume index decreased by 7.0 ml/m2 (p \u3c 0.0005) with MT and by 6.5 ml/m2 (p \u3c 0.0001) with MS, while SWI decreased by 6.2 g-m/m2 (p \u3c 0.0005) with MT and by 6.0 g-m/m2 (p \u3c 0.001) with MS. CONCLUSION: Metoprolol tartrate and MS produce similar hemodynamic and clinical effects acutely and chronically despite the fourfold greater starting dose of MS used in this study. A more rapid initiation with readily available starting doses of MS may offer distinct advantages compared with MT in treating chronic heart failure patients with beta-adrenergic blocking agents

Short-term and long-term hemodynamic and clinical effects of metoprolol alone and combined with amlodipine in patients with chronic heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Initiation of beta-blocker therapy is often limited by worsening congestive heart failure, which may manifest as worsening hemodynamics. Deleterious hemodynamic effects might be mitigated with the vasodilation of combined calcium channel/beta-blocker therapy. METHODS AND RESULTS: This prospective, randomized study assessed the safety and efficacy of metoprolol alone or combined with amlodipine on hemodynamic parameters at baseline, 2 hours after the first dose of study medication, and after 12 weeks of therapy in patients receiving background triple therapy for mild to severe heart failure. Functional, exercise, and hormonal status were assessed at baseline and end of study. Twenty-nine patients (mean age 50 +/- 12.1 years) were enrolled; 21 completed 12 weeks of treatment. Mean ejection fraction at baseline was 13.4% +/- 5.7%; 79% of patients had heart failure classified as New York Heart Association class III, and 66% had heart failure of idiopathic origin. Heart rate and blood pressure did not change with short-term therapy in either group. The first dose of both regimens produced significant increases in systemic vascular resistance and significant decreases in cardiac output and index and stroke volume and stroke work indexes; combination therapy acutely yielded small but statistically significant increases in pulmonary artery, pulmonary capillary wedge, and right atrial pressures. Long-term therapy with both regimens produced significant decreases in heart rate, systemic vascular resistance, and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure and significant increases in cardiac output and index and stroke volume and stroke work indexes. Combination therapy produced significant long-term decreases in blood pressure. CONCLUSIONS: There was no further measurable benefit with the addition of amlodipine to metoprolol compared with the effects of metoprolol alone. Therapy with metoprolol alone and the combination of metoprolol and amlodipine was well tolerated in patients with mild to severe heart failure, as evidenced by a lack of adverse effects on hemodynamic parameters over the short term and clinical and hemodynamic improvement with long-term treatment