Cochrane for Clinicians

Putting Evidence into Practice

Are Beta Blockers Effective First-line Treatments for Hypertension?



FREE PREVIEW Log in or buy this issue to read the full article. AAFP members and paid subscribers get free access to all articles. Subscribe now.


FREE PREVIEW Subscribe or buy this issue. AAFP members and paid subscribers get free access to all articles.

Am Fam Physician. 2007 Nov 1;76(9):1306-1308.

This clinical content conforms to AAFP criteria for evidence-based continuing medical education (EB CME). See CME Quiz on page 1277.

Clinical Scenario

A 55-year-old woman presents with new-onset hypertension.

Clinical Question

Should beta blockers be used as first-line treatments for lowering blood pressure?

Evidence-Based Answer

Current evidence does not support the use of beta blockers as initial therapy for hypertension.

Cochrane Abstract

Background: Two recent systematic reviews found first-line beta blockers to be less effective in reducing the incidence of stroke and the combined end point of stroke, myocardial infarction, and death compared with all other antihypertensive drugs taken together. However, beta blockers might be better or worse than a specific class of drugs for a particular outcome measure; therefore, comparing beta blockers with all other classes taken together could be misleading. In addition, these systematic reviews did not assess the tolerability of beta blockers relative to other antihypertensive medications. Thus, we undertook this review to reassess the place of beta blockers as first-line therapy for hypertension compared with other major classes of antihypertensive drugs.

Objectives: To quantify the effectiveness and safety of beta blockers on morbidity and mortality end points in adults with hypertension.

Search Strategy: We searched eligible studies up to June 2006 in the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Medline, Embase, and reference lists of previous reviews, and by contacting hypertension experts.

Selection Criteria: We selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the effects of beta blockers compared with placebo, no therapy, or other drug classes (as monotherapy or first-line therapy for hypertension) on mortality and morbidity end points in men and non-pregnant women 18 years or older.

Data Collection and Analysis: At least two authors independently applied study selection criteria, assessed study quality, and extracted data; differences were resolved by consensus. We expressed study results as relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and conducted quantitative analyses with trial participants in groups to which they were randomly allocated, regardless of which or how much treatment they actually received. In the absence of significant heterogeneity among studies (P > .1), we performed a meta-analysis using a fixed-effects method. Otherwise, we used the random-effects method and investigated the cause of heterogeneity by stratified analysis. In addition, we used the Higgins statistic (I2) to quantify the amount of between-study variability in effect attributable to true heterogeneity rather than chance.

Main Results: Thirteen RCTs (n = 91,561) that met our inclusion criteria compared beta blockers with placebo or no treatment (four trials with 23,613 participants), diuretics (five trials with 18,241 participants), calcium channel blockers (four trials with 44,825 participants), and renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors (three trials with 10,828 participants). The risk of all-cause mortality was not different between first-line beta blockers and placebo (RR = 0.99; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.11; I2 = 0 percent); diuretics; or RAS inhibitors, but the risk was higher for beta blockers compared with calcium channel blockers (RR = 1.07; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.14; I2 = 2.2%; absolute risk increase [ARI] = 0.5 percent; number needed to harm [NNH] = 200).

The risk of total cardiovascular disease was lower for first-line beta blockers compared with placebo (RR = 0.88; 95% CI, 0.79 to 0.97; I2 = 21.4 percent; absolute risk reduction [ARR] = 0.7 percent; number needed to treat [NNT] = 140). This is primarily a reflection of the significant decrease in stroke (RR = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.96; I2 = 0 percent; ARR = 0.5 percent; NNT = 200). Coronary heart disease risk was not significantly different between beta blockers and placebo. The effect of beta blockers on cardiovascular disease was significantly worse than that of calcium channel blockers (RR = 1.18; 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.29; I2 = 0 percent; ARI = 1.3 percent; NNH = 80) but was not significantly different from that of diuretics or RAS inhibitors. Increased total cardiovascular disease was caused by an increase in stroke compared with calcium channel blockers (RR = 1.24; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.40; I2 = 0 percent; ARI = 0.6 percent; NNH = 180). There was also an increase in stroke with beta blockers compared with RAS inhibitors (RR = 1.30; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.53; I2 = 29.1 percent; ARI = 1.5 percent; NNH = 65).

Coronary heart disease risk was not significantly different between beta blockers and diuretics or calcium channel blockers or RAS inhibitors. In addition, patients taking beta blockers were more likely to discontinue treatment because of adverse effects than those taking diuretics (RR = 1.86; 95% CI, 1.39 to 2.50; I2 = 78.2 percent; ARI = 6.4 percent; NNH = 16) or RAS inhibitors (RR = 1.41; 95% CI, 1.29 to 1.54; I2 = 12.1 percent; ARI = 5.5 percent; NNH=18); there was no significant difference between beta blockers and calcium channel blockers.

Authors' conclusions: The available evidence does not support the use of beta blockers as first-line drugs in the treatment of hypertension. This conclusion is based on the relatively weak effect of beta blockers to reduce stroke and the absence of an effect on coronary heart disease when compared with placebo or no treatment. More importantly, it is based on the trend towards worse outcomes compared with calcium channel blockers, RAS inhibitors, and thiazide diuretics. Most of the evidence for these conclusions comes from trials in which atenolol (Tenormin) was the beta blocker used (75 percent of participants taking beta blockers in this review). However, it is not known whether beta blockers have differential effects on younger and older patients or whether there are differences among the subtypes of beta blockers.


These summaries have been derived from Cochrane reviews published in the Cochrane Database of SystematicReviews in the Cochrane Library. Their content has, as far as possible, been checked with the authors of the originalreviews, but the summaries should not be regarded as an official product of the Cochrane Collaboration; minorediting changes have been made to the text (http://www.cochrane.org)

Practice Pointers

To reduce rates of stroke and coronary heart disease, the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC 7) recommends reducing blood pressures to 140/90 mm Hg in the general population and to 130/80 mm Hg in patients with diabetes or chronic kidney disease.1 If patients do not meet blood pressure goals with lifestyle modifications, thiazide diuretics are recommended as first-line pharmacotherapies. Other antihypertensive medications are recommended if certain “compelling indications” are present: beta blockers for coronary heart disease with angina, beta blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) for heart failure, and ACE inhibitors or ARBs for diabetes.1

Two recent meta-analyses found that atenolol (Tenormin) was less effective than other anti-hypertensives at reducing stroke2 and overall cardiovascular outcomes,3 calling into question the role of beta blockers in the primary treatment of hypertension. This Cochrane review found that the highest-quality evidence on the effect of beta blockers on patient-oriented outcomes such as morbidity and mortality is mainly from studies of atenolol in North American and Western European populations.4

Overall, the reviewed studies failed to provide support for the use of beta blockers. Although beta blockers were no better or worse than diuretics, they were inferior to calcium channel blockers in reducing risk of mortality or total cardiovascular disease and were inferior to ACE inhibitors or ARBs and calcium channel blockers in reducing risk of stroke. The only findings favoring beta blockers showed that they were superior to placebo in reducing risk of stroke and total cardiovascular disease. Table 1 compares beta blockers with other antihypertensive medications.4

Table 1

Beta Blockers vs. Other Antihypertensives for Improving Patient-Oriented Outcomes

Comparison antihypertensive Outcomes
Total mortality Coronary heart disease Stroke Total cardiovascular disease

Placebo

No difference

No difference

Beta blockers superior (NNT = 200)

Beta blockers superior (NNT = 140)

Diuretics

No difference

No difference

No difference

No difference

Calcium channel blockers

Beta blockers inferior (NNH = 200)

No difference

Beta blockers inferior (NNH = 180)

Beta blockers inferior (NNH = 80)

ACE inhibitors or ARBs

No difference

No difference

Beta blockers inferior (NNH = 65)

No difference


NNT = number needed to treat; NNH = number needed to harm; ACE = angiotensin-converting enzyme; ARB = angiotensin receptor blocker.

Information from reference1.

Table 1   Beta Blockers vs. Other Antihypertensives for Improving Patient-Oriented Outcomes

View Table

Table 1

Beta Blockers vs. Other Antihypertensives for Improving Patient-Oriented Outcomes

Comparison antihypertensive Outcomes
Total mortality Coronary heart disease Stroke Total cardiovascular disease

Placebo

No difference

No difference

Beta blockers superior (NNT = 200)

Beta blockers superior (NNT = 140)

Diuretics

No difference

No difference

No difference

No difference

Calcium channel blockers

Beta blockers inferior (NNH = 200)

No difference

Beta blockers inferior (NNH = 180)

Beta blockers inferior (NNH = 80)

ACE inhibitors or ARBs

No difference

No difference

Beta blockers inferior (NNH = 65)

No difference


NNT = number needed to treat; NNH = number needed to harm; ACE = angiotensin-converting enzyme; ARB = angiotensin receptor blocker.

Information from reference1.

Lifetime risk of coronary heart disease and stroke is directly related to higher blood pressure5; therefore, the primary reason for treating hypertension is to reduce morbidity and mortality from these conditions. Generic beta blockers are inexpensive and may seem appealing as initial antihypertensive therapy; however, this Cochrane review supports the JNC 7 recommendation to begin medical treatment of high blood pressure with thiazide diuretics. ALLHAT (Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering treatment to prevent Heart Attack Trial) demonstrated that thiazide diuretics are as effective as calcium channel blockers and ACE inhibitors for reducing cardiovascular risk.6

Address correspondence to William E. Cayley, Jr., MD, bcayley@yahoo.com. Reprints are not available from the author.

Author disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

REFERENCES

1. Wiysonge CS, Bradley H, Mayosi BM, Maroney R, Mbewu A, Opie LH, et al. Beta-blockers for hypertension. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;(1):CD002003.

2. Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR, Cushman WC, Green LA, Izzo JL Jr, et al. for the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; National High Blood Pressure Education Program Coordinating Committee The seventh report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Hypertension. 2003;42:1206–52.

3. Lindholm LH, Carlberg B, Samuelsson O. Should beta blockers remain first choice in the treatment of primary hypertension? A meta-analysis. Lancet. 2005;366:1545–53.

4. Khan N, McAlister FA. Re-examining the efficacy of beta-blockers for the treatment of hypertension: a meta-analysis [Published correction appears in CMAJ 2007;176:976]. CMAJ. 2006;174:1737–42.

5. Lewington S, Clarke R, Qizilbash N, Peto R, Collins R. for the Prospective Studies Collaboration Age-specific relevance of usual blood pressure to vascular mortality: a meta-analysis of individual data for one million adults in 61 prospective studies [Published correction appears in Lancet 2003;361:1060]. Lancet. 2002;360:1903–13.

6. ALLHAT Officers and Coordinators for the ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group. Major outcomes in high-risk hypertensive patients randomized to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or calcium channel blocker vs diuretic: the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering treatment to prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) [Published corrections appear in JAMA 2003;289:178, and JAMA 2004;291:2196]. JAMA. 2002;288:2981–97.

The Cochrane Abstract is a summary of a review from the Cochrane Library. It is accompanied by an interpretation that will help clinicians put evidence into practice. Dr. Cayley presents a clinical scenario and question based on the Cochrane Abstract, followed by an evidence-based answer and a critique of the review. The practice recommendations in this activity are available at http://www.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab002003.html.

The series coordinator for AFP is Clarissa Kripke, MD, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of California, San Francisco.


Copyright © 2007 by the American Academy of Family Physicians.
This content is owned by the AAFP. A person viewing it online may make one printout of the material and may use that printout only for his or her personal, non-commercial reference. This material may not otherwise be downloaded, copied, printed, stored, transmitted or reproduced in any medium, whether now known or later invented, except as authorized in writing by the AAFP. Contact afpserv@aafp.org for copyright questions and/or permission requests.

Want to use this article elsewhere? Get Permissions


Article Tools

  • Print page
  • Share this page
  • AFP CME Quiz

Information From Industry

More in Pubmed

Navigate this Article