You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 165 No. 3, February 14, 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Editor's Correspondence
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (1)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related articles
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Cardiovascular System
 •Cardiovascular Disease/ Myocardial Infarction
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

An Alternative View of Current Evidence in Support of Perioperative {beta}-Blockers

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

We read with interest the studies by Siddiqui et al1 and Lindenauer et al.2 Each report has, as its raison d’être, the supposition that perioperative {beta}-blockade is the standard of care for the prevention of postoperative cardiac complications. Furthermore, both studies presume that physicians who do not prescribe {beta}-blockers are not practicing good perioperative medicine. We wish to express the contrarian view that the evidence supporting the recommendation for perioperative {beta}-blockade is insufficient and that a vast amount of research is still required in the field of perioperative risk reduction.

Two meta-analyses have pooled the data from randomized controlled studies of perioperative {beta}-blockade.3-4 Although both groups of reviewers found statistically significant reductions in myocardial infarction (MI), the pooled effect estimates were heavily weighted by 2 studies. One study was an interim analysis of an unblinded trial of highly selected, high-risk vascular patients.5 In the second study,6 the in-hospital incidence of . . . [Full Text of this Article]


AUTHOR INFORMATION
W. Scott Beattie, MD, PhD, FRCPC; Duminda N. Wijeysundera, MD; Peter T. Choi, MD, MSc(Epid), FRCPC



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLES

The Potential Preventability of Postoperative Myocardial Infarction: Underuse of Perioperative {beta}-Adrenergic Blockade
Peter K. Lindenauer, Janice Fitzgerald, Nancy Hoople, and Evan M. Benjamin
Arch Intern Med. 2004;164(7):762-766.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Lack of Physician Concordance With Guidelines on the Perioperative Use of {beta}-Blockers
Anita K. Siddiqui, Shahid Ahmed, Henri Delbeau, David Conner, and Joseph Mattana
Arch Intern Med. 2004;164(6):664-667.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

{beta}-Blockers and Reduction of Cardiac Events in Noncardiac Surgery: Scientific Review
Andrew D. Auerbach and Lee Goldman
JAMA. 2002;287(11):1435-1444.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  






HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2005 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.