Impact of Cardioselective β-Blockers on Mortality in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Atherosclerosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: beta-Blocker use is associated with improved health outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disease. There is a general reluctance to prescribe beta-blockers in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) because they may worsen symptoms. OBJECTIVES: We investigated the relationship between cardioselective beta-blockers and mortality in patients with COPD undergoing major vascular surgery. METHODS: We evaluated 3,371 consecutive patients who underwent major vascular surgery at one academic institution between 1990 and 2006. The patients were divided into those with and without COPD on the basis of symptoms and spirometry. The major endpoints were 30-day and long-term mortality after vascular surgery. Patients were defined as receiving low-dose therapy if the dosage was less than 25% of the maximum recommended therapeutic dose; dosages higher than this were defined as intensified dose. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: There were 1,205 (39%) patients with COPD of whom 462 (37%) received cardioselective beta-blocking agents. beta-Blocker use was associated independently with lower 30-day (odds ratio, 0.37; 95% confidence interval, 0.19-0.72) and long-term mortality in patients with COPD (hazards ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.60-0.88). Intensified dose was associated with both reduced 30-day and long-term mortality in patients with COPD, whereas low dose was not. CONCLUSIONS: Cardioselective beta-blockers were associated with reduced mortality in patients with COPD undergoing vascular surgery. In carefully selected patients with COPD, the use of cardioselective beta-blockers appears to be safe and associated with reduced mortality.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".