Skip to main content
. 2019 Mar 20;14(3):e0212785. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0212785

Table 1. Included trial characteristics.

Study, Year, Country Comparison (mg) Headache Type Classification Design Duration (weeks) Sample Size (dropout %) Age Women Dose titrated Rescue Medication Allowed
Acebutolol
Nanda, 1978, Scotland Acebutolol (800) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic NS Crossover 12 43 (23%) NS 74% Yes Yes
Alprenolol
Ekbom, 1975, Sweden Alprenolol (200) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic Ad-hoc 1962 Crossover 6 33 (15) 41.5 82% No Yes
Atenolol
Forssman, 1983, Sweden Atenolol (100) v. Placebo Migraine-unspecified Ad-hoc 1962 Crossover 13 24 (17) 40 80% No Yes
Johannsson, 1987, Sweden Atenolol (100) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic Ad-hoc 1962 Crossover 12 72 (13) 43 70% No Yes
Stensrud, 1980, Norway Propranolol (160) v. Atenolol (100) Migraine-episodic Ad-hoc 1962 Crossover 6 35 (20) NS 69% No Yes
Bisoprolol
van de Ven, 1997, Europe Bisoprolol (5) v. Bisoprolol (10) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic IHS1988 Parallel 12 226 (14) 38.7 82% No Yes
Metoprolol
Andersson, 1983, Denmark Metoprolol (200) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic WFNRG 1969 Parallel 8 71 (13) 39.7 85% No Yes
Diener, 2001, Europe Metoprolol (200) v. Aspirin (300) Migraine-episodic IHS 1988 Parallel 16 270 (15) 39.4 81% Yes Yes
Gong, 2016, China Metoprolol (25) + Flunarizine (5) v. Flunarizine (5) Migraine-unspecified Parallel 12 80 (0) 47.5 40% No Yes
Grotemeyer, 1988, Germany Metoprolol (200) v. Flunarizine (10) Migraine-episodic Ad hoc 1962 Crossover 7 29 (17) 39 79% No Yes
Grotemeyer, 1990, Germany Metoprolol (200) v. Acetylsalicyclic Acid (1500) Migraine-episodic IHS 1988 Crossover 12 28 (NS) 31 82% No Yes
Hesse, 1994, Denmark Metoprolol (100) v. Acupuncture Migraine-episodic IHS 1988 Parallel 17 85 (10) 44.7 84% No Yes
Kangasniemi, 1987, Scandinavia Metoprolol (200) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic Ad-hoc 1962 Crossover 8 77 (11) 37.5 80% No Yes
Langohr, 1985, Germany Metoprolol (100) v. Clomipramine (100) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic Ad-hoc 1962 Crossover 4 63 (43) 44.4 67% No Yes
Li, 2006, China Metoprolol (125) v. Placebo Migraine-unspecified IHS 1988 Parallel 12 60 (0) 48.5 100% No Yes
Louis 1985, Europe Metoprolol (100) v. Clonidine (0.1) Migraine-episodic WFNRG 1969 Crossover 8 31 (26) 35.5 81% Yes Yes
Ma, 2011, China Metoprolol (50) + Flunarizine (5) v. Flunarizine (5) Migraine-episodic HIS 2004 Parallel 48 56 (0) 36.3 65% No Yes
Schellenberg, 2008, Germany Metoprolol (142.5) v. Nebivolol (5) Migraine-episodic IHS 2004 Parallel 18 30 (7) 39 87% Yes Yes
Siniatchkin, 2007, Germany Metoprolol (200) v. Placebo Migraine-unspecified IHS2004 Parallel 12 20 (0%) 37 85% Yes Yes
Sorensen 1991, Denmark Metoprolol (200) v. Flunarizine (10) Migraine IHS 1988 Parallel 20 149 (1) 42 79% No Yes
Steiner, 1988, UK Metoprolol Cr (100) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic Vahlquist 1955 Parallel 8 59 (NS) 37.4 76% No Yes
Streng 2005, Germany Metoprolol (200) v. Acupuncture) Migraine-episodic IHS 1997 Parallel 12 114 (17) 36.6 88% Yes Yes
Vilming, 1985, Sweden Metoprolol (100) v. Pizotifen (1.5) Migraine-episodic WFNRG 1969 Crossover 8 35 (14) 37.6 83% Yes Yes
Worz 1992, Germany Metoprolol (200) v. Bisoprolol (10) Migraine-episodic IHS1988 Crossover 12 125 (38) 38.5 71% Yes Yes
Yang, 2006, China Metoprolol (90) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic IHS 1988 Parallel 12 60 (0) 48.5 100% No Yes
Yang, 2016, China Metoprolol (95) v. Metoprolol (95) + Fluoxetine Migraine-episodic NS Parallel 6 120 (0) 38.4 64% No Yes
Zhou, 2015, China Metoprolol (95) v. Metoprolol (95) + Fluoxetine Migraine-episodic NS Parallel 6 112 (0) 37.0 63% No Yes
Nadolol
Freitag, 1984, USA Nadolol (80) v. Nadolol (160) v. Placebo Migraine-unspecified Ad-hoc 1962 Parallel 12 32 (20) 36.7 81% No Yes
Ryan, 1982, USA Nadolol (80) v. Nadolol (160) v Nadolol (240) v Placebo Migraine-episodic NS Parallel 12 80 (1%) NS 78% No Yes
Oxprenolol
Ekbom, 1977, Sweden Oxprenolol (240) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic Ad-hoc 1962 Crossover 12 34 (12) 41.8 76% No Yes
Pindolol
Ekbom, 1972, Sweden Pindolol (7.5) v. Pindolol (15) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic Ad-hoc 1962 Parallel 4 30 (NS) 33.7 87% No Yes
Pindolol + Amitriptyline
Agius, 2013, Italy Pindolol (10)+ Amitriptyline (10) v. Amitriptyline (10) v. Placebo Tension-chronic IHS 2004 Parallel 8 64 (3) 35.6 74% No Yes
Streng, 2005, Germany Metoprolol (200) v. Acupuncture Migraine-episodic IHS 1997 Parallel 12 114 (17) 36.6 88% Yes Yes
Propranolol
Ahuja, 1985, India Propranolol (120) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic Ad-hoc 1962 Crossover 8 26 (NS) NS 46% No NS
al-Qassab, 1993, UK Propranolol (80) v. Propranolol (160) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic Ad-hoc 1962 Crossover 8 45 (33) 36 80% No Yes
Albers, 1989, USA Propranolol (180) v. Nifedipine (60) Migraine-episodic Ad hoc 1962 Parallel 24 40 (37) 35.2 89% Yes Yes
Andersson, 1981, Denmark Propranolol (160) v. Femoxitine (400) Migraine NS Crossover 24 49 (24) 38 69% Yes Yes
Ashtari, 2008, Iran Propranolol (80) vs. Topiramate (50) Migraine-episodic IHS 2005 Parallel 8 62 (3) 30.8 82% Yes Yes
Baldrati, 1983, Italy Propranolol (80) v. Aspirin (1.9 mg/kg) Migraine-not specified Ad hoc 1962 Crossover 12 18 (33) 33.3 89% No NS
Behan, 1980, Scotland Propranolol (120) v. Methysergide (3) Migraine-not specified NS Crossover 12 56 (36) NS 66% No No
Bonuso, 1998, Italy Propranolol (80) v. Flunarizine (10) Migraine-not specified IHS 1988 Parallel 8 50 (16) 32 68% No NS
Bordini, 1997, Brazil Propranolol (60) v. Flunarizine (10) v. Combo. Migraine-episodic IHS 1988 Parallel 17 52 (13) 31.2 91% No Yes
Borgesen, 1974, Denmark Propranolol (120) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic Ad-hoc 1962 Crossover 12 12 (33) 37.6 83% Yes Yes
Carroll, 1990, UK Propranolol (80) v. Propranolol (160) Migraine-episodic Ad hoc 1962 Crossover 12 51 (27) 39 69% No Yes
Chen, 2009, China Propranolol (60) + Flunarizine (10) v. Topoiramate (100) Migraine-episodic IHS 1988 Parallel 12 82 (0) 38.2 60% Yes Yes
Dahlof, 1987, Sweden Propranolol (120) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic WFNRG 1969 Crossover 4 28 (0) NS 93% No Yes
Diener, 1996, German Propranolol (120) v. Cylcendalate (1200) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic IHS 1988 Parallel 12 214 (17) 39 78% Yes Yes
Diener, 2002, Germany Propranolol (160) v. Flunarizine (5) v. Flunarizine (10) Migraine-episodic IHS 1988 Parallel 16 808 (18) 38.8 63% Yes Yes
Diener, 2004, Europe Propranolol (160) v. Topiramate (100) v. Topiramate (200) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic IHS 1988 Parallel 26 575 (37) 41 80% Yes Yes
Domingues, 2009, Brazil Propranolol (80) v. Nortriptyline (40) v. Combo. Migraine-chronic IHS 2004 Parallel 12 76 (42) NS NS Yes Yes
DongXiang, 2010, China Propranolol (90) + Amitriptyline (100) v. Amitriptyline (100) Migraine-episodic HIS 1988 Parallel 12 310 (0) 32.5 80% Yes Yes
Formisano, 1991, Italy Propranolol (120) v. Nimodipine (120) Migraine-episodic IHS 1988 Parallel 16 22 (14) 39.2 55% No Yes
Forssman, 1976, Sweden Propranolol (240) v. Placebo Migraine-unspecified NS Crossover 10 40 (20) 37.4 88% No Yes
Gawel, 1992, Canada Propranolol (120) v. Flunarizine (10) Migraine-episodic WFNRG 1970 Parallel 16 94 (19) 35.9 89% Yes Yes
Gerber, 1991, Germany Propranolol (120) v. Metoprolol (150) v. Nifedipine (30) Migraine-episodic IHS 1988 Parallel 12 58 (NS) 42.4 73% Yes Yes
Gerber, 1995, Germany Propranolol (120/160) v. Cyclandelate (1200/1600) Migraine-episodic IHS 1988 Parallel 8 84 (26) 40.9 90% No Yes
Ghobadi, 2013, Iran Propranolol (120) v. Nimodipine (30) Migraine IHS 2004 Parallel 24 102 (2) 47 83% No Yes
Grotemeyer, 1987, German Propranolol (120) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic Ad-hoc 1962 Crossover 12 30 (20) 36 73% No Yes
Havanka-Kannianen, 1988, Finland Propranolol (80) v. Propranolol (160) Migraine-episodic Ad-hoc 1962 Crossover 12 48 (13) 37.7 81% No Yes
Hedman, 1986, Denmark Propranolol (80) v. Metoprolol (100) Migraine-episodic WFNRG 1970 Crossover 4 12 (0) 40 67% NS Yes
Holdorff, 1977, Germany Propranolol (120) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic Ad-hoc 1962 Parallel 12 53 (30) NS NS No Yes
Holroyd, 2010, USA Propranolol/Nadolol v. Propranolol/Nadolol + Behavior Therapy v. Behavior therapy v. Placebo Migraine-episodic IHS 1988 Parallel 64 232 (51) 38.2 79% Yes Yes
Jin, 2001, China Propranolol (30) + Flunarizine (10) v. Diazepam (30) + Nimodipine (60) Migraine NS Parallel 24 84 (0) NS 75% No Yes
Johnson, 1986, New Zealand Propranolol (240) Mefenamic Acid (1500) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic NS Crossover 12 29 (41) 42 69% No Yes
Kangasniemi 1983, Finland Propranolol (160) v. Femoxetine (400) Migraine-episodic NS Crossover 12 29 (11) 37 86% No Yes
Kangasniemi 1984, Finland Propranolol (240) v. Metoprolol (200) Migraine-episodic WFNRG 1970 Crossover 8 36 (6) 33.8 89% No Yes
Kaniecki, 1997, USA Propranolol (240) v. Divalproex (1500) Migraine-episodic IHS 1988 Crossover 12 37 (14) NS 81% Yes Yes
Kass, 1980, Norway Propranolol (160) v. Clonidine (0.1) Migraine-unspecified WFNRG 1970 Crossover 16 23 (9) 39.7 30% No Yes
Kaushik, 2005, India Propranolol (80) v. Biofeedback Migraine-episodic IHS 1988 Parallel 24 192 (13) NS 69% No Yes
Ke, 2003, China Propranolol (30) v. Propranolol (30) + Flunarizine (5) v. Flunarizine (5) Migraine-chronic IHS 1988 Parallel 8 121 (0) 31 74% No Yes
Kjaersgard 1994, Denmark Propranolol (120) v. Tolfenamic Acid (300) Migraine-unspecified IHS 1988 Crossover 12 76 (26) 43.3 79% No Yes
Klapper, 1994,USA Propranolol (140) v. Divalproex (1100) Migraine-unspecified IHS 1988 Crossover 8 24 (50) NS NS Yes Unclear
Kozubski, 1995, Poland Propranolol (160) Valproaic Acid (1500) Migraine-unspecified IHS 1988 Crossover 10 35 (NS) NS 100% Yes NS
Kuritzky, 1987, Israel Propranolol (160) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic NS Crossover 8 38 (18) NS NS No Yes
Li, 2002, China Propranolol (30) v. Flunarizine (5) Migraine-Episodic IHS, 1988 Parallel 4 126 (0) 38.7 60% No Yes
Li, 2004, China Propranolol (60) v. Valproate (.45 mg/kg) Migraine-Episodic NS Parallel 36 40 (0) NS NS No NS
Lucking, 1988, Germany Propranolol (120) v. Flunarizine (10) Migraine-episodic NS Parallel 16 521 (NS) 42 80% No Yes
Maissen, 1991, Germany Propranolol (120) v. 5-Hydroxytryptophan (300) Migraine-episodic NS Parallel 16 39 (18) 39.4 67% Yes Yes
Malvea, 1973, USA Propranolol (NS) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic NS Crossover 6 31 (6) NS 87% Yes Yes
Mathew, 1980, USA Propranolol (160) v. Placebo v. Amitriptyline (75) v. Biofedback Mixed- headaches NS Parallel 24 340 (20) 35.5 94% Yes Yes
Mikkelsen, 1986, Denmark Propranolol (120) v. Tolfenamic Acid (300) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic Ad-hoc 1962 Crossover 12 31 (21) 39.4 84% No Yes
Nadelmann, 1986, USA Propranolol (320) v. Placebo Migraine-unspecified Ad-hoc 1962 Crossover 12 57 (39) NS 86% No Yes
Nair, 1975, India Propranolol (80) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic NS Crossover 8 20 (0) 27.3 50% No No
Nambiar, 2011, India Propranolol (80) v. Riboflavin (100) Migraine-episodic IHS 1988 Parallel 24 100 (NS) 31 55% Yes Yes
Palferman, 1983, UK Propranolol (120) v. Placebo Migraine-unspecified NS Crossover 8 10 (38) 41.4 80% No Yes
Olerud, 1986, Sweden Propranolol (80) v. Nadolol (80) Migraine-episodic NS Parallel 24 28(NS) NS 79% No Yes
Pita, 1977, Spain Propranolol (160) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic Ad-hoc 1962 Crossover 8 9 (0) 32 78% No Yes
Pradalier, 1989, Norway Propranolol (160) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic IHS 1988 Parallel 12 74 (26) 37.4 76% No NS
Ryan, 1984, USA Propranolol (160) v. Nadolol (80) v. Nadolol (160) Migraine-episodic NS Parallel 12 48 (6) NS 73% No Yes
Sargent, 1985, USA Propranolol (120) v. Naproxen (1100) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic NS Parallel 14 149 (16) 30 79% Yes Yes
Shimell, 1990, South Africa Propranolol (180) v. Flunarizine (10) Migraine-episodic Ad hoc 1962 Parallel 16 58 (2) 34 70% Yes NS
Silberstein, 2012, USA Propranolol (240) + Topiramate (100) v. Topiramate (100) Migraine-chronic IHS 2006 Parallel 24 191 (39) 42 90% Yes Yes
Sjaastad, 1972, Norway Pindolol (15) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic NS Crossover 4 28 (14) 35.3 79% Yes Yes
Soyka, 1990, Germany Propranolol (120) v. Flunarizine (10) Migraine-unspecified NS Parallel 16 434 42 82% Yes Yes
Standnes, 1982, Norway Propranolol (80) v. Timolol (10) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic Ad-hoc 1962 Crossover 12 25 (28) 41.4 80% Yes Yes
Stensrud, 1976, Norway Propranolol (160) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic Ad-hoc 1962 Crossover 4 20 (5) 43.5 70% No Yes
Stensrud, 1980, Norway Propranolol (80) v. Atenolol (50) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic Ad-hoc 1962 Crossover 6 35 (20) NS 69% No Yes
Stovner, 2014, Norway Propranolol (160) v. Candesartan (16) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic NS Crossover 12 72 (15) 37 82% Yes Yes
Sudilovsky, 1987, USA Propranolol (160) v. Nadolol (80) v. Nadolol (160) Migraine-episodic Ad hoc 1962 Parallel 12 140 (30) 39.3 76% Yes Yes
Tfelt-Hansen, 1984, Scandinavia Propranolol (160) v. Timolol (20) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic Ad-hoc 1962 Crossover 12 96 (28) 39.5 74% No Yes
Weber, 1971, USA Propranolol (20) v. Placebo Migraine-unspecified Ad-hoc 1962 Crossover 12 25 (24) 40.6 52% No Yes
Wideroe, 1974, Norway Propranolol (160) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic Ad-hoc 1962 Crossover 12 30 (13) 40 90% No Yes
Wen, 2016, China Propranolol (30) v. Flunarizine (10) Migraine Episodic NS Parallel 8 100 (0) 25.6 65% No Yes
Yuan, 2005, China Propranolol (120) v. Topiramate (150) Migraine-unspecified IHS 1988 Parallel 12 67 (0) 29.9 64% Yes No
Zhu, 2005, China Propranolol (30) v. Flunarizine (10) Migraine-unspecified IHS 1988 Parallel 8 90 (0) 28.1 73% No No
Ziegler, 1993, USA Propranolol (240) v. Amitriptyline (150) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic NS Crossover 10 54 (44) 38 73% Yes Yes
Timolol
Briggs, 1979, UK Timolol (20) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic Ad-hoc 1962 Crossover 6 14 (7) NS 71% No Yes
Stellar, 1984, USA Timolol (30) v. Placebo Migraine-episodic Ad-hoc 1962 Crossover 8 107 (12) 43 72% No Yes

NS: Not Stated