Methods |
Design: parallel (2 arms)
Country: Brazil
Multicenter:
International: no
Intention‐to‐treat for mortality from any cause: yes.
Follow‐up period: 6 months
|
Participants |
Enrolled: 63
Randomized: 30
Carvedilol group: 15
Placebo group: 15
Carvedilol group: 15
Placebo group: 15
Carvedilol group: 6.6% (1/15)
Placebo group: 13.2% (2/15)
Imbalance between comparison groups: 6.6%
Carvedilol group: 80% (12/15)
Placebo group: 86.6% (13/15)
Differences between comparison groups: 6.6%
Carvedilol group: 46.2 (7.62)
Placebo group: 51.06 (6.11)
Carvedilol group: 28.78 (1.48)
Placebo group: 29.5 (1.79)
Carvedilol group: 83.3% (12/15)
Placebo group: 73.3% (11/15)
Age 18 to 65 years;
New York Heart Association: II to IV;
Ejection fraction and left ventricular fraction using isotopic ventriculography: ≤ 35%;
All of the participants were already using digitalis, diuretics, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and spironolactone, and may or may not have been using amiodarone and anticoagulant.
Functional class IV requiring use of vasoactive drugs;
Severe bradycardia ≤ 50 beats per minute;
Atrioventricular blocks 2nd or 3rd degree, without permanent pacemaker;
Systolic blood pressure ≤ 60 mm Hg;
Comorbidities, such as renal insufficiency (creatinine ≥ 3.0), or hepatic disease, serious bronchial asthma, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease;
Pregnant or not using contraception.
|
Interventions |
Carvedilol group: 3.125 mg/day and up‐titrated every 8 days to 50 mg/day. Duration: 4 months
Placebo: details not stated
Nature of placebo: not stated
|
Outcomes |
Functional class;
Overall survival;
Quality of life (Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire (MLHFQ));
Blood pressure;
Heart rate;
Electrocardiogram parameters;
Ventricular remodeling;
Change in left ventricular ejection fraction;
Change in noradrenaline and brain natriuretic peptide levels;
Adverse events.
|
Notes |
Clinical trial number: not applicable
Sample size estimation a priori: not given
Trial conduction date: not given
Sponsor: not stated
Conflict of interest: not stated
Data were gathered from PhD thesis
|
Risk of bias |
Bias |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) |
Unclear risk |
Insufficient information to permit judgement of 'low risk' or 'high risk' |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) |
Unclear risk |
Insufficient information to permit judgement of 'low risk' or 'high risk' |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes |
Unclear risk |
Insufficient information to permit judgement of 'low risk' or 'high risk' |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes |
Unclear risk |
Insufficient information to permit judgement of 'low risk' or 'high risk' |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes |
High risk |
Loss post‐randomisation: 16.6%.
Comment: this trial had a small sample size; therefore, 16.6% could be considered a high loss of participants. |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) |
Low risk |
This trial included four important outcomes: mortality, adverse events, quality of life, and safety. |
Other bias |
Low risk |
‐ |