Alvaro Ábarzúa-Araya1, Cristián P Navarrete-Dechent2, Felipe Heusser3, Javiera Retamal3, María Soledad Zegpi-Trueba2. 1. Department of Dermatology, Facultad de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile. Electronic address: alvaroabarzuaaraya@gmail.com. 2. Department of Dermatology, Facultad de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile. 3. Department of Pediatric Cardiology, Facultad de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Infantile hemangiomas have a dramatic response to propranolol, a nonselective beta-blocker. However, this treatment is not risk-free and many patients are excluded because of respiratory comorbidities. Atenolol is a cardioselective beta-blocker that may have fewer adverse events. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of atenolol against propranolol in a noninferiority trial. METHODS: In all, 23 patients met the inclusion criteria and were randomized to receive either atenolol or propranolol. Thirteen patients were treated withatenolol and 10 with propranolol. Follow-up was made at baseline, 2 weeks, 4 weeks, and then monthly for 6 months. RESULTS: Patients treated with atenolol had a complete response of 53.8% and 60% with propranolol, respectively. These results were nonsignificant (P = .68). Relevant adverse events were not reported. LIMITATIONS: The reduced number of patients could have influenced our results. CONCLUSION:Atenolol appears to be as effective as propranolol. We did not find significant differences between these results or any adverse events.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Infantile hemangiomas have a dramatic response to propranolol, a nonselective beta-blocker. However, this treatment is not risk-free and many patients are excluded because of respiratory comorbidities. Atenolol is a cardioselective beta-blocker that may have fewer adverse events. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of atenolol against propranolol in a noninferiority trial. METHODS: In all, 23 patients met the inclusion criteria and were randomized to receive either atenolol or propranolol. Thirteen patients were treated with atenolol and 10 with propranolol. Follow-up was made at baseline, 2 weeks, 4 weeks, and then monthly for 6 months. RESULTS:Patients treated with atenolol had a complete response of 53.8% and 60% with propranolol, respectively. These results were nonsignificant (P = .68). Relevant adverse events were not reported. LIMITATIONS: The reduced number of patients could have influenced our results. CONCLUSION:Atenolol appears to be as effective as propranolol. We did not find significant differences between these results or any adverse events.
Authors: Peter H Hoeger; John I Harper; Eulalia Baselga; Damien Bonnet; Laurence M Boon; Marta Ciofi Degli Atti; Maya El Hachem; Arnold P Oranje; Agneta Troilius Rubin; Lisa Weibel; Christine Léauté-Labrèze Journal: Eur J Pediatr Date: 2015-05-29 Impact factor: 3.183