| Object A non-selectiveβ-receptor blocker and a selectiveβ-receptor blocker were used respectively for treatment of hyperthyroidism in patients. The differences between the effects from the two blockers will be indicated by comparisons of the heart rate, thyroid hormone (TH) , glucose and lipids metabolism in these patients who were treated with projected medication. The reason why the selectiveβ1-receptor blocker was considered to have more significance and be more suitable for treatment of hyperthyroidism in humans will be discussed.Method One hundred and five patients who were first suffered from hyperthyroidism were randomly divided into three groups on purpose of research. All the patients were asked to take orally methimazol since beginning, 10mg each time and three times per day. The patients in control group were not asked to take anyβ1-receptor blockers as assistant medication. The patients in therapy group A were asked to take Bisoprolol, a selectiveβ1 adrenergic receptor blocker, along with methimazol as assistant medication for four weeks (5mg per day if patients's heart rate is less than 110 beat per minute, 10mg per day if otherwise). The patients in therapy group B were asked to take Propranolol, a non-selectiveβ1 adrenergic receptor blocker, together with methimazol as assistant medication for four weeks (10mg each time and 3 times per day if patients's heart rate is less than 110 per minute, double the dosage if otherwise). All the patients's heart rate, FT3, FT4, FPG, 2hPBG, TG, TC, LDL-C and HDL-C have been recorded according to a schedule including'prior to taking medication','two weeks later'and'four weeks later'since starting medication.Results (1)After first two weeks, due to the help from the medication, heart rate of patients in therapy group A dropped from 120.2±11.3 beat/minute (prior to taking medication) to 81.6±7.8 beat/minute. After four weeks, it dropped to 74.3±6.5 beat/minute. Accordingly, heart rate of patients in therapy group B dropped from 119.4±12.5 beat/minute(prior to taking medication) to 93.1±10.8 beat/minute(two weeks later) and 85.4±6.3 beat/minute(four weeks later), respectively. Thus, it is statistically well indicated that heart rate control was efficiently performed through the both medications(P<0.05) and that medication for therapy group A obtained relatively more effective curative effect than that for therapy group B.(2)After first two weeks, we did not see the statistical change on FT3, FT4 results for all three groups(P>0.05). After four weeks, we started seeing the statistical decrease on FT3, FT4 results(P<0.05). With a reference of the values from control group, the percentage of dropped values from both therapy groups were quite close.(3)After four weeks, we started seeing the statistical decrease on FPG, 2hPBG4 results for all the three groups(P<0.05). With a reference of the values from control group, the percentage of dropped values in both therapy groups were similar (P>0.05).(4)After four weeks, we started seeing the statistical increase on TG, TC, LDL-C results for all the three groups(P<0.05), but no change was found on HDL-C result(P>0.05). With a reference of the values from control group, no statistical change was observed on TG, TC, LDL-C records of therapy group A (P>0.05). With a reference of the values from control group, statistical change was found on TG, TC, LDL-C records of therapy group B (P<0.05).Conclusions (1)Bisoprolol has no influence on glucose and lipids metabolism as well as thyroid hormones in patients with hyperthyroidism.In contrast, Propranolol has influence on lipids metabolism .(2)Compared to Propranolol, Bisoprolol showed more effective for hyperthyroidism in patients with Tachyarrhythmia . Instead of Propranolol, Bisoprolol should be considered as the preferred assistant medication that can be taken safely for hyperthyroidism patients.
|
PDF Full Text Request