Abstract

Introduction

Cerebral side effects have long been recognized as complications to beta-blocker treatment. However, evidence of a longitudinal relationship between the use of beta-blockers and incident dementiais still controversial.

Objective

To evaluate the longitudinal relationship between use of beta-blockers, as a class, and incident risk of all-cause dementia, vascular dementia, Alzheimer and mixed dementia.

Methods

From the prospective, population-based, Malmö Preventive Project, 18,063 individuals (mean age 68.2, males 63.4%) were included at baseline and followed for 84,506 person-years. Patients with prevalent cerebrovascular disease and dementia were excluded. In order to weight the risk of incident dementia associated with beta-blocker consumption, we performed propensity score matching analysis, resulting in 3,720 matched pairs of beta-blocker users and non-users at baseline, and multivariable Cox proportional-hazardsregression.

Results

Overall, 122 study participants (1.6%) were diagnosed with dementia over the course of follow-up. Use of beta-blockers was independently associated with increased risk of developing vascular dementia, regardless of confounding factors (HR: 1.72, 95% CI 1.01–3.78; p=0.048). Conversely, treatment with BB was not associated with increased risk of all-cause, Alzheimer and mixed dementia (HR: 1.15; 95% CI 0.80–1.66; p=0.44; HR: 0.85; 95% CI 0.48–1.54; P=0.59 and HR: 1.35; 95% CI 0.56–3.27; p=0.50, respectively).

Conclusions and relevance

We observed that use of beta-blockers, as a class, is associated with increased longitudinal risk of vascular dementia in the general elderly population, regardless of cardiovascular risk factors, prevalent or incident history of atrial fibrillation, stroke, coronary events and heart failure. Further studies are needed to confirm our findings in the general population and to explore the mechanisms underlying the relationship between use of beta-blockers and increased risk of vascular dementia.

This content is only available as a PDF.
This article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model)
You do not currently have access to this article.