Metoprolol tartrate vs succinate
Pro Research Analysisby 
Searched over 200M research papers
Metoprolol Tartrate vs. Succinate: A Comparative Analysis
Introduction to Metoprolol Forms
Metoprolol is a beta-blocker commonly prescribed for heart conditions such as congestive heart failure (CHF) and acute myocardial infarction. It is available in two primary forms: metoprolol tartrate (MT) and metoprolol succinate (MS). While both forms are used to manage similar conditions, they differ in their pharmacokinetic properties and clinical effects.
Hemodynamic Effects in Congestive Heart Failure
Hemodynamic Comparison
A study comparing the hemodynamic effects of twice-daily MT and once-daily MS in CHF patients found that both forms produced similar long-term functional, exercise, and hemodynamic benefits. However, during chronic therapy, both forms exhibited parallel adverse hemodynamic effects, such as decreased cardiac index and increased systemic vascular resistance .
Heart Rate and Cardiac Function
Another study observed that MS significantly decreased the average heart rate in CHF patients compared to MT, although both forms had similar effects on left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVDd), ejection fraction (EF), blood urea nitrogen (BUN), and creatinine (Crea) levels . This suggests that while MS may offer better heart rate control, both forms are equally effective in improving overall cardiac function.
Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Properties
Sustained-Release vs. Immediate-Release
MS is available as a sustained-release formulation, which allows for once-daily dosing, whereas MT is typically administered twice daily. This difference in dosing frequency can impact patient compliance and convenience. Studies have shown that MS's sustained-release properties lead to more stable plasma concentrations, which may contribute to its effectiveness in reducing heart rate and improving cardiac function 910.
Solid-State Behavior
The solid-state structures of MT and MS have been studied, revealing that MS has a slightly greater cohesive energy and different macroscopic behaviors compared to MT. MS undergoes reversible anisotropic lattice expansion/contraction upon temperature changes and quickly recrystallizes after melting, whereas MT expands/contracts isotropically and forms an amorphous solid upon cooling 58. These differences may influence the stability and shelf-life of the medications.
Clinical Outcomes and Safety
Mortality and Hospitalizations
A meta-analysis comparing carvedilol and metoprolol (both tartrate and succinate forms) in heart failure patients found no significant difference in all-cause mortality or hospitalizations between carvedilol and MS. However, carvedilol was superior to MT in reducing all-cause mortality . This suggests that while MS and carvedilol are similarly effective, MT may be less effective in reducing mortality.
Safety in COPD Patients
In patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) complicating CHF, MS was found to be more effective than MT in improving cardiac function, although both forms had similar safety profiles . This indicates that MS may be a better option for patients with coexisting COPD and CHF.
Conclusion
Both metoprolol tartrate and succinate are effective in managing heart conditions such as CHF and acute myocardial infarction. MS offers advantages in terms of heart rate control, dosing convenience, and stability, making it a preferable option in many cases. However, both forms have similar effects on overall cardiac function and safety profiles. Clinicians should consider individual patient needs and specific clinical scenarios when choosing between MT and MS.
Sources and full results
Most relevant research papers on this topic