...
首页> 外文期刊>Cardiology Research >Ivabradine Versus Beta-Blockers in Mitral Stenosis in Sinus Rhythm: An Updated Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
【24h】

Ivabradine Versus Beta-Blockers in Mitral Stenosis in Sinus Rhythm: An Updated Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

机译:伊伐布雷定与β-受体阻滞剂治疗窦性心律的二尖瓣狭窄:随机对照试验的最新荟萃分析

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Background: Symptoms of mitral stenosis (MS) are worsened during tachycardia and exercise. Beta-blockers are used in controlling heart rate (HR) in MS, resulting in symptom improvement, but coming with significant side effects. Ivabradine has a selective action on the sinus node devoid of the usual side effects of beta-blockers. Small studies have recently investigated the role of ivabradine in MS in sinus rhythm. Our aim was to determine the efficacy of ivabradine, compared to beta-blockers, in terms of exercise duration, maximum HR achieved, resting HR, mean gradient, and working capacity among patients with MS in sinus rhythm.Methods: We conducted a systematic search of studies using MEDLINE, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Clinical Key, Cochrane, and clinicaltrials.gov databases in all languages and examined reference lists of studies. We included studies if they are: 1) randomized controlled trials comparing ivabradine and beta-blockers; 2) of adults ≥ 19 years old with MS in sinus rhythm; and 3) reported data on exercise duration, maximum HR achieved, resting HR, mean gradient, and working capacity. Studies identified were assessed for risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration Tool for Assessing Risk of Bias. We used inverse variance analysis of fixed effects to compute for mean difference, carried out using Review Manager (RevMan) 5.3.Results: Pooled analysis from five identified trials showed that among patients with MS in sinus rhythm, ivabradine was better compared to beta-blockers in total exercise duration (mean difference: 32.73 s (95% CI: 12.19, 53.27; P = 0.002; I2 = 0%)), maximum HR achieved after exercise (mean difference: -3.87 beats per minute (95% CI: -5.88, -1.860; P = 0.0002; I2 = 23%)), and work capacity (mean difference: 0.56 METS (95% CI: 0.33, 0.80; P < 0.00001; I2 = 0%)); inferior to beta-blockers in resting HR achieved (mean difference: 1.83 s (95% CI: 0.39, 3.28; P = 0.01; I2 = 91%)); and comparable to beta-blockers in terms of mean gradient (mean difference: -0.52 mm Hg (95% CI: -1.20, 0.16; P = 0.13; I2 = 6%)).Conclusions: Ivabradine is better or comparable to beta-blockers in terms of the outcomes measured, and may be considered as an alternative for patients with MS in sinus rhythm who are intolerant to beta-blockers.Cardiol Res. 2018;9(4):224-230doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/cr737w.
机译:背景:心动过速和运动期间二尖瓣狭窄(MS)的症状加重。 Beta受体阻滞剂用于控制MS的心率(HR),可改善症状,但会带来明显的副作用。伊伐布雷定对窦房结具有选择性作用,没有β-受体阻滞剂的常见副作用。最近的小型研究调查了伊伐布雷定在MS在窦性心律中的作用。我们的目的是确定依伐布雷定与β-受体阻滞剂相比在运动持续时间,获得的最大HR,静息HR,平均梯度和窦律性MS患者中的工作能力方面的疗效。方法:我们进行了系统的研究使用MEDLINE,Google Scholar,ScienceDirect,Scopus,Clinical Key,Cochrane和Clinicaltrials.gov数据库进行所有语言的研究,并检查了研究参考清单。如果它们是,我们将其纳入研究:1)比较伊伐布雷定和β受体阻滞剂的随机对照试验; 2)≥19岁的成年人窦律有MS; 3)报告有关运动时间,达到的最大心率,静息心率,平均梯度和工作能力的数据。使用Cochrane评估偏倚风险的协作工具对鉴定出的研究进行偏倚风险评估。我们使用Review Manager(RevMan)5.3进行了固定效应的逆方差分析,以计算均值差。结果:五个已鉴定试验的汇总分析表明,窦律性MS患者中,伊伐布雷定优于β受体阻滞剂总运动时间(平均差异:32.73 s(95%CI:12.19,53.27; P = 0.002; I2 = 0%)),运动后获得的最大HR(平均差异:-3.87次/分钟(95%CI:- 5.88,-1.860; P = 0.0002; I2 = 23%)和工作能力(平均差:0.56 METS(95%CI:0.33,0.80; P <0.00001; I2 = 0%));在静息HR方面次于β受体阻滞剂(平均差异:1.83 s(95%CI:0.39,3.28; P = 0.01; I2 = 91%));并且在平均梯度方面可与β受体阻滞剂相媲美(均值差:-0.52毫米汞柱(95%CI:-1.20,0.16; P = 0.13; I2 = 6%))。结论:伊伐布雷定比β-阻滞剂更好或更可比阻滞剂的测量结果可被视为对β阻滞剂不耐受的窦性心律不全的MS患者的替代药物。 2018; 9(4):224-230doi:https://doi.org/10.14740/cr737w。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号