首页> 外文期刊>American Journal of Kidney Diseases: The official journal of the National Kidney Foundation >Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in CKD: A meta-analysis of patient-level data from 3 randomized trials
【24h】

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in CKD: A meta-analysis of patient-level data from 3 randomized trials

机译:植入式心脏复律除颤器,主要用于预防CKD突发性心脏猝死:来自3个随机试验的患者水平数据的荟萃分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background The benefit of a primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) among patients with chronic kidney disease is uncertain. Study Design Meta-analysis of patient-level data from randomized controlled trials. Setting & Population Patients with symptomatic heart failure and left ventricular ejection fraction 35%. Selection Criteria for Studies From 7 available randomized controlled studies with patient-level data, we selected studies with available data for important covariates. Studies without patient-level data for baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) were excluded. Intervention Primary prevention ICD versus usual care effect modification by eGFR. Outcomes Mortality, rehospitalizations, and effect modification by eGFR. Results We included data from the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial I (MADIT-I), MADIT-II, and the Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Trial (SCD-HeFT). 2,867 patients were included; 36.3% had eGFR 60 mL/min/1.73 m2. Kaplan-Meier estimate of the probability of death during follow-up was 43.3% for 1,334 patients receiving usual care and 35.8% for 1,533 ICD recipients. After adjustment for baseline differences, there was evidence that the survival benefit of ICDs in comparison to usual care depends on eGFR (posterior probability for null interaction P 0.001). The ICD was associated with survival benefit for patients with eGFR ≥ 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 (adjusted HR, 0.49; 95% posterior credible interval, 0.24-0.95), but not for patients with eGFR 60 mL/min/1.73 m 2 (adjusted HR, 0.80; 95% posterior credible interval, 0.40-1.53). eGFR did not modify the association between the ICD and rehospitalizations. Limitations Few patients with eGFR 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 were available. Differences in trial-to-trial measurement techniques may lead to residual confounding. Conclusions Reductions in baseline eGFR decrease the survival benefit associated with the ICD. These findings should be confirmed by additional studies specifically targeting patients with varying eGFRs.
机译:背景技术在患有慢性肾脏疾病的患者中,一级预防性植入式心脏复律除颤器(ICD)的益处尚不确定。对来自随机对照试验的患者水平数据进行研究设计荟萃分析。设置与人群有症状心力衰竭且左心室射血分数<35%的患者。研究的选择标准我们从7项具有患者水平数据的随机对照研究中,选择了具有重要协变量的可用数据的研究。排除了没有患者水平数据的基线估计肾小球滤过率(eGFR)的研究。干预通过eGFR进行一级预防性ICD与常规护理效果的改善。通过eGFR实现死亡率,重新住院和效果改善。结果我们纳入了多中心自动除颤器植入试验I(MADIT-I),MADIT-II和心力衰竭试验中的心脏猝死(SCD-HeFT)数据。纳入2867例患者; 36.3%的eGFR <60毫升/分钟/1.73平方米。 Kaplan-Meier估计在随访期间死亡的概率为1,334名接受常规护理的患者为43.3%,而1,533名ICD接受者为35.8%。在对基线差异进行调整后,有证据表明,与常规护理相比,ICD的生存获益取决于eGFR(无效相互作用的后验概率P <0.001)。对于eGFR≥60 mL / min / 1.73 m2(校正后的HR,0.49;后可信区间为95%,0.24-0.95)的患者,ICD与生存获益相关,但对于eGFR <60 mL / min / 1.73 m的患者则与生存无关。 2(调整后的HR,0.80; 95%后可信区间,0.40-1.53​​)。 eGFR并未修改ICD与再次住院之间的关联。局限性很少有eGFR <30 mL / min / 1.73 m2的患者。两次尝试的测量技术上的差异可能会导致残留的混淆。结论基线eGFR降低会降低与ICD相关的生存获益。这些发现应通过针对具有不同eGFR的患者的其他研究进一步证实。

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