...
首页> 外文期刊>Clinical cardiology. >The Risk of Atrial Fibrillation With Ivabradine Treatment: A Meta‐analysis With Trial Sequential Analysis of More Than 40000 Patients
【24h】

The Risk of Atrial Fibrillation With Ivabradine Treatment: A Meta‐analysis With Trial Sequential Analysis of More Than 40000 Patients

机译:伊伐布雷定治疗引起的心房颤动的风险:荟萃分析和试验序贯分析法对超过40000例患者进行分析

获取原文
           

摘要

Abstract Recent trials reported that risk of atrial fibrillation (AF) is increased in patients using ivabradine compared with controls. We performed this meta-analysis to investigate the risk of AF association with ivabradine treatment on the basis of data obtained from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library for RCTs that comprised >100 patients. The incidence of AF was assessed. We obtained data from European Medicines Agency (EMA) scientific reports for the RCTs in which the incidence of AF was not reported. We used trial sequential analysis (TSA) to provide information on when we had reached firm evidence of new AF based on a 15% relative risk increase (RRI) in ivabradine treatment. Three RCTs and 1 EMA overall oral safety set (OOSS) pooled analysis (included 5 RCTs) were included in the meta-analysis (N?=?40?437). The incidence of AF was 5.34% in patients using ivabradine and 4.56% in placebo. There was significantly higher incidence of AF (24% RRI) in the ivabradine group when compared with placebo before (RR: 1.24, 95% confidence interval: 1.08-1.42, P = 0.003, I 1980 = 53%) and after excluding OOSS (RR: 1.24, 95% confidence interval: 1.06-1.44, P = 0.008). In the TSA, the cumulative z-curve crossed both the traditional boundary ( P = 0.05) and the trial sequential monitoring boundary, indicating firm evidence for ≥15% increase in ivabradine treatment when compared with placebo. Study results indicate that AF is more common in the ivabradine group (24% RRI) than in controls.
机译:摘要最近的试验报道,与对照组相比,使用伊伐布雷定的患者发生房颤(AF)的风险增加。我们根据来自随机对照试验(RCT)的数据进行了这项荟萃分析,以研究房颤与伊伐布雷定治疗相关的风险。我们在PubMed,EMBASE,Scopus和Cochrane库中搜索了包括100多名患者的RCT。评估房颤的发生率。我们从欧洲药物管理局(EMA)的RCT的科学报告中获得了数据,但未报告房颤的发生率。我们使用试验序贯分析(TSA)来提供信息,以基于伊伐布雷定治疗中相对危险度增加(RRI)15%的情况得出新房颤的确切证据。荟萃分析包括3个RCT和1个EMA总口服安全性(OOSS)合并分析(包括5个RCT)(N≥40?437)。使用伊伐布雷定的患者房颤发生率为5.34%,而使用安慰剂的房颤发生率为4.56%。与安慰剂治疗前相比(RR:1.24,95%置信区间:1.08-1.42,P = 0.003,I 1980 = 53%)和排除OOSS后,伊伐布雷定组的AF(24%RRI)发生率显着高于安慰剂( RR:1.24,95%置信区间:1.06-1.44,P = 0.008)。在TSA中,累积的Z曲线同时跨越了传统边界(P = 0.05)和试验性顺序监测边界,这表明与安慰剂相比,伊伐布雷定治疗增加了15%以上的确凿证据。研究结果表明,在伊伐布雷定组(24%RRI)中AF比对照组更常见。

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