Risk of cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality among diabetic patients prescribed rosiglitazone or pioglitazone: a meta-analysis of retrospective cohort studies.

BACKGROUND

The difference of cardiovascular effects between rosiglitazone and pioglitazone treatment for diabetic patients has not been thoroughly studied. We performed a meta-analysis to compare the risk of cardiovascular adverse effects in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with rosiglitazone compared to pioglitazone.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase were searched to identify retrospective cohort studies assessing cardiovascular outcomes with rosiglitazone and pioglitazone. Meta-analysis of retrospective cohort studies was conducted using RevMan 5.0 software to calculate risk ratios.

RESULTS

Of the 74 references identified, eight studies involving 945 286 patients fit the inclusion criteria for the analysis. The results of meta-analyses showed that, compared with pioglitazone, rosiglitazone therapy significantly increased the risk of myocardial infarction (risk ratios (RR) 1.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04 - 1.32; P = 0.01), the risk of heart failure (RR 1.18, 95%CI 1.02 - 1.36; P = 0.03), and total mortality (RR 1.13, 95%CI 1.08 - 1.20; P < 0.000 01).

CONCLUSION

Compared with pioglitazone, rosiglitazone was associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction, heart failure, and all-cause mortality in diabetic patients.