Gyöngyösi Mariann, Wojakowski Wojciech, Navarese Eliano P, Moye Lemuel À
From the Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria (M.G.); 3rd Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland (W.W.); Division of Cardiology, Pulmonology and Vascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Germany (E.P.N.); Systematic Investigation and Research on Interventions and Outcomes (SIRIO) MEDICINE Research Network (E.P.N.); and CCTRN Data Coordinating Center, University of Texas Houston School of Public Health, Houston (L.À.M.).
Circ Res. 2016 Apr 15;118(8):1254-63. doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.115.307347.
In contrast to multiple publication-based meta-analyses involving clinical cardiac regeneration therapy in patients with recent myocardial infarction, a recently published meta-analysis based on individual patient data reported no effect of cell therapy on left ventricular function or clinical outcome. A comprehensive review of the data collection, statistics, and the overall principles of meta-analyses provides further clarification and explanation for this controversy. The advantages and pitfalls of different types of meta-analyses are reviewed here. Each meta-analysis approach has a place when pivotal clinical trials are lacking and sheds light on the magnitude of the treatment in a complex healthcare field.
与基于多篇出版物的涉及近期心肌梗死患者临床心脏再生治疗的荟萃分析不同,最近发表的一项基于个体患者数据的荟萃分析报告称,细胞治疗对左心室功能或临床结局没有影响。对数据收集、统计以及荟萃分析的总体原则进行全面回顾,可为这一争议提供进一步的澄清和解释。本文将对不同类型荟萃分析的优点和缺陷进行综述。在缺乏关键临床试验的情况下,每种荟萃分析方法都有其用武之地,并能揭示复杂医疗领域中治疗效果的程度。