Suppr超能文献

氯沙坦与β受体阻滞剂对马凡综合征心血管保护作用的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。

The effects of losartan versus beta-blockers on cardiovascular protection in marfan syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

机构信息

Center for Evidence-Based Medicine, Department of Education, Taipei Medical University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.

School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.

出版信息

J Formos Med Assoc. 2020 Jan;119(1 Pt 1):182-190. doi: 10.1016/j.jfma.2019.03.018. Epub 2019 Apr 16.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Variable effects of beta-blockers (BB) and/or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) were reported to retard aortic root growth in Marfan syndrome (MFS). This study aimed to compare the effects of BB therapy and ARB-related therapies on cardiovascular protection in MFS.

METHODS

Studies of randomized control trials comparing the efficacy of only-BB and ARB-related (only-ARB or ARB-plus-BB) therapies for MFS published before July 31, 2018 in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were selected. The outcomes included changes in aortic growth and cardiovascular events.

RESULTS

Eight trials involving 1381 patients were included. Patients received only-BB and ARB-related therapies did not differ significantly in changes in aortic growth (aortic root diameter: standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.04, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.11-0.19, p = 0.63) or cardiovascular events (aortic dissection: Peto odds ratio [OR] = 1.67, 95% CI: 0.42-6.72, p = 0.47; aortic surgery: risk ratio = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.66-1.41, p = 0.86; death: Peto OR = 2.78, 95% CI: 0.39-19.82, p = 0.31). Subgroup analysis revealed that ARB-plus-BB therapy exhibited nonsignificantly better outcomes than only-BB therapy (aortic root diameter: SMD = 0.11, 95% CI: -0.22-0.45, p = 0.52; ascending aorta diameter: SMD = 0.10, 95% CI: -0.07-0.27, p = 0.26; aortic surgery: Peto OR = 1.10, 95% CI: 0.75-1.61, p = 0.62).

CONCLUSION

For cardiovascular protection in MFS, only-ARB therapy is not inferior to only-BB therapy. Moreover, the outcomes of ARB-plus-BB therapy seemed to be favourable to those of only-BB therapy.

摘要

背景和目的

有研究报道,β受体阻滞剂(BB)和/或血管紧张素受体阻滞剂(ARB)的疗效存在差异,可能会延缓马凡综合征(MFS)患者主动脉根部生长。本研究旨在比较 BB 治疗和 ARB 相关治疗对 MFS 患者心血管保护的效果。

方法

检索 2018 年 7 月 31 日前在 PubMed、Embase 和 Cochrane 图书馆发表的比较仅 BB 治疗和 ARB 相关(仅 ARB 或 ARB 联合 BB)治疗 MFS 疗效的随机对照试验。结局指标包括主动脉生长变化和心血管事件。

结果

纳入 8 项涉及 1381 例患者的试验。仅 BB 治疗和 ARB 相关治疗的患者在主动脉生长变化方面无显著差异(主动脉根部直径:标准化均数差 [SMD] = 0.04,95%置信区间 [CI]:-0.11 至 0.19,p = 0.63)或心血管事件(主动脉夹层:Peto 比值比 [OR] = 1.67,95%CI:0.42 至 6.72,p = 0.47;主动脉手术:风险比 = 0.97,95%CI:0.66 至 1.41,p = 0.86;死亡:Peto OR = 2.78,95%CI:0.39 至 19.82,p = 0.31)。亚组分析显示,ARB 联合 BB 治疗的结局优于仅 BB 治疗(主动脉根部直径:SMD = 0.11,95%CI:-0.22 至 0.45,p = 0.52;升主动脉直径:SMD = 0.10,95%CI:-0.07 至 0.27,p = 0.26;主动脉手术:Peto OR = 1.10,95%CI:0.75 至 1.61,p = 0.62)。

结论

对于 MFS 的心血管保护,仅 ARB 治疗并不劣于仅 BB 治疗。此外,ARB 联合 BB 治疗的结局似乎优于仅 BB 治疗。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验