Krishna Mohan Gautham Varun, Chenna Venkata Sai Harshabhargav, Tirumandyam Gayathri, Mian Abdur Rehman, Rashid Atif, Saleem Faraz
Internal Medicine, Tirunelveli Medical College, Tirunelveli, IND.
Medicine, University of Perpetual Help System Dalta, Las Pinas, PHL.
Cureus. 2023 May 7;15(5):e38662. doi: 10.7759/cureus.38662. eCollection 2023 May.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of bempedoic acid in preventing cardiovascular events among high-risk patients. We conducted a meta-analysis following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Two independent researchers carried out online database searches on Medline, the Cochrane Library of Clinical Trials, and EMBASE until April 15, 2023, using search terms such as "bempedoic acid," "cardiovascular outcomes," and "randomized controlled trial." We also utilized medical subject heading (MeSH) terms and Boolean algebra operators to refine our search. We included articles that compared cardiovascular outcomes between patients receiving bempedoic acid and those receiving a placebo. The primary outcome assessed was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, hospitalization for unstable angina, and coronary revascularization. The meta-analysis included three randomized controlled trials with a total of 16,978 patients. The use of bempedoic acid was associated with a significant reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events. Individual analyses reported a low risk of myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, and hospitalization due to unstable angina in patients receiving bempedoic acid. Furthermore, our meta-analysis found that bempedoic acid is a safe treatment option, as there was no significant difference between the bempedoic acid and placebo groups in terms of adverse events and serious adverse events. Our findings support the use of bempedoic acid as a promising treatment option for high-risk cardiovascular patients. However, since our meta-analysis included a limited number of studies with short follow-up periods, larger studies are necessary to provide more definitive evidence.
本研究的目的是评估贝派地酸在预防高危患者心血管事件方面的有效性和安全性。我们按照系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南进行了一项Meta分析。两名独立研究人员在Medline、Cochrane临床试验图书馆和EMBASE上进行在线数据库检索,直至2023年4月15日,使用了“贝派地酸”、“心血管结局”和“随机对照试验”等检索词。我们还利用医学主题词(MeSH)术语和布尔代数运算符来优化检索。我们纳入了比较接受贝派地酸治疗的患者与接受安慰剂治疗的患者心血管结局的文章。评估的主要结局是主要不良心血管事件(MACE),定义为心血管死亡、心肌梗死、非致命性卒中、因不稳定型心绞痛住院和冠状动脉血运重建的综合结果。该Meta分析包括三项随机对照试验,共16978名患者。使用贝派地酸与主要不良心血管事件显著减少相关。个体分析报告称,接受贝派地酸治疗的患者发生心肌梗死、冠状动脉血运重建和因不稳定型心绞痛住院的风险较低。此外,我们的Meta分析发现,贝派地酸是一种安全的治疗选择,因为在不良事件和严重不良事件方面,贝派地酸组和安慰剂组之间没有显著差异。我们的研究结果支持将贝派地酸作为高危心血管患者一种有前景的治疗选择。然而,由于我们的Meta分析纳入的研究数量有限且随访期较短,因此需要开展更大规模研究以提供更确凿的证据。