Suppr超能文献

沙库巴曲缬沙坦与血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂或血管紧张素受体阻滞剂在预防导管消融术后房颤复发中的疗效:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。

Efficacy of sacubitril-valsartan vs. angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers in preventing atrial fibrillation recurrence after catheter ablation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

作者信息

Baía Bezerra Fernando, Rodrigues Sobreira Luis Eduardo, Tsuchiya Sano Vitor Kendi, de Oliveira Macena Lôbo Artur, Cavalcanti Orestes Cardoso Jorge Henrique, Alves Kelly Francinny, Aquino de Moraes Francisco Cezar, Consolim-Colombo Fernanda Marciano

机构信息

Anhembi Morumbi University, Avenida Deputado Benedito Matarazzo, 6070 - Jardim Aquarius, São José Dos Campos, Brazil.

Federal University of Pará, 68371-040, Altamira, Brazil.

出版信息

Herz. 2025 Apr;50(2):135-141. doi: 10.1007/s00059-024-05275-w. Epub 2024 Sep 23.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Patients who have undergone catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) may experience recurrence of this condition. The efficacy of sacubitril-valsartan (S/V) in preventing AF recurrence compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) is not established. This meta-analysis aimed to establish the best therapeutic choice for preventing AF recurrence after catheter ablation.

METHOD

A systematic search of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing the use of S/V with ACEI/ARB in patients who underwent catheter ablation. Results are presented as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity was assessed with the I statistic, and outcomes are expressed as relative risk (RR). R software version 4.2.3 was used for the analysis.

RESULTS

Three RCTs and one cohort study, comprising 642 patients with 319 patients in the S/V group and 323 in the control group, were included. Follow-up ranged from 6 to 36 months, with mean ages ranging from 58.9 to 65.8 years. A significant reduction in persistent AF occurrence was demonstrated favoring the S/V group (RR: 0.54; 95% CI: [0.41, 0.70]; p = 0.000004; I: 80%) over the ACEI/ARB group. There was no significant difference in left ventricular ejection fraction with S/V use (MD: 1.23; 95% CI: [-0.12, 2.60]; p = 0.076; I: 0%) compared with ACEI/ARB. The analysis also showed a significant reduction in left atrial volume index (MD: -5.33; 95% CI: [-8.76, -1.90]; p = 0.002; I: 57%) in the S/V group compared with the ACEI/ARB group.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrated the efficacy of S/V in reducing the incidence of AF in patients undergoing catheter ablation compared with the use of ACEI/ARB. However, more RCTs are needed for a comprehensive evaluation of its efficacy in reducing AF recurrence after catheter ablation in clinical practice.

摘要

背景

接受房颤导管消融术的患者可能会出现房颤复发。与血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂(ACEI)或血管紧张素II受体阻滞剂(ARB)相比,沙库巴曲缬沙坦(S/V)预防房颤复发的疗效尚未确定。本荟萃分析旨在确定导管消融术后预防房颤复发的最佳治疗选择。

方法

对PubMed、Embase和Cochrane数据库进行系统检索,以查找比较接受导管消融术的患者使用S/V与ACEI/ARB的随机对照试验(RCT)和观察性研究。结果以平均差(MD)和95%置信区间(CI)表示。使用I统计量评估异质性,结果以相对风险(RR)表示。使用R软件4.2.3版进行分析。

结果

纳入了3项RCT和1项队列研究,共642例患者,其中S/V组319例,对照组323例。随访时间为6至36个月,平均年龄为58.9至65.8岁。结果显示,与ACEI/ARB组相比,S/V组持续性房颤的发生率显著降低(RR:0.54;95%CI:[0.41, 0.70];p = 0.000004;I:80%)。与使用ACEI/ARB相比,使用S/V时左心室射血分数无显著差异(MD:1.23;95%CI:[-0.12, 2.60];p = 0.076;I:0%)。分析还显示,与ACEI/ARB组相比,S/V组的左心房容积指数显著降低(MD:-5.33;95%CI:[-8.76, -1.90];p = 0.002;I:57%)。

结论

本荟萃分析表明,与使用ACEI/ARB相比,S/V在降低接受导管消融术患者的房颤发生率方面具有疗效。然而,在临床实践中,需要更多的RCT来全面评估其在降低导管消融术后房颤复发方面的疗效。

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