钙通道阻滞剂对射血分数保留和轻度降低的心力衰竭患者的影响:系统回顾和荟萃分析

IF 2.5 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Hidekatsu Fukuta , Toshihiko Goto , Takeshi Kamiya
{"title":"钙通道阻滞剂对射血分数保留和轻度降低的心力衰竭患者的影响:系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"Hidekatsu Fukuta ,&nbsp;Toshihiko Goto ,&nbsp;Takeshi Kamiya","doi":"10.1016/j.ijcha.2024.101515","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In contrast to beta-blockers and renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, the role of calcium channel blockers (CCBs) in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains uncertain. Despite several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies exploring the effects of CCBs on prognosis and exercise capacity in HFpEF patients, the findings have been inconsistent, likely due to limited statistical power and/or variations in study design. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on the effects of CCBs in HFpEF patients. The search of electronic databases identified 2 RCTs including 35 patients and 4 cohort studies including 25,078 patients. In cases of significant heterogeneity (I<sup>2</sup> &gt; 50 %), data were pooled using a random-effects model; otherwise, a fixed-effects model was used. In pooled analysis of the cohort studies, use of CCBs was not associated with the risk of all-cause death (hazard ratio [95 % CI] = 0.913 [0.732, 1.139], P<em><sub>random</sub></em> = 0.420) or hospitalization for heart failure (1.050 [0.970, 1.137], P<em><sub>fix</sub></em> = 0.230). Separate analyses for dihydropyridine and non-dihydropyridine CCBs revealed similar results. In pooled analysis of the RCTs, verapamil increased exercise time (weighted mean difference [95 % CI] = 0.953 [0.109, 1.797] min; P<em><sub>fix</sub></em> = 0.027) and decreased the congestive heart failure score (2.019 [1.673, 2.365] points; P<em><sub>fix</sub></em> &lt; 0.001) compared with placebo. In conclusion, in HFpEF patients, verapamil may improve exercise capacity and symptoms but use of CCBs, regardless of subclass, may not be associated with better prognosis. Our meta-analysis is limited by the inclusion of only several studies for each outcome and further research is necessary to confirm our findings.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":38026,"journal":{"name":"IJC Heart and Vasculature","volume":"55 ","pages":"Article 101515"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352906724001817/pdfft?md5=9f45e0323afe32cf45a0c30bc60d89cb&pid=1-s2.0-S2352906724001817-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects of calcium channel blockers in patients with heart failure with preserved and mildly reduced ejection fraction: A systematic review and meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Hidekatsu Fukuta ,&nbsp;Toshihiko Goto ,&nbsp;Takeshi Kamiya\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijcha.2024.101515\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>In contrast to beta-blockers and renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, the role of calcium channel blockers (CCBs) in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains uncertain. Despite several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies exploring the effects of CCBs on prognosis and exercise capacity in HFpEF patients, the findings have been inconsistent, likely due to limited statistical power and/or variations in study design. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on the effects of CCBs in HFpEF patients. The search of electronic databases identified 2 RCTs including 35 patients and 4 cohort studies including 25,078 patients. In cases of significant heterogeneity (I<sup>2</sup> &gt; 50 %), data were pooled using a random-effects model; otherwise, a fixed-effects model was used. In pooled analysis of the cohort studies, use of CCBs was not associated with the risk of all-cause death (hazard ratio [95 % CI] = 0.913 [0.732, 1.139], P<em><sub>random</sub></em> = 0.420) or hospitalization for heart failure (1.050 [0.970, 1.137], P<em><sub>fix</sub></em> = 0.230). Separate analyses for dihydropyridine and non-dihydropyridine CCBs revealed similar results. In pooled analysis of the RCTs, verapamil increased exercise time (weighted mean difference [95 % CI] = 0.953 [0.109, 1.797] min; P<em><sub>fix</sub></em> = 0.027) and decreased the congestive heart failure score (2.019 [1.673, 2.365] points; P<em><sub>fix</sub></em> &lt; 0.001) compared with placebo. In conclusion, in HFpEF patients, verapamil may improve exercise capacity and symptoms but use of CCBs, regardless of subclass, may not be associated with better prognosis. Our meta-analysis is limited by the inclusion of only several studies for each outcome and further research is necessary to confirm our findings.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38026,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"IJC Heart and Vasculature\",\"volume\":\"55 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101515\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352906724001817/pdfft?md5=9f45e0323afe32cf45a0c30bc60d89cb&pid=1-s2.0-S2352906724001817-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"IJC Heart and Vasculature\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352906724001817\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IJC Heart and Vasculature","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352906724001817","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

与β受体阻滞剂和肾素-血管紧张素系统抑制剂相比,钙通道阻滞剂(CCB)在射血分数保留型心力衰竭(HFpEF)患者中的作用仍不确定。尽管有几项随机对照试验(RCT)和队列研究探讨了钙通道阻滞剂对射血分数保留型心力衰竭患者预后和运动能力的影响,但研究结果并不一致,这可能是由于统计能力有限和/或研究设计不同所致。我们旨在对有关 CCBs 对 HFpEF 患者影响的研究进行系统回顾和荟萃分析。通过检索电子数据库,我们发现了包括 35 名患者在内的 2 项 RCT 研究和包括 25,078 名患者在内的 4 项队列研究。在存在明显异质性(I2 > 50%)的情况下,采用随机效应模型对数据进行汇总;否则,采用固定效应模型。在队列研究的汇总分析中,CCBs 的使用与全因死亡风险(危险比 [95 % CI] = 0.913 [0.732, 1.139],Pfix = 0.420)或心衰住院风险(1.050 [0.970, 1.137],Pfix = 0.230)无关。对二氢吡啶类和非二氢吡啶类 CCBs 的单独分析显示了相似的结果。与安慰剂相比,维拉帕米增加了运动时间(加权平均差 [95 % CI] = 0.953 [0.109, 1.797] 分钟;Pfix = 0.027),降低了充血性心力衰竭评分(2.019 [1.673, 2.365] 分;Pfix < 0.001)。总之,对于 HFpEF 患者,维拉帕米可改善运动能力和症状,但使用 CCBs(无论属于哪种亚类)可能与更好的预后无关。我们的荟萃分析由于针对每种结果仅纳入了几项研究而受到限制,因此有必要开展进一步的研究来证实我们的发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effects of calcium channel blockers in patients with heart failure with preserved and mildly reduced ejection fraction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

In contrast to beta-blockers and renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, the role of calcium channel blockers (CCBs) in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains uncertain. Despite several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies exploring the effects of CCBs on prognosis and exercise capacity in HFpEF patients, the findings have been inconsistent, likely due to limited statistical power and/or variations in study design. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on the effects of CCBs in HFpEF patients. The search of electronic databases identified 2 RCTs including 35 patients and 4 cohort studies including 25,078 patients. In cases of significant heterogeneity (I2 > 50 %), data were pooled using a random-effects model; otherwise, a fixed-effects model was used. In pooled analysis of the cohort studies, use of CCBs was not associated with the risk of all-cause death (hazard ratio [95 % CI] = 0.913 [0.732, 1.139], Prandom = 0.420) or hospitalization for heart failure (1.050 [0.970, 1.137], Pfix = 0.230). Separate analyses for dihydropyridine and non-dihydropyridine CCBs revealed similar results. In pooled analysis of the RCTs, verapamil increased exercise time (weighted mean difference [95 % CI] = 0.953 [0.109, 1.797] min; Pfix = 0.027) and decreased the congestive heart failure score (2.019 [1.673, 2.365] points; Pfix < 0.001) compared with placebo. In conclusion, in HFpEF patients, verapamil may improve exercise capacity and symptoms but use of CCBs, regardless of subclass, may not be associated with better prognosis. Our meta-analysis is limited by the inclusion of only several studies for each outcome and further research is necessary to confirm our findings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
IJC Heart and Vasculature
IJC Heart and Vasculature Medicine-Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
10.30%
发文量
216
审稿时长
56 days
期刊介绍: IJC Heart & Vasculature is an online-only, open-access journal dedicated to publishing original articles and reviews (also Editorials and Letters to the Editor) which report on structural and functional cardiovascular pathology, with an emphasis on imaging and disease pathophysiology. Articles must be authentic, educational, clinically relevant, and original in their content and scientific approach. IJC Heart & Vasculature requires the highest standards of scientific integrity in order to promote reliable, reproducible and verifiable research findings. All authors are advised to consult the Principles of Ethical Publishing in the International Journal of Cardiology before submitting a manuscript. Submission of a manuscript to this journal gives the publisher the right to publish that paper if it is accepted. Manuscripts may be edited to improve clarity and expression.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信