Ketut Angga Aditya Putra Pramana, Ni Gusti Ayu Made Sintya Dwi Cahyani, Yusra Pintaningrum, Basuki Rahmat
{"title":"心房颤动患者左心房阑尾关闭术与口服抗凝疗法的疗效:随机对照试验的最新荟萃分析。","authors":"Ketut Angga Aditya Putra Pramana, Ni Gusti Ayu Made Sintya Dwi Cahyani, Yusra Pintaningrum, Basuki Rahmat","doi":"10.1186/s43044-024-00576-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical results of Left Atrial Appendage Closure (LAAC) and oral anticoagulation (OAC) in individuals with AF.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>For randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the clinical results of OAC to LAAC in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), we searched PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane. The included publications were subjected to meta-analyses using Review Manager v5.4.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In comparison to OAC, LAAC was linked with a decreased incidence of all stroke (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.55-0.84; p = 0.0004). LAAC was also linked to a decreased risk of hemorrhagic stroke (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.07-0.55; p = 0.002). There is no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of ischemic stroke (OR 1.05; 95% CI 0.59-1.84; p = 0.88) or systemic embolization (OR 1.02; 95% CI 0.42-2.46; p = 0.97).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>According to our meta-analysis, the LAAC was less likely than the OAC to have a complete or hemorrhagic stroke. For the two groups, however, there was no difference in the risk of ischemic stroke or systemic embolization.</p>","PeriodicalId":74993,"journal":{"name":"The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology","volume":"76 1","pages":"144"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11496447/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Outcomes of left atrial appendage closure versus oral anticoagulant therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation: an updated meta-analysis of randomized control trials.\",\"authors\":\"Ketut Angga Aditya Putra Pramana, Ni Gusti Ayu Made Sintya Dwi Cahyani, Yusra Pintaningrum, Basuki Rahmat\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s43044-024-00576-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical results of Left Atrial Appendage Closure (LAAC) and oral anticoagulation (OAC) in individuals with AF.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>For randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the clinical results of OAC to LAAC in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), we searched PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane. The included publications were subjected to meta-analyses using Review Manager v5.4.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In comparison to OAC, LAAC was linked with a decreased incidence of all stroke (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.55-0.84; p = 0.0004). LAAC was also linked to a decreased risk of hemorrhagic stroke (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.07-0.55; p = 0.002). There is no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of ischemic stroke (OR 1.05; 95% CI 0.59-1.84; p = 0.88) or systemic embolization (OR 1.02; 95% CI 0.42-2.46; p = 0.97).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>According to our meta-analysis, the LAAC was less likely than the OAC to have a complete or hemorrhagic stroke. For the two groups, however, there was no difference in the risk of ischemic stroke or systemic embolization.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74993,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology\",\"volume\":\"76 1\",\"pages\":\"144\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11496447/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43044-024-00576-1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43044-024-00576-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:本研究的目的是比较左心房附壁关闭术(LAAC)和口服抗凝药(OAC)对房颤患者的临床效果:本研究旨在比较左心房附壁关闭术(LAAC)和口服抗凝药(OAC)对房颤患者的临床效果:我们检索了 PubMed、ScienceDirect 和 Cochrane 等网站,以查找在心房颤动(AF)患者中比较 OAC 和 LAAC 临床效果的随机对照试验(RCT)。我们使用Review Manager v5.4对纳入的文献进行了荟萃分析:与 OAC 相比,LAAC 可降低所有中风的发病率(OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.55-0.84; p = 0.0004)。LAAC 还可降低出血性中风的风险(OR 0.20,95% CI 0.07-0.55;P = 0.002)。在缺血性中风(OR 1.05;95% CI 0.59-1.84;P = 0.88)或全身性栓塞(OR 1.02;95% CI 0.42-2.46;P = 0.97)方面,两组之间没有统计学意义上的差异:根据我们的荟萃分析,与 OAC 相比,LAAC 发生完全性或出血性卒中的几率更低。然而,两组患者发生缺血性卒中或全身性栓塞的风险没有差异。
Outcomes of left atrial appendage closure versus oral anticoagulant therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation: an updated meta-analysis of randomized control trials.
Background: The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical results of Left Atrial Appendage Closure (LAAC) and oral anticoagulation (OAC) in individuals with AF.
Methods: For randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the clinical results of OAC to LAAC in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), we searched PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane. The included publications were subjected to meta-analyses using Review Manager v5.4.
Results: In comparison to OAC, LAAC was linked with a decreased incidence of all stroke (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.55-0.84; p = 0.0004). LAAC was also linked to a decreased risk of hemorrhagic stroke (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.07-0.55; p = 0.002). There is no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of ischemic stroke (OR 1.05; 95% CI 0.59-1.84; p = 0.88) or systemic embolization (OR 1.02; 95% CI 0.42-2.46; p = 0.97).
Conclusions: According to our meta-analysis, the LAAC was less likely than the OAC to have a complete or hemorrhagic stroke. For the two groups, however, there was no difference in the risk of ischemic stroke or systemic embolization.