Artur de Oliveira Macena Lôbo, Luis Eduardo Rodrigues Sobreira, Danilo Monteiro Ribeiro, Isabela Junger Meirelles Aguiar, Francinny Alves Kelly
{"title":"甲状腺机能亢进治疗后死亡率和心血管发病率的比较:系统综述和贝叶斯网络荟萃分析。","authors":"Artur de Oliveira Macena Lôbo, Luis Eduardo Rodrigues Sobreira, Danilo Monteiro Ribeiro, Isabela Junger Meirelles Aguiar, Francinny Alves Kelly","doi":"10.1007/s12020-025-04342-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Therapeutic approaches for hyperthyroidism, namely antithyroid drugs, radioiodine, and thyroidectomy, aim to restore normal thyroid function while minimizing harm. However, the difference in outcomes related to mortality and cardiovascular diseases between them remains controversial.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central, and Web of Science were searched for randomized controlled trials and cohort studies that compared any of the three supracited therapeutic approaches between themselves. A Bayesian model estimated hazard ratios (HR) with 95% credible intervals (CrI) using a random-effects model. Treatments were ranked by surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight cohort studies encompassing 172,585 hyperthyroid patients were included. Thyroidectomy was associated with lower all-cause mortality compared to antithyroid drugs (HR 0.442; 95% CrI 0.244-0.783) but not radioiodine (HR 0.675; 95% CrI 0.424-1.296). No significant differences were observed for cardiovascular mortality when comparing thyroidectomy to antithyroids (HR 0.440; 95% CrI 0.177-1.127) and radioiodine (HR 0.580; 95% CrI 0.342-1.064). For major cardiovascular events (MACE) there was no significant difference between radioiodine vs. antithyroids (HR 0.557; 95% CrI 0.265-1.006) and thyroidectomy (HR 0.784; 95% CrI 0.347-1.917). Thyroidectomy did not reduce heart failure risk vs. antithyroids (HR 0.353; 95% CrI 0.115-1.251) and radioiodine (HR 0.426; 95% CrI 0.131-1.749). SUCRA rankings suggested thyroidectomy as the best treatment concerning mortality and heart failure, while radioiodine ranked highest for MACE.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Thyroidectomy and radioiodine may offer better long-term cardiovascular and mortality outcomes compared to antithyroid drugs. Further studies with proper designs are needed to verify the nature of these associations.</p>","PeriodicalId":49211,"journal":{"name":"Endocrine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of mortality and cardiovascular morbidity following treatment for hyperthyroidism: A systematic review and bayesian network meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Artur de Oliveira Macena Lôbo, Luis Eduardo Rodrigues Sobreira, Danilo Monteiro Ribeiro, Isabela Junger Meirelles Aguiar, Francinny Alves Kelly\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12020-025-04342-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Therapeutic approaches for hyperthyroidism, namely antithyroid drugs, radioiodine, and thyroidectomy, aim to restore normal thyroid function while minimizing harm. However, the difference in outcomes related to mortality and cardiovascular diseases between them remains controversial.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central, and Web of Science were searched for randomized controlled trials and cohort studies that compared any of the three supracited therapeutic approaches between themselves. A Bayesian model estimated hazard ratios (HR) with 95% credible intervals (CrI) using a random-effects model. Treatments were ranked by surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight cohort studies encompassing 172,585 hyperthyroid patients were included. Thyroidectomy was associated with lower all-cause mortality compared to antithyroid drugs (HR 0.442; 95% CrI 0.244-0.783) but not radioiodine (HR 0.675; 95% CrI 0.424-1.296). No significant differences were observed for cardiovascular mortality when comparing thyroidectomy to antithyroids (HR 0.440; 95% CrI 0.177-1.127) and radioiodine (HR 0.580; 95% CrI 0.342-1.064). For major cardiovascular events (MACE) there was no significant difference between radioiodine vs. antithyroids (HR 0.557; 95% CrI 0.265-1.006) and thyroidectomy (HR 0.784; 95% CrI 0.347-1.917). Thyroidectomy did not reduce heart failure risk vs. antithyroids (HR 0.353; 95% CrI 0.115-1.251) and radioiodine (HR 0.426; 95% CrI 0.131-1.749). SUCRA rankings suggested thyroidectomy as the best treatment concerning mortality and heart failure, while radioiodine ranked highest for MACE.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Thyroidectomy and radioiodine may offer better long-term cardiovascular and mortality outcomes compared to antithyroid drugs. Further studies with proper designs are needed to verify the nature of these associations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49211,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Endocrine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Endocrine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12020-025-04342-4\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Endocrine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12020-025-04342-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of mortality and cardiovascular morbidity following treatment for hyperthyroidism: A systematic review and bayesian network meta-analysis.
Introduction: Therapeutic approaches for hyperthyroidism, namely antithyroid drugs, radioiodine, and thyroidectomy, aim to restore normal thyroid function while minimizing harm. However, the difference in outcomes related to mortality and cardiovascular diseases between them remains controversial.
Methods: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central, and Web of Science were searched for randomized controlled trials and cohort studies that compared any of the three supracited therapeutic approaches between themselves. A Bayesian model estimated hazard ratios (HR) with 95% credible intervals (CrI) using a random-effects model. Treatments were ranked by surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA).
Results: Eight cohort studies encompassing 172,585 hyperthyroid patients were included. Thyroidectomy was associated with lower all-cause mortality compared to antithyroid drugs (HR 0.442; 95% CrI 0.244-0.783) but not radioiodine (HR 0.675; 95% CrI 0.424-1.296). No significant differences were observed for cardiovascular mortality when comparing thyroidectomy to antithyroids (HR 0.440; 95% CrI 0.177-1.127) and radioiodine (HR 0.580; 95% CrI 0.342-1.064). For major cardiovascular events (MACE) there was no significant difference between radioiodine vs. antithyroids (HR 0.557; 95% CrI 0.265-1.006) and thyroidectomy (HR 0.784; 95% CrI 0.347-1.917). Thyroidectomy did not reduce heart failure risk vs. antithyroids (HR 0.353; 95% CrI 0.115-1.251) and radioiodine (HR 0.426; 95% CrI 0.131-1.749). SUCRA rankings suggested thyroidectomy as the best treatment concerning mortality and heart failure, while radioiodine ranked highest for MACE.
Conclusion: Thyroidectomy and radioiodine may offer better long-term cardiovascular and mortality outcomes compared to antithyroid drugs. Further studies with proper designs are needed to verify the nature of these associations.
期刊介绍:
Well-established as a major journal in today’s rapidly advancing experimental and clinical research areas, Endocrine publishes original articles devoted to basic (including molecular, cellular and physiological studies), translational and clinical research in all the different fields of endocrinology and metabolism. Articles will be accepted based on peer-reviews, priority, and editorial decision. Invited reviews, mini-reviews and viewpoints on relevant pathophysiological and clinical topics, as well as Editorials on articles appearing in the Journal, are published. Unsolicited Editorials will be evaluated by the editorial team. Outcomes of scientific meetings, as well as guidelines and position statements, may be submitted. The Journal also considers special feature articles in the field of endocrine genetics and epigenetics, as well as articles devoted to novel methods and techniques in endocrinology.
Endocrine covers controversial, clinical endocrine issues. Meta-analyses on endocrine and metabolic topics are also accepted. Descriptions of single clinical cases and/or small patients studies are not published unless of exceptional interest. However, reports of novel imaging studies and endocrine side effects in single patients may be considered. Research letters and letters to the editor related or unrelated to recently published articles can be submitted.
Endocrine covers leading topics in endocrinology such as neuroendocrinology, pituitary and hypothalamic peptides, thyroid physiological and clinical aspects, bone and mineral metabolism and osteoporosis, obesity, lipid and energy metabolism and food intake control, insulin, Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes, hormones of male and female reproduction, adrenal diseases pediatric and geriatric endocrinology, endocrine hypertension and endocrine oncology.