BMC medicine · 2015
Effects of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists in patients with preserved ejection fraction: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
СтатьяМетаанализПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Chen Yanmei, Wang He, Lu Yongkang, Huang Xiaobo, Liao Yulin, Bin Jianping
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) have been shown to be effective in patients with heart failure or myocardial infarction complicated by a reduced ejection fraction. However, the role of MRAs in patients with preserved ejection fraction (PEF) remains to be clarified. We aimed to summarize the evidence for the efficacy of MRAs in patients with either heart failure with PEF (HF-PEF) or myocardial infarction with PEF (MI-PEF).
METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and clinical trials databases for randomized controlled trials, through June 2014, assessing MRA treatment in HF-PEF or MI-PEF patients. Fourteen randomized controlled trials (MI-PEF, 5; HF-PEF, 9; n = 6,428 patients) were included.
RESULTS: MRA treatment reduced the risk of hospitalization for heart failure (relative risk, 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70 to 0.98), improved quality of life (weighted mean difference [WMD], -5.16; 95% CI, -8.03 to -2.30), left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (standardized mean difference, -0.21; 95% CI, 0.32 to -0.11), and serum amino-terminal peptide of procollagen type-III level (WMD, -1.50, 95% CI, -1.72 to -1.29) in patients with PEF. In addition, MRAs reduced E/e'(an echocardiographic estimate of filling pressure for assessment of diastolic function; WMD, -1.82; 95% CI, -2.23 to -1.42) in HF-PEF patients and E/A ratio (the ratio of early to late diastolic transmitral flow; WMD, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.14) in MI-PEF patients. However, all-cause mortality was not improved by MRAs in either HF-PEF (P = 0.90) or MI-PEF (P = 0.27) patients.
CONCLUSIONS: MRA treatment in PEF patients led to reduced hospitalization for heart failure, quantifiable improvements in quality of life and diastolic function, and reversal of cardiac remodeling, but did not provide any all-cause mortality benefit.
METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and clinical trials databases for randomized controlled trials, through June 2014, assessing MRA treatment in HF-PEF or MI-PEF patients. Fourteen randomized controlled trials (MI-PEF, 5; HF-PEF, 9; n = 6,428 patients) were included.
RESULTS: MRA treatment reduced the risk of hospitalization for heart failure (relative risk, 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70 to 0.98), improved quality of life (weighted mean difference [WMD], -5.16; 95% CI, -8.03 to -2.30), left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (standardized mean difference, -0.21; 95% CI, 0.32 to -0.11), and serum amino-terminal peptide of procollagen type-III level (WMD, -1.50, 95% CI, -1.72 to -1.29) in patients with PEF. In addition, MRAs reduced E/e'(an echocardiographic estimate of filling pressure for assessment of diastolic function; WMD, -1.82; 95% CI, -2.23 to -1.42) in HF-PEF patients and E/A ratio (the ratio of early to late diastolic transmitral flow; WMD, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.14) in MI-PEF patients. However, all-cause mortality was not improved by MRAs in either HF-PEF (P = 0.90) or MI-PEF (P = 0.27) patients.
CONCLUSIONS: MRA treatment in PEF patients led to reduced hospitalization for heart failure, quantifiable improvements in quality of life and diastolic function, and reversal of cardiac remodeling, but did not provide any all-cause mortality benefit.