European journal of preventive cardiology · 2012
Long-term beta blockers for stable angina: systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Shu De Fen, Dong Bi Rong, Lin Xiu Fang, Wu Tai Xiang, Liu Guan Jian
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of long-term beta blockers in patients with stable angina.
METHODS: We reviewed the literature up to June 2010 from CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CBM, and CNKI for randomized controlled trials. The appropriate data were meta-analysed using Revman 5.0.
RESULTS: Twenty-six trials including 6108 patients were identified. The treatment with beta blockers has significantly decreased all-cause mortality when compared with no control (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.79), but has had no statistically differences when compared with placebo (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.38) and with calcium-channel blocker (CCB) (OR0.84, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.44). This was similar in patients with fatal and non-fatal acute myocardial infarction when compared with placebo (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.17) or CCB (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.66); on revascularization and quality of life. The beta blockers reduced the incident of unstable angina compared to no treatment (OR 0.14, 95% CI0.07 to 0.29), but increased unstable angina compared to placebo (OR 3.32, 95% CI 1.50 to 7.36). There was a significant reduction of nitrate consumption when beta blockers were compared with CCBs (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.54 to 0.82),but not with placebo and trimetazidine. There was no significant difference in angina attack between each group. Side effects in beta blocker were similar with ones in controls.
CONCLUSIONS: Beta blockers may decrease the death and unstable angina when compared with no treatment, but no more effective than other anti-anginal agents on prophylaxis of myocardial ischaemia in stable angina patients.
METHODS: We reviewed the literature up to June 2010 from CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CBM, and CNKI for randomized controlled trials. The appropriate data were meta-analysed using Revman 5.0.
RESULTS: Twenty-six trials including 6108 patients were identified. The treatment with beta blockers has significantly decreased all-cause mortality when compared with no control (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.79), but has had no statistically differences when compared with placebo (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.38) and with calcium-channel blocker (CCB) (OR0.84, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.44). This was similar in patients with fatal and non-fatal acute myocardial infarction when compared with placebo (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.17) or CCB (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.66); on revascularization and quality of life. The beta blockers reduced the incident of unstable angina compared to no treatment (OR 0.14, 95% CI0.07 to 0.29), but increased unstable angina compared to placebo (OR 3.32, 95% CI 1.50 to 7.36). There was a significant reduction of nitrate consumption when beta blockers were compared with CCBs (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.54 to 0.82),but not with placebo and trimetazidine. There was no significant difference in angina attack between each group. Side effects in beta blocker were similar with ones in controls.
CONCLUSIONS: Beta blockers may decrease the death and unstable angina when compared with no treatment, but no more effective than other anti-anginal agents on prophylaxis of myocardial ischaemia in stable angina patients.