-
The American Journal of Medicine Sep 2011Supraventricular tachyarrhythmias including atrial fibrillation are common and troubling complications after cardiac surgery, and thus considerable interest in... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Supraventricular tachyarrhythmias including atrial fibrillation are common and troubling complications after cardiac surgery, and thus considerable interest in pharmacologic prophylaxis has developed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of sotalol in the prevention of postoperative supraventricular tachyarrhythmias.
METHODS
Standard methods of meta-analysis were used. Randomized clinical trials published in English language were eligible for the meta-analysis.
RESULTS
A systematic review revealed 15 eligible publications that provided 20 comparisons of sotalol with a control group. The incidence and relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) of developing postoperative supraventricular tachyarrhythmias while taking sotalol were sotalol (n=489) versus placebo (n=499): 22.5% versus 41.5%, RR=0.55 (CI, 0.454-0.667, P<.001); sotalol (n=304) versus no treatment (n=311): 12% versus 39%, RR=0.329 (CI, 0.236-0.459, P<.001); sotalol (n=488) versus beta-blocker (n=555): 14% versus 23%, RR=0.644 (CI, 0.495-0.838, P<.001); sotalol (n=139) versus amiodarone (n=146): no significant differences in supraventricular tachyarrhythmia prevention; and sotalol (n=51) versus magnesium (n=54): no significant differences in supraventricular tachyarrhythmia prevention. Initiating sotalol orally or intravenously had no significant effect on efficacy. Initiating sotalol after surgery showed a trend toward less adverse events (before: RR=1.700 [CI, 0.903-3.200] and after: RR=0.767 [CI, 0.391-1.505]).
CONCLUSION
Sotalol is more effective in the prevention of supraventricular tachyarrhythmia than placebo or beta-blockers. Initiating sotalol before cardiac surgery has no advantage compared with initiating sotalol shortly after surgery. Starting sotalol intravenously after surgery may be a more reliable method than administering via a nasogastric tube or delaying treatment until the patient can take oral medication.
Topics: Anti-Arrhythmia Agents; Atrial Fibrillation; Double-Blind Method; Drug Therapy, Combination; Electrocardiography; Heart Diseases; Humans; Infusions, Intravenous; Magnesium; Postoperative Care; Postoperative Complications; Prospective Studies; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sotalol; Tachycardia, Supraventricular
PubMed: 21854895
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2011.04.025 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2024Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most frequent sustained arrhythmia. Cardioversion is a rhythm control strategy to restore normal/sinus rhythm, and can be achieved... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most frequent sustained arrhythmia. Cardioversion is a rhythm control strategy to restore normal/sinus rhythm, and can be achieved through drugs (pharmacological) or a synchronised electric shock (electrical cardioversion).
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of pharmacological and electrical cardioversion for atrial fibrillation (AF), atrial flutter and atrial tachycardias.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (CPCI-S) and three trials registers (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP and ISRCTN) on 14 February 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) at the individual patient level. Patient populations were aged ≥ 18 years with AF of any type and duration, atrial flutter or other sustained related atrial arrhythmias, not occurring as a result of reversible causes.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodology to collect data and performed a network meta-analysis using the standard frequentist graph-theoretical approach using the netmeta package in R. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence which we presented in our summary of findings with a judgement on certainty. We calculated differences using risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) as well as ranking treatments using a P value. We assessed clinical and statistical heterogeneity and split the networks for the primary outcome and acute procedural success, due to concerns about violating the transitivity assumption.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 112 RCTs (139 records), from which we pooled data from 15,968 patients. The average age ranged from 47 to 72 years and the proportion of male patients ranged from 38% to 92%. Seventy-nine trials were considered to be at high risk of bias for at least one domain, 32 had no high risk of bias domains, but had at least one domain classified as uncertain risk, and one study was considered at low risk for all domains. For paroxysmal AF (35 trials), when compared to placebo, anteroapical (AA)/anteroposterior (AP) biphasic truncated exponential waveform (BTE) cardioversion (RR: 2.42; 95% CI 1.65 to 3.56), quinidine (RR: 2.23; 95% CI 1.49 to 3.34), ibutilide (RR: 2.00; 95% CI 1.28 to 3.12), propafenone (RR: 1.98; 95% CI 1.67 to 2.34), amiodarone (RR: 1.69; 95% CI 1.42 to 2.02), sotalol (RR: 1.58; 95% CI 1.08 to 2.31) and procainamide (RR: 1.49; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.97) likely result in a large increase in maintenance of sinus rhythm until hospital discharge or end of study follow-up (certainty of evidence: moderate). The effect size was larger for AA/AP incremental and was progressively smaller for the subsequent interventions. Despite low certainty of evidence, antazoline may result in a large increase (RR: 28.60; 95% CI 1.77 to 461.30) in this outcome. Similarly, low-certainty evidence suggests a large increase in this outcome for flecainide (RR: 2.17; 95% CI 1.68 to 2.79), vernakalant (RR: 2.13; 95% CI 1.52 to 2.99), and magnesium (RR: 1.73; 95% CI 0.79 to 3.79). For persistent AF (26 trials), one network was created for electrical cardioversion and showed that, when compared to AP BTE incremental energy with patches, AP BTE maximum energy with patches (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.55) likely results in a large increase, and active compression AP BTE incremental energy with patches (RR: 1.14, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.131) likely results in an increase in maintenance of sinus rhythm at hospital discharge or end of study follow-up (certainty of evidence: high). Use of AP BTE incremental with paddles (RR: 1.03, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.09; certainty of evidence: low) may lead to a slight increase, and AP MDS Incremental paddles (RR: 0.95, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.05; certainty of evidence: low) may lead to a slight decrease in efficacy. On the other hand, AP MDS incremental energy using patches (RR: 0.78, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.87), AA RBW incremental energy with patches (RR: 0.76, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.88), AP RBW incremental energy with patches (RR: 0.76, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.86), AA MDS incremental energy with patches (RR: 0.76, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.86) and AA MDS incremental energy with paddles (RR: 0.68, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.83) probably result in a decrease in this outcome when compared to AP BTE incremental energy with patches (certainty of evidence: moderate). The network for pharmacological cardioversion showed that bepridil (RR: 2.29, 95% CI 1.26 to 4.17) and quindine (RR: 1.53, (95% CI 1.01 to 2.32) probably result in a large increase in maintenance of sinus rhythm at hospital discharge or end of study follow-up when compared to amiodarone (certainty of evidence: moderate). Dofetilide (RR: 0.79, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.44), sotalol (RR: 0.89, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.18), propafenone (RR: 0.79, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.25) and pilsicainide (RR: 0.39, 95% CI 0.02 to 7.01) may result in a reduction in this outcome when compared to amiodarone, but the certainty of evidence is low. For atrial flutter (14 trials), a network could be created only for antiarrhythmic drugs. Using placebo as the common comparator, ibutilide (RR: 21.45, 95% CI 4.41 to 104.37), propafenone (RR: 7.15, 95% CI 1.27 to 40.10), dofetilide (RR: 6.43, 95% CI 1.38 to 29.91), and sotalol (RR: 6.39, 95% CI 1.03 to 39.78) probably result in a large increase in the maintenance of sinus rhythm at hospital discharge or end of study follow-up (certainty of evidence: moderate), and procainamide (RR: 4.29, 95% CI 0.63 to 29.03), flecainide (RR 3.57, 95% CI 0.24 to 52.30) and vernakalant (RR: 1.18, 95% CI 0.05 to 27.37) may result in a large increase in maintenance of sinus rhythm at hospital discharge or end of study follow-up (certainty of evidence: low). All tested electrical cardioversion strategies for atrial flutter had very high efficacy (97.9% to 100%). The rate of mortality (14 deaths) and stroke or systemic embolism (3 events) at 30 days was extremely low. Data on quality of life were scarce and of uncertain clinical significance. No information was available regarding heart failure readmissions. Data on duration of hospitalisation was scarce, of low quality, and could not be pooled.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Despite the low quality of evidence, this systematic review provides important information on electrical and pharmacological strategies to help patients and physicians deal with AF and atrial flutter. In the assessment of the patient comorbidity profile, antiarrhythmic drug onset of action and side effect profile versus the need for a physician with experience in sedation, or anaesthetics support for electrical cardioversion are key aspects when choosing the cardioversion method.
Topics: Aged; Humans; Middle Aged; Anti-Arrhythmia Agents; Atrial Fibrillation; Atrial Flutter; Bias; Electric Countershock; Network Meta-Analysis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tachycardia; Male; Female
PubMed: 38828867
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013255.pub2 -
Archives of Internal Medicine Apr 2006A variety of antiarrhythmic drugs have been used to prevent recurrence of atrial fibrillation after conversion to sinus rhythm. We performed a systematic review to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
A variety of antiarrhythmic drugs have been used to prevent recurrence of atrial fibrillation after conversion to sinus rhythm. We performed a systematic review to determine the effect of long-term treatment with those drugs on death, embolisms, adverse effects, and atrial fibrillation recurrence.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library (all up to May 2005), and the reference lists of retrieved articles. We included randomized controlled trials that compared any antiarrhythmic against control (placebo or no treatment) or another antiarrhythmic, for more than 6 months. Postoperative atrial fibrillation was excluded. Two evaluators independently reviewed the retrieved studies and extracted all data. Disagreements were resolved by discussion. All results were calculated at 1 year of follow-up.
RESULTS
Forty-four trials were included, with a total of 11 322 patients. Several class IA (disopyramide phosphate, quinidine sulfate), class IC (flecainide acetate, propafenone hydrochloride), and class III (amiodarone, dofetilide, sotalol hydrochloride) drugs significantly reduced recurrence of atrial fibrillation (number needed to treat, 2-9), but all increased withdrawals due to adverse effects (number needed to harm [NNH], 9-27) and all but amiodarone and propafenone increased proarrhythmia (NNH, 17-119). Class IA drugs, pooled, were associated with increased mortality compared with controls (Peto odds ratio, 2.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-5.59; P = .04; NNH, 109). No other antiarrhythmic showed a significant effect on mortality compared with controls. We could not analyze other outcomes because data were lacking.
CONCLUSION
Class IA, IC, and III drugs are effective in maintaining sinus rhythm but increase adverse effects, and class IA drugs may increase mortality.
Topics: Anti-Arrhythmia Agents; Atrial Fibrillation; Electric Countershock; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Secondary Prevention
PubMed: 16606807
DOI: 10.1001/archinte.166.7.719 -
Circulation Jul 2002Postoperative atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common complication of cardiac surgery and has been associated with increased incidence of other complications and increased... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Postoperative atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common complication of cardiac surgery and has been associated with increased incidence of other complications and increased hospital length of stay (LOS). Prevention of AF is a reasonable clinical goal, and, consequently, many randomized trials have evaluated the effectiveness of pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions for prevention of AF. To better understand the role of various prophylactic therapies against postoperative AF, a systematic review of evidence from randomized trials was performed.
METHODS AND RESULTS
Fifty-two randomized trials (controlled by placebo or routine treatment) of beta-blockers, sotalol, amiodarone, or pacing were identified by systematic literature search. The 3 drug treatments each prevented AF with the following odds ratios (ORs): beta-blockers, 0.39 (95% CI, 0.28 to 0.52); sotalol, 0.35 (95% CI, 0.26 to 0.49); and amiodarone, 0.48 (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.61). Pacing was also effective; for biatrial pacing, the OR was 0.46 (95% CI, 0.30 to 0.71). The influence of pharmacological interventions on LOS was as follows: -0.66 day (95% CI, 2.04 to 0.72) for beta-blockers; -0.40 day (95% CI, 0.87 to 0.08) for sotalol; and -0.91 day (95% CI, 1.59 to -0.23) for amiodarone. The influence for biatrial pacing was -1.54 day (95% CI, -2.85 to -0.24). The incidence of stroke was 1.2% in all the treatment groups combined and 1.4% in controls (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.46 to 1.74).
CONCLUSIONS
Beta-blockers, sotalol, and amiodarone all reduce risk of postoperative AF with no marked difference between them. There is evidence that use of these drugs will reduce LOS. Biatrial pacing is a promising new treatment opportunity. There was no evidence that reducing postoperative AF reduces stroke; however, data on stroke are incomplete.
Topics: Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; Amiodarone; Anti-Arrhythmia Agents; Atrial Fibrillation; Cardiac Pacing, Artificial; Cardiac Surgical Procedures; Humans; Length of Stay; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Factors; Sotalol; Stroke
PubMed: 12093773
DOI: 10.1161/01.cir.0000021113.44111.3e -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2019Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have yielded conflicting results regarding the ability of beta-blockers to influence perioperative cardiovascular morbidity and...
BACKGROUND
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have yielded conflicting results regarding the ability of beta-blockers to influence perioperative cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Thus routine prescription of these drugs in unselected patients remains a controversial issue. A previous version of this review assessing the effectiveness of perioperative beta-blockers in cardiac and non-cardiac surgery was last published in 2018. The previous review has now been split into two reviews according to type of surgery. This is an update and assesses the evidence in cardiac surgery only.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of perioperatively administered beta-blockers for the prevention of surgery-related mortality and morbidity in adults undergoing cardiac surgery.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Biosis Previews and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science on 28 June 2019. We searched clinical trials registers and grey literature, and conducted backward- and forward-citation searching of relevant articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included RCTs and quasi-randomized studies comparing beta-blockers with a control (placebo or standard care) administered during the perioperative period to adults undergoing cardiac surgery. We excluded studies in which all participants in the standard care control group were given a pharmacological agent that was not given to participants in the intervention group, studies in which all participants in the control group were given a beta-blocker, and studies in which beta-blockers were given with an additional agent (e.g. magnesium). We excluded studies that did not measure or report review outcomes.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risks of bias. We assessed the certainty of evidence with GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 63 studies with 7768 participants; six studies were quasi-randomized and the remaining were RCTs. All participants were undergoing cardiac surgery, and in most studies, at least some of the participants were previously taking beta-blockers. Types of beta-blockers were: propranolol, metoprolol, sotalol, esmolol, landiolol, acebutolol, timolol, carvedilol, nadolol, and atenolol. In twelve studies, beta-blockers were titrated according to heart rate or blood pressure. Duration of administration varied between studies, as did the time at which drugs were administered; in nine studies this was before surgery, in 20 studies during surgery, and in the remaining studies beta-blockers were started postoperatively. Overall, we found that most studies did not report sufficient details for us to adequately assess risk of bias. In particular, few studies reported methods used to randomize participants to groups. In some studies, participants in the control group were given beta-blockers as rescue therapy during the study period, and all studies in which the control was standard care were at high risk of performance bias because of the open-label study design. No studies were prospectively registered with clinical trials registers, which limited the assessment of reporting bias. We judged 68% studies to be at high risk of bias in at least one domain.Study authors reported few deaths (7 per 1000 in both the intervention and control groups), and we found low-certainty evidence that beta-blockers may make little or no difference to all-cause mortality at 30 days (risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47 to 1.90; 29 studies, 4099 participants). For myocardial infarctions, we found no evidence of a difference in events (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.52; 25 studies, 3946 participants; low-certainty evidence). Few study authors reported cerebrovascular events, and the evidence was uncertain (RR 1.37, 95% CI 0.51 to 3.67; 5 studies, 1471 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Based on a control risk of 54 per 1000, we found low-certainty evidence that beta-blockers may reduce episodes of ventricular arrhythmias by 32 episodes per 1000 (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.63; 12 studies, 2296 participants). For atrial fibrillation or flutter, there may be 163 fewer incidences with beta-blockers, based on a control risk of 327 incidences per 1000 (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.59; 40 studies, 5650 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, the evidence for bradycardia and hypotension was less certain. We found that beta-blockers may make little or no difference to bradycardia (RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.92 to 2.91; 12 studies, 1640 participants; low-certainty evidence), or hypotension (RR 1.84, 95% CI 0.89 to 3.80; 10 studies, 1538 participants; low-certainty evidence).We used GRADE to downgrade the certainty of evidence. Owing to studies at high risk of bias in at least one domain, we downgraded each outcome for study limitations. Based on effect size calculations in the previous review, we found an insufficient number of participants in all outcomes (except atrial fibrillation) and, for some outcomes, we noted a wide confidence interval; therefore, we also downgraded outcomes owing to imprecision. The evidence for atrial fibrillation and length of hospital stay had a moderate level of statistical heterogeneity which we could not explain, and we, therefore, downgraded these outcomes for inconsistency.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found no evidence of a difference in early all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular events, hypotension and bradycardia. However, there may be a reduction in atrial fibrillation and ventricular arrhythmias when beta-blockers are used. A larger sample size is likely to increase the certainty of this evidence. Four studies awaiting classification may alter the conclusions of this review.
Topics: Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; Arrhythmias, Cardiac; Bradycardia; Cardiac Surgical Procedures; Cerebrovascular Disorders; Humans; Hypotension; Morbidity; Myocardial Infarction; Myocardial Ischemia; Perioperative Care; Postoperative Complications; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31544227
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013435