-
Cureus Mar 2024This study aims to assess the association between intravenous diltiazem and metoprolol in rate control for atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with rapid ventricular rate,... (Review)
Review
This study aims to assess the association between intravenous diltiazem and metoprolol in rate control for atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with rapid ventricular rate, focusing on rate control efficacy and hemodynamic adverse events. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, electronic searches were conducted in Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) until February 20, 2024. The primary outcome was achieving ventricular rate control < 110/min. Secondary outcomes included new hypotension (systolic blood pressure < 90 mm Hg) and bradycardia (heart rate < 60/min). Nineteen studies (three randomized controlled trials and 16 observational studies) were included in this meta-analysis. Pooled analysis showed intravenous metoprolol resulted in a 39% lower rate control attainment compared to diltiazem (OR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.44 to 0.84; p = 0.002). There were no significant differences in bradycardia (OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.22 to 1.22; p = 0.13) or hypotension risk (OR: 1.08; 95% CI: 0.72 to 1.61; p = 0.72) between the two groups. Intravenous diltiazem demonstrated superior rate control efficacy compared to metoprolol in AF patients with rapid ventricular rate. However, no significant differences were observed in safety outcomes, namely, bradycardia and hypotension.
PubMed: 38646329
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.56560 -
Hypertension in Pregnancy Dec 2024Preeclampsia (PE) is a pregnancy disorder that represents a major cause of maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Preeclampsia (PE) is a pregnancy disorder that represents a major cause of maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality.
METHODS
This network meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO. We searched the PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov. and Embase databases for studies published from inception to the 31 of March 2023. RevMan5.3 software provided by the Cochrane Collaboration was used for direct meta-analysis (DMA) statistical analysis. Funnel maps, network meta-analysis (NMA), the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to rank the different interventions and publication bias were generated by STATA 17.0 software.
RESULTS
We included eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving a total of 1192 women with PE; two studies were of high quality and six were of moderate quality. Eight interventions were addressed in the NMA. In the DMA, we found that blood pressure in the Ketanserin group were significantly higher than those in the Nicardipine group. NMA showed that blood pressure in the Dihydralazine group was significantly higher than that in the Methyldopa, Labetalol, Nicardipine and Diltiazem groups. And the blood pressure in the Labetalol group was significantly lower than that in the Nicardipine group. SUCRA values showed that Diltiazem was more effective in lowering blood pressure than other drugs looked at in this study.
CONCLUSION
According to the eight RCTs included in this study, Diltiazem was the most effective in reducing blood pressure in PE patients; Labetalol and Nicardipine also had good effects. Diltiazem is preferred for the treatment of patients with severe PE and high blood pressure.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Antihypertensive Agents; Labetalol; Pre-Eclampsia; Diltiazem; Nicardipine; Network Meta-Analysis
PubMed: 38488570
DOI: 10.1080/10641955.2024.2329068 -
The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine Jan 2024There may be many predictors of anticoagulation-related gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), but until now, systematic reviews and assessments of the certainty of the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND/AIMS
There may be many predictors of anticoagulation-related gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), but until now, systematic reviews and assessments of the certainty of the evidence have not been published. We conducted a systematic review to identify all risk factors for anticoagulant-associated GIB to inform risk prediction in the management of anticoagulation- related GIB.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to search PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases (from inception through January 21, 2022) using the following search terms: anticoagulants, heparin, warfarin, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, DOACs, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, risk factors. According to inclusion and exclusion criteria, studies of risk factors for anticoagulation-related GIB were identified. Risk factors for anticoagulant-associated GIB were used as the outcome index of this review.
RESULTS
We included 34 studies in our analysis. For anticoagulant-associated GIB, moderate-certainty evidence showed a probable association with older age, kidney disease, concomitant use of aspirin, concomitant use of the antiplatelet agent, heart failure, myocardial infarction, hematochezia, renal failure, coronary artery disease, helicobacter pylori infection, social risk factors, alcohol use, smoking, anemia, history of sleep apnea, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, international normalized ratio (INR), obesity et al. Some of these factors are not included in current GIB risk prediction models. such as anemia, co-administration of gemfibrozil, co-administration of verapamil or diltiazem, INR, heart failure, myocardial infarction, etc.
CONCLUSION
The study found that anemia, co-administration of gemfibrozil, co-administration of verapamil or diltiazem, INR, heart failure, myocardial infarction et al. were associated with anticoagulation-related GIB, and these factors were not in the existing prediction models. This study informs risk prediction for anticoagulant-associated GIB, it also informs guidelines for GIB prevention and future research.
Topics: Humans; Anemia; Anticoagulants; Diltiazem; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage; Gemfibrozil; Heart Failure; Helicobacter Infections; Helicobacter pylori; Myocardial Infarction; Risk Factors; Verapamil
PubMed: 38062723
DOI: 10.3904/kjim.2023.098 -
Clinical Research in Cardiology :... Jun 2024Intravenous beta-blockers are commonly used to manage patients with acute atrial fibrillation (AF) and atrial flutter (AFl), but the choice of specific agent is often... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Efficacy and safety of intravenous beta-blockers in acute atrial fibrillation and flutter is dependent on beta-1 selectivity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials.
BACKGROUND
Intravenous beta-blockers are commonly used to manage patients with acute atrial fibrillation (AF) and atrial flutter (AFl), but the choice of specific agent is often not evidence-based.
METHODS
A prospectively-registered systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials (PROSPERO: CRD42020204772) to compare the safety and efficacy of intravenous beta-blockers against alternative pharmacological agents.
RESULTS
Twelve trials comparing beta-blockers with diltiazem, digoxin, verapamil, anti-arrhythmic drugs and placebo were included, with variable risk of bias and 1152 participants. With high heterogeneity (I = 87%; p < 0.001), there was no difference in the primary outcomes of heart rate reduction (standardised mean difference - 0.65 beats/minute compared to control, 95% CI - 1.63 to 0.32; p = 0.19) or the proportion that achieved target heart rate (risk ratio [RR] 0.85, 95% CI 0.36-1.97; p = 0.70). Conventional selective beta-1 blockers were inferior for target heart rate reduction versus control (RR 0.33, 0.17-0.64; p < 0.001), whereas super-selective beta-1 blockers were superior (RR 1.98, 1.54-2.54; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between beta-blockers and comparators for secondary outcomes of conversion to sinus rhythm (RR 1.15, 0.90-1.46; p = 0.28), hypotension (RR 1.85, 0.87-3.93; p = 0.11), bradycardia (RR 1.29, 0.25-6.82; p = 0.76) or adverse events leading to drug discontinuation (RR 1.03, 0.49-2.17; p = 0.93). The incidence of hypotension and bradycardia were greater with non-selective beta-blockers (p = 0.031 and p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
Across all intravenous beta-blockers, there was no difference with other medications for acute heart rate control in atrial fibrillation and flutter. Efficacy and safety may be improved by choosing beta-blockers with higher beta-1 selectivity.
Topics: Humans; Atrial Fibrillation; Atrial Flutter; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Heart Rate; Treatment Outcome; Acute Disease; Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; Adrenergic beta-1 Receptor Antagonists; Administration, Intravenous; Anti-Arrhythmia Agents
PubMed: 37658166
DOI: 10.1007/s00392-023-02295-0 -
Cureus Jun 2023Facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy (FSHD) is the third most common type of muscular dystrophy. This disease presents as a slowly progressive asymmetric muscle... (Review)
Review
Facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy (FSHD) is the third most common type of muscular dystrophy. This disease presents as a slowly progressive asymmetric muscle weakness that involves the facial, scapular, and upper arm muscles mainly. Currently, there is no established consensus on this disease treatment in terms of medications. We assessed the response to the treatment of the drugs utilized in clinical trials by performing a systematic literature review in English using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews (PRISMA) and meta-analyses. We only used human clinical trials in patients diagnosed with FSHD that received consistent pharmacological treatment. We included 11 clinical trials that fulfilled our criteria. We concluded that albuterol had statistically significant results in three out of four clinical trials, with improved elbow flexors muscle strength. Vitamin C, vitamin E, zinc gluconate, and selenomethionine showed significant improvement in the maximal voluntary contraction and endurance limit time of quadriceps muscle. At the same time, diltiazem and MYO-029 demonstrate no improvement in function, strength, or muscle mass. Losmapimod, currently in phase I of the ReDUX4 trial, showed promising results. Peradventure, more clinical trials are still needed to address this subject. Nevertheless, this review provides a clear and concise update on the treatment for this disease.
PubMed: 37404420
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.39903 -
Emergency Medicine International 2023Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia encountered in the emergency department (ED) and when patients present in acute AF with rapid ventricular... (Review)
Review
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia encountered in the emergency department (ED) and when patients present in acute AF with rapid ventricular rate (RVR), it can result in significant morbidity and mortality. Primary treatment modalities are aimed at rate control with the two most common agents being intravenous metoprolol and diltiazem. Some evidence suggests that diltiazem may be more effective at controlling rate in these patients; however, the dosing strategies, pharmacologic differences, and study designs may play a role in the observation of these differences. The purpose of this article is to review the evidence for using weight-based metoprolol in the treatment of AF with RVR. The vast majority of studies comparing metoprolol and diltiazem for the treatment of acute AF with RVR compare a flat dose of metoprolol to a weight-based dose of diltiazem. Following a comprehensive review, only two studies have compared a weight-based dosing strategy of intravenous (IV) metoprolol versus IV diltiazem for this disease state. Overall, the two studies only contained 94 patients and failed to meet power. Beyond differing dosing strategies, differences in pharmacokinetics between the two medications (like the onset of action and metabolism) could have played a role in the differences observed in the studies. Further studies are warranted to provide better guidance on which agent should be used in the treatment of acute AF with RVR.
PubMed: 37096182
DOI: 10.1155/2023/3138064 -
Digestive Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) 2023Topical treatments and botulinum toxin injections are valid options for the management of patients with chronic anal fissures (CAF), but little is known about the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Topical treatments and botulinum toxin injections are valid options for the management of patients with chronic anal fissures (CAF), but little is known about the efficacy of these techniques in long-term follow-up. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness, given to clinical outcomes, of medical treatments with calcium antagonists, nitroglycerin, and botulinum toxin on CAF treatment in adults.
METHOD
A systemic review and meta-analysis developed according to PRISMA [PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000100; BMJ. 2010 Mar 23;340:c332] and registered in PROSPERO (Registration number: CRD42020120386). A systematic literature search was conducted through MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases. Randomized control trials that compared medical treatment were identified; publications had to have a clinical definition of CAF with at least one of the following signs or symptoms: visible sphincter fibers at the base of the fissure, anal papillae, sentinel piles, and indurated margins. The symptoms had to be chronic for at least 4 weeks. Data were independently extracted for each study, and a meta-analysis was drawn using fixed- and random-effects models.
RESULTS
17 randomized trials met the inclusion criteria. Diltiazem showed a superior effect compared with glycerin (RR = 1.16 [95% CI = 1.05-1.30]; I2 = 18%) and with fewer adverse effects (RR = 0.13 [95% CI = 0.04-0.042]; I2 = 87%). Similar results were evidenced with the use of nifedipine compared with lidocaine (RR = 4.53 [95% CI = 2.99-6.86]; I2 = 28%). Botulinum toxin did not show statistically significant differences compared to glycerin (RR = 0.81 [95% CI = 0.02-29.36]; I2 = 93%) or isosorbide dinitrate (RR = 1.45 [95% CI = 0.32-6.54]; I2 = 85%). Regarding recurrence, nifedipine was superior to lidocaine (RR = 0.18 [95% CI = 0.08-0.44]; I2 = 31%).
CONCLUSIONS
Calcium channel blockers performed well regarding the healing of CAF when compared to others in long-term follow-up. The superiority of botulinum toxin was not evidenced compared to topical treatments. More studies are needed to better assess recurrence rates.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Fissure in Ano; Nifedipine; Glycerol; Treatment Outcome; Nitroglycerin; Chronic Disease
PubMed: 36646066
DOI: 10.1159/000528222 -
Open Heart Jan 2023Coronary artery vasospasm is an abnormal spasm of coronary arteries that cause transient or complete occlusion without exertion. It causes stable angina to ACS. However,...
BACKGROUND
Coronary artery vasospasm is an abnormal spasm of coronary arteries that cause transient or complete occlusion without exertion. It causes stable angina to ACS. However, this can be prevented by calcium channel blockers (CCBs) which suppress Ca influx into the vascular muscle cells. Nevertheless, several CCBs adverse effects are harmful for these patients. Selecting the right CCBs would give the best clinical practice.
METHOD
The studies were obtained from four major medical databases by various keywords. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were implemented as adult >18 years, observational study, English language and drug of interest. Duplicates were eliminated, and the remaining studies were reviewed. Final full-texts assessment was conducted independently by Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Revised Cochrane.
RESULTS
The search found 1378 articles. However, six studies were selected after implementing the study criteria. Diltiazem was found to decrease angina and increase quality of life until 12th week of treatment; however, some adverse effects include atrioventricular block and recurrent angina up till 4th week were found. Meanwhile, nifedipine was found to decrease vasospastic angina (VSA) by the fourth and eighth weeks of treatment. Nevertheless, it caused excessive drop in BP and increase heart rate by eighth week. In addition, slow-release preparation of both CCBs were found to increase efficacy and compliance. Lastly amlodipine was also found to decrease VSA by 17%±140% and 33% after 6 weeks, but further studies needed.
CONCLUSION
Diltiazem, nifedipine and amlodipine are potent in decreasing VSA, however, tailoring specific CCBs adverse reactions to patient condition and the drug preparation would be substantially beneficial for the outcome.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Calcium Channel Blockers; Diltiazem; Coronary Vasospasm; Nifedipine; Calcium; Quality of Life; Amlodipine; Observational Studies as Topic
PubMed: 36634997
DOI: 10.1136/openhrt-2022-002179 -
World Journal of Surgery Feb 2023Haemorrhoidectomy is often complicated by significant post-operative pain, to which spasm of the internal anal sphincter is thought to be a contributing factor. This... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Haemorrhoidectomy is often complicated by significant post-operative pain, to which spasm of the internal anal sphincter is thought to be a contributing factor. This study appraises the evidence behind interventions aimed at lowering sphincter spasm to relieve post-haemorrhoidectomy pain.
METHODS
A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses compliant systematic review was conducted. Medline, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases were systematically searched. All RCTs which compared interventions targeting the internal anal sphincter to relieve pain post excisional haemorrhoidectomy were included. The primary outcome measure was pain on the visual analogue scale.
RESULTS
Of the initial 10,221 search results, 39 articles were included in a qualitative synthesis, and 33 studies were included in a meta-analysis. Topical glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) reduced pain on day 7 (7 studies, 485 participants), with a mean difference and 95% confidence interval (MD, 95% CI) of -1.34 (-2.31; -0.37), I = 91%. Diltiazem reduced pain on day 3 on the VAS, and the MD was -2.75 (-398; -1.51) shown in five studies (n = 227). Botulinum toxin reduced pain on day 7, in four studies with 178 participants, MD -1.43 (-2.50; -0.35) I = 62%. The addition of Lateral Internal Sphincterotomy to haemorrhoidectomy reduced pain on day 2 in three studies with 275 participants, MD of -2.13 (-3.49; -0.77) I = 92%. The results were limited by high heterogeneity and risk of bias.
CONCLUSION
Evidence suggests that lateral sphincterotomy, administration of botulinum toxin and the application of topical diltiazem or GTN can reduce post-operative pain after haemorrhoidectomy. Lateral sphincterotomy should not be routinely used due to the risk of incontinence.
Topics: Humans; Hemorrhoidectomy; Diltiazem; Nitroglycerin; Pain, Postoperative; Spasm; Botulinum Toxins
PubMed: 36357803
DOI: 10.1007/s00268-022-06807-3 -
Indian Heart Journal 2022Intravenous calcium channel blockers or beta-blockers are the preferred rate control medications for hemodynamically stable patients with atrial fibrillation with rapid... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Intravenous calcium channel blockers or beta-blockers are the preferred rate control medications for hemodynamically stable patients with atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular rate (AF-RVR) in the emergency department.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the efficacy of intravenous diltiazem and metoprolol for rate control and safety with respect to development of hypotension and bradycardia in patients with AF-RVR.
METHODS
For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane databases, and the clinicaltrials.gov registry between database inception and 30th May 2021. Articles were included if they compared efficacy and safety of diltiazem versus metoprolol in critically ill adult patients hospitalized with AF-RVR. Outcome measures were achievement of rate control, development of new hypotension, and bradycardia after drug administration.
RESULTS
Of 86 records identified, 14 were eligible, all of which had a low to moderate risk of overall bias. The meta-analysis (Mantel-Haenszel, random-effects model) showed that diltiazem use was associated with increased achievement of rate control target compared to metoprolol [14 studies, n = 1732, Odds Ratio (OR): 1.92; 95% Confidence Intervals (CI):1.26 to 2.90; I = 61%]. In the pooled analysis, no differences were seen in hypotension using diltiazem vs metoprolol [12 studies, n = 1477, OR: 0.96; 95% CI:0.61 to 1.52; I = 35%] or bradycardia [9 studies, n = 1203, OR: 2.44; 95% CI: 0.82 to 7.31; I = 48%].
CONCLUSIONS
Intravenous diltiazem is associated with increased achievement of rate control target in patients with AF-RVR compared to metoprolol, while both medications are associated with similar incidence of hypotension and bradycardia.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Diltiazem; Atrial Fibrillation; Metoprolol; Bradycardia; Hypotension; Heart Rate
PubMed: 36334652
DOI: 10.1016/j.ihj.2022.10.195