-
BMJ Open Mar 2020The aim of this review is to summarise the latest evidence on efficacy and safety of treatments for new-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) in critical illness.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this review is to summarise the latest evidence on efficacy and safety of treatments for new-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) in critical illness.
PARTICIPANTS
Critically ill adult patients who developed NOAF during admission.
PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES
Primary outcomes were efficacy in achieving rate or rhythm control, as defined in each study. Secondary outcomes included mortality, stroke, bleeding and adverse events.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Knowledge on 11 March 2019 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies reporting treatment efficacy for NOAF in critically ill patients. Data were extracted, and quality assessment was performed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool, and an adapted Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.
RESULTS
Of 1406 studies identified, 16 remained after full-text screening including two RCTs. Study quality was generally low due to a lack of randomisation, absence of blinding and small cohorts. Amiodarone was the most commonly studied agent (10 studies), followed by beta-blockers (8), calcium channel blockers (6) and magnesium (3). Rates of successful rhythm control using amiodarone varied from 30.0% to 95.2%, beta-blockers from 31.8% to 92.3%, calcium channel blockers from 30.0% to 87.1% and magnesium from 55.2% to 77.8%. Adverse effects of treatment were rarely reported (five studies).
CONCLUSION
The reported efficacy of beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, magnesium and amiodarone for achieving rhythm control was highly varied. As there is currently significant variation in how NOAF is managed in critically ill patients, we recommend future research focuses on comparing the efficacy and safety of amiodarone, beta-blockers and magnesium. Further research is needed to inform the decision surrounding anticoagulant use in this patient group.
Topics: Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; Adult; Amiodarone; Atrial Fibrillation; Calcium Channel Blockers; Critical Illness; Humans; Magnesium; Stroke
PubMed: 32209631
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034774 -
JACC. Clinical Electrophysiology Oct 2019The goal of this analysis was to pool data from published studies on outcomes after implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy in patients with Chagas heart... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
The goal of this analysis was to pool data from published studies on outcomes after implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy in patients with Chagas heart disease (CHD).
BACKGROUND
CHD is characterized by a high burden of ventricular arrhythmias and an increased risk of sudden cardiac death. The indications for ICD are not well established.
METHODS
An extensive literature search without language restrictions was performed to identify all studies on ICD therapy in patients with CHD. A random effects model was used to calculate percentages and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS
Of 397 articles screened, 13 studies (all observational) were included. There were 1,041 patients (mean age at implantation 57 ± 11 years; 64% men), most of whom (92%) received an ICD for secondary prevention. Antiarrhythmic medication consisted of amiodarone (79%) and beta-blockers (44%). Overall, the annual all-cause mortality rate was 9.0% (95% CI: 6.9 to 11.7) in 2.8 ± 1.9 years of follow-up, and the annual sudden cardiac death rate was 2.0% (95% CI: 1.3 to 3.3) in 2.6 ± 1.9 years. In addition, 24.8% (95% CI: 15.7 to 37.0) of patients received 1 or more appropriate interventions (shocks or antitachycardia pacing), 4.7% (95% CI: 3.2 to 6.9) received inappropriate shocks, and 9.1% (95% CI: 5.5 to 14.7) had electric storms annually.
CONCLUSIONS
In patients with an ICD, annual all-cause mortality rate was 9%. Appropriate ICD interventions and electric storms were frequent, occurring at a rate of 25% and 9% per year, respectively. Inappropriate ICD shocks were not infrequent (5% per year). The benefits and risks of ICD therapy in patients with CHD should be carefully weighed until data from better studies become available.
Topics: Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; Amiodarone; Anti-Arrhythmia Agents; Chagas Cardiomyopathy; Death, Sudden, Cardiac; Defibrillators, Implantable; Electric Countershock; Humans; Primary Prevention; Secondary Prevention; Tachycardia, Ventricular; Ventricular Fibrillation
PubMed: 31648747
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacep.2019.07.003 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2019Atrial fibrillation is the most frequent sustained arrhythmia. Atrial fibrillation often recurs after restoration of normal sinus rhythm. Antiarrhythmic drugs have been...
BACKGROUND
Atrial fibrillation is the most frequent sustained arrhythmia. Atrial fibrillation often recurs after restoration of normal sinus rhythm. Antiarrhythmic drugs have been widely used to prevent recurrence. This is an update of a review previously published in 2006, 2012 and 2015.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effects of long-term treatment with antiarrhythmic drugs on death, stroke, drug adverse effects and recurrence of atrial fibrillation in people who had recovered sinus rhythm after having atrial fibrillation.
SEARCH METHODS
We updated the searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase in January 2019, and ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP in February 2019. We checked the reference lists of retrieved articles, recent reviews and meta-analyses.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Two authors independently selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any antiarrhythmic drug with a control (no treatment, placebo, drugs for rate control) or with another antiarrhythmic drug in adults who had atrial fibrillation and in whom sinus rhythm was restored, spontaneously or by any intervention. We excluded postoperative atrial fibrillation.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently assessed quality and extracted data. We pooled studies, if appropriate, using Mantel-Haenszel risk ratios (RR), with 95% confidence intervals (CI). All results were calculated at one year of follow-up or the nearest time point.
MAIN RESULTS
This update included one new study (100 participants) and excluded one previously included study because of double publication. Finally, we included 59 RCTs comprising 20,981 participants studying quinidine, disopyramide, propafenone, flecainide, metoprolol, amiodarone, dofetilide, dronedarone and sotalol. Overall, mean follow-up was 10.2 months.All-cause mortalityHigh-certainty evidence from five RCTs indicated that treatment with sotalol was associated with a higher all-cause mortality rate compared with placebo or no treatment (RR 2.23, 95% CI 1.03 to 4.81; participants = 1882). The number need to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) for sotalol was 102 participants treated for one year to have one additional death. Low-certainty evidence from six RCTs suggested that risk of mortality may be higher in people taking quinidine (RR 2.01, 95% CI 0.84 to 4.77; participants = 1646). Moderate-certainty evidence showed increased RR for mortality but with very wide CIs for metoprolol (RR 2.02, 95% CI 0.37 to 11.05, 2 RCTs, participants = 562) and amiodarone (RR 1.66, 95% CI 0.55 to 4.99, 2 RCTs, participants = 444), compared with placebo.We found little or no difference in mortality with dofetilide (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.27; moderate-certainty evidence) or dronedarone (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.09; high-certainty evidence) compared to placebo/no treatment. There were few data on mortality for disopyramide, flecainide and propafenone, making impossible a reliable estimation for those drugs.Withdrawals due to adverse eventsAll analysed drugs increased withdrawals due to adverse effects compared to placebo or no treatment (quinidine: RR 1.56, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.78; disopyramide: RR 3.68, 95% CI 0.95 to 14.24; propafenone: RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.46; flecainide: RR 15.41, 95% CI 0.91 to 260.19; metoprolol: RR 3.47, 95% CI 1.48 to 8.15; amiodarone: RR 6.70, 95% CI 1.91 to 23.45; dofetilide: RR 1.77, 95% CI 0.75 to 4.18; dronedarone: RR 1.58, 95% CI 1.34 to 1.85; sotalol: RR 1.95, 95% CI 1.23 to 3.11). Certainty of the evidence for this outcome was low for disopyramide, amiodarone, dofetilide and flecainide; moderate to high for the remaining drugs.ProarrhythmiaVirtually all studied antiarrhythmics showed increased proarrhythmic effects (counting both tachyarrhythmias and bradyarrhythmias attributable to treatment) (quinidine: RR 2.05, 95% CI 0.95 to 4.41; disopyramide: no data; flecainide: RR 4.80, 95% CI 1.30 to 17.77; metoprolol: RR 18.14, 95% CI 2.42 to 135.66; amiodarone: RR 2.22, 95% CI 0.71 to 6.96; dofetilide: RR 5.50, 95% CI 1.33 to 22.76; dronedarone: RR 1.95, 95% CI 0.77 to 4.98; sotalol: RR 3.55, 95% CI 2.16 to 5.83); with the exception of propafenone (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.39 to 4.47) for which the certainty of evidence was very low and we were uncertain about the effect. Certainty of the evidence for this outcome for the other drugs was moderate to high.StrokeEleven studies reported stroke outcomes with quinidine, disopyramide, flecainide, amiodarone, dronedarone and sotalol. High-certainty evidence from two RCTs suggested that dronedarone may be associated with reduced risk of stroke (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.95; participants = 5872). This result is attributed to one study dominating the meta-analysis and has yet to be reproduced in other studies. There was no apparent effect on stroke rates with the other antiarrhythmics.Recurrence of atrial fibrillationModerate- to high-certainty evidence, with the exception of disopyramide which was low-certainty evidence, showed that all analysed drugs, including metoprolol, reduced recurrence of atrial fibrillation (quinidine: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.88; disopyramide: RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.01; propafenone: RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.74; flecainide: RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.77; metoprolol: RR 0.83 95% CI 0.68 to 1.02; amiodarone: RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.58; dofetilide: RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.85; dronedarone: RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.91; sotalol: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.87). Despite this reduction, atrial fibrillation still recurred in 43% to 67% of people treated with antiarrhythmics.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is high-certainty evidence of increased mortality associated with sotalol treatment, and low-certainty evidence suggesting increased mortality with quinidine, when used for maintaining sinus rhythm in people with atrial fibrillation. We found few data on mortality in people taking disopyramide, flecainide and propafenone, so it was not possible to make a reliable estimation of the mortality risk for these drugs. However, we did find moderate-certainty evidence of marked increases in proarrhythmia and adverse effects with flecainide.Overall, there is evidence showing that antiarrhythmic drugs increase adverse events, increase proarrhythmic events and some antiarrhythmics may increase mortality. Conversely, although they reduce recurrences of atrial fibrillation, there is no evidence of any benefit on other clinical outcomes, compared with placebo or no treatment.
Topics: Anti-Arrhythmia Agents; Atrial Fibrillation; Electric Countershock; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recurrence; Secondary Prevention
PubMed: 31483500
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005049.pub5 -
Europace : European Pacing,... Aug 2019To evaluate the efficacy and safety of vernakalant for the cardioversion of atrial fibrillation (AF). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of vernakalant for the cardioversion of atrial fibrillation (AF).
METHODS AND RESULTS
We reviewed the literature for randomized trials that compared vernakalant to another drug or placebo in patients with AF of onset ≤7 days. We used a random-effects model to combine quantitative data and rated the quality of evidence using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation). From 441 total citations in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL (December 2018), we identified nine trials evaluating 1358 participants. Six trials compared vernakalant to placebo, two trials compared vernakalant to ibutilide, and one trial compared vernakalant to amiodarone. We found significant methodological bias in four trials. For conversion within 90 min, vernakalant was superior to placebo [50% conversion, risk ratio (RR) 5.15; 95% confidence interval (CI); 2.24-11.84, I2 = 91%], whereas we found no significant difference in conversion when vernakalant was compared with an active drug (56% vs. 24% conversion, RR 2.40; 95% CI 0.76-7.58, I2 = 94). Sinus rhythm was maintained at 24 h in 85% (95% CI 80-88%) of patients who converted acutely with vernakalant. Overall, we judged the quality of evidence for efficacy to be low based on inconsistency and suspected publication bias. There was no significant difference in the risk of significant adverse events between vernakalant and comparator (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.70-1.28, I2 = 0, moderate quality evidence). Vernakalant is safe and effective for rapid and durable restoration of sinus rhythm in patients with recent-onset AF.
CONCLUSION
Vernakalant should be a first line option for the pharmacological cardioversion of patients with haemodynamically stable recent-onset AF without severe structural heart disease.
Topics: Anisoles; Anti-Arrhythmia Agents; Atrial Fibrillation; Humans; Pyrrolidines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31292622
DOI: 10.1093/europace/euz175 -
Journal of Cardiology Jun 2019Amiodarone, which inhibits CYP2C9 and P-glycoprotein, is commonly prescribed with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and polypharmacy in high-risk... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants with amiodarone, P-glycoprotein inhibitors, or polypharmacy in patients with atrial fibrillation: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Amiodarone, which inhibits CYP2C9 and P-glycoprotein, is commonly prescribed with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and polypharmacy in high-risk atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. We studied efficacy and safety of NOACs in AF patients receiving amiodarone, P-glycoprotein inhibitor, or polypharmacy.
METHODS
After a systematic database search (Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, SCOPUS, and Web of Science), four phase-III randomized trials comparing NOACs and warfarin in "with/without amiodarone," "with/without P-glycoprotein inhibitors," or "with/without multiple (≥5, polypharmacy) concomitant drugs" subgroups were included. The outcomes were pooled using a random-effects model to determine the relative risks (RRs) for stroke/systemic thromboembolism (SSTE), major bleeding (MB), intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), and all-cause mortality.
RESULTS
Among patients taking amiodarone, superiority of NOACs over warfarin in non-amiodarone users disappeared in terms of SSTE (p=0.11), MB (p=0.95), ICH (p=0.26), and mortality (p=0.32). No safety benefit (MB) of NOACs compared to warfarin was shown in patients taking P-glycoprotein inhibitors (p=0.47), but SSTE prevention was still superior with NOACs compared to warfarin in the same patient group [RR=0.78 (0.61-0.99), p=0.04, I=11%]. In AF patients with polypharmacy, NOACs showed a lower risk of SSTE [RR=0.82 (0.71-0.96), p=0.01, I=0%] and mortality [RR=0.91 (0.83-0.99), p=0.04, I=0%], but not MB (p=0.81) compared to warfarin.
CONCLUSIONS
NOACs were equivalent to warfarin among AF patients with concomitant amiodarone use in terms of efficacy, safety, and mortality. There was no safety benefit of NOACs over warfarin in patients using polypharmacy or P-glycoprotein inhibitors.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
The protocol of this meta-analysis was registered on PROSPERO under CRD42018104808 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp?ID=CRD42018104808).
Topics: ATP Binding Cassette Transporter, Subfamily B, Member 1; Administration, Oral; Adult; Aged; Amiodarone; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Polypharmacy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stroke; Thromboembolism; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30770140
DOI: 10.1016/j.jjcc.2018.12.018 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Oct 2018Drug-induced interstitial lung disease (DIILD) occurs as a result of numerous agents, but the risk often only becomes apparent after the marketing authorisation of such... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Drug-induced interstitial lung disease (DIILD) occurs as a result of numerous agents, but the risk often only becomes apparent after the marketing authorisation of such agents.
METHODS
In this PRISMA-compliant systematic review, we aimed to evaluate and synthesise the current literature on DIILD.
RESULTS
Following a quality assessment, 156 full-text papers describing more than 6000 DIILD cases were included in the review. However, the majority of the papers were of low or very low quality in relation to the review question (78%). Thus, it was not possible to perform a meta-analysis, and descriptive review was undertaken instead. DIILD incidence rates varied between 4.1 and 12.4 cases/million/year. DIILD accounted for 3⁻5% of prevalent ILD cases. Cancer drugs, followed by rheumatology drugs, amiodarone and antibiotics, were the most common causes of DIILD. The radiopathological phenotype of DIILD varied between and within agents, and no typical radiological pattern specific to DIILD was identified. Mortality rates of over 50% were reported in some studies. Severity at presentation was the most reliable predictor of mortality. Glucocorticoids (GCs) were commonly used to treat DIILD, but no prospective studies examined their effect on outcome.
CONCLUSIONS
Overall high-quality evidence in DIILD is lacking, and the current review will inform larger prospective studies to investigate the diagnosis and management of DIILD.
PubMed: 30326612
DOI: 10.3390/jcm7100356 -
Trends in Cardiovascular Medicine Jul 2019Although amiodarone is considered the most effective antiarrhythmic agent, its use is limited by a wide variety of potential toxicities. The purpose of this review is to...
Although amiodarone is considered the most effective antiarrhythmic agent, its use is limited by a wide variety of potential toxicities. The purpose of this review is to provide a comprehensive "bench to bedside" overview of the ways amiodarone influences thyroid function. We performed a systematic search of MEDLINE to identify peer-reviewed clinical trials, randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, and other clinically relevant studies. The search was limited to English-language reports published between 1950 and 2017. Amiodarone was searched using the terms adverse effects, hypothyroidism, myxedema, hyperthyroidism, thyroid storm, atrial fibrillation, ventricular arrhythmia, and electrical storm. Google and Google scholar as well as bibliographies of identified articles were reviewed for additional references. We included 163 germane references in this review. Because amiodarone is one of the most frequently prescribed antiarrhythmic drugs in the United States, the mechanistic, diagnostic and therapeutic information provided is relevant for practicing clinicians in a wide range of medical specialties.
Topics: Amiodarone; Animals; Anti-Arrhythmia Agents; Humans; Predictive Value of Tests; Prognosis; Risk Assessment; Thyroid Diseases; Thyroid Function Tests; Thyroid Gland
PubMed: 30309693
DOI: 10.1016/j.tcm.2018.09.005 -
PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases Aug 2018Chagas disease is a neglected chronic condition caused by Trypanosoma cruzi, with high prevalence and burden in Latin America. Ventricular arrhythmias are common in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Chagas disease is a neglected chronic condition caused by Trypanosoma cruzi, with high prevalence and burden in Latin America. Ventricular arrhythmias are common in patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy, and amiodarone has been widely used for this purpose. The aim of our study was to assess the effect of amiodarone in patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy.
METHODOLOGY
We searched MEDLINE, Embase and LILACS up to January 2018. Data from randomized and observational studies evaluating amiodarone use in Chagas cardiomyopathy were included. Two reviewers selected the studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Overall quality of evidence was accessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).
PRINCIPAL FINDINGS
We included 9 studies (3 before-after studies, 5 case series and 1 randomized controlled trial). Two studies with a total of 38 patients had the full dataset, allowing individual patient data (IPD) analysis. In 24-hour Holter, amiodarone reduced the number of ventricular tachycardia episodes in 99.9% (95%CI 99.8%-100%), ventricular premature beats in 93.1% (95%CI 82%-97.4%) and the incidence of ventricular couplets in 79% (RR 0.21, 95%CI 0.11-0.39). Studies not included in the IPD analysis showed a reduction of ventricular premature beats (5 studies), ventricular tachycardia (6 studies) and ventricular couplets (1 study). We pooled the incidence of adverse side effects with random effects meta-analysis; amiodarone was associated with corneal microdeposits (61.1%, 95%CI 19.0-91.3, 5 studies), gastrointestinal events (16.1%, 95%CI 6.61-34.2, 3 studies), sinus bradycardia (12.7%, 95%CI 3.71-35.5, 6 studies), dermatological events (10.6%, 95%CI 4.77-21.9, 3 studies) and drug discontinuation (7.68%, 95%CI 4.17-13.7, 5 studies). Quality of evidence ranged from moderate to very low.
CONCLUSIONS
Amiodarone is effective in reducing ventricular arrhythmias, but there is no evidence for hard endpoints (sudden death, hospitalization). Although our findings support the use of amiodarone, it is important to balance the potential benefits and harms at the individual level for decision-making.
Topics: Amiodarone; Arrhythmias, Cardiac; Chagas Cardiomyopathy
PubMed: 30125291
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0006742 -
ESC Heart Failure Oct 2018Wild-type transthyretin (ATTRwt) cardiac amyloidosis has emerged as an important cause of heart failure in the elderly. Atrial fibrillation (AF) commonly affects older...
AIMS
Wild-type transthyretin (ATTRwt) cardiac amyloidosis has emerged as an important cause of heart failure in the elderly. Atrial fibrillation (AF) commonly affects older adults with heart failure and is associated with reduced survival, but its role in ATTRwt is unclear. We sought to explore the clinical impact of AF in ATTRwt.
METHODS AND RESULTS
Patients with biopsy-proven ATTRwt cardiac amyloidosis (n = 146) were retrospectively identified, and clinical, echocardiographic, and biochemical data were collected. Patients were classified as AF or non-AF and followed for survival for a median of 41.4 ± 27.1 months. Means testing, univariable, and multivariable regression models were employed. A systematic review was performed. AF was observed in 70% (n = 102). Mean age was similar (AF, 75 ± 6 vs. non-AF, 74 ± 5 years, P = 0.22). Anticoagulant treatment of patients with AF was as follows: 78% warfarin, 17% novel anticoagulant, and 6% no anticoagulation. Amiodarone was prescribed to 24%. There were no differences in left ventricular ejection fraction (P = 0.09) or left atrial volume (P = 0.87); however, mean diastolic dysfunction grade was higher in AF (mean 2.7 ± 0.5 vs. 2.4 ± 0.5, P = 0.01). While creatinine (P = 0.52) and B-type natriuretic peptide (P = 0.48) were similar, patients with AF had lower serum transthyretin concentrations (221 ± 51 vs. 250 ± 52 μg/mL, P < 0.01). Survival between groups was similar (P = 0.46).
CONCLUSIONS
These data provide an evidence basis for clinical management and demonstrate that AF in ATTRwt does not negatively impact survival. Further analysis of the relationship between transthyretin concentration and AF development is warranted.
Topics: Amyloid Neuropathies, Familial; Atrial Fibrillation; Echocardiography, Doppler; Electrocardiography; Global Health; Heart Rate; Humans; Incidence
PubMed: 29916559
DOI: 10.1002/ehf2.12308 -
Frontiers in Physiology 2018To evaluate possible adverse effects and efficacy of Wenxin keli (WXKL)-amiodarone combination on heart failure complicated by ventricular arrhythmia. Nine electronic...
To evaluate possible adverse effects and efficacy of Wenxin keli (WXKL)-amiodarone combination on heart failure complicated by ventricular arrhythmia. Nine electronic literature databases (the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, IPA, AMED, CBM, CNKI, VIP, and WanFang) were searched up to February 2018. Two authors extracted data and assessed risk of bias of the included studies independently. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs about WXKL-amiodarone combination and amiodarone alone were eligible for comparison. Thirteen trials involving 1,126 patients were included. Risk of bias was assessed as high in three studies and unclear in the remaining 10 studies. Six trials reported adverse events (AE). There was no obvious difference between WXKL-amiodarone combination group and amiodarone group in reported AEs (OR 0.64; 95%CI 0.39-1.07). The total effective rate of WXKL-amiodarone combination group was greater than that of amiodarone group (RR 1.22; 95%CI 1.16-1.29). The pooled results showed that the combination group was more effective in reducing heart rate (MD -2.25; 95%CI -2.61 to -1.88, = 0.46, = 0%), the frequency of ventricular premature complexes (MD -2.03; 95%CI -2.41 to -1.65) and QT dispersion (MD 5.59; 95%CI 3.60-7.58). The WXKL-amiodarone combination is safe and shows more protective effects on heart failure combined with ventricular arrhythmia compared with amiodarone alone. Further research is warranted, ideally involving large, prospective, rigorous trials, in order to confirm these findings.
PubMed: 29875671
DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2018.00487