-
British Journal of Anaesthesia May 2022New onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) is the most common arrhythmia affecting critically unwell patients. NOAF can lead to worsening haemodynamic compromise, heart... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
New onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) is the most common arrhythmia affecting critically unwell patients. NOAF can lead to worsening haemodynamic compromise, heart failure, thromboembolic events, and increased mortality. The aim of this systematic review and narrative synthesis is to evaluate the non-pharmacological and pharmacological management strategies for NOAF in critically unwell patients.
METHODS
Of 1782 studies, 30 were eligible for inclusion, including 4 RCTs and 26 observational studies. Efficacy of direct current cardioversion, amiodarone, β-adrenergic receptor antagonists, calcium channel blockers, digoxin, magnesium, and less commonly used agents such as ibutilide are reported.
RESULTS
Cardioversion rates of 48% were reported for direct current cardioversion; however, re-initiation of NOAF was as high as 23.4%. Amiodarone was the most commonly reported intervention with cardioversion rates ranging from 18% to 96% followed by β-antagonists with cardioversion rates from 40% to 92%. Amiodarone was more effective than diltiazem (odds ratio [OR]=1.91, P=0.32) at cardioversion. Short-acting β-antagonists esmolol and landiolol were more effective compared with diltiazem for cardioversion (OR=3.55, P=0.04) and HR control (OR=3.2, P<0.001).
CONCLUSION
There was significant variation between studies with regard to the definition of successful cardioversion and heart rate control, making comparisons between studies and interventions difficult. Future RCTs comparing individual anti-arrhythmic agents, in particular magnesium, amiodarone, and β-antagonists, and studying the role of anticoagulation in critically unwell patients are required. There is also an urgent need for a core outcome dataset for studies of new onset atrial fibrillation to allow comparisons between different anti-arrhythmic strategies.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42019121739.
Topics: Adult; Amiodarone; Anti-Arrhythmia Agents; Atrial Fibrillation; Diltiazem; Electric Countershock; Humans; Magnesium
PubMed: 34916053
DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2021.11.016 -
JACC. Heart Failure Feb 2022This study sought to estimate and compare the aggregate treatment benefit of pharmacological therapy for heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
This study sought to estimate and compare the aggregate treatment benefit of pharmacological therapy for heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction.
BACKGROUND
The estimated treatment effects of various combinations of contemporary HF medical therapies are not well characterized.
METHODS
We performed a systematic network meta-analysis, using MEDLINE/EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized controlled trials published between January 1987 and January 2020. We included angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, beta-blockers (BB), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), digoxin, hydralazine-isosorbide dinitrate, ivabradine, angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNi), sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i), vericiguat, and omecamtiv-mecarbil. The primary outcome was all-cause death. We estimated the life-years gained in 2 HF populations (BIOSTAT-CHF [BIOlogy Study to TAilored Treatment in Chronic Heart Failure] and ASIAN-HF [Asian Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Registry]).
RESULTS
We identified 75 relevant trials representing 95,444 participants. A combination of ARNi, BB, MRA, and SGLT2i was most effective in reducing all-cause death (HR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.31-0.49); followed by ARNi, BB, MRA, and vericiguat (HR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.32-0.53); and ARNi, BB, and MRA (HR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.36-0.54). Results were similar for the composite outcome of cardiovascular death or first hospitalization for HF (HR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.29-0.46 for ARNi, BB, MRA, and SGLT2i; HR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.35-0.56 for ARNi, BB, MRA, and omecamtiv-mecarbil; and HR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.34-0.55 for ARNi, BB, MRA, and vericiguat). The estimated additional number of life-years gained for a 70-year-old patient on ARNi, BB, MRA, and SGLT2i was 5.0 years (2.5-7.5 years) compared with no treatment in secondary analyses.
CONCLUSIONS
In patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction, the estimated aggregate benefit is greatest for a combination of ARNi, BB, MRA, and SGLT2i.
Topics: Aged; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Heart Failure; Humans; Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists; Network Meta-Analysis; Stroke Volume
PubMed: 34895860
DOI: 10.1016/j.jchf.2021.09.004 -
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine 2021Whether digoxin is associated with increased mortality in atrial fibrillation (AF) remains controversial. We aimed to assess the risk of mortality and clinical effects...
Whether digoxin is associated with increased mortality in atrial fibrillation (AF) remains controversial. We aimed to assess the risk of mortality and clinical effects of digoxin use in patients with AF. PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library were systematically searched to identify eligible studies comparing all-cause mortality of patients with AF taking digoxin with those not taking digoxin, and the length of follow-up was at least 6 months. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted and pooled. A total of 29 studies with 621,478 patients were included. Digoxin use was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality in all patients with AF (HR 1.17, 95% CI 1.13-1.22, < 0.001), especially in patients without HF (HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.11-1.47, < 0.001). There was no significant association between digoxin and mortality in patients with AF and HF (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.99-1.14, = 0.110). In all patients with AF, regardless of concomitant HF, digoxin use was associated with an increased risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) (HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.23-1.60, < 0.001) and cardiovascular (CV) mortality (HR 1.27, 95% CI 1.08-1.50, < 0.001), and digoxin use had no significant association with all-cause hospitalization (HR 1.13, 95% CI 0.92-1.39, = 0.230). We conclude that digoxin use is associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality, CV mortality, and SCD, and it does not reduce readmission for AF, regardless of concomitant HF. Digoxin may have a neutral effect on all-cause mortality in patients with AF with concomitant HF. https://www.crd.york.ac.ukPROSPERO.
PubMed: 34660731
DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2021.731135 -
Evidence-based Complementary and... 2021The L. leaf is gaining interest as a potential therapeutic agent for alleviating dengue- and non-dengue-associated thrombocytopaenia. In that regard, safety... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
The L. leaf is gaining interest as a potential therapeutic agent for alleviating dengue- and non-dengue-associated thrombocytopaenia. In that regard, safety considerations are as important as efficacy potential. The safety evaluation of botanical products for human use is complicated by variable formulations, complex phytochemical composition, and extrinsic toxicants. This review aimed to systematically collate related safety clinical and preclinical data, as well as reports on herb-drug interactions of leaf consumption.
METHODS
A systematic search using predetermined keywords on electronic databases (MEDLINE, Cochrane Library Central, LILACS, and Web of Science) and grey literature was conducted. Relevant clinical and preclinical studies were identified, screened, and analysed to present an overall safety profile of leaf consumption.
RESULTS
A total of 41 articles were included (23 clinical, 5 ongoing trials, and 13 preclinical) for descriptive analysis on study characteristics, adverse reactions, toxicity findings, and herb-drug interactions, from which 13 randomised controlled and quasiexperimental trials were further assessed for risk of bias and reporting quality. Overall, leaf consumption (in the form of juice and standardised aqueous extract) was well tolerated by adult humans for short durations (
digoxin, ciprofloxacin, and artemisinin were accounted. CONCLUSION
leaf consumption in adults is generally safe for short-term use though cautioned in pregnancy and people with liver impairment. It has potential herb-drug interactions with oral hypoglycaemic agents, p-glycoprotein substrates, and antibiotics with cation chelating properties.
PubMed: 34040647
DOI: 10.1155/2021/5511221 -
European Journal of Heart Failure Apr 2021The aim of this study was to synthesize the evidence on the effect of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) pharmacotherapy on health-related quality of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS
The aim of this study was to synthesize the evidence on the effect of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) pharmacotherapy on health-related quality of life (HRQoL).
METHODS AND RESULTS
We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform in June 2020. Randomized placebo-controlled trials evaluating contemporary HFrEF pharmacotherapy and reporting HRQoL as an outcome were included. Two reviewers independently assessed studies for eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and GRADE certainty of evidence. The primary outcome was HRQoL at last available follow-up analysed using a random-effects model. We included 37 studies from 5770 identified articles. Risk of bias was low in 10 trials and high/unclear in 27 trials. High certainty evidence from meta-analyses demonstrated improved HRQoL over placebo with sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors [standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08-0.23] and intravenous iron (SMD 0.52, 95% CI 0.04-1.00). Furthermore, high certainty evidence from ≥1 landmark trial further supported improved HRQoL with angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) (SMD 0.09, 95% CI 0.02-0.17), ivabradine (SMD 0.14, 95% CI 0.04-0.23), hydralazine-nitrate (SMD 0.24, 95% CI 0.04-0.44) vs. placebo, and for angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) compared with an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor (SMD 0.09, 95% CI 0.02-0.17). Findings were inconclusive for ACE inhibitors, beta-blockers, digoxin, and oral iron based on low-to-moderate certainty evidence.
CONCLUSION
ARBs, ARNIs, SGLT2 inhibitors, ivabradine, hydralazine-nitrate, and intravenous iron improved HRQoL in patients with HFrEF. These findings can be incorporated into discussions with patients to enable shared decision-making.
Topics: Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Heart Failure; Humans; Quality of Life; Stroke Volume
PubMed: 33634543
DOI: 10.1002/ejhf.2141 -
Contraception: X 2020Clinicians have used feticidal agents prior to second trimester abortion for many years. Despite the widespread use of various agents to induce fetal demise, a...
UNLABELLED
Clinicians have used feticidal agents prior to second trimester abortion for many years. Despite the widespread use of various agents to induce fetal demise, a comprehensive or systematic review of the evidence is lacking on the safety, effectiveness, and most effective routes of administration.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the existing drugs and routes of administration used in inducing fetal demise prior to abortion, and to determine the safety, effectiveness, and acceptability of these feticidal agents.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, POPLINE, and Global Index Medicus to identify studies describing pharmacologic agents used to induce fetal demise prior to termination of pregnancy. We included randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing digoxin, potassium chloride (KCL), and lidocaine to induce fetal demise. We included studies that evaluated the primary outcomes of safety and effectiveness, including success in achieving fetal demise, induction to expulsion time for medical abortion, dilation and evacuation time, as well as maternal side effects and complications. Two authors independently screened abstracts and full texts. One reviewer extracted data from the included studies, which was counterchecked by a second reviewer.
RESULTS
We identified eight studies that met inclusion criteria: three randomized controlled trials, and five observational studies. A total of 4505 women received drugs to induce fetal demise at 17 to 38 weeks' gestation, including digoxin ( = 4174), KCL ( = 324), and lidocaine ( = 7). Intra-fetal digoxin was superior to intra-amniotic digoxin in achieving fetal demise (OR 3.51, 95% CI 1.60, 7.78). Intracardiac KCL 15% 2-3 mL reduced induction to expulsion time by 320 min (p <.006).Similarly, intracardiac KCL 15% 1-3 ml reduced dilation and evacuation time from 16.1 ± 7.9 min to 12.7 ± 5 min (p < 0.001). Intracardiac lidocaine 2% 10 mL was more effective at achieving fetal demise than intracardiac KCL 6 mmol (85.7% vs. 57.9%). Intra-amniotic and intra-fetal digoxin 1 mg, as compared to no feticidal agent, led to greater pre-procedure expulsion, hospital readmission, and the presence of one or more signs of infection.
CONCLUSIONS
Evidence from included cohort studies demonstrates that digoxin, KCL, and lidocaine are all effective in inducing fetal demise. Intra-fetal administration of digoxin is superior to intra-amniotic digoxin administration. Administration of feticide using intracardiac KCL may shorten the abortion experience. Limited data from observational studies also supports an increase in maternal side effects and/or complications related to the administration of digoxin.
IMPLICATIONS
Intra-fetal administration of digoxin is more effective in achieving fetal demise when compared to intra-amniotic administration. There is a knowledge gap in determining the single best drug for inducing fetal demise prior to abortion. Additional research is needed to compare different feticidal agents in terms of safety and effectiveness.
PubMed: 33294839
DOI: 10.1016/j.conx.2020.100046 -
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Jul 2020This is a PROSPERO registered systematic review (CRD42018105207), conducted to summarize the available knowledge regarding the population pharmacokinetics of digoxin in... (Review)
Review
This is a PROSPERO registered systematic review (CRD42018105207), conducted to summarize the available knowledge regarding the population pharmacokinetics of digoxin in paediatrics and to identify the sources of variability in its disposition. PubMed, ISI Web of Science, SCOPUS and Science Direct databases were searched from inception to January 2019. All paediatric population pharmacokinetic studies of digoxin that utilized the nonlinear mixed-effect modelling approach were incorporated in this review, and data were synthesized descriptively. After application of the inclusion-exclusion criteria 8 studies were included. Most studies described digoxin pharmacokinetics as a 1-compartment model with only 1 study describing its pharmacokinetics as 2-compartments. Age was an important predictor of clearance in studies involving neonates or infants, other predictors of clearance were weight, height, serum creatinine, coadministration of spironolactone and presence of congestive heart failure. Congestive heart failure was also associated with an increased volume of distribution in 1 study. The estimated value of apparent clearance in a typical individual standardized by mean weight ranged between 0.24 and 0.56 L/h/kg, the interindividual variability in clearance ranged between 7.0 and 35.1%. Half of the studies evaluated the performance of their developed models via external evaluation. In conclusion, substantial predictors of digoxin pharmacokinetics in the paediatric population in addition to model characteristics and evaluation techniques are presented. For clinicians, clearance could be predicted using age especially in neonates or infants, weight, height, serum creatinine, coadministration of medications and disease status. For future researchers, designing pharmacokinetic studies that allow 2-compartment modelling and linking pharmacokinetics with pharmacodynamics is recommended.
Topics: Child; Digoxin; Heart Failure; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Models, Biological; Nonlinear Dynamics; Pediatrics; Spironolactone
PubMed: 32153059
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.14272 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2020Approximately half of people with heart failure have chronic kidney disease (CKD). Pharmacological interventions for heart failure in people with CKD have the potential... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Approximately half of people with heart failure have chronic kidney disease (CKD). Pharmacological interventions for heart failure in people with CKD have the potential to reduce death (any cause) or hospitalisations for decompensated heart failure. However, these interventions are of uncertain benefit and may increase the risk of harm, such as hypotension and electrolyte abnormalities, in those with CKD.
OBJECTIVES
This review aims to look at the benefits and harms of pharmacological interventions for HF (i.e., antihypertensive agents, inotropes, and agents that may improve the heart performance indirectly) in people with HF and CKD.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies through 12 September 2019 in consultation with an Information Specialist and using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials of any pharmacological intervention for acute or chronic heart failure, among people of any age with chronic kidney disease of at least three months duration.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently screened the records to identify eligible studies and extracted data on the following dichotomous outcomes: death, hospitalisations, worsening heart failure, worsening kidney function, hyperkalaemia, and hypotension. We used random effects meta-analysis to estimate treatment effects, which we expressed as a risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane tool. We applied the GRADE methodology to rate the certainty of evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
One hundred and twelve studies met our selection criteria: 15 were studies of adults with CKD; 16 studies were conducted in the general population but provided subgroup data for people with CKD; and 81 studies included individuals with CKD, however, data for this subgroup were not provided. The risk of bias in all 112 studies was frequently high or unclear. Of the 31 studies (23,762 participants) with data on CKD patients, follow-up ranged from three months to five years, and study size ranged from 16 to 2916 participants. In total, 26 studies (19,612 participants) reported disaggregated and extractable data on at least one outcome of interest for our review and were included in our meta-analyses. In acute heart failure, the effects of adenosine A1-receptor antagonists, dopamine, nesiritide, or serelaxin on death, hospitalisations, worsening heart failure or kidney function, hyperkalaemia, hypotension or quality of life were uncertain due to sparse data or were not reported. In chronic heart failure, the effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) (4 studies, 5003 participants: RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.02; I = 78%; low certainty evidence), aldosterone antagonists (2 studies, 34 participants: RR 0.61 95% CI 0.06 to 6.59; very low certainty evidence), and vasopressin receptor antagonists (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.89; 2 studies, 1840 participants; low certainty evidence) on death (any cause) were uncertain. Treatment with beta-blockers may reduce the risk of death (any cause) (4 studies, 3136 participants: RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.79; I = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). Treatment with ACEi or ARB (2 studies, 1368 participants: RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.90; I = 97%; very low certainty evidence) had uncertain effects on hospitalisation for heart failure, as treatment estimates were consistent with either benefit or harm. Treatment with beta-blockers may decrease hospitalisation for heart failure (3 studies, 2287 participants: RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.05; I = 87%; low certainty evidence). Aldosterone antagonists may increase the risk of hyperkalaemia compared to placebo or no treatment (3 studies, 826 participants: RR 2.91, 95% CI 2.03 to 4.17; I = 0%; low certainty evidence). Renin inhibitors had uncertain risks of hyperkalaemia (2 studies, 142 participants: RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.49; I = 0%; very low certainty). We were unable to estimate whether treatment with sinus node inhibitors affects the risk of hyperkalaemia, as there were few studies and meta-analysis was not possible. Hyperkalaemia was not reported for the CKD subgroup in studies investigating other therapies. The effects of ACEi or ARB, or aldosterone antagonists on worsening heart failure or kidney function, hypotension, or quality of life were uncertain due to sparse data or were not reported. Effects of anti-arrhythmic agents, digoxin, phosphodiesterase inhibitors, renin inhibitors, sinus node inhibitors, vasodilators, and vasopressin receptor antagonists were very uncertain due to the paucity of studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The effects of pharmacological interventions for heart failure in people with CKD are uncertain and there is insufficient evidence to inform clinical practice. Study data for treatment outcomes in patients with heart failure and CKD are sparse despite the potential impact of kidney impairment on the benefits and harms of treatment. Future research aimed at analysing existing data in general population HF studies to explore the effect in subgroups of patients with CKD, considering stage of disease, may yield valuable insights for the management of people with HF and CKD.
Topics: Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; Antidiuretic Hormone Receptor Antagonists; Antihypertensive Agents; Heart Failure; Hospitalization; Humans; Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic
PubMed: 32103487
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012466.pub2 -
Evidence-based Complementary and... 2019Heart failure is a major public health problem worldwide nowadays. However, the morbidity, mortality, and awareness of heart failure are not satisfied as well as the... (Review)
Review
Efficacy and Safety of Fuzi Formulae on the Treatment of Heart Failure as Complementary Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of High-Quality Randomized Controlled Trials.
OBJECTIVE
Heart failure is a major public health problem worldwide nowadays. However, the morbidity, mortality, and awareness of heart failure are not satisfied as well as the status of current treatments. According to the standard treatment for chronic heart failure (CHFST), Fuzi (the seminal root of Debx.) formulae are widely used as a complementary treatment for heart failure in clinical practice for a long time. We are aiming to assess the efficacy and safety of Fuzi formulae (FZF) on the treatment of heart failure according to high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
METHODS
RCTs in PubMed, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Scientific Journals Database (VIP), and Wanfang Database were searched from their inception until June 2019. In addition, the U.S. National Library of Medicine (clinicaltrials.gov) and the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (http://www.chictr.org.cn) were also searched. We included RCTs that test the efficacy and safety of FZF for the treatment of heart failure, compared with placebo, CHFST, or placebo plus CHFST. The methodological quality of included studies were evaluated by the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. RCTs with Cochrane risk of bias (RoB) score ≥4 were included in the analysis. The meta-analysis was conducted through RevMan 5.2 software. The GRADE approach was used to assess the quality of the evidence.
RESULTS
Twelve RCTs with 1490 participants were identified. The studies investigated the efficacy and safety of FZF, such as FZF plus the CHFST vs placebo plus CHFST ( = 4), FZF plus CHFST vs CHFST ( = 6), FZF plus digoxin tablets (DT) plus CHFST vs placebo plus DT plus CHFST ( = 1), and FZF plus placebo plus CHFST vs placebo plus DT plus CHFST ( = 1). Meta-analysis indicated that FZF have additional benefits based on the CHFST in reducing plasma NT-proBNP level, MLHFQ scores, Lee's heart failure scores (LHFs), and composite cardiac events (CCEs). Meanwhile, it also improved the efficacy on TCM symptoms (TCMs), NYHA functional classification (NYHAfc), 6MWD, and LVEF. Adverse events were reported in 6 out of 12 studies without significant statistical difference. However, after assessing the strength of evidence, it was found that only the quality of evidence for CCEs was high, and the others were either moderate or low or very low. So we could not draw confirmative conclusions on its additional benefits except CCEs. Further clinical trials should be well designed to avoid the issues that were identified in this study.
CONCLUSION
The efficacy and additional benefits of FZF for CCEs were certain according to the high-quality evidence assessed through GRADE. However, the efficacy and additional benefits for the other outcomes were uncertain judging from current studies. In addition, the safety assessment has a great room for improvement. Thus, further research studies are needed to find more convincing proofs.
PubMed: 31949473
DOI: 10.1155/2019/9728957 -
JACC. Heart Failure Mar 2019This study sought to summarize all available evidence on sex differences in adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to heart failure (HF) medication.
OBJECTIVES
This study sought to summarize all available evidence on sex differences in adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to heart failure (HF) medication.
BACKGROUND
Women are more likely to experience ADRs than men, and these reactions may negatively affect women's immediate and long-term health. HF in particular is associated with increased ADR risk because of the high number of comorbidities and older age. However, little is known about ADRs in women with HF who are treated with guideline-recommended drugs.
METHODS
A systematic search of PubMed and EMBASE was performed to collect all available information on ADRs to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, β-blockers, angiotensin II receptor blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, ivabradine, and digoxin in both women and men with HF.
RESULTS
The search identified 155 eligible records, of which only 11 (7%) reported ADR data for women and men separately. Sex-stratified reporting of ADRs did not increase over the last decades. Six of the 11 studies did not report sex differences. Three studies reported a higher risk of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor-related ADRs in women, 1 study showed higher digoxin-related mortality risk for women, and 1 study reported a higher risk of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist-related ADRs in men. No sex differences in ADRs were reported for angiotensin II receptor blockers and β-blockers. Sex-stratified data were not available for ivabradine.
CONCLUSIONS
These results underline the scarcity of ADR data stratified by sex. The study investigators call for a change in standard scientific practice toward reporting of ADR data for women and men separately.
Topics: Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Cardiotonic Agents; Cardiovascular Agents; Digoxin; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Female; Heart Failure; Humans; Ivabradine; Male; Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists; Mortality; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Research Design; Research Report; Sex Distribution; Sex Factors; Stroke Volume
PubMed: 30819382
DOI: 10.1016/j.jchf.2019.01.009