-
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders Apr 2023Myocardial infarction (MI) is one of the life-threatening coronary-associated pathologies characterized by sudden cardiac death. The provision of complete insight into... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Myocardial infarction (MI) is one of the life-threatening coronary-associated pathologies characterized by sudden cardiac death. The provision of complete insight into MI complications along with designing a preventive program against MI seems necessary.
METHODS
Various databases (PubMed, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Embase, and Google scholar search engine) were hired for comprehensive searching. The keywords of "Prevalence", "Outbreak", "Burden", "Myocardial Infarction", "Myocardial Infarct", and "Heart Attack" were hired with no time/language restrictions. Collected data were imported into the information management software (EndNote v.8x). Also, citations of all relevant articles were screened manually. The search was updated on 2022.9.13 prior to the publication.
RESULTS
Twenty-two eligible studies with a sample size of 2,982,6717 individuals (< 60 years) were included for data analysis. The global prevalence of MI in individuals < 60 years was found 3.8%. Also, following the assessment of 20 eligible investigations with a sample size of 5,071,185 individuals (> 60 years), this value was detected at 9.5%.
CONCLUSION
Due to the accelerated rate of MI prevalence in older ages, precise attention by patients regarding the complications of MI seems critical. Thus, determination of preventive planning along with the application of safe treatment methods is critical.
Topics: Humans; Myocardial Infarction
PubMed: 37087452
DOI: 10.1186/s12872-023-03231-w -
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders Feb 2017Most studies of outcomes after myocardial infarction (MI) focus on the acute phase after the index event. We assessed mortality and morbidity trends after the first year... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Most studies of outcomes after myocardial infarction (MI) focus on the acute phase after the index event. We assessed mortality and morbidity trends after the first year in survivors of acute MI, by conducting a systematic literature review.
METHODS
Literature searches were conducted in Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews to identify epidemiological studies of long-term (>10 years) mortality and morbidity trends in individuals who had experienced an acute MI more than 1 year previously.
RESULTS
Thirteen articles met the inclusion criteria. Secular trends showed a consistent decrease in mortality and morbidity after acute MI from early to more recent study periods. The relative risk for all-cause death and cardiovascular outcomes (recurrent MI, cardiovascular death) was at least 30% higher than that in a general reference population at both 1-3 years and 3-5 years after MI. Risk factors leading to worse outcomes after MI included comorbid diabetes, hypertension and peripheral artery disease, older age, reduced renal function, and history of stroke.
CONCLUSIONS
There have been consistent improvements in secular trends for long-term survival and cardiovascular outcomes after MI. However, MI survivors remain at higher risk than the general population, particularly when additional risk factors such as diabetes, hypertension, or older age are present.
Topics: Age Factors; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Cause of Death; Comorbidity; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Myocardial Infarction; Prognosis; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Survivors; Time Factors
PubMed: 28173750
DOI: 10.1186/s12872-017-0482-9 -
European Journal of Preventive... Sep 2017Background In contemporary atrial fibrillation trials most deaths are cardiac related, whereas stroke and bleeding represent only a small subset of deaths. We aimed to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Background In contemporary atrial fibrillation trials most deaths are cardiac related, whereas stroke and bleeding represent only a small subset of deaths. We aimed to evaluate the long-term risk of cardiac events and all-cause mortality in individuals with atrial fibrillation compared to no atrial fibrillation. Design A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies published between 1 January 2006 and 21 October 2016. Methods Four databases were searched. Studies had follow-up of at least 500 stable patients for either cardiac endpoints or all-cause mortality for 12 months or longer. Publication bias was evaluated and random effects models were used to synthesise the results. Heterogeneity between studies was examined by subgroup and meta-regression analyses. Results A total of 15 cohort studies was included. Analyses indicated that atrial fibrillation was associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction (relative risk (RR) 1.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.26-1.85), all-cause mortality (RR 1.95, 95% CI 1.50-2.54) and heart failure (RR 4.62, 95% CI 3.13-6.83). Coronary heart disease at baseline was associated with a reduced risk of myocardial infarction and explained 57% of the heterogeneity. A prospective cohort design accounted for 25% of all-cause mortality heterogeneity. Due to there being fewer than 10 studies, sources of heterogeneity were inconclusive for heart failure. Conclusions Atrial fibrillation seems to be associated with an increased risk of subsequent myocardial infarction in patients without coronary heart disease and an increased risk of, all-cause mortality and heart failure in patients with and without coronary heart disease.
Topics: Aged; Atrial Fibrillation; Cause of Death; Coronary Disease; Female; Heart Failure; Humans; Incidence; Male; Middle Aged; Myocardial Infarction; Odds Ratio; Prevalence; Prognosis; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Time Factors
PubMed: 28617620
DOI: 10.1177/2047487317715769 -
JAMA Internal Medicine May 2022The association between statin-induced reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels and the absolute risk reduction of individual, rather than... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Evaluating the Association Between Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Reduction and Relative and Absolute Effects of Statin Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
IMPORTANCE
The association between statin-induced reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels and the absolute risk reduction of individual, rather than composite, outcomes, such as all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke, is unclear.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the association between absolute reductions in LDL-C levels with treatment with statin therapy and all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke to facilitate shared decision-making between clinicians and patients and inform clinical guidelines and policy.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed and Embase were searched to identify eligible trials from January 1987 to June 2021.
STUDY SELECTION
Large randomized clinical trials that examined the effectiveness of statins in reducing total mortality and cardiovascular outcomes with a planned duration of 2 or more years and that reported absolute changes in LDL-C levels. Interventions were treatment with statins (3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors) vs placebo or usual care. Participants were men and women older than 18 years.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Three independent reviewers extracted data and/or assessed the methodological quality and certainty of the evidence using the risk of bias 2 tool and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Any differences in opinion were resolved by consensus. Meta-analyses and a meta-regression were undertaken.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Primary outcome: all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes: myocardial infarction, stroke.
FINDINGS
Twenty-one trials were included in the analysis. Meta-analyses showed reductions in the absolute risk of 0.8% (95% CI, 0.4%-1.2%) for all-cause mortality, 1.3% (95% CI, 0.9%-1.7%) for myocardial infarction, and 0.4% (95% CI, 0.2%-0.6%) for stroke in those randomized to treatment with statins, with associated relative risk reductions of 9% (95% CI, 5%-14%), 29% (95% CI, 22%-34%), and 14% (95% CI, 5%-22%) respectively. A meta-regression exploring the potential mediating association of the magnitude of statin-induced LDL-C reduction with outcomes was inconclusive.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
The results of this meta-analysis suggest that the absolute risk reductions of treatment with statins in terms of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke are modest compared with the relative risk reductions, and the presence of significant heterogeneity reduces the certainty of the evidence. A conclusive association between absolute reductions in LDL-C levels and individual clinical outcomes was not established, and these findings underscore the importance of discussing absolute risk reductions when making informed clinical decisions with individual patients.
Topics: Cardiovascular Diseases; Cholesterol, LDL; Female; Humans; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Male; Myocardial Infarction; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stroke
PubMed: 35285850
DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2022.0134 -
International Journal of Cardiology Apr 2022Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) can overcome the intrinsic limitations of coronary angiography for lesion assessment and stenting. IVUS improves outcomes of patients... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Intravascular ultrasound-guided versus coronary angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) can overcome the intrinsic limitations of coronary angiography for lesion assessment and stenting. IVUS improves outcomes of patients presenting with stable or complex coronary artery disease, but dedicated data on the impact of IVUS-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains scarce.
METHODS
We systematically searched Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Google Scholar for studies that compared clinical outcomes for IVUS- versus angio-guided PCI in patients with AMI. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality and the secondary endpoint major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model was used to calculate pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
RESULTS
Nine studies (8 observational, 1 RCT) with a total of 838.902 patients (796.953 angio-guided PCI, 41.949 IVUS-guided PCI) were included. In patients with AMI, IVUS-guided PCI was associated with a significantly lower risk of all-cause mortality (pooled RR: 0.70; 95% CI, 0.59-0.82; p < 0.01), MACE (pooled RR: 0.86; 95% CI, 0.74-0.99; p = 0.04) and target vessel revascularization (TVR) (pooled RR: 0.83; 95% CI, 0.73-0.95; p < 0.01). In the subset of patients presenting with ST-segment elevation, IVUS-guided PCI remained associated with a reduced risk for both all-cause mortality (pooled RR: 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66-0.95, p = 0.01) and MACE (pooled RR: 0.86; 95% CI, 0.74-0.99, p = 0.04).
CONCLUSIONS
This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis comparing IVUS- versus angio-guided PCI in patients with AMI, showing a beneficial effect of IVUS-guided PCI on all-cause mortality, MACE and TVR. Results of ongoing dedicated prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.
Topics: Coronary Angiography; Coronary Artery Disease; Humans; Myocardial Infarction; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Treatment Outcome; Ultrasonography, Interventional
PubMed: 35041893
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2022.01.021 -
JAMA Cardiology Aug 2020Recently, the Complete vs Culprit-Only Revascularization to Treat Multivessel Disease After Early PCI (percutaneous coronary intervention) for STEMI (ST-segment... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Recently, the Complete vs Culprit-Only Revascularization to Treat Multivessel Disease After Early PCI (percutaneous coronary intervention) for STEMI (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction [MI]) (COMPLETE) trial showed that angiography-guided PCI of the nonculprit lesion with the goal of complete revascularization reduced cardiovascular (CV) death or new MI compared with PCI of the culprit lesion only in STEMI. Whether complete revascularization also reduces CV mortality is uncertain. Moreover, whether the association of complete revascularization with hard clinical outcomes is consistent when fractional flow reserve (FFR)- and angiography-guided strategies are used is unknown.
OBJECTIVE
To determine through a systematic review and meta-analysis (1) whether complete revascularization is associated with decreased CV mortality and (2) whether heterogeneity in the association occurs when FFR- and angiography-guided PCI strategies for nonculprit lesions are performed.
DATA SOURCES
A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, ISI Web of Science, and CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) from database inception to September 30, 2019, was performed. Conference proceedings were also reviewed from January 1, 2002, to September 30, 2019.
STUDY SELECTION
English-language randomized clinical trials comparing complete revascularization vs culprit-lesion-only PCI in patients with STEMI and multivessel disease were included.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
The combined odds ratio (OR) was calculated with the random-effects model using the Mantel-Haenszel method (sensitivity with fixed-effects model). Heterogeneity was measured using the I2 statistic. Publication bias was evaluated using the inverted funnel plot approach. Data were analyzed from October 2019 to January 2020.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Cardiovascular death and the composite of CV death or new MI.
RESULTS
Ten randomized clinical trials involving 7030 unique patients were included. The weighted mean follow-up time was 29.5 months. Complete revascularization was associated with reduced CV death compared with culprit-lesion-only PCI (80 of 3191 [2.5%] vs 106 of 3406 [3.1%]; OR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.48-0.99]; P = .05; fixed-effects model OR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.55-0.99]; P = .04). All-cause mortality occurred in 153 of 3426 patients (4.5%) in the complete revascularization group vs 177 of 3604 (4.9%) in the culprit-lesion-only group (OR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.67-1.05]; P = .13; I2 = 0%). Complete revascularization was associated with a reduced composite of CV death or new MI (192 of 2616 [7.3%] vs 266 of 2586 [10.3%]; OR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.55-0.87]; P = .001; fixed-effects model OR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.57-0.84]; P < .001), with no heterogeneity in this outcome when complete revascularization was performed using an FFR-guided strategy (OR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.43-1.44]) or an angiography-guided strategy (OR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.38-0.97]; P = .52 for interaction).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In patients with STEMI and multivessel disease, complete revascularization was associated with a reduction in CV mortality compared with culprit-lesion-only PCI. There was no differential association with treatment between FFR- and angiography-guided strategies on major CV outcomes.
Topics: Coronary Vessels; Humans; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction
PubMed: 32432651
DOI: 10.1001/jamacardio.2020.1251 -
International Journal of Cardiology Feb 2023Few studies have analyzed the incidence and the risk of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) during the post-acute phase of COVID-19 infection. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Few studies have analyzed the incidence and the risk of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) during the post-acute phase of COVID-19 infection.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the incidence and risk of AMI in COVID-19 survivors after SARS-CoV-2 infection by a systematic review and meta-analysis of the available data.
METHODS
Data were obtained searching MEDLINE and Scopus for all studies published at any time up to September 1, 2022 and reporting the risk of incident AMI in patients recovered from COVID-19 infection. AMI risk was evaluated using the Mantel-Haenszel random effects models with Hazard ratio (HR) as the effect measure with 95% confidence interval (CI) while heterogeneity was assessed using Higgins and Thomson I statistic.
RESULTS
Among 2765 articles obtained by our search strategy, four studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria for a total of 20,875,843 patients (mean age 56.1 years, 59.1% males). Of them, 1,244,604 had COVID-19 infection. Over a mean follow-up of 8.5 months, among COVID-19 recovered patients AMI occurred in 3.5 cases per 1.000 individuals compared to 2.02 cases per 1.000 individuals in the control cohort, defined as those who did not experience COVID-19 infection in the same period). COVID-19 patients showed an increased risk of incident AMI (HR: 1.93, 95% CI: 1.65-2.26, p < 0.0001, I = 83.5%). Meta-regression analysis demonstrated that the risk of AMI was directly associated with age (p = 0.01) and male gender (p = 0.001), while an indirect relationship was observed when the length of follow-up was utilized as moderator (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION
COVID-19 recovered patients had an increased risk of AMI.
Topics: Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Female; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Myocardial Infarction
PubMed: 36535564
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2022.12.032 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Mar 2023To determine the relative efficacy of structured named diet and health behaviour programmes (dietary programmes) for prevention of mortality and major cardiovascular... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparison of seven popular structured dietary programmes and risk of mortality and major cardiovascular events in patients at increased cardiovascular risk: systematic review and network meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the relative efficacy of structured named diet and health behaviour programmes (dietary programmes) for prevention of mortality and major cardiovascular events in patients at increased risk of cardiovascular disease.
DESIGN
Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
DATA SOURCES
AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine Database), CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), Embase, Medline, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched up to September 2021.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomised trials of patients at increased risk of cardiovascular disease that compared dietary programmes with minimal intervention (eg, healthy diet brochure) or alternative programmes with at least nine months of follow-up and reporting on mortality or major cardiovascular events (such as stroke or non-fatal myocardial infarction). In addition to dietary intervention, dietary programmes could also include exercise, behavioural support, and other secondary interventions such as drug treatment.
OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
All cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and individual cardiovascular events (stroke, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and unplanned cardiovascular interventions).
REVIEW METHODS
Pairs of reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. A random effects network meta-analysis was performed using a frequentist approach and grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) methods to determine the certainty of evidence for each outcome.
RESULTS
40 eligible trials were identified with 35 548 participants across seven named dietary programmes (low fat, 18 studies; Mediterranean, 12; very low fat, 6; modified fat, 4; combined low fat and low sodium, 3; Ornish, 3; Pritikin, 1). At last reported follow-up, based on moderate certainty evidence, Mediterranean dietary programmes proved superior to minimal intervention for the prevention of all cause mortality (odds ratio 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.56 to 0.92; patients at intermediate risk: risk difference 17 fewer per 1000 followed over five years), cardiovascular mortality (0.55, 0.39 to 0.78; 13 fewer per 1000), stroke (0.65, 0.46 to 0.93; 7 fewer per 1000), and non-fatal myocardial infarction (0.48, 0.36 to 0.65; 17 fewer per 1000). Based on moderate certainty evidence, low fat programmes proved superior to minimal intervention for prevention of all cause mortality (0.84, 0.74 to 0.95; 9 fewer per 1000) and non-fatal myocardial infarction (0.77, 0.61 to 0.96; 7 fewer per 1000). The absolute effects for both dietary programmes were more pronounced for patients at high risk. There were no convincing differences between Mediterranean and low fat programmes for mortality or non-fatal myocardial infarction. The five remaining dietary programmes generally had little or no benefit compared with minimal intervention typically based on low to moderate certainty evidence.
CONCLUSIONS
Moderate certainty evidence shows that programmes promoting Mediterranean and low fat diets, with or without physical activity or other interventions, reduce all cause mortality and non-fatal myocardial infarction in patients with increased cardiovascular risk. Mediterranean programmes are also likely to reduce stroke risk. Generally, other named dietary programmes were not superior to minimal intervention.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42016047939.
Topics: Humans; Cardiovascular Diseases; Network Meta-Analysis; Risk Factors; Myocardial Infarction; Stroke; Diet, Fat-Restricted
PubMed: 36990505
DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2022-072003 -
Health Technology Assessment... May 2021Early diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction is important, but only 20% of emergency admissions for chest pain will actually have an acute myocardial infarction....
BACKGROUND
Early diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction is important, but only 20% of emergency admissions for chest pain will actually have an acute myocardial infarction. High-sensitivity cardiac troponin assays may allow rapid rule out of myocardial infarction and avoid unnecessary hospital admissions.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin assays for the management of adults presenting with acute chest pain, in particular for the early rule-out of acute myocardial infarction.
METHODS
Sixteen databases were searched up to September 2019. Review methods followed published guidelines. Studies were assessed for quality using appropriate risk-of-bias tools. The bivariate model was used to estimate summary sensitivity and specificity for meta-analyses involving four or more studies; otherwise, random-effects logistic regression was used. The health economic analysis considered the long-term costs and quality-adjusted life-years associated with different troponin testing methods. The de novo model consisted of a decision tree and a state-transition cohort model. A lifetime time horizon (of 60 years) was used.
RESULTS
Thirty-seven studies (123 publications) were included in the review. The high-sensitivity cardiac troponin test strategies evaluated are defined by the combination of four factors (i.e. assay, number and timing of tests, and threshold concentration), resulting in a large number of possible combinations. Clinical opinion indicated a minimum clinically acceptable sensitivity of 97%. When considering single test strategies, only those using a threshold at or near to the limit of detection for the assay, in a sample taken at presentation, met the minimum clinically acceptable sensitivity criterion. The majority of the multiple test strategies that met this criterion comprised an initial rule-out step, based on high-sensitivity cardiac troponin levels in a sample taken on presentation and a minimum symptom duration, and a second stage for patients not meeting the initial rule-out criteria, based on presentation levels of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin and absolute change after 1, 2 or 3 hours. Two large cluster randomised controlled trials found that implementation of an early rule-out pathway for myocardial infarction reduced length of stay and rate of hospital admission without increasing cardiac events. In the base-case analysis, standard troponin testing was both the most effective and the most costly. Other testing strategies with a sensitivity of 100% (subject to uncertainty) were almost equally effective, resulting in the same life-year and quality-adjusted life-year gain at up to four decimal places. Comparisons based on the next best alternative showed that for willingness-to-pay values below £8455 per quality-adjusted life-year, the Access High Sensitivity Troponin I (Beckman Coulter, Brea, CA, USA) [(symptoms > 3 hours AND < 4 ng/l at 0 hours) OR (< 5 ng/l AND Δ < 5 ng/l at 0 to 2 hours)] would be cost-effective. For thresholds between £8455 and £20,190 per quality-adjusted life-year, the Elecsys Troponin-T high sensitive (Roche, Basel, Switzerland) (< 12 ng/l at 0 hours AND Δ < 3 ng/l at 0 to 1 hours) would be cost-effective. For a threshold > £20,190 per quality-adjusted life-year, the Dimension Vista High-Sensitivity Troponin I (Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany) (< 5 ng/l at 0 hours AND Δ < 2 ng/l at 0 to 1 hours) would be cost-effective.
CONCLUSIONS
High-sensitivity cardiac troponin testing may be cost-effective compared with standard troponin testing.
STUDY REGISTRATION
This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019154716.
FUNDING
This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Evidence Synthesis programme and will be published in full in ; Vol. 25, No. 33. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Topics: Chest Pain; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Humans; Myocardial Infarction; Quality-Adjusted Life Years; Troponin
PubMed: 34061019
DOI: 10.3310/hta25330 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2017Cardiovascular disease is the most common cause of death globally. Traditionally, centre-based cardiac rehabilitation programmes are offered to individuals after cardiac... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Cardiovascular disease is the most common cause of death globally. Traditionally, centre-based cardiac rehabilitation programmes are offered to individuals after cardiac events to aid recovery and prevent further cardiac illness. Home-based cardiac rehabilitation programmes have been introduced in an attempt to widen access and participation. This is an update of a review previously published in 2009 and 2015.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the effect of home-based and supervised centre-based cardiac rehabilitation on mortality and morbidity, exercise-capacity, health-related quality of life, and modifiable cardiac risk factors in patients with heart disease.
SEARCH METHODS
We updated searches from the previous Cochrane Review by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid) and CINAHL (EBSCO) on 21 September 2016. We also searched two clinical trials registers as well as previous systematic reviews and reference lists of included studies. No language restrictions were applied.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials, including parallel group, cross-over or quasi-randomised designs) that compared centre-based cardiac rehabilitation (e.g. hospital, gymnasium, sports centre) with home-based programmes in adults with myocardial infarction, angina, heart failure or who had undergone revascularisation.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened all identified references for inclusion based on pre-defined inclusion criteria. Disagreements were resolved through discussion or by involving a third review author. Two authors independently extracted outcome data and study characteristics and assessed risk of bias. Quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE principles and a Summary of findings table was created.
MAIN RESULTS
We included six new studies (624 participants) for this update, which now includes a total of 23 trials that randomised a total of 2890 participants undergoing cardiac rehabilitation. Participants had an acute myocardial infarction, revascularisation or heart failure. A number of studies provided insufficient detail to enable assessment of potential risk of bias, in particular, details of generation and concealment of random allocation sequencing and blinding of outcome assessment were poorly reported.No evidence of a difference was seen between home- and centre-based cardiac rehabilitation in clinical primary outcomes up to 12 months of follow up: total mortality (relative risk (RR) = 1.19, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.16; participants = 1505; studies = 11/comparisons = 13; very low quality evidence), exercise capacity (standardised mean difference (SMD) = -0.13, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.02; participants = 2255; studies = 22/comparisons = 26; low quality evidence), or health-related quality of life up to 24 months (not estimable). Trials were generally of short duration, with only three studies reporting outcomes beyond 12 months (exercise capacity: SMD 0.11, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.23; participants = 1074; studies = 3; moderate quality evidence). However, there was evidence of marginally higher levels of programme completion (RR 1.04, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.08; participants = 2615; studies = 22/comparisons = 26; low quality evidence) by home-based participants.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This update supports previous conclusions that home- and centre-based forms of cardiac rehabilitation seem to be similarly effective in improving clinical and health-related quality of life outcomes in patients after myocardial infarction or revascularisation, or with heart failure. This finding supports the continued expansion of evidence-based, home-based cardiac rehabilitation programmes. The choice of participating in a more traditional and supervised centre-based programme or a home-based programme may reflect local availability and consider the preference of the individual patient. Further data are needed to determine whether the effects of home- and centre-based cardiac rehabilitation reported in the included short-term trials can be confirmed in the longer term and need to consider adequately powered non-inferiority or equivalence study designs.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Cardiac Rehabilitation; Exercise Tolerance; Female; Heart Failure; Home Care Services; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Myocardial Infarction; Myocardial Revascularization; Patient Dropouts; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rehabilitation Centers; Risk Factors
PubMed: 28665511
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007130.pub4