4.6 Article

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers decrease the incidence of atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL INVESTIGATION
卷 41, 期 7, 页码 719-733

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2362.2010.02460.x

关键词

Angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers; angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors; atrial fibrillation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background There is not a general agreement regarding antiarrhythmic effects on atrial fibrillation (AF) of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs). This study was to assess whether ACEIs and ARBs could decrease the incidence of AF. Materials and methods Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched for trials reported from 1950 to May 2009. Search terms included 'randomized controlled trial (RCT), controlled clinical trials, random allocation' and medical subject headings that included all spellings of ACEIs and ARBs agents, 'atrial fibrillation' and 'atrial flutter'. Randomized, controlled human trials of ACEIs or ARBs reporting AF were included. Data were extracted independently by two reviewers using a predefined data extraction sheet, including study quality indicators. Meta-analysis and subgroup analyses were carried out with a random effects model. Results Twenty-one trials including 91 381 patients and 5730 AF events were identified. Overall, ACEIs/ARBs reduced the relative risk (c) of AF by 25%. In primary and secondary prevention, ACEIs/ARBs decreased the incidence of AF by 24% and 27%, respectively. Patients with hypertension (RR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.54-0.92), patients with chronic heart failure (RR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.39-0.87) and those with AF (RR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.52-0.96) benefited from ACEIs/ARBs treatment. Conclusions ACEIs/ARBs are effective for primary prevention and secondary prevention of AF. They decrease the incidence of AF especially in patients with hypertension, patients with chronic heart failure and those with AF.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据