Dataset Information

Shensongyangxin Capsules for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To evaluate the evidence for the effectiveness and safety of Shensongyangxin Capsules (SSYX) for treating paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF).

Methods

We searched for randomized clinical trials for SSYX in PAF up to June 2015. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess the methodological quality. RevMan 5.3 was used to synthesize the results.

Results

We included 22 trials involving 2,347 PAF patients. The quality of the included studies was generally poor. The results of the meta-analysis showed that SSYX plus routine treatment was more effective at improving P-wave dispersion (Pwd) and the frequency of PAF attacks compared with routine treatment alone. The results from the included trials that compared SSYX plus routine treatment and arrhythmic drugs plus routine treatment were inconsistent. Trials reported on Pwd, quality of life, frequency of PAF attacks or maintenance rate of sinus rhythm and found that SSYX combined with anti-arrhythmic drugs plus routine treatment was more effective than anti-arrhythmic drugs plus routine treatment. Four of the trials reported adverse events, indicating that SSYX was potentially safer than anti-arrhythmic drugs.

Conclusions

There appears to be some benefit from the use of SSYX. However, due to poor methodological quality, we could not draw confirmative conclusions regarding the beneficial effect of using SSYX.

SUBMITTER: Chen G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4801382 | biostudies-literature | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Shensongyangxin Capsules for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials.

Chen Guang G Wei Benjun B Wang Jie J Feng Bo B Li Zhaoling Z Zhang Zhenpeng Z He Qingyong Q

PloS one 20160321 3

<h4>Objective</h4>To evaluate the evidence for the effectiveness and safety of Shensongyangxin Capsules (SSYX) for treating paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF).<h4>Methods</h4>We searched for randomized clinical trials for SSYX in PAF up to June 2015. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess the methodological quality. RevMan 5.3 was used to synthesize the results.<h4>Results</h4>We included 22 trials involving 2,347 PAF patients. The quality of the included studies was generally poor. ...[more]

PMID: 26999010

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceRecurrent atrial fibrillation (AF) commonly occurs after catheter ablation and is associated with patient morbidity and health care costs.ObjectiveTo evaluate the superiority of an augmented double wide-area circumferential ablation (WACA) compared with a standard single WACA in preventing recurrent atrial arrhythmias (AA) (atrial tachycardia, atrial flutter, or atrial fibrillation [AF]) in patients with paroxysmal AF.Design, setting, and participantsThis was a pragmatic, multicenter, prospective, randomized, open, blinded end point superiority clinical trial conducted at 10 university-affiliated centers in Canada. The trial enrolled patients 18 years and older with symptomatic paroxysmal AF from March 2015 to May 2017. Analysis took place between January and April 2022. Analyses were intention to treat.InterventionsPatients were randomized (1:1) to receive radiofrequency catheter ablation for pulmonary vein isolation with either a standard single WACA or an augmented double WACA.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was AA recurrence between 91 and 365 days postablation. Patients underwent 42 days of ambulatory electrocardiography monitoring after ablation. Secondary outcomes included need for repeated catheter ablation and procedural and safety variables.ResultsOf 398 patients, 195 were randomized to the single WACA (control) arm (mean [SD] age, 60.6 [9.3] years; 65 [33.3%] female) and 203 to the double WACA (experimental) arm (mean [SD] age, 61.5 [9.3] years; 66 [32.5%] female). Overall, 52 patients (26.7%) in the single WACA arm and 50 patients (24.6%) in the double WACA arm had recurrent AA at 1 year (relative risk, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.66-1.29; P = .64). Twenty patients (10.3%) in the single WACA arm and 15 patients (7.4%) in the double WACA arm underwent repeated catheter ablation (relative risk, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.38-1.36). Adjudicated serious adverse events occurred in 13 patients (6.7%) in the single WACA arm and 14 patients (6.9%) in the double WACA arm.Conclusions and relevanceIn this randomized clinical trial of patients with paroxysmal AF, additional ablation by performing a double ablation lesion set did not result in improved freedom from recurrent AA compared with a standard single ablation set.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02150902.

Project description:ImportanceAtrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia. Although patients have reported that various exposures determine when and if an AF event will occur, a prospective evaluation of patient-selected triggers has not been conducted, and the utility of characterizing presumed AF-related triggers for individual patients remains unknown.ObjectiveTo test the hypothesis that n-of-1 trials of self-selected AF triggers would enhance AF-related quality of life.Design, setting, and participantsA randomized clinical trial lasting a minimum of 10 weeks tested a smartphone mobile application used by symptomatic patients with paroxysmal AF who owned a smartphone and were interested in testing a presumed AF trigger. Participants were screened between December 22, 2018, and March 29, 2020.Interventionsn-of-1 Participants received instructions to expose or avoid self-selected triggers in random 1-week blocks for 6 weeks, and the probability their trigger influenced AF risk was then communicated. Controls monitored their AF over the same time period.Main outcomes and measuresAF was assessed daily by self-report and using a smartphone-based electrocardiogram recording device. The primary outcome comparing n-of-1 and control groups was the Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality-of-Life (AFEQT) score at 10 weeks. All participants could subsequently opt for additional trigger testing.ResultsOf 446 participants who initiated (mean [SD] age, 58 [14] years; 289 men [58%]; 461 White [92%]), 320 (72%) completed all study activities. Self-selected triggers included caffeine (n = 53), alcohol (n = 43), reduced sleep (n = 31), exercise (n = 30), lying on left side (n = 17), dehydration (n = 10), large meals (n = 7), cold food or drink (n = 5), specific diets (n = 6), and other customized triggers (n = 4). No significant differences in AFEQT scores were observed between the n-of-1 vs AF monitoring-only groups. In the 4-week postintervention follow-up period, significantly fewer daily AF episodes were reported after trigger testing compared with controls over the same time period (adjusted relative risk, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.43- 0.83; P < .001). In a meta-analysis of the individualized trials, only exposure to alcohol was associated with significantly heightened risks of AF events.Conclusions and relevancen-of-1 Testing of AF triggers did not improve AF-associated quality of life but was associated with a reduction in AF events. Acute exposure to alcohol increased AF risk, with no evidence that other exposures, including caffeine, more commonly triggered AF.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03323099.

Project description:BackgroundDuring recent years, systematic reviews of observational studies have compared digoxin to no digoxin in patients with atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter, and the results of these reviews suggested that digoxin seems to increase the risk of all-cause mortality regardless of concomitant heart failure. Our objective was to assess the benefits and harms of digoxin for atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter based on randomized clinical trials.MethodsWe searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, SCI-Expanded, BIOSIS for eligible trials comparing digoxin versus placebo, no intervention, or other medical interventions in patients with atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter in October 2016. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, and quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were heart failure, stroke, heart rate control, and conversion to sinus rhythm. We performed both random-effects and fixed-effect meta-analyses and chose the more conservative result as our primary result. We used Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA) to control for random errors. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the body of evidence.Results28 trials (n = 2223 participants) were included. All were at high risk of bias and reported only short-term follow-up. When digoxin was compared with all control interventions in one analysis, we found no evidence of a difference on all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR), 0.82; TSA-adjusted confidence interval (CI), 0.02 to 31.2; I2 = 0%); serious adverse events (RR, 1.65; TSA-adjusted CI, 0.24 to 11.5; I2 = 0%); quality of life; heart failure (RR, 1.05; TSA-adjusted CI, 0.00 to 1141.8; I2 = 51%); and stroke (RR, 2.27; TSA-adjusted CI, 0.00 to 7887.3; I2 = 17%). Our analyses on acute heart rate control (within 6 hours of treatment onset) showed firm evidence of digoxin being superior compared with placebo (mean difference (MD), -12.0 beats per minute (bpm); TSA-adjusted CI, -17.2 to -6.76; I2 = 0%) and inferior compared with beta blockers (MD, 20.7 bpm; TSA-adjusted CI, 14.2 to 27.2; I2 = 0%). Meta-analyses on acute heart rate control showed that digoxin was inferior compared with both calcium antagonists (MD, 21.0 bpm; TSA-adjusted CI, -30.3 to 72.3) and with amiodarone (MD, 14.7 bpm; TSA-adjusted CI, -0.58 to 30.0; I2 = 42%), but in both comparisons TSAs showed that we lacked information. Meta-analysis on acute conversion to sinus rhythm showed that digoxin compared with amiodarone reduced the probability of converting atrial fibrillation to sinus rhythm, but TSA showed that we lacked information (RR, 0.54; TSA-adjusted CI, 0.13 to 2.21; I2 = 0%).ConclusionsThe clinical effects of digoxin on all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, quality of life, heart failure, and stroke are unclear based on current evidence. Digoxin seems to be superior compared with placebo in reducing the heart rate, but inferior compared with beta blockers. The long-term effect of digoxin is unclear, as no trials reported long-term follow-up. More trials at low risk of bias and low risk of random errors assessing the clinical effects of digoxin are needed.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42016052935.

Dataset Information

Shensongyangxin Capsules for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Shensongyangxin Capsules for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets