[Phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors for the treatment of heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis].

Ramiro Monzón-Herrera, Federico Listorti, Natalia Vensentini, Javier Mariani
{"title":"[Phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors for the treatment of heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis].","authors":"Ramiro Monzón-Herrera, Federico Listorti, Natalia Vensentini, Javier Mariani","doi":"10.24875/ACM.23000209","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The treatment with phosphodiesterase-5 (PDE-5) inhibitors was postulated in heart failure (HF). We conducted a systematic review and a meta-analysis on their beneficial and adverse effects in patients with HF.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A meta-analysis of randomized trials evaluating the chronic use of PDE-5 inhibitors in patients with HF was conducted. Endpoints included death, HF hospitalizations, functional capacity, pulmonary pressures, quality of life, and adverse effects. Random-effects models were used to pool outcomes. Categorical data were summarized with relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI), and continuous data with weighted mean differences and standardized mean differences.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixteen studies (1119 participants) were included. No effect was observed on mortality (RR: 1.16; 95%CI: 0.50-2.66; I2: 0.0%) or HF hospitalizations (RR: 0.75; 95%CI: 0.41-1.37; I2: 38.7%). Treatment significantly reduced pulmonary systolic pressure (-10.64 mmHg; 95%CI: -5.14 to -16.15 mmHg; I2: 96.0%), and increased peak oxygen consumption (2.06 ml/kg/min; 95%CI: 0.40-3.72; I2: 89.6%), although with high inconsistency. There were no significant effects on quality of life (-0.15; 95%CI: -0.48-0.18; I2: 0.0%). On the other hand, the risk of headaches was increased (RR: 1.63; 95%CI: 1.11-2.39; I2: 0.0%). Publication bias was identified for HF hospitalizations.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Current data suggest that PDE-5 inhibitors therapy does not improve prognosis or quality of life among HF patients. Hemodynamic and functional effects could be relevant, and more studies are necessary to define its role.</p>","PeriodicalId":93885,"journal":{"name":"Archivos de cardiologia de Mexico","volume":" ","pages":"309-323"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11259423/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archivos de cardiologia de Mexico","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24875/ACM.23000209","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The treatment with phosphodiesterase-5 (PDE-5) inhibitors was postulated in heart failure (HF). We conducted a systematic review and a meta-analysis on their beneficial and adverse effects in patients with HF.

Method: A meta-analysis of randomized trials evaluating the chronic use of PDE-5 inhibitors in patients with HF was conducted. Endpoints included death, HF hospitalizations, functional capacity, pulmonary pressures, quality of life, and adverse effects. Random-effects models were used to pool outcomes. Categorical data were summarized with relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI), and continuous data with weighted mean differences and standardized mean differences.

Results: Sixteen studies (1119 participants) were included. No effect was observed on mortality (RR: 1.16; 95%CI: 0.50-2.66; I2: 0.0%) or HF hospitalizations (RR: 0.75; 95%CI: 0.41-1.37; I2: 38.7%). Treatment significantly reduced pulmonary systolic pressure (-10.64 mmHg; 95%CI: -5.14 to -16.15 mmHg; I2: 96.0%), and increased peak oxygen consumption (2.06 ml/kg/min; 95%CI: 0.40-3.72; I2: 89.6%), although with high inconsistency. There were no significant effects on quality of life (-0.15; 95%CI: -0.48-0.18; I2: 0.0%). On the other hand, the risk of headaches was increased (RR: 1.63; 95%CI: 1.11-2.39; I2: 0.0%). Publication bias was identified for HF hospitalizations.

Conclusions: Current data suggest that PDE-5 inhibitors therapy does not improve prognosis or quality of life among HF patients. Hemodynamic and functional effects could be relevant, and more studies are necessary to define its role.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
[治疗心力衰竭的磷酸二酯酶 5 抑制剂:系统回顾和荟萃分析]。
目的:心力衰竭(HF)患者可使用磷酸二酯酶-5(PDE-5)抑制剂进行治疗。我们对PDE-5抑制剂对心力衰竭患者的益处和不良影响进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析:方法:我们对评估心力衰竭患者长期使用 PDE-5 抑制剂的随机试验进行了荟萃分析。终点包括死亡、高血压住院、功能能力、肺部压力、生活质量和不良反应。采用随机效应模型对结果进行汇总。分类数据以相对风险(RR)和95%置信区间(95%CI)汇总,连续数据以加权平均差和标准化平均差汇总:结果:共纳入 16 项研究(1119 名参与者)。未观察到对死亡率(RR:1.16;95%CI:0.50-2.66;I2:0.0%)或高血压住院率(RR:0.75;95%CI:0.41-1.37;I2:38.7%)的影响。治疗明显降低了肺动脉收缩压(-10.64 mmHg;95%CI:-5.14 至 -16.15 mmHg;I2:96.0%),增加了峰值耗氧量(2.06 ml/kg/min;95%CI:0.40-3.72;I2:89.6%),但不一致性很高。对生活质量没有明显影响(-0.15;95%CI:-0.48-0.18;I2:0.0%)。另一方面,头痛的风险有所增加(RR:1.63;95%CI:1.11-2.39;I2:0.0%)。结论:目前的数据表明,PDE-5抑制剂治疗并不能改善HF患者的预后或生活质量。结论:目前的数据表明,PDE-5 抑制剂治疗并不能改善心房颤动患者的预后或生活质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Analysis of COVID-19 patients hospitalized in general wards and intensive care units: Insights from the RIMAC cardiopulmonary imaging registry across Latin American centers. Comment on the firsts insights of the arterial hypertension study in México (RIHTA): are we doing things right? Instituto y no hospital. La distintiva organización que Ignacio Chávez concibió para combatir integralmente a las enfermedades del corazón en México. En el octogésimo aniversario del Instituto Nacional de Cardiología. [Right ventricle-dependent coronary circulation in pulmonary atresia with intact ventricular septum. About three patients without coronary ostium atresia. Is a transient percutaneous decompression maneuver necessary?] [Clinical characterization of patients with complete fetal atrioventricular block].
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1