Comparing higher-dose and single standard-dose influenza vaccines in preventing cardiovascular events: a meta-analysis with 68,713 patients

IF 3.9 3区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Public Health Pub Date : 2024-07-27 DOI:10.1016/j.puhe.2024.06.034
{"title":"Comparing higher-dose and single standard-dose influenza vaccines in preventing cardiovascular events: a meta-analysis with 68,713 patients","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.puhe.2024.06.034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>This manuscript offers an in-depth comparative examination of the effectiveness of higher-dose (double standard-dose and high-dose) influenza vaccines in contrast to a single standard-dose vaccine when it comes to alleviating major cardiovascular events.</p></div><div><h3>Study design</h3><p>Meta-Analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>To conduct this study, an exhaustive search was carried out in the medical English literature using databases such as PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane CENTRAL until 10 April 2024. The evaluation of associations was achieved through the calculation of pooled relative risks (RRs) accompanied by their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A meticulous analysis encompassed a comprehensive cohort of 68,713 patients. Among these participants, 34,430 individuals were randomly assigned to receive a higher-dose influenza vaccination, whereas 34,283 received the standard influenza vaccination. Contrary to initial expectations, a higher-dose influenza vaccine did not manifest elevated efficacy compared to the standard-dose vaccine in terms of mitigating major cardiovascular events. The computed pooled RR stood at 1.0, accompanied by a 95% CI ranging from 0.93 to 1.10.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>While this systematic review and meta-analysis did not find a statistically significant advantage of higher-dose influenza vaccines over a single standard-dose vaccine in preventing major cardiovascular events, the observed trend towards risk reduction warrants continued investigation. These findings contribute to the ongoing dialogue surrounding vaccination strategies and their implications for cardiovascular outcomes.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49651,"journal":{"name":"Public Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0033350624002750","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

This manuscript offers an in-depth comparative examination of the effectiveness of higher-dose (double standard-dose and high-dose) influenza vaccines in contrast to a single standard-dose vaccine when it comes to alleviating major cardiovascular events.

Study design

Meta-Analysis.

Methods

To conduct this study, an exhaustive search was carried out in the medical English literature using databases such as PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane CENTRAL until 10 April 2024. The evaluation of associations was achieved through the calculation of pooled relative risks (RRs) accompanied by their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

A meticulous analysis encompassed a comprehensive cohort of 68,713 patients. Among these participants, 34,430 individuals were randomly assigned to receive a higher-dose influenza vaccination, whereas 34,283 received the standard influenza vaccination. Contrary to initial expectations, a higher-dose influenza vaccine did not manifest elevated efficacy compared to the standard-dose vaccine in terms of mitigating major cardiovascular events. The computed pooled RR stood at 1.0, accompanied by a 95% CI ranging from 0.93 to 1.10.

Conclusion

While this systematic review and meta-analysis did not find a statistically significant advantage of higher-dose influenza vaccines over a single standard-dose vaccine in preventing major cardiovascular events, the observed trend towards risk reduction warrants continued investigation. These findings contribute to the ongoing dialogue surrounding vaccination strategies and their implications for cardiovascular outcomes.

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
比较高剂量和单一标准剂量流感疫苗在预防心血管事件方面的作用:对 68,713 名患者进行的荟萃分析。
简介:本稿件对高剂量(双标准剂量和高剂量)流感疫苗与单一标准剂量疫苗在缓解重大心血管事件方面的有效性进行了深入的比较研究:研究设计:Meta 分析:为了开展这项研究,我们使用 PubMed/MEDLINE、EMBASE 和 Cochrane CENTRAL 等数据库对医学英文文献进行了详尽的检索,检索期至 2024 年 4 月 10 日。通过计算汇集相对风险(RRs)及其相应的 95% 置信区间(CIs)来评估相关性:细致的分析涵盖了 68,713 名患者。在这些参与者中,34430 人被随机分配接种高剂量流感疫苗,而 34283 人接种的是标准流感疫苗。与最初的预期相反,与标准剂量疫苗相比,高剂量流感疫苗在减轻重大心血管事件方面并没有表现出更高的疗效。计算得出的总RR为1.0,95% CI为0.93至1.10:虽然这项系统回顾和荟萃分析没有发现高剂量流感疫苗在预防重大心血管事件方面比单一标准剂量疫苗具有统计学上的显著优势,但观察到的风险降低趋势值得继续研究。这些发现有助于围绕疫苗接种策略及其对心血管后果的影响展开持续对话。
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
Public Health
Public Health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
280
审稿时长
37 days
期刊介绍: Public Health is an international, multidisciplinary peer-reviewed journal. It publishes original papers, reviews and short reports on all aspects of the science, philosophy, and practice of public health.
期刊最新文献
Factors affecting detection and estimation of SARS-CoV-2 RNA concentration of COVID-19 positive cases in wastewater influent: A systematic review A nomogram to predict long COVID risk based on pre- and post-infection factors: Results from a cross-sectional study in South China Socio-spatial inequalities in presence of primary care physicians and patients' ability to register: A simulated-patient survey in the Paris Region Effect of water and sanitation, PM pollution and climate change of COPD and LRIs under different sociodemographic transitions Estimated number and incidence of influenza-associated acute respiratory infection cases in winter 2021/22 in Wanzhou District, China
×
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