{"title":"The Landscape of Randomized Clinical Trial Meta-analyses on Statins for Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: A Scoping Review.","authors":"Panagiotis Skouras, Theodosis Kalamatianos, Mariam Markouli, Angelos Karagiannis, Lampis C Stavrinou","doi":"10.2174/0118715273270503230928100141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) is a type of non-traumatic SAH that can have detrimental effects on the central nervous system, resulting in severe disability or death.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Early nimodipine is currently the only strongly recommended pharmacological treatment that has shown efficacy in improving neurological/functional outcomes in aSAH patients. Whether statin treatment is of benefit to aSAH patients is an issue that has generated considerable interest and debate. In the present scoping review, we mapped and analyzed the available literature on metaanalyses of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) examining the effect of statins on aSAH. Seventeen meta-analyses of RCTs, published between 2008 and 2023, were identified.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Treatments in included meta-analyses were based on various regimens of simvastatin, pravastatin, pitavastatin or atorvastatin for up to 21 days. Eleven of the included reports indicated some beneficial effect of statin treatment, reducing rates of at least one of the following: cerebral vasospasm, delayed cerebral ischemia/delayed ischemic neurologic deficit, mortality or functional/ neurological outcome. In contrast, six meta-analyses, showed no such effects.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The limitations reported by several meta-analyses, included low patient numbers or disproportionate representation of patients from certain RCTs, differences in drug treatment, patient diagnostic criteria and outcome evaluation between RCTs, as well as poor data quality or lack of RCTs data. Knowledge of the reported limitations may aid the design of future clinical trials and/or their meta-analyses.</p>","PeriodicalId":93947,"journal":{"name":"CNS & neurological disorders drug targets","volume":" ","pages":"1320-1327"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CNS & neurological disorders drug targets","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/0118715273270503230928100141","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
Introduction: Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) is a type of non-traumatic SAH that can have detrimental effects on the central nervous system, resulting in severe disability or death.
Methods: Early nimodipine is currently the only strongly recommended pharmacological treatment that has shown efficacy in improving neurological/functional outcomes in aSAH patients. Whether statin treatment is of benefit to aSAH patients is an issue that has generated considerable interest and debate. In the present scoping review, we mapped and analyzed the available literature on metaanalyses of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) examining the effect of statins on aSAH. Seventeen meta-analyses of RCTs, published between 2008 and 2023, were identified.
Results: Treatments in included meta-analyses were based on various regimens of simvastatin, pravastatin, pitavastatin or atorvastatin for up to 21 days. Eleven of the included reports indicated some beneficial effect of statin treatment, reducing rates of at least one of the following: cerebral vasospasm, delayed cerebral ischemia/delayed ischemic neurologic deficit, mortality or functional/ neurological outcome. In contrast, six meta-analyses, showed no such effects.
Conclusion: The limitations reported by several meta-analyses, included low patient numbers or disproportionate representation of patients from certain RCTs, differences in drug treatment, patient diagnostic criteria and outcome evaluation between RCTs, as well as poor data quality or lack of RCTs data. Knowledge of the reported limitations may aid the design of future clinical trials and/or their meta-analyses.