Résumé
Objective: To systemically evaluate clinical efficacy of ivabradine (IVA) treating the patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). Methods: We searched PubMed, Conchrane Library, EMbase, CBM, CNKI and Wanfang database to enroll the random control trials of IVA treating CHF up to 2016-10. Meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.2 software. Results: A total of 12 English literature were finally enrolled which including 2 groups: IVA group, n=807 and Control group, n=800. Meta-analysis showed that compared with Control group, IVA group had increased LVEF (MD=2.68, 95％CI 1.85-3.50, P<0.00001), decreased left ventricular end-diastolic volume (MD=-5.78, 95％ CI -9.79 to -1.76, P=0.005), decreased left ventricular end-systolic volume (MD=-8.91, 95％ CI -11.23 to -6.59, P<0.00001) and reduced N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (MD=-109.22, 95％ CI -126.42 to -92.01, P<0.00001); while systolic blood pressure (MD=6.02, 95％CI -0.80 to 12.84, P=0.08) and diastolic blood pressure (MD=3.6495％ CI -0.48 to 7.77, P=0.08) were similar between 2 groups. Conclusion: IVA improved ventricular remodeling in CHF patients and had no obvious effect on blood pressure. The long-term effect and safety of IVA should be further confirmed by high quality random control trial and the result from evidence-based medicine.
Résumé
Objective: To systemically evaluate clinical efficacy of ivabradine (IVA) treating the patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). Methods: We searched PubMed, Conchrane Library, EMbase, CBM, CNKI and Wanfang database to enroll the random control trials of IVA treating CHF up to 2016-10. Meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.2 software. Results: A total of 12 English literature were finally enrolled which including 2 groups: IVA group, n=807 and Control group, n=800. Meta-analysis showed that compared with Control group, IVA group had increased LVEF (MD=2.68, 95％CI 1.85-3.50, P<0.00001), decreased left ventricular end-diastolic volume (MD=-5.78, 95％ CI -9.79 to -1.76, P=0.005), decreased left ventricular end-systolic volume (MD=-8.91, 95％ CI -11.23 to -6.59, P<0.00001) and reduced N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (MD=-109.22, 95％ CI -126.42 to -92.01, P<0.00001); while systolic blood pressure (MD=6.02, 95％CI -0.80 to 12.84, P=0.08) and diastolic blood pressure (MD=3.6495％ CI -0.48 to 7.77, P=0.08) were similar between 2 groups. Conclusion: IVA improved ventricular remodeling in CHF patients and had no obvious effect on blood pressure. The long-term effect and safety of IVA should be further confirmed by high quality random control trial and the result from evidence-based medicine.