Bayesian Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials on the Efficacy of Antiarrhythmics in the Pharmacological Cardioversion of Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation

Effectiveness of Fludrocortisone Plus Hydrocortisone versus Hydrocortisone Alone in Septic Shock: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Rationale: The use of hydrocortisone in adult patients with septic shock is controversial, and the effectiveness of adding fludrocortisone to hydrocortisone remains uncertain. Objectives: To assess the comparative effectiveness and safety of fludrocortisone plus hydrocortisone, hydrocortisone alone, and placebo or usual care in adults with septic shock. Methods: A systematic review and a Bayesian network meta-analysis of peer-reviewed randomized trials were conducted. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at last follow-up. Treatment effects are presented as relative risks (RRs) with 95% credible intervals (CrIs). Placebo or usual care was the reference treatment. Measurements and Main Results: Among 7,553 references, we included 17 trials (7,688 patients). All-cause mortality at last follow-up was lowest with fludrocortisone plus hydrocortisone (RR, 0.85; 95% CrI, 0.72-0.99; 98.3% probability of superiority, moderate-certainty evidence), followed by hydrocortisone alone (RR, 0.97; 95% CrI, 0.87-1.07; 73.1% probability of superiority, low-certainty evidence). The comparison of fludrocortisone plus hydrocortisone versus hydrocortisone alone was based primarily on indirect evidence (only two trials with direct evidence). Fludrocortisone plus hydrocortisone was associated with a 12% lower risk of all-cause mortality compared with hydrocortisone alone (RR, 0.88; 95% CrI, 0.74-1.03; 94.2% probability of superiority, moderate-certainty evidence). Conclusions: In adult patients with septic shock, fludrocortisone plus hydrocortisone was associated with lower risk of all-cause mortality at last follow-up than placebo and hydrocortisone alone. The scarcity of head-to-head trials comparing fludrocortisone plus hydrocortisone versus hydrocortisone alone led our network meta-analysis to rely primarily on indirect evidence for this comparison. Although we undertook several sensitivity analyses and assessments, these findings should be considered while also acknowledging the heterogeneity of included trials.

Effectiveness of antazoline versus amiodarone, flecainide and propafenone in restoring sinus rhythm at the emergency department

PURPOSE

Little is known about the effectiveness of pharmacological cardioversion (PCV) with antazoline in comparison to flecainide. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of antazoline in restoring sinus rhythm (SR) versus amiodarone, flecainide and propafenone in a group of emergency department (ED) patients.

MATERIALS/METHODS

This was a single-centre retrospective analysis of patient records from an ED in a large hospital in Poland. We analysed a total of 1878 patient records, divided based on the anti-arrhythmic drug (AAD) administered during PCV: antazoline (n ​= ​1080), antazoline ​+ ​β-blocker (n ​= ​479), amiodarone (n ​= ​129), flecainide (n ​= ​102), propafenone (n ​= ​88). Of the patients, 63.5 ​% were female (median 65 years, [19-100]).

RESULTS

The percentage of successful PCV was significantly higher in the antazoline group (84.3 ​%) than in the antazoline ​+ ​β-blocker (75.8 ​%, p ​= ​0.0001), propafenone (75.6 ​%, p ​= ​0.0364) and amiodarone (68.8 ​%, p ​< ​0.0001) groups. Post-hoc analysis revealed that patients who received PCV with antazoline, antazoline ​+ ​β-blocker, flecainide and propafenone had significantly shorter time to SR than those who received amiodarone (p ​< ​0.0001). Univariate regression analysis revealed that patients who underwent PCV with antazoline were almost twice as likely to return to SR compared to the other groups (p ​< ​0.0001, OR 1.81, 95 ​% CI 1.44-2.27).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study comparing the effectiveness of antazoline in PCV versus flecainide in addition to the previously studied amiodarone and propafenone. Our results indicate that antazoline is more effective in restoring SR than amiodarone, flecainide and propafenone. In addition, antazoline restored SR significantly faster than amiodarone or propafenone.

Safety and Effectiveness of Antidysrhythmic Drugs for Pharmacologic Cardioversion of Recent-Onset Atrial Fibrillation: a Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The available evidence to determine which antidysrhythmic drug is superior for pharmacologic cardioversion of recent-onset (onset within 48 h) atrial fibrillation (AF) is uncertain. We aimed to identify the safest and most effective agent for pharmacologic cardioversion of recent-onset AF in the emergency department.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science from inception to February 21, 2023 (PROSPERO: CRD42018083781). Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials that enrolled adult participants with AF ≤ 48 h, compared a guideline-recommended antidysrhythmic drug with another antidysrhythmic drug or a different formulation of the same drug or placebo and reported specific adverse events. The primary outcome was immediate, serious adverse event - cardiac arrest, sustained ventricular tachydysrhythmia, atrial flutter 1:1 atrioventricular conduction, hypotension, and bradycardia. Additional analyses included the outcomes of conversion to sinus rhythm within 4 h and 24 h. We extracted data according to PRISMA-NMA and appraised trials using Cochrane RoB 2. We performed Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) using a Markov Chain Monte Carlo method with random-effect model and vague prior distribution to calculate odds ratios with 95% credible intervals. We assessed confidence using CINeMA. We used surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to rank agent(s).

RESULTS

The systematic review initially identified 5545 studies. Twenty-five studies met eligibility criteria, and 22 studies (n = 3082) provided data for NMA, which demonstrated that vernakalant (SUCRA = 70.9%) is most likely to be safest. Additional effectiveness NMA demonstrated that flecainide (SUCRA = 89.0%) is most likely to be superior for conversion within 4 h (27 studies; n = 2681), and ranolazine-amiodarone IV (SUCRA 93.7%) is most likely to be superior for conversion within 24 h (24 studies; n = 3213). Confidence in the NMA estimates is variable and limited mostly by within-study bias and imprecision.

CONCLUSIONS

Among guideline-recommended antidysrhythmic drugs, the combination of digoxin IV and amiodarone IV is definitely among the least safe for cardioversion of recent onset AF; flecainide, vernakalant, ibutilide, propafenone, and amiodarone IV are definitely among the most effective for cardioversion within 4 h; flecainide is definitely among the most effective for cardioversion within 24 h. Further, randomized controlled trials with predetermined and strictly defined, hemodynamic adverse event outcomes are recommended.