| 心房颤动患者节律控制与室率控制预后比较的荟萃评价 |
| 投稿时间：2011-06-10 修订日期：2011-06-27 点此下载全文 |
| 引用本文：陈阵,李文强,刘韬,刘亚凤.心房颤动患者节律控制与室率控制预后比较的荟萃评价[J].医学研究杂志,2012,41(3):92-97 |
| DOI：
|
| 摘要点击次数: 1007 |
| 全文下载次数: 907 |
|
|
| 中文摘要:目的评价房颤患者节律控制与室率控制2种治疗方法预后有无差异。方法计算机检索Pubmed（2000~2010）、Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews（2000~2010）、EMbase（2000~2010）中关于心房颤动患者节律控制与室率控制预后进行比较的随机对照研究（RCTs），同时筛检纳入文献的参考文献，对纳入研究的方法学进行评价。研究者对文献质量进行严格评价和资料提取，对符合质量标准的RCTs用Revman 5.0 软件进行荟萃分析。结果6个RCTs共6615名患者纳入研究，其中节律控制组（节律组）3312例，室率控制组（室率组）3303例。荟萃分析结果表明房颤患者节律组再次住院人数高于室率组。对于心房颤动患者节律组与室率组在全因总病死率、发生缺血性脑卒中、发生非中枢神经系统性出血方面相关的RCTs结果显示无显著差异。结论与控制心房颤动的节律相比，控制心室率可以降低患者住院次数但不增加发生其他不良结局的危险性。控制心室率、联合使用抗凝药可以作为心房颤动患者的治疗方案。 |
| 中文关键词:心房颤动 节律控制 心室率控制 |
| |
| Prognosis of Rhythm Control vs Rate Control of Atrial Fibrillation：a Systematic Review |
|
|
| Abstract:ObjectiveTo evaluate the difference of prognosis between rhythm control and rate control in patients with atrial fibrillation. MethodsWe searched the Pubmed（2000-2010）, Medline（2000-2010）, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews（2000-2010）,EMbase（2000-2010）to collect randomized controlled trials(RCTSs). The quality of RCTSs was critically appraised and data were extracted by reviewers independently．Meta analyses were conducted for the eligible RCTSs. ResultsSix RCTSs were included.For the endpoints of death, ischaemic stroke and non-CNS bleeding, there was no significant difference from the RCTSs. ConclusionCompared to rhythm control, rate control could decrease the risk of hospitalization and not increase the risk of other adverse endpoints. Optimizing rate control and more widespread and effective anticoagulation are a good treatment for atrial fibrillation. |
| keywords:Atrial fibrillation Rhythm control Rate control |
| 查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
