胺碘酮与普罗帕酮转复心房颤动疗效对比研究的系统评价

目的比较胺碘酮与普罗帕酮转复心房颤动(简称房颤)的疗效,为临床用药提供参考。方法计算机检索Cochrane图书馆(2008年第3期)、PubMed、EMBASE(荷兰医学文摘),中国生物医学文献数据库和中国知网全文数据库,收集2000年1月～2008年6月公开发表的有关比较胺碘酮与普罗帕酮转复房颤效果的文献,并用RevMan5.0统计软件对这些文献进行统计分析。结果共纳入5个随机对照试验,累计胺碘酮治疗组262例,普罗帕酮治疗组255例。胺碘酮与普罗帕酮转复房颤效果的合并OR值为1.26,95%可信区间为0.83～1.91,P>0.05。结论胺碘酮与普罗帕酮转复房颤的效果没有差异。

Systematic review of comparative study on the efficacy of amiodarone versus propafenone for the conversion of atrial fibrillation

Objective To provide evidence for the clinic use of amiodarone and propafenone through investigating the efficacy of amiodarone versus propafenone for the conversion of atrial fibrillation. Method The Cochrane library（ Issue 3, 2008） , PubMed, EMBASE, Chinese Biomedical Database and China National Knowledge Interact were searched. The literature comparing the efficacy of amiodarone versus propafenone for the conversion of atrial fibrillation, which were published between January 2000 and June 2008, were included. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.0 software. Results Five randomized controlled trails （RCT） were identified. The amiodarone and propafenone cases were 262 and 255, respectively. The pooled odds ratio （ OR ） values and 95% confidence interval were 1.26,0.83 - 1.91 respectively, P 〉 0.05. Conclusions There is no significant difference between the efficacy of amiodarone and that of propafenone for the conversion of atrial fibrillation.