SORA

Advancing, promoting and sharing knowledge of health through excellence in teaching, clinical practice and research into the prevention and treatment of illness

Dronedarone versus sotalol in patients with atrial fibrillation: A systematic literature review and network meta-analysis.

Singh, JP; Blomström-Lundqvist, C; Turakhia, MP; Camm, AJ; Fazeli, MS; Kreidieh, B; Crotty, C; Kowey, PR (2023) Dronedarone versus sotalol in patients with atrial fibrillation: A systematic literature review and network meta-analysis. Clin Cardiol, 46 (6). pp. 589-597. ISSN 1932-8737 https://doi.org/10.1002/clc.24011
SGUL Authors: Camm, Alan John

[img]
Preview
PDF Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (1MB) | Preview
[img] Microsoft Word (.docx) (Supporting information) Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (139kB)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There are limited comparative data on safety and efficacy within commonly used Vaughan-Williams (VW) class III antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) for maintenance of sinus rhythm in adults with atrial fibrillation (AF). HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that dronedarone and sotalol, two commonly prescribed VW class III AADs with class II properties, have different safety and efficacy effects in patients with nonpermanent AF. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted searching MEDLINE®, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) up to June 15, 2021 (NCT05279833). Clinical trials and observational studies that evaluated safety and efficacy of dronedarone or sotalol in adults with AF were included. Bayesian random-effects network meta-analysis (NMA) was used to quantify comparative safety and efficacy. Where feasible, we performed sensitivity analyses by including only randomized controlled trials (RCTs). RESULTS: Of 3581 records identified through database searches, 37 unique studies (23 RCTs, 13 observational studies, and 1 nonrandomized trial) were included in the NMA. Dronedarone was associated with a statistically significantly lower risk of all-cause death versus sotalol (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.38 [95% credible interval, CrI: 0.19, 0.74]). The association was numerically similar in the sensitivity analysis (HR = 0.46 [95% CrI: 0.21, 1.02]). AF recurrence and cardiovascular death results were not significantly different between dronedarone and sotalol in all-studies and sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: The NMA findings indicate that, across all clinical trials and observational studies included, dronedarone compared with sotalol was associated with a lower risk of all-cause death, but with no difference in AF recurrence.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: © 2023 The Authors. Clinical Cardiology published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Keywords: antiarrhythmia agents, atrial fibrillation, dronedarone, network meta-analysis, sotalol, systematic review, antiarrhythmia agents, atrial fibrillation, dronedarone, network meta-analysis, sotalol, systematic review, 1102 Cardiorespiratory Medicine and Haematology, Cardiovascular System & Hematology
SGUL Research Institute / Research Centre: Academic Structure > Molecular and Clinical Sciences Research Institute (MCS)
Journal or Publication Title: Clin Cardiol
ISSN: 1932-8737
Dates:
DateEvent
15 June 2023Published
6 April 2023Published Online
17 February 2023Accepted
Publisher License: Creative Commons: Attribution 4.0
PubMed ID: 37025083
Web of Science ID: WOS:000894947902673
Go to PubMed abstract
URI: https://openaccess.sgul.ac.uk/id/eprint/115408
Publisher's version: https://doi.org/10.1002/clc.24011

Actions (login required)

Edit Item Edit Item