4.6 Article

Effects of Coenzyme Q10 on Statin-Induced Myopathy: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

期刊

MAYO CLINIC PROCEEDINGS
卷 90, 期 1, 页码 24-34

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2014.08.021

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10) supplementation on statin-induced myopathy. Participants and Methods: We searched the MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and EMBASE databases (November 1, 1987, to May 1, 2014) to identify randomized controlled trials investigating the impact of CoQ10 on muscle pain and plasma creatine kinase (CK) activity as 2 measures of statin-induced myalgia. Two independent reviewers extracted data on study characteristics, methods, and outcomes. Results: We included 6 studies with 302 patients receiving statin therapy: 5 studies with 226 participants evaluated the effect of CoQ10 supplementation on plasma CK activity, and 5 studies (4 used in the CK analysis and 1 other study) with 253 participants were included to assess the effect of CoQ10 supplementation on muscle pain. Compared with the control group, plasma CK activity was increased after CoQ10 supplementation, but this change was not significant (mean difference, 11.69 U/L [to convert to mkat/L, multiply by 0.0167]; 95% CI, -14.25 to 37.63 U/L; P=.38). Likewise, CoQ10 supplementation had no significant effect on muscle pain despite a trend toward a decrease (standardized mean difference, -0.53; 95% CI, -1.33 to 0.28; P=.20). No dose-effect association between changes in plasma CK activity (slope, -0.001; 95% CI, -0.004 to 0.001; P=.33) or in the indices of muscle pain (slope, 0.002; 95% CI, -0.005 to 0.010; P=.67) and administered doses of CoQ10 were observed. Conclusion: The results of this meta-analysis of available randomized controlled trials do not suggest any significant benefit of CoQ10 supplementation in improving statin-induced myopathy. Larger, well-designed trials are necessary to confirm the findings from this meta-analysis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据