4.2 Review

Efficacy and Safety of L-Carnitine Treatment for Chronic Heart Failure: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

期刊

BIOMED RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL
卷 2017, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

HINDAWI LTD
DOI: 10.1155/2017/6274854

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81673753, 81373625]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Whether additional benefit can be achieved with the use of L-carnitine (L-C) in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) remains controversial. We therefore performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the effects of L-C treatment in CHF patients. Methods. Pubmed, Ovid Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) database, Wanfang database, Chinese Biomedical (CBM) database, and Chinese Science and Technology Periodicals database (VIP) until September 30, 2016, were identified. Studies that met the inclusion criteria were systematically evaluated by two reviewers independently. Results. 17 RCTs with 1625 CHF patients were included in this analysis. L-C treatment in CHF was associated with considerable improvement in overall efficacy (OR = 3.47, P < 0.01), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (WMD: 4.14%, P = 0.01), strike volume (SV) (WMD: 8.21 ml, P = 0.01), cardiac output (CO) (WMD: 0.88 L/min, P < 0.01), and E/A (WMD: 0.23, P < 0.01). Moreover, treatment with L-C also resulted in significant decrease in serum levels of BNP (WMD: -124.60 pg/ml, P = 0.01), serum levels of NT-proBNP (WMD: -510.36 pg/ml, P < 0.01), LVESD (WMD: -4.06 mm, P < 0.01), LVEDD (WMD: -4.79 mm, P < 0.01), and LVESV (WMD: -20.16ml, 95% CI: -35.65 to -4.67, P < 0.01). However, there were no significant differences in all-cause mortality, 6-minute walk, and adverse events between L-C and control groups. Conclusions. L-C treatment is effective for CHF patients in improving clinical symptoms and cardiac functions, decreasing serum levels of BNP and NT-proBNP. And it has a good tolerance.

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

4.2
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