Arturo Giordano1,2, Mariangela Peruzzi3, Antonino G M Marullo3, Giacomo Frati3,4, Sebastiano Sciarretta3,4, Giovanni Napolitano5, Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai6,7. 1. Unità Operativa di Interventistica Cardiovascolare, Presidio Ospedaliero Pineta Grande, Castel Volturno, Italy. 2. Unità Operativa di Emodinamica, Casa di Salute Santa Lucia, San Giuseppe Vesuviano, Italy. 3. Department of Medico-Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Sapienza University of Rome, Corso della Repubblica 79, 04100, Latina, Italy. 4. Department of AngioCardioNeurology, IRCCS Neuromed, Pozzilli, Italy. 5. Cardiology and Coronary Care Unit, Presidio Ospedaliero S. Giuliano, ASL Napoli 2 Nord, Giugliano, Italy. 6. Department of Medico-Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Sapienza University of Rome, Corso della Repubblica 79, 04100, Latina, Italy. giuseppe.biondizoccai@uniroma1.it. 7. Department of AngioCardioNeurology, IRCCS Neuromed, Pozzilli, Italy. giuseppe.biondizoccai@uniroma1.it.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The management of atherosclerosis requires a complex integration of the knowledge on its pathophysiology, patient values, and the synthesis of the global scientific evidence informing on its prevention and treatment. Novel statistical methods such as umbrella reviews and network meta-analyses (NMAs) offer a unique opportunity for integrating different sources of evidence stemming from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or internally valid observational studies. We aimed to provide an updated perspective on the most important contributions of recent network meta-analyses on atherosclerosis prevention and treatment. RECENT FINDINGS: We identified and appraised in detail 9 NMAs on atherosclerosis prevention, all published in 2016, whereas a total of 12 NMAs on atherosclerosis treatment published between 2014 and 2016 were identified. Most NMAs focused on RCTs only, with primary prevention analyses including on average more trials and patients than those focusing on secondary prevention. In most cases, conclusive findings for clinically relevant outcomes could be provided. Yet, several inconclusive findings were reported, suggesting thus that NMAs can also guide new research by emphasizing where new evidence is most needed. NMAs provide a unique opportunity for poignant synthesis of high-quality evidence. In particular, they seem particularly promising when the evidence base has reached a sufficient level of maturity, and several competing interventions require comprehensive and comparative risk-benefit appraisal.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The management of atherosclerosis requires a complex integration of the knowledge on its pathophysiology, patient values, and the synthesis of the global scientific evidence informing on its prevention and treatment. Novel statistical methods such as umbrella reviews and network meta-analyses (NMAs) offer a unique opportunity for integrating different sources of evidence stemming from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or internally valid observational studies. We aimed to provide an updated perspective on the most important contributions of recent network meta-analyses on atherosclerosis prevention and treatment. RECENT FINDINGS: We identified and appraised in detail 9 NMAs on atherosclerosis prevention, all published in 2016, whereas a total of 12 NMAs on atherosclerosis treatment published between 2014 and 2016 were identified. Most NMAs focused on RCTs only, with primary prevention analyses including on average more trials and patients than those focusing on secondary prevention. In most cases, conclusive findings for clinically relevant outcomes could be provided. Yet, several inconclusive findings were reported, suggesting thus that NMAs can also guide new research by emphasizing where new evidence is most needed. NMAs provide a unique opportunity for poignant synthesis of high-quality evidence. In particular, they seem particularly promising when the evidence base has reached a sufficient level of maturity, and several competing interventions require comprehensive and comparative risk-benefit appraisal.
Authors: Thibault Lhermusier; Michael J Lipinski; Udaya S Tantry; Ricardo O Escarcega; Nevin Baker; Kevin P Bliden; Marco A Magalhaes; Hideaki Ota; Wenjie Tian; Lakshmana Pendyala; Saar Minha; Fang Chen; Rebecca Torguson; Paul A Gurbel; Ron Waksman Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2015-01-06 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Giuseppe G L Biondi-Zoccai; Antonio Abbate; Giovanna Liuzzo; Luigi M Biasucci Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2003-04-02 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Asim M Rafique; Piyush Nayyar; Tracy Y Wang; Roxana Mehran; Usman Baber; Peter B Berger; Jonathan Tobis; Jesse Currier; Ravi H Dave; Timothy D Henry Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2016-05-23 Impact factor: 11.195
Authors: Felix H Zakirov; Dongwei Zhang; Andrey V Grechko; Wei-Kai Wu; Anastasia V Poznyak; Alexander N Orekhov Journal: Pharmacol Res Perspect Date: 2020-04