Comparison the efficacy of amiodarone and lidocaine for cardiac arrest: A network meta-analysis.
Medicine · 2023-04-14 · Meta-analysis
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is no evidence that antiarrhythmic drugs can improve long-term survival or survival with favorable neurological outcomes in cardiac arrest patients. We did this network meta-analysis to comprehensively compare the efficacy of various antiarrhythmic drugs for cardiac arrest patients. METHODS: We searched studies from inception until Nov 11, 2022 through PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP Database, and Wanfang database. All studies comparing different antiarrhythmic drugs for cardiac arrest were included in this meta-analysis. Outcomes were survival to hospital discharge in cardiac arrest, survival to hospital admission/24 h and favorable neurological outcome. This network meta-analysis was performed by R software. RESULTS: Finally, a total of 9 studies (10,980 patients) were finally included in this network meta-analysis. Amiodarone (odd ratio [OR] 2.28, 95% credibility interval [CrI] 1.61-3.27) and lidocaine (OR 1.53, 95% CrI 1.05-2.25) was superior than placebo in terms of the survival to hospital admission/24 h with statistically significant. Amiodarone (OR 2.19, 95% CrI 1.54-3.14) and lidocaine (OR 1.58, 95% CrI 1.09-2.32) was superior than placebo in terms of the survival to hospital discharge with statistically significant. Amiodarone (OR 2.43, 95% CrI 1.61-3.68) and lidocaine (OR 1.62, 95% CrI 1.04-2.53) was superior than placebo in terms of the favorable neurological outcome with statistically significant. The surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) shows that amiodarone ranked first (SUCRA, 99.6%), lidocaine ranked second (SUCRA, 49.6%), placebo ranked the last (SUCRA, 0.86%). Inverted funnel plot is essentially symmetrical, it is possible that this study has a small sample effect or a small publication bias. CONCLUSIONS: Amiodarone had the best effect on both survival to hospital admission, discharge and more favorable neurological outcome. Thus, amiodarone should be listed as first line drug for cardiac arrest. However, the quality of available evidence limits the formation of powerful conclusions regarding the comparative efficacy or safety of amiodarone or lidocaine used to treat cardiac arrest. Higher-quality randomized controlled trials are required for further research in future.
Abstract © the authors or publisher, via PubMed. Reuse and removal
Tags
Amiodarone · Anaesthetics · Cardiovascular drugs · Lidocaine · Mortality & survival · Quality of life & function
Related articles
- Comparative Effectiveness of Amiodarone Versus Lidocaine as Antiarrhythmic Therapy for Cardiac Arrest with Shockable Rhythms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. (J Clin Med, 2026)
- Canadian Cardiovascular Society/Canadian Cardiovascular Critical Care Society/Canadian Association of Interventional Cardiology Clinical Practice Update on Optimal Post Cardiac Arrest and Refractory Cardiac Arrest Patient Care. (Can J Cardiol, 2024)
- Effect of amiodarone and lidocaine on shock-refractory cardiac arrest: a systematic review and meta-analysis. (Kardiol Pol, 2020)
- Amiodarone and/or lidocaine for cardiac arrest: A Bayesian network meta-analysis. (Am J Emerg Med, 2020)
- Comparative effectiveness of antiarrhythmics for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. (Resuscitation, 2017)
- Antiarrhythmics in Cardiac Arrest: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. (Heart Lung Circ, 2018)