TY - JOUR
T1 - Oxygen Therapy in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction
T2 - A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis
AU - Abuzaid, Ahmed
AU - Fabrizio, Carly
AU - Felpel, Kevin
AU - Al Ashry, Haitham S.
AU - Ranjan, Pragya
AU - Elbadawi, Ayman
AU - Mohamed, Ahmed H.
AU - Barssoum, Kirolos
AU - Elgendy, Islam Y.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2018/6
Y1 - 2018/6
N2 - Objective: Oxygen therapy is frequently used for patients with acute myocardial infarction. The aim of this study is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the outcomes of oxygen therapy versus no oxygen therapy in post–acute myocardial infarction settings. Methods: A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted for randomized studies, which reported cardiovascular events in oxygen versus no oxygen therapy. The evaluated outcomes were all-cause mortality, recurrent coronary events (ischemia or myocardial infarction), heart failure, and arrhythmias. Summary-adjusted risk ratios (RRs) were calculated by the random effects DerSimonian and Laird model. The risk of bias of the included studies was assessed by Cochrane scale. Results: Our meta-analysis included a total of 7 studies with 3842 patients who received oxygen therapy and 3860 patients without oxygen therapy. Oxygen therapy did not decrease the risk of all-cause mortality (pooled RR, 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81-1.21; P =.43), recurrent ischemia or myocardial infarction (pooled RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.95-1.48; P =.75), heart failure (pooled RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.61-1.45; P =.348), and occurrence of arrhythmia events (pooled RR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.85-1.2; P =.233) compared with the no oxygen arm. Conclusions: This meta-analysis confirms the lack of benefit of routine oxygen therapy in patients with acute myocardial infarction with normal oxygen saturation levels.
AB - Objective: Oxygen therapy is frequently used for patients with acute myocardial infarction. The aim of this study is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the outcomes of oxygen therapy versus no oxygen therapy in post–acute myocardial infarction settings. Methods: A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted for randomized studies, which reported cardiovascular events in oxygen versus no oxygen therapy. The evaluated outcomes were all-cause mortality, recurrent coronary events (ischemia or myocardial infarction), heart failure, and arrhythmias. Summary-adjusted risk ratios (RRs) were calculated by the random effects DerSimonian and Laird model. The risk of bias of the included studies was assessed by Cochrane scale. Results: Our meta-analysis included a total of 7 studies with 3842 patients who received oxygen therapy and 3860 patients without oxygen therapy. Oxygen therapy did not decrease the risk of all-cause mortality (pooled RR, 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81-1.21; P =.43), recurrent ischemia or myocardial infarction (pooled RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.95-1.48; P =.75), heart failure (pooled RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.61-1.45; P =.348), and occurrence of arrhythmia events (pooled RR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.85-1.2; P =.233) compared with the no oxygen arm. Conclusions: This meta-analysis confirms the lack of benefit of routine oxygen therapy in patients with acute myocardial infarction with normal oxygen saturation levels.
KW - Coronary artery disease
KW - Myocardial infarction
KW - Oxygen
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85042878739
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85042878739#tab=citedBy
U2 - 10.1016/j.amjmed.2017.12.027
DO - 10.1016/j.amjmed.2017.12.027
M3 - Article
C2 - 29355510
AN - SCOPUS:85042878739
SN - 0002-9343
VL - 131
SP - 693
EP - 701
JO - American Journal of Medicine
JF - American Journal of Medicine
IS - 6
ER -