Cardiovascular benefits of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with heart failure: a meta-analysis of small and large randomized controlled trials

• Published in: American journal of cardiovascular disease 2021-01, Vol.11 (3), p.262-272
• Main Authors: Shoar, Saeed, Shah, Ahmed Ali, Ikram, Waleed, Farooq, Najam, Udoh, Agnes, Tabibzadeh, Elsa, Khavandi, Soheila, Khavandi, Siamak
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Original
• ISSN: 2160-200X; 2160-200X

BACKGROUNDSodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have shown promise in improving cardiovascular outcome in patients with heart failure (HF) and diabetes mellitus (DM). Although these benefits have been confirmed by several meta-analyses, small studies have not been included into these pooled analyses. AIMPublication of recent RCTs prompted us to perform this updated meta-analysis to examine the consistency of favorable cardiovascular outcomes of SGLT2 inhibitors in HF patients by inclusion of clinical trials with small sample size. METHODSWe conducted a systematic review of the literature in PubMed/Medline and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify all RCTs investigating the benefits of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with HF. The primary endpoint of this meta-analysis was to compare the cardiovascular death (CVD) and hospitalization for HF (HHF) between patients who received an SGLT2 inhibitor and those who received a placebo or a non-SGLT2 inhibitor. We used a risk difference (RD) and log hazard ratio (HR) to pool the reported difference across the included RCTs. RESULTSA total of 12 RCTs encompassing 59,825 patients at different stages of HF and DM were included, 32,448 patients in the SGLT2 inhibitor group and 27,377 patients in the control group. A pooled analysis of RCTs, regardless of HF severity or DM status, showed a significantly reduced RD for CVD (RD =-0.01, 95% CI [-0.01, 0.00], P=0.01) and HHF (RD =-0.02, 95% CI [-0.03, -0.01], P=0.0005) in patients who received a SGLT2 inhibitor compared to those who did not. A sub-group analysis showed a significantly reduced RD for CVD (RD =-0.01, 95% CI [-0.02, 0.00], P=0.03) and HHF (RD =-0.02, 95% CI [-0.03, 0.00], P=0.01) in patients with DM who received SGLT2 inhibitors regardless of the severity of HF. Also, regardless of DM status, RD for HHF favored the use of SGLT2 inhibitor than the control medication (RD =-0.05, 95% CI [-0.06, -0.03], P