Evidence Hub

Efficacy and Safety of Stellate Ganglion Block for Treating Angina Pectoris: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Wei Y, Xiong J, Li X, Ling F, Zhao Y, Sun Y, Yao J, Hu J et al.

Cardiovascular therapeutics, 2025

373 participants · 8 citations

Abstract

Purpose: This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is aimed at assessing the clinical efficacy and safety of stellate ganglion block (SGB) for angina pectoris (AP). Methods: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Science and Technology Journal Database, and Wanfang databases were comprehensively searched for RCTs investigating SGB treatment for AP. The retrieval time was from the establishment date of each database to October 10, 2024. The Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool was used to determine the methodological quality. Review Manager 5.4 software was employed for data analysis, and GRADEpro GDT software was utilized to evaluate the quality of evidence. Results: Ultimately, six RCTs were included, encompassing 373 patients with angina. The overall methodological quality of the included studies was moderate, with the evaluation of evidence quality showing 12 low-quality and five extremely low-quality studies. The meta-analysis results demonstrated that compared with the control group, the experimental group had lower frequency and duration of AP, visual analog scale score, heart rate, detection rate of S-T segment elevation ≥ 0.1 mV on electrocardiogram (ECG) after 24 h of treatment, detection rate of abnormal T waves on ECG after 24 h of treatment, and S-T segment displacement on ECG after treatment. Furthermore, the experimental group exhibited lower serum Cardiac…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 373 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free