Evidence Hub

Comparing the clinical outcomes across different sodium/glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors in heart failure patients: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Yao H. Teo, C. Yoong, N. L. Syn, Y. Teo, Jia Yang Alex Cheong, Y. Lim, Chi-Hang Lee, T. Yeo et al.

European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 2021

15,373 participants · 14 citations

Abstract

PURPOSE: Empagliflozin, dapagliflozin, canagliflozin, and ertugliflozin have been shown in randomized controlled trials to improve cardiovascular, metabolic, and renal outcomes in heart failure patients. To date, there has not been any meta-analysis examining the differences in clinical outcomes across different SGLT2 inhibitors in heart failure patients.

METHODS: Four electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, SCOPUS) were searched on 13 September 2020 for articles published from 1 January 2000 to 13 September 2020 examining the effect of SGLT2 inhibitors on cardiovascular, renal, and metabolic outcomes in heart failure patients. Frequentist network meta-analysis was performed on extracted data.

RESULTS: Ten randomized controlled trials were included with a combined cohort of 15,373 patients. In heart failure patients, frequentist network meta-analysis demonstrated no demonstrable difference in treatment effect across the SGLT2 inhibitors for heart failure hospitalization, cardiovascular deaths, composite of cardiovascular deaths and heart failure hospitalizations, all-cause mortality, and a composite of cardiovascular deaths and non-fatal myocardial infarction and non-fatal stroke. There was no demonstrable difference in treatment effect for worsening renal function or the weighted mean difference for weight, hemoglobin A1c, and systolic blood pressure.

CONCLUSIONS: There were no demonstrable treatment differences across SGLT2 inhibitors across cardiovascular, renal,…

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: 15,373 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