Efficacy and Safety of Intravenous Diltiazem Versus Metoprolol in the Management of Atrial Fibrillation with Rapid Ventricular Response in the Emergency Department: A Comprehensive Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses

Figures

• 

  Figure 1:. Rate control success. The figure illustrates the results of a comprehensive analysis comparing the rate control success at different time intervals between intravenous diltiazem and intravenous metoprolol in patients with atrial fibrillation and rapid ventricular response. The analysis indicates significantly greater rate control success with intravenous diltiazem, which was most evident at 30 min. Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; IV, inverse variance; SE, standard error.

• 

  Figure 2:. Ventricular rate reduction. This figure presents a comprehensive analysis comparing the reduction in ventricular rate at various time intervals between intravenous diltiazem and intravenous metoprolol in patients with acute atrial fibrillation. The analysis reveals a significantly greater reduction in ventricular rate with intravenous diltiazem, with the greatest reduction occurring at 10 min. Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; IV, inverse variance; MD, mean difference; SE, standard error.

• 

  Figure 3:. Hypotension. This figure illustrates the comprehensive analysis of hypotension incidence, comparing intravenous diltiazem and intravenous metoprolol in acute atrial fibrillation. The analysis reveals a significantly higher risk of hypotension associated with intravenous diltiazem treatment compared to intravenous metoprolol. Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; IV, inverse variance; RR, risk ratio; SE, standard error.

• 

  Supplementary Figure S1:. Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment for individual randomized controlled trials.

• 

  Supplementary Figure S2:. Funnel plots. A: Rate control success at 10 min. B: Rate control success at 60 min. The funnel plots showed no risk of publication bias. Abbreviation: Std Error, standard error.