Key result
Digoxin shows neutral mortality in sinus-rhythm HFrEF but increases mortality in AF.
Why the study?
The role and safety of digoxin in patients with systolic congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and post myocardial infarction remain uncertain due to conflicting data from retrospective analyses.
Does digoxin affect overall mortality in patients with atrial fibrillation, systolic heart failure, or post-myocardial infarction?
Systematic Review
Does digoxin affect overall mortality in patients with atrial fibrillation, systolic heart failure, or post-myocardial infarction?
Supports avoiding digoxin in atrial fibrillation; confirms neutral mortality effect in systolic heart failure with sinus rhythm.
AIM: To review digoxin use in systolic congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and after myocardial infarction. METHODS: A comprehensive PubMed search was performed using the key words "digoxin and congestive heart failure", "digoxin and atrial fibrillation", "digoxin, atrial fibrillation and systolic congestive heart failure", and "digoxin and myocardial infarction". Only articles written in English were included in this study. We retained studies originating from randomized controlled trials, registries and included at least 500 patients. The studies included patients with atrial fibrillation or heart failure or myocardial infarction and had a significant proportion of patients (at least 5%) on digoxin. A table reviewing the different hazard ratios was developed based on the articles selected. Our primary endpoint was the overall mortality in the patients on digoxin vs those without digoxin, among patients with atrial fibrillation and also among patients with atrial fibrillation and systolic heart failure. We reviewed the most recent international guidelines to discuss current recommendations. RESULTS: A total of 18 studies were found that evaluated digoxin and overall mortality in different clinical settings including systolic congestive heart failure and normal sinus rhythm (n = 5), atrial fibrillation with and without systolic congestive heart failure (n = 9), and myocardial infarction (n = 4). Overall, patients with systolic congestive heart failure with normal sinus rhythm, digoxin appears to have a neutral effect on mortality especially if close digoxin level monitoring is employed. However, most of the observational studies evaluating digoxin use in atrial fibrillation without systolic congestive heart failure showed an increase in overall mortality when taking digoxin. In the studies evaluated in this systematic review, the data among patients with atrial fibrillation and systolic congestive heart failure, as well as post myocardial infarction were more controversial. The extent to which discrepancies among studies are based on statistical methods is currently unclear, as these studies' findings are generated by retrospective analyses that employed different techniques to address confounding. CONCLUSION: Based on the potential risks and benefits, as well as the presence of alternative drugs, there is a limited role for digoxin in the management of patients with normal sinus rhythm and congestive heart failure. Based on the retrospective studies reviewed there is a growing volume of data showing increased mortality in those with only atrial fibrillation. The proper role of digoxin is, however, less certain in other subgroups of patients, such as those with both atrial fibrillation and systolic congestive heart failure or after a myocardial infarction. Further studies may provide helpful information for such subgroups of patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sebastiano Virgadamo (2015) conducted a systematic review in Atrial fibrillation, congestive heart failure, and post myocardial infarction. Digoxin vs. No digoxin was evaluated on Overall mortality. In a systematic review of 18 studies, digoxin had a neutral effect on mortality in systolic heart failure with normal sinus rhythm but increased mortality in atrial fibrillation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: