PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
December 1, 1989Archives of Internal Medicine244 citations

Meta-analytic Evidence Against Prophylactic Use of Lidocaine in Acute Myocardial Infarction

View Full Paper
LHLouis K. Hine

Key Result

Prophylactic lidocaine administered during the hospital phase of acute myocardial infarction significantly increased mortality (risk difference 0.029; 95% CI +0.004 to +0.055).

Study Design

Type

Meta-Analysis (n=9,063)

Structured PICO

Does lidocaine prophylaxis reduce mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction?

P
Population
9,063 patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) pooled from 14 RCTs (6 prehospital-phase RCTs with n=7,656 and 8 hospital-phase RCTs with n=1,407)
I
Intervention
Lidocaine prophylaxis
C
Comparator
Control group (as defined in the included RCTs)
O
Outcome
Mortalityhard clinical

Prophylactic lidocaine in acute myocardial infarction does not reduce mortality and may increase it when administered in the hospital phase.

Main Result

Effect estimate: Risk difference 0.029 (hospital phase) (95% CI +0.004 to +0.055)

Abstract

Although lidocaine prophylaxis reduces the incidence of ventricular fibrillation during acute myocardial infarction (AMI), randomized control trials (RCTs) have not demonstrated any significant mortality effect of this therapy. We conducted a meta-analysis of 14 RCTs of lidocaine prophylaxis during AMI to detect any mortality effect. Six prehospital- and eight hospital-phase RCTs that randomized totals of 7656 and 1407 patients, respectively, were selected and reviewed in a blinded fashion. Mortality data were evaluated according to therapy type, reporting interval, and patient category. The prehospital-phase RCTs showed no meaningful mortality effect (risk difference, 0.0184; 95% confidence interval, -0.048 to +0.012). The hospital-phase RCTs showed a statistically significant increase in mortality during the treatment period for lidocaine recipients (risk difference, 0.029; 95% confidence interval, +0.004 to +0.055). These results confirm that lidocaine administered to monitored patients during the prehospital phase of AMI will not reduce mortality by a clinically important amount and suggest that lidocaine administered in the hospital phase of monitored, uncomplicated AMI may increase mortality among recipients with proved AMI.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Louis K. Hine (1989) conducted a meta-analysis in Acute Myocardial Infarction (n=9,063). Lidocaine prophylaxis vs. Control was evaluated on Mortality (Risk difference 0.029 (hospital phase), 95% CI +0.004 to +0.055). Prophylactic lidocaine administered during the hospital phase of acute myocardial infarction significantly increased mortality (risk difference 0.029; 95% CI +0.004 to +0.055).

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a09773687ad1657d25159d3https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.1989.00390120056011
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper