| Title |
Colchicine for Prevention of Post-Operative Atrial Fibrillation A Meta-Analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
JACC: Clinical Electrophysiology, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jacep.2015.09.016 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Justin Z. Lee, Nirmal Singh, Carol L. Howe, See-Wei Low, Jennifer J. Huang, Gilbert Ortega, Kwan S. Lee, Anil Pandit |
| Abstract |
This study sought to investigate the efficacy and safety of colchicine for prevention of post-operative atrial fibrillation. Proinflammatory processes induced during cardiac surgery may contribute toward post-operative atrial fibrillation (AF). Colchicine is a potent anti-inflammatory agent, which may have a role in post-operative AF prevention. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Library databases for randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing colchicine versus placebo for prevention of post-operative AF. The main outcome measure of interest was the development of AF within 12 months after cardiac surgery. The overall risk ratio (RR) for the development of post-operative AF was computed using a random-effects model. Data analyzed from 3 randomized studies with a total of 912 patients, where 457 patients received colchicine and 455 patients received placebo, showed that perioperative colchicine therapy was associated with a reduced incidence of post-operative AF (RR: 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.46 to 0.91; p < 0.01). Although colchicine therapy was associated with increased incidence of gastrointestinal intolerance (RR: 2.20; 95% CI: 1.31 to 3.70; p = 0.003), it was not associated with early treatment discontinuation (RR: 1.37; 95% CI: 0.95 to 1.96; p = 0.09). In conclusion, current evidence suggests that colchicine therapy is efficacious for the prevention of post-operative AF, and may be considered as adjunctive prophylaxis. Further studies may be required to determine the optimal treatment protocol to reduce the incidence of gastrointestinal intolerance. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 52 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 10% |
| Librarian | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Researcher | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 13 | 25% |
| Unknown | 17 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 48% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 19 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 November 2019.
All research outputs
#14,914,476
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from JACC: Clinical Electrophysiology
#1,269
of 1,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#139,892
of 294,333 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC: Clinical Electrophysiology
#26
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.9. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 294,333 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.