Skip to main content
Download PDF

Redefining outcomes of ventricular arrhythmia for SGLT2 inhibitor medication in heart failure patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Systematic Reviews volume 14, Article number: 31 (2025) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have been shown to lower the risk of re-hospitalization and cardiovascular mortality among heart failure (HF) patients. Nevertheless, the impact of these agents on ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) has not been thoroughly investigated. To assess the beneficial impact of SGLT2 inhibitors on VAs in patients at various stages of HF, a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials involving SGLT2 inhibitors in this patient population was performed.

Methods

A comprehensive search of the PubMed, Embase, Ovid, ProQuest, Scopus, and Cochrane databases was performed for clinical trials published up to November 21, 2024. The primary outcomes of interest were incidences of VAs and sudden cardiac death (SCD) between the groups receiving SGLT2 inhibitors and the control drugs. For the outcomes observed in the populations of the included trials and in specific subgroups, hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled and meta-analysed across the analyses.

Results

A total of 23 randomized trials (22 placebo-controlled trials and 1 active-controlled trial) involving 74,380 patients (37,372 receiving SGLT2 inhibitors and 37,008 in the control group) were included. The analysed SGLT2 inhibitors included canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, empagliflozin, bexagliflozin, sotagliflozin, and ertugliflozin. The participants were non-advanced HF patients, including at-risk for HF, pre-HF, and symptomatic HF, with follow-up duration ranging from 12 to 296 weeks. Compared with the control, treatment with SGLT2 inhibitors was associated with significantly reduced risk of VAs (risk ratio (RR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74–0.98; P = 0.02) and SCD (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.64–0.98; P = 0.03). Subgroup analyses indicated that longer follow-up (≥ 1 year) taking SGLT2 inhibitors can still reduce the risk of VAs (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65–0.96; P = 0.02) and SCD (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.65–0.99; P = 0.04).

Conclusion

SGLT2 inhibitors have beneficial effects on lowering risks of VAs and SCD in patients with type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), and heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF), with longer follow-up duration reinforcing these findings. However, future prospective trials are needed to verify the effects of SGLT2 inhibitors on VAs and SCD.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO (CRD42024601914)

Highlights

1. Redefine outcomes of ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) and sudden cardiac death (SCD) for SGLT2 inhibitor medication in heart failure patients.

2. SGLT2 inhibitors lower the risks of VAs and SCD in patients at various stages of HF, excluding advanced HF.

3. Longer therapeutic effects were associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of VAs and SCD.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Heart failure (HF) is a growing health and economic burden worldwide, with its prevalence increasing to 1–3% in the general adult population, with high mortality and substantial annual healthcare costs per patient [1]. According to the AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure, HF is categorized into four distinct stages: at-risk for HF (Stage A), pre-HF (Stage B), symptomatic HF (Stage C), and advanced HF (Stage D) [2]. In the guideline, sodium‐glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors were recommended at different stages of HF, including Stage A patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and cardiovascular disease (CVD) or high risks for CVD and Stage C patients of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), or heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) [2].

SGLT2 inhibitors are a class of anti-hyperglycemic drugs that include empagliflozin, dapagliflozin, canagliflozin, sotagliflozin, and ertugliflozin, all of which are currently available in the clinic. SGLT2 is located in segment 1 of the proximal renal tubules and contributes to the re-absorption of approximately 90% of the glucose filtered by the kidney [3]. Inhibition of this transporter leads to a reduction in glucose re-absorption by the kidney and an increase in glucose excretion in the urine [4]. Although these agents are initially designed to lower plasma glucose levels, several studies have demonstrated their protective effects on the prognosis of HF patients, regardless of diabetes status, indicating that their benefits extend beyond mere blood glucose control [5,6,7].

It is widely known that ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) are associated with high mortality in HF patients and HF can increase the occurrence of VAs [8, 9]. In addition to VAs, sudden cardiac death (SCD) is also a major cause of death in HF patients, with the majority of SCD cases attributed to VAs [8, 10]. However, conclusions regarding the effects of SGLT2 inhibitors on VAs/SCD remain contentious due to variations in inclusion criteria across studies. Several meta-analyses have shown a reduction in ventricular tachycardia following SGLT2 inhibitor treatment, although these findings did not reach statistical significance [11,12,13,14]. Recent studies have shown that SGLT2 inhibitors are effective in addressing HF-induced VAs, necessitating a systematic evaluation of their effects [15, 16]. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate whether SGLT2 inhibitor medication can lead to a reduction in VAs among individuals at various stages of non-advanced HF, including T2DM and CVD or high risks for CVD, HFrEF, HFpEF, and HFmrEF.

Methods

Protocol and registration

The protocol for this meta-analysis was registered in advance with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42024601914).

Search strategy

This meta-analysis was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A systematic literature search of relevant randomized clinical trials was conducted across multiple databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, ProQuest, Scopus, Ovid, and ClinicalTrials.gov, with a cut-off date of November 21, 2024. PubMed is frequently used in biomedicine, offering extensive literature in biomedical and life sciences. Embase, a biomedical and pharmacology database by Elsevier, focuses on drug information and research. Cochrane Library offers high-quality healthcare info, including systematic reviews, clinical trials, and decision support, suitable for evidence-based medicine. Web of Science, a comprehensive citation database, provides impact and trend insights into research literature. ProQuest offers academic resources like journal articles, dissertations, and conference papers. Scopus, a large citation and abstract database by Elsevier, covers science, technology, and medicine. Ovid is a comprehensive online information and literature search platform integrating multiple databases, including MEDLINE and EMBASE. ClinicalTrials.gov provides clinical trial registration and results, crucial for trial transparency and integrity. Searching these databases enhances meta-analysis quality and reliability, ensuring scientific and objective research outcomes.

Both published and unpublished randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were reviewed via the search strategy outlined in eTable 3 in the Supplement. No language restrictions were applied. Additionally, the references listed in the identified studies were carefully checked to ensure that no additional studies were omitted.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Eligible RCTs were required to meet the following criteria: (i) patients aged 18 years or older with various stages of HF; (ii) a comparative analysis between SGLT2 inhibitors and either a placebo or an active control; and (iii) the reporting of relevant outcomes of interest. RCTs focused on type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM), or advanced HF were excluded. Trial eligibility was confirmed by two independent reviewers (M.L. and L.Z.), and discrepancies between reviewers were resolved by consensus or, if necessary, by a third investigator (X.F.).

Outcomes of interest

The outcomes of interest were reported as serious adverse events according to the Medical Dictionary for Drug Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) to reduce potential bias. The specific outcomes examined included the incidence of various forms of VAs and SCD. In this meta-analysis, VAs included ventricular tachycardia, ventricular fibrillation, ventricular flutter, ventricular extrasystole, ventricular asystole, Brugada syndrome, and Torsades de Pointes, and the detailed definition of SCD is presented in eTable 1. Additionally, subgroup analyses were conducted to compare the effects of SGLT2 inhibitor treatment across different drug types and lengths of follow-up.

Data extraction and quality assessment

Two reviewers (M.L. and L.Z.) independently extracted the data via a standard form that included the following items: (i) characteristics of the studies, sample size, study design, and follow-up duration; (ii) baseline characteristics of the study population; and (iii) interventions, comparisons, and outcomes of interest. Study quality was evaluated via the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool, a process carried out by both M.L. and L.Z. Any discrepancies during this evaluation were resolved through consensus or adjudication by a third author (X. F.).

Statistical analysis

We used pooled relative risks (RRs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to present the incidence of SCD or VAs. The assessment of heterogeneity was assessed via the Cochran Q test statistic and Higgins and Thompson I. For the Q test, a P value of 50% indicated at least moderate heterogeneity. If significant heterogeneity was detected, we used the random-effects (RE) model; otherwise, the fixed-effects (FE) model was applied when heterogeneity was not significant. The analysis was conducted with the Review Manager (RevMan, version 5.3; Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014).

Results

Characteristics of eligible studies

A total of 11,795 records were identified, of which 23 RCTs [17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39] met inclusion criteria in this meta-analysis, comprising a cumulative sample size of 74,380 participants (37,008 patients treated with SGLT2 inhibitors and 37,372 control subjects) (Fig. 1). The baseline characteristics of the included studies and participants were summarized in Table 1. Among the 23 published trials reviewed, 22 were placebo-controlled, while the left one was active-controlled (with glimepiride). These trials were categorized by specific types of SGLT2 inhibitors, with seven trials focusing on empagliflozin, five trials on canagliflozin, six trials on dapagliflozin, two on ertugliflozin, one on bexagliflozin, and two on sotagliflozin. Fourteen RCTs reported SCD, and 22 reported VAs. A summary of the specific events of interest reported in the included trials can be found in eTable 1. The mean age of the participants ranged from 63 to 71.9 years old, and the percentage of males ranged from 43.2 to 92.7%, with a median follow-up period spanning from 12 to 296 weeks.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Flow diagram for study identification and inclusion

Full size image
Table 1 Baseline characteristics of patients included in each study
Full size table

The quality assessment results are presented in eTable 2. Most RCTs were considered high methodological quality. One trial had an open-label design, given the well-defined diagnostic criteria, clear protocol, and well-executed methodology, we considered it to have a low risk of performance bias [28]. Two trials reported minor imbalances in baseline characteristics between the empagliflozin and placebo groups [30, 37]. Since these imbalances were minor, we also deemed these two trials to be at low risk of performance bias. In another study, the percentage of participants who discontinued treatment due to serious events exceeded 20%, indicating a high risk of attrition bias [22]. Nonetheless, the included patients who discontinued follow-up were limited and the percentage of patients who lost follow-up was less than 5%, the characteristics of the included two groups’ patients are balanced. Consequently, we assessed this trial as having a low risk of performance bias as well.

Incidence of ventricular arrhythmias

VAs events were reported in 22 RCTs, 21 of which involved comparisons between SGLT2 inhibitors and placebo [17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27, 29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36, 38, 39], whereas one trial compared SGLT2 inhibitors with an active control [28]. 277 patients receiving SGLT2 inhibitors experienced VAs (n = 37,274), whereas 320 individuals in the control group experienced VAs (n = 36,689). The aggregated results indicated that SGLT2 inhibitor therapy was associated with a lower risk of VAs than the control (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.74–0.98; P = 0.02) (Fig. 2A).

Fig. 2
figure 2

Efficacy of SGLT-2 inhibitors in reducing the incidence of ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death. A VAs; B SCD

Full size image

In the subgroup analysis by specific SGLT2 inhibitor type, canagliflozin (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.34–1.20; P = 0.16), sotagliflozin (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.39–1.57; P = 0.49), dapagliflozin (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.71–1.15; P = 0.39), ertugliflozin (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.44–1.81; P = 0.75) and empagliflozin (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.50–1.11; P = 0.15) showed no significant reduction in risk of VAs compared with the control group (Fig. 3A). To evaluate the effect of compliance of SGLT2 inhibitor treatment on VAs incidence, subgroup analysis for follow-up duration was conducted and results showed that longer follow-up durations (≥ 1 year; RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65–0.96; P = 0.02) significantly reduced the incidence of VAs compared to shorter durations (< 1 year) (Fig. 3B). These findings suggested that a longer therapeutic effect was associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of VAs. All analyses performed above revealed low heterogeneity. The results of the funnel plot with Begg’s and Egger’s tests showed no significant publication bias (eFig. 1).

Fig. 3
figure 3

Subgroup analysis of the effects of various drugs and durations on the efficacy of SGLT-2 inhibitors in reducing the incidence of ventricular arrhythmias. A Effects of different sodium‒glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors on the incidence of ventricular arrhythmias. B The duration of pharmacotherapy influences the effectiveness of SGLT2 inhibitors in reducing the incidence of ventricular arrhythmias

Full size image

Incidence of sudden cardiac death

Fourteen RCTs reported SCD events, with one trial taking glimepiride as an active placebo in the control arm [28] and the remaining studies using placebo in the control arm [20,21,22, 25, 26, 29,30,31,32, 34, 35, 37, 39]. Among the total 360 SCD events, 159 occurred in the SGLT2 inhibitor group (n = 36,172), and 201 occurred in the placebo group (n = 35,814). After pooling the data from these 14 trials, a significantly reduced SCD risk was identified for SGLT2 inhibitor therapy compared to placebo, with RR of 0.79 and 95% CI of 0.64–0.98 (P = 0.03) (Fig. 2B). However, the subgroup analysis based on drug type revealed inconsistent results relative to the overall effect: empagliflozin (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.47–1.12; P = 0.15), canagliflozin (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.52–1.16; P = 0.22), sotagliflozin (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.65–2.36; P = 0.51), and dapagliflozin (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.52–1.02; P = 0.06) (Fig. 4A).

Fig. 4
figure 4

Subgroup analysis of various drugs and treatment durations on the efficacy of SGLT2 inhibitors in mitigating the occurrence of sudden cardiac death. A Differential effects of various SGLT2 inhibitors on the rates of sudden cardiac death. B The duration of pharmacotherapy influences the effectiveness of SGLT2 inhibitors in reducing the incidence of sudden cardiac death

Full size image

In terms of the impact of the follow-up period on SCD incidence, a shorter duration (< 1 year, RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.27–1.64; P = 0.38) did not significantly affect SCD incidence. Conversely, a longer duration (≥ 1 year, RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.65–0.99; P = 0.04) was associated with a lower SCD incidence (Fig. 4B). All the pooled results above presented low heterogeneity across the studies. Additionally, a visual inspection of the funnel plot with Begg’s and Egger’s tests showed no significant publication bias (eFig. 2).

Discussion

In this meta-analysis of 23 trials involving 74,380 patients at different stages of HF, we observed that overall, therapy with SGLT2 inhibitors was associated with a lower risk of SCD and VAs in patients with non-advanced HF, differing from the findings of several previous studies demonstrating no relativity [11,12,13,14]. Notably, within the subgroup for a longer follow-up duration (> 1 year) of SGLT2 inhibitor therapy, a significant reduction in the incidence of reported VAs and SCD events remains.

The anti-arrhythmic effects of SGLT2 inhibitors have also gained attention. In the EMBODY trial, heart rate variability and turbulence indicators of cardiac sympathetic and parasympathetic nerve activities were improved in the empagliflozin group compared with the placebo group. Such improvements in autonomic nerve activity can lead to a decreased incidence of VAs [40]. Additionally, dapagliflozin has been shown to benefit patients with T2DM and HFrEF by reducing the burden of ventricular ectopic beats, decreasing heart rate variability, and reducing the heterogeneity of ventricular repolarization [41, 42]. Furthermore, another study reported that SGLT2 inhibitor treatment could significantly attenuate the burden of inflammation and reduce composite cardiac outcomes, VAs included, in patients with T2DM [43].

Studies on the direct association between SGLT2 inhibitor treatment and VAs have also been explored as in the EMPA-ICD and the ERASE trials investigated the effects of empagliflozin on VAs in T2DM and HF patients, respectively. These two trials revealed that empagliflozin significantly reduced VAs occurrence in T2DM or/and HF patients with an ICD/CRT-D [17, 18]. With the device implantation, these trials directly showed that SGLT2 inhibitors reduced the occurrence of VAs from the recordings by ICD/CRT-D. However, these trials have limited enrolled patients. Further large clinical trials need to be conducted to investigate the direct effects of SGLT2 inhibitors on VAs and SCD in HF patients. On the other side, meta-analysis provides an alternative way to study the association between SGLT2 inhibitor treatment and arrhythmia in a real world and large population way. One meta-analysis reported that SGLT2 inhibitors were associated with a lower rate of ventricular tachycardia in HF, T2DM, and chronic kidney disease (CKD) patient populations. However, it was limited to only seven studies [44]. Another meta-analysis of randomized trials in HF, T2DM, and chronic CKD patients suggested that SGLT2 inhibitor treatment was not associated with the incidence of VAs [11,12,13,14]. With the update of clinical guidelines, we included patients at Stages A, B, and C of HF, and excluded studies involving patients with advanced HF, defined by severe and persistent symptoms of HF (NYHA class IV) [2]. By extending the inclusion of participants ranging across different stages of HF, we found that SGLT2 inhibitor treatment was associated with a 19% risk reduction in VAs, agreeing with other clinical studies suggested that SGLT2 inhibitor treatment may significantly attenuate VAs, though encompassed as part of composite cardiac outcomes [45, 46].

VA is a major cause of SCD [47]. Investigating the association between SGLT2 inhibitors and SCD can also help explore the anti-arrhythmic properties of these pharmacological agents. A meta-analysis indicated that SGLT2 inhibitor therapy was associated with a significantly lower risk of SCD in patients with HF receiving conventional treatments [48]. Additionally, another meta-analysis revealed that SGLT2 inhibitors are linked to a significant decrease in the incidence of SCD in patients with T2DM [11]. Although some meta-analyses suggested that the relationship between SGLT2 inhibitors and SCD is not significant [12, 49], our results supported the SGLT2 inhibitor treatment significantly reduced the risk of SCD to various stages of HF patients, which in accordance with the EMPA-REG OUTCOME study revealed that empagliflozin significantly reduced cardiovascular death, including SCD [50].

Currently, there is a lack of extensive clinical trials specifically examining the anti-arrhythmic effects of SGLT2 inhibitors via a comparative analysis of arrhythmic incidence prior to and following SGLT2 inhibitor treatment. As SGLT2 inhibitor drugs have gained increasing attention for their cardio-protective properties, some ongoing clinical trials are investigating the impact of SGLT2 inhibitors on VAs and SCD. Some studies have designated VAs/SCD as one of their endpoints; however, these studies are currently in various stages of participant recruitment or are not yet recruiting. The ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers of these trials include NCT03271879, NCT06124937, NCT04117763, NCT05550441, and NCT03977116. With these trials complete, the association between SGLT2 inhibitor treatment and the occurrence of VAs/SCD will be clearer.

As previously noted, the discrepancies observed in various meta-analyses regarding the effect of SGLT2 inhibitors on VAs or SCD could be due to varied inclusion criteria. Our meta-analysis specifically paid more attention to patients at high risk of HF, defined by a history of T2DM lasting 10 years or more and a systolic blood pressure > 140 mmHg (average of 3 readings) recorded during the screening visits. These high-risk factors for HF correspond to Stage A: at-risk for HF. The Stages B and C of HF patients were also included in this meta-analysis. We excluded patients with advanced HF. Consequently, these novel eligibility criteria employed in our study resulted in different patient characteristics compared with those of previous studies, leading to our findings showing that SGLT2 inhibitor treatment could effectively reduce the incidence of VAs and SCD in non-advanced HF patients. Furthermore, the low event recordings of VAs and SCD may lead to an inaccurate estimation of the real incidence, as VAs/SCD were not designated primary or secondary outcomes in the studies reviewed. All included clinical trials reported VAs as appendages in adverse events and by regular 12-lead electrocardiogram measurements. This method of monitoring contributes to an underestimation of VAs events. Thus, the frequency and duration of VAs events among different patients remain largely unknown. Future clinical trials should consider employing alternative rhythm monitoring techniques, such as cardiac implantable devices, and should prioritize the assessment of VAs as either a primary or secondary outcome to elucidate the interaction between SGLT2 inhibitor treatment and VAs.

In addition to these clinical studies and meta-analyses, preclinical studies have investigated the underlying mechanisms of the anti-arrhythmic effects of SGLT2 inhibitors. Firstly, SGLT2 inhibitor treatment can attenuate prolonged action potential duration, which is achieved by modulating various ion currents involved in each phase of the action potential under pathological conditions. Specifically, SGLT2 inhibitor treatment can mitigate the increased late sodium current (INa,L) by modifying the states of cardiac sodium channels in both diabetic and HF models [51,52,53]. Additionally, these inhibitors can reduce the increased activity of Na+/H+ exchangers (NHEs) in the cardiomyocytes of failing hearts [52, 54], leading to alleviation of intracellular Na+ accumulation and subsequent cytoplasmic Ca2+ overload, as well as mitochondrial Ca2+ depletion. Furthermore, SGLT2 inhibitors can modulate the activity/phosphorylation of calcium/calmodulin-dependent protein kinase II (CaMKII) to regulate RyR2 and sarcoplasmic reticulum calcium ATPase (SERCA)/PLN, resulting in increased Ca2+ reuptake and decreased Ca2+ leakage from the sarcoplasmic reticulum (SR), thereby reducing VAs [51, 55]. Moreover, SGLT2 inhibitors have been shown to restore mitochondrial calcium homeostasis in HF, avoiding adversely affecting the regeneration of nicotinamide‐adenine dinucleotide, compromising the antioxidant system and subsequently reducing the incidence of VAs [56, 57]. Secondly, SGLT2 inhibitors such as dapagliflozin can attenuate the increased sympathetic nerve activities observed in HF model [58] . In failing hearts, the activation of neural hormone pathways can lead to abnormal electrical automaticity and exacerbate HF. Additionally, SGLT2 inhibitors such as dapagliflozin reduce inflammation in models of HF and diabetes [59, 60]. Finally, the promotion of osmotic diuresis and natriuresis to alleviate cardiac load and improve left ventricular function alterations in hemodynamic and metabolic parameters (such as ketone bodies) to protect against myocardial remodelling, reduction in epicardial adipose tissue may also count [61, 62].

Limitations

This meta-analysis has several limitations. First, accurately estimating the incidence of SCD and VAs is challenging due to diverse definitions, and some qualified studies were excluded because SCD or VA events were unidentified from the comprehensive safety events. Additionally, subgroup analysis has insignificant results due to the limited clinical publications. Second, the types of VA included in the analysis varied, potentially resulting in the omission of certain specific VA types. The lack of ECG monitoring, such as the use of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), may under-report the number of SCD and VA events. Third, the distribution of patients across different stages of HF was not uniform, with a few studies possibly including patients with advanced HF. Finally, some trials investigating VAs and SCD as primary or secondary outcomes are currently ongoing.

Conclusions

SGLT2 inhibitor therapy was associated with an overall lower risk of VAs and SCD in patients with non-advanced HF, including T2DM, CVD, HFrEF, HFpEF, and HFmrEF. Besides, a long treatment duration (> 1 year) has also exhibited a consistent reduction of VAs and SCD occurrence. However, further prospective studies with large populations, including advanced HF and longer follow-up periods, are needed before definitive conclusions can be reached.

Data availability

The data used in this review were extracted from published studies, and the original data could be obtained by searching databases. Other data supporting the results of this review are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  1. Savarese G, Becher PM, Lund LH, et al. Global burden of heart failure: a comprehensive and updated review of epidemiology. Cardiovasc Res. 2023;118(17):3272–87. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1093/cvr/cvac013.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Heidenreich PA, Bozkurt B, Aguilar D, et al. 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA guideline for the management of heart failure: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2022;145(18):e895–1032. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1161/CIR.0000000000001063.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Wright EM, Loo DDF, Hirayama BA. Biology of human sodium glucose transporters. Physiol Rev. 2011;91(2):733–94. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1152/physrev.00055.2009.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Zelniker TA, Braunwald E. Mechanisms of cardiorenal effects of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors: JACC state-of-the-art review. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;75(4):422–34. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.jacc.2019.11.031.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Inzucchi SE, Kosiborod M, Fitchett D, et al. Improvement in cardiovascular outcomes with empagliflozin is independent of glycemic control. Circulation. 2018;138(17):1904–7. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1161/circulationaha.118.035759.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. McMurray JJV, Solomon SD, Inzucchi SE, et al. Dapagliflozin in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. New Engl J Med. 2019;381(21):1995–2008. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1056/NEJMoa1911303.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Packer M, Anker SD, Butler J, et al. Cardiovascular and renal outcomes with empagliflozin in heart failure. Ne Engl J Med. 2020;383(15):1413–24. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1056/NEJMoa2022190.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Lip GY, Heinzel FR, Gaita F, et al. European Heart Rhythm Association/Heart Failure Association joint consensus document on arrhythmias in heart failure, endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society. Europace. 2016;18(1):12–36. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1093/europace/euv191.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Podrid PJ, Fogel RI, Fuchs TT. Ventricular arrhythmia in congestive heart failure. American journal of cardiology. 1992;69(18):82G-95G; discussion 95G-96G. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/0002-9149(92)91257-5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Watanabe E, Tanabe T, Osaka M, et al. Sudden cardiac arrest recorded during Holter monitoring: prevalence, antecedent electrical events, and outcomes. Heart Rhythm. 2014;11(8):1418–25. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.hrthm.2014.04.036.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Fernandes GC, Fernandes A, Cardoso R, et al. Association of SGLT2 inhibitors with arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death in patients with type 2 diabetes or heart failure: a meta-analysis of 34 randomized controlled trials. Heart Rhythm. 2021;18(7):1098–105. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.hrthm.2021.03.028.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sfairopoulos D, Zhang N, Wang Y, et al. Association between sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors and risk of sudden cardiac death or ventricular arrhythmias: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Europace. 2022;24(1):20–30. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1093/europace/euab177.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Yin Z, Zheng H, Guo Z. Effect of sodium-glucose co-transporter protein 2 inhibitors on arrhythmia in heart failure patients with or without type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022;9: 902923. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3389/fcvm.2022.902923.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Scheen AJ. Glucose-lowering agents and risk of ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death: a comprehensive review ranging from sulphonylureas to SGLT2 inhibitors. Diabetes Metab. 2022;48(6): 101405. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.diabet.2022.101405.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Fawzy AM, Rivera-Caravaca JM, Underhill P, Fauchier L, Lip GYH. Incident heart failure, arrhythmias and cardiovascular outcomes with sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor use in patients with diabetes: insights from a global federated electronic medical record database. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2023;25(2):602–10. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1111/dom.14854.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Curtain JP, Docherty KF, Jhund PS, et al. Effect of dapagliflozin on ventricular arrhythmias, resuscitated cardiac arrest, or sudden death in DAPA-HF. Euro Heart J. 2021;42(36):3727–38. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1093/eurheartj/ehab560.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Fujiki S, Iijima K, Nakagawa Y, et al. Effect of empagliflozin on ventricular arrhythmias in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: the EMPA-ICD trial. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2024;23(1):224. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s12933-024-02309-9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Benedikt M, Oulhaj A, Rohrer U, et al. Ertugliflozin to reduce arrhythmic burden in patients with ICDs/CRT-Ds. NEJM evidence. 2024;3(10):EVIDoa2400147. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1056/EVIDoa2400147.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. McMurray JJV, Docherty KF, de Boer RA, et al. Effect of dapagliflozin versus placebo on symptoms and 6-minute walk distance in patients with heart failure: the DETERMINE randomized clinical trials. Circulation. 2024;149(11):825–38. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1161/circulationaha.123.065061.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Solomon SD, McMurray JJV, Claggett B, et al. Dapagliflozin in heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction. N Engl J Med. 2022;387(12):1089–98. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1056/NEJMoa2206286.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Spertus JA, Birmingham MC, Nassif M, et al. The SGLT2 inhibitor canagliflozin in heart failure: the CHIEF-HF remote, patient-centered randomized trial. Nat Med. 2022;28(4):809–13. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1038/s41591-022-01703-8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Anker SD, Butler J, Filippatos G, et al. Empagliflozin in heart failure with a preserved ejection fraction. N Engl J Med. 2021;385(16):1451–61. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1056/NEJMoa2107038.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Nassif ME, Windsor SL, Borlaug BA, et al. The SGLT2 inhibitor dapagliflozin in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a multicenter randomized trial. Nat Med. 2021;27(11):1954–60. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1038/s41591-021-01536-x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Nassif ME, Qintar M, Windsor SL, et al. Empagliflozin effects on pulmonary artery pressure in patients with heart failure: results from the EMBRACE-HF trial. Circulation. 2021;143(17):1673–86. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1161/circulationaha.120.052503.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Bhatt DL, Szarek M, Steg PG, et al. Sotagliflozin in patients with diabetes and recent worsening heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(2):117–28. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1056/NEJMoa2030183.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Bhatt DL, Szarek M, Pitt B, et al. Sotagliflozin in patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(2):129–39. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1056/NEJMoa2030186.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Santos-Gallego CG, Vargas-Delgado AP, Requena-Ibanez JA, et al. Randomized trial of empagliflozin in nondiabetic patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021;77(3):243–55. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.jacc.2020.11.008.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Tanaka A, Hisauchi I, Taguchi I, et al. Effects of canagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes and chronic heart failure: a randomized trial (CANDLE). ESC Heart Failure. 2020;7(4):1585–94. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1002/ehf2.12707.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Zelniker TA, Bonaca MP, Furtado RHM, et al. Effect of dapagliflozin on atrial fibrillation in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: insights from the DECLARE-TIMI 58 trial. Circulation. 2020;141(15):1227–34. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1161/circulationaha.119.044183.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. McMurray JJV, Freeman MW, Massaro JO, et al. 32-OR: the Bexagliflozin Efficacy and Safety Trial (BEST): a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase IIII, clinical trial. Diabetes. 2020;69(Supplement_1). https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.2337/db20-32-OR.

  31. Cannon CP, Pratley R, Dagogo-Jack S, et al. Cardiovascular outcomes with ertugliflozin in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(15):1425–35. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1056/NEJMoa2004967.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Perkovic V, Jardine MJ, Neal B, et al. Canagliflozin and renal outcomes in type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. N Engl J Med. 2019;380(24):2295–306. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1056/NEJMoa1811744.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Verma S, Mazer CD, Yan AT, et al. Effect of empagliflozin on left ventricular mass in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease: the EMPA-HEART CardioLink-6 randomized clinical trial. Circulation. 2019;140(21):1693–702. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1161/circulationaha.119.042375.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Neal B, Perkovic V, Mahaffey KW, et al. Canagliflozin and cardiovascular and renal events in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(7):644–57. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1056/NEJMoa1611925.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Zinman B, Wanner C, Lachin JM, et al. Empagliflozin, cardiovascular outcomes, and mortality in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(22):2117–28. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1056/NEJMoa1504720.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Leiter LA, Cefalu WT, de Bruin TW, et al. Dapagliflozin added to usual care in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus with preexisting cardiovascular disease: a 24-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study with a 28-week extension. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2014;62(7):1252–62. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1111/jgs.12881.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Barnett AH, Mithal A, Manassie J, et al. Efficacy and safety of empagliflozin added to existing antidiabetes treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2014;2(5):369–84. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/s2213-8587(13)70208-0.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Yale JF, Bakris G, Cariou B, et al. Efficacy and safety of canagliflozin in subjects with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2013;15(5):463–73. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1111/dom.12090.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. McMurray JJV, Solomon SD, Inzucchi SE, et al. Dapagliflozin in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. N Engl J Med. 2019;381(21):1995–2008. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1056/NEJMoa1911303.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Shimizu W, Kubota Y, Hoshika Y, et al. Effects of empagliflozin versus placebo on cardiac sympathetic activity in acute myocardial infarction patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: the EMBODY trial. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2020;19(1):148. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s12933-020-01127-z.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Ilyas F, Jones L, Tee SL, et al. Acute pleiotropic effects of dapagliflozin in type 2 diabetic patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: a crossover trial. ESC heart failure. 2021;8(5):4346–52. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1002/ehf2.13553.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Nakase M, Yahagi K, Horiuchi Y, et al. Effect of dapagliflozin on ventricular repolarization in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Heart Vessels. 2023;38(12):1414–21. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1007/s00380-023-02298-x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Sardu C, Massetti M, Testa N, et al. Effects of Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors (SGLT2-I) in patients with Ischemic Heart Disease (IHD) treated by coronary artery bypass grafting via MiECC: inflammatory burden, and clinical outcomes at 5 years of follow-up. Front Pharmacol. 2021;12: 777083. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3389/fphar.2021.777083.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Li HL, Lip GYH, Feng Q, et al. Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and cardiac arrhythmias: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2021;20(1):100. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s12933-021-01293-8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Chen HY, Huang JY, Siao WZ, Jong GP. The association between SGLT2 inhibitors and new-onset arrhythmias: a nationwide population-based longitudinal cohort study. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2020;19(1):73. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s12933-020-01048-x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Jhuo SJ, Lin TH, Lin YH, et al. Clinical observation of SGLT2 inhibitor therapy for cardiac arrhythmia and related cardiovascular disease in diabetic patients with controlled hypertension. J Pers Med. 2022;12(2): 271. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3390/jpm12020271.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Zeppenfeld K, Tfelt-Hansen J, de Riva M, et al. 2022 ESC guidelines for the management of patients with ventricular arrhythmias and the prevention of sudden cardiac death. Euro Heart J. 2022;43(40):3997–4126. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1093/eurheartj/ehac262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Oates CP, Santos-Gallego CG, Smith A, et al. SGLT2 inhibitors reduce sudden cardiac death risk in heart failure: Meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2023;34(5):1277–85. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1111/jce.15894.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Liao J, Ebrahimi R, Ling Z, et al. Effect of SGLT-2 inhibitors on arrhythmia events: insight from an updated secondary analysis of > 80,000 patients (the SGLT2i-arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death). Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2024;23(1):78. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s12933-024-02137-x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Fischereder M, Schönermarck U. Empagliflozin, cardiovascular outcomes, and mortality in type 2 diabetes. New Engl J Med. 2016;374(11):1092–3. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1056/NEJMc1600827.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Wen Q, Zhang R, Ye K, et al. Empagliflozin rescues pro-arrhythmic and Ca(2+) homeostatic effects of transverse aortic constriction in intact murine hearts. Sci Rep. 2024;14(1):15683. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1038/s41598-024-66098-7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Lee TI, Chen YC, Lin YK, et al. Empagliflozin attenuates myocardial sodium and calcium dysregulation and reverses cardiac remodeling in streptozotocin-induced diabetic rats. Int J Mol Sci. 2019;20(7). https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3390/ijms20071680.

  53. Philippaert K, Kalyaanamoorthy S, Fatehi M, et al. Cardiac late sodium channel current is a molecular target for the sodium/glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor empagliflozin. Circulation. 2021;143(22):2188–204. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1161/circulationaha.121.053350.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Baartscheer A, Schumacher CA, Wüst RC, et al. Empagliflozin decreases myocardial cytoplasmic Na(+) through inhibition of the cardiac Na(+)/H(+) exchanger in rats and rabbits. Diabetologia. 2017;60(3):568–73. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1007/s00125-016-4134-x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Mustroph J, Wagemann O, Lücht CM, et al. Empagliflozin reduces Ca/calmodulin-dependent kinase II activity in isolated ventricular cardiomyocytes. ESC heart failure. 2018;5(4):642–8. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1002/ehf2.12336.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Bode D, Semmler L, Wakula P, et al. Dual SGLT-1 and SGLT-2 inhibition improves left atrial dysfunction in HFpEF. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2021;20(1):7. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s12933-020-01208-z.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Kohlhaas M, Liu T, Knopp A, et al. Elevated cytosolic Na+ increases mitochondrial formation of reactive oxygen species in failing cardiac myocytes. Circulation. 2010;121(14):1606–13. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1161/circulationaha.109.914911.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Zhang N, Feng B, Ma X, et al. Dapagliflozin improves left ventricular remodeling and aorta sympathetic tone in a pig model of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2019;18(1):107. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s12933-019-0914-1.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. Arow M, Waldman M, Yadin D, et al. Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor dapagliflozin attenuates diabetic cardiomyopathy. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2020;19(1):7. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s12933-019-0980-4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Byrne NJ, Matsumura N, Maayah ZH, et al. Empagliflozin blunts worsening cardiac dysfunction associated with reduced NLRP3 (nucleotide-binding domain-like receptor protein 3) inflammasome activation in heart failure. Circ Heart Fail. 2020;13(1): e006277. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1161/circheartfailure.119.006277.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Jhuo SJ, Liu IH, Tsai WC, et al. Effects of secretome from fat tissues on ion currents of cardiomyocyte modulated by sodium-glucose transporter 2 inhibitor. Molecules (Basel). 2020;25(16). https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.3390/molecules25163606.

  62. Sato T, Aizawa Y, Yuasa S, et al. The effect of dapagliflozin treatment on epicardial adipose tissue volume. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2018;17(1):6. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s12933-017-0658-8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to gratefully acknowledge all the investigators who participated in this work.

Funding

This work was supported by the Sichuan Science and Technology Program (2024YFFK0180 to Dr. Ou, 2024JDHJ0051 to Dr. Tan), Sichuan Education Department Project (17ZA0434 to Dr. Ou), Luzhou Science and Technology Bureau (2023RCX174 and LY-63 to Dr. Ou), National Natural Science Foundation of China (81900300 to Dr. Wen), Collaborative Innovation Center for Prevention and Treatment of Cardiovascular Disease of Sichuan Province (xtcx-2016–10 to Dr. Fan), and Ph.D. Programs Foundation of the Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University (2016-QB-25 to Dr. Fan).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Miao Lin, Shiyu Zhang and Lu Zhang contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Key Laboratory of Medical Electrophysiology of the Ministry of Education, Medical Electrophysiological Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Institute of Cardiovascular Research, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China

    Miao Lin, Shiyu Zhang, Yang Luo, Yajin Peng, Xiaoqiu Tan & Xianhong Ou

  2. Department of Cardiology, The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China

    Lu Zhang, Chengying Yang, Xinrong Fan & Xianhong Ou

  3. School of Basic Medical Sciences, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, 646000, China

    Xiaoqiu Tan

  4. Department of Cardiology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China

    Qiang Wen

  5. State Key Laboratory for Chemistry and Molecular Engineering of Medicinal Resources, School of Chemistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Guangxi Normal University, Guilin, China

    Xianhong Ou

Authors
  1. Miao Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shiyu Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lu Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  4. Chengying Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yang Luo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yajin Peng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  7. Xiaoqiu Tan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  8. Qiang Wen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  9. Xinrong Fan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  10. Xianhong Ou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

XO, XF and QW contributed to the study concept and design. ML, LZ and SZ conducted the meta-analysis, interpreted the data, and drafted the manuscript. ML, CY, YP, and YL were responsible for the literature search, data collection, and quality assessment. XO, XF, XT, and QW contributed to the verification and supervision. All the authors critically revised the manuscript for important intellectual content and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Qiang Wen, Xinrong Fan or Xianhong Ou.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

All the authors provided consent for publication.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

13643_2025_2766_MOESM1_ESM.docx

Supplementary Material 1. eTable 1. Number of patients with SCD or ventricular arrhythmias. eTable 2. Risk of bias assessment. eTable 3. Search strategy. eFigure 1. Funnel plot of meta-analysis for incidence of ventricular arrhythmias. eFigure 2. Funnel plot of meta-analysis for incidence of sudden death.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lin, M., Zhang, S., Zhang, L. et al. Redefining outcomes of ventricular arrhythmia for SGLT2 inhibitor medication in heart failure patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Syst Rev 14, 31 (2025). https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s13643-025-02766-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s13643-025-02766-7

Keywords

Systematic Reviews

ISSN: 2046-4053