-
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2021The prevalence rate of hypertension and breast cancer increases with advancing age. Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASIs), β-blockers (BBs), calcium channel...
The prevalence rate of hypertension and breast cancer increases with advancing age. Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASIs), β-blockers (BBs), calcium channel blockers (CCBs), and diuretics are widely used to treat patients with hypertension. Although, the association between the use of antihypertensive medication and breast cancer has been highly debated, recent evidence supporting this association remains controversial. To evaluate the association between the use of antihypertensive medication and the risk of breast cancer and its prognosis. This study was conducted using data from the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases retrieved for the period from January 2000 to April 2021. Articles and their references were checked and summary effects were calculated using random- and fixed-effects models. Heterogeneity test and sensitivity analysis were also performed. This meta-analysis included 57 articles, which were all related to breast cancer risk or prognosis. Assessment of breast cancer risk using the pooled data showed that the use of BBs or CCBs or diuretics was associated with increased cancer risk [BB: relative risk (RR) = 1.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.09-1.32; CCBs: RR = 1.06, 95% CI 1.03-1.08; diuretics: RR = 1.06, 95% CI 1.01-1.11]. Long-term use of diuretic increased the risk of breast cancer (RR = 1.10, 95% CI 1.01-1.20), whereas long-term RASIs treatment reduced the risk (RR = 0.78, 95% CI 0.68-0.91). In addition, we found that diuretic users may be related to elevated breast cancer-specific mortality [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.18, 95% CI 1.04-1.33], whereas using other antihypertensive medications was not associated with this prognosis in patients with breast cancer. Using CCBs, BBs, and diuretics increased the risk of breast cancer. In addition, diuretics may elevate the risk of breast cancer-specific mortality. The long-term use of RASIs was associated with a significantly lower breast cancer risk, compared with non-users. Thus, this analysis provides evidence to support the benefits of the routine use of RASIs in patients with hypertension, which has important public health implications.
PubMed: 34054514
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2021.609901 -
Cureus Jun 2023The purpose of the present systematic review was to synthesize evidence on associated risk factors of hearing loss (HL) in children. Evidence-based research articles on... (Review)
Review
The purpose of the present systematic review was to synthesize evidence on associated risk factors of hearing loss (HL) in children. Evidence-based research articles on HL published between January 2013 and December 2022 using PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus databases were searched. The study included children between zero and three years of age who have permanent bilateral/unilateral HL (BHL/UHL) by employing case-control studies, randomized controlled trials, nonrandomized studies, prospective or retrospective cohort studies, and studies with or without comparison groups. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal checklist for longitudinal and cross-sectional studies were used to rate the quality of the chosen studies. The studies that would be considered were reviewed by two independent authors, and a third author was contacted if there was a dispute. A preliminary literature search uncovered 505 articles from the electronic search and 41 studies by hand searching. Duplicate records were eliminated, leaving 432 records. The abstract and title were read, and 340 studies were eliminated. There were 92 articles in total that qualified for full-text screening. Among these, 75 articles were disregarded since they lacked information or failed to assess the risk factors for HL. The qualitative synthesis, therefore, included 17 articles. Most often, cross-sectional study designs were used in the studies that were reviewed, which were then followed by longitudinal studies. Three of the studies that were reviewed used a prospective cohort design. The quality of all the included studies was rated to be good. The current review revealed that the primary statistically significant risk factors for HL included ventilator support; craniofacial anomalies; low birth weight (LBW); forceps delivery; loop diuretics; meningitis; asphyxia; intensive care; consanguinity; sepsis; Apgar scores between 0 and 4 at one minute; toxoplasmosis, other agents, rubella, cytomegalovirus, and herpes (TORCH) infections; and hyperbilirubinemia.
PubMed: 37456446
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.40464 -
Pharmacology Research & Perspectives Oct 2022The misattribution of an adverse drug reaction (ADR) as a symptom or illness can lead to the prescribing of additional medication, referred to as a prescribing cascade....
The misattribution of an adverse drug reaction (ADR) as a symptom or illness can lead to the prescribing of additional medication, referred to as a prescribing cascade. The aim of this systematic review is to identify published prescribing cascades in community-dwelling adults. A systematic review was reported in line with the PRISMA guidelines and pre-registered with PROSPERO. Electronic databases (Medline [Ovid], EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Library) and grey literature sources were searched. Inclusion criteria: community-dwelling adults; risk-prescription medication; outcomes-initiation of new medicine to "treat" or reduce ADR risk; study type-cohort, cross-sectional, case-control, and case-series studies. Title/abstract screening, full-text screening, data extraction, and methodological quality assessment were conducted independently in duplicate. A narrative synthesis was conducted. A total of 101 studies (reported in 103 publications) were included. Study sample sizes ranged from 126 to 11 593 989 participants and 15 studies examined older adults specifically (≥60 years). Seventy-eight of 101 studies reported a potential prescribing cascade including calcium channel blockers to loop diuretic (n = 5), amiodarone to levothyroxine (n = 5), inhaled corticosteroid to topical antifungal (n = 4), antipsychotic to anti-Parkinson drug (n = 4), and acetylcholinesterase inhibitor to urinary incontinence drugs (n = 4). Identified prescribing cascades occurred within three months to one year following initial medication. Methodological quality varied across included studies. Prescribing cascades occur for a broad range of medications. ADRs should be included in the differential diagnosis for patients presenting with new symptoms, particularly older adults and those who started a new medication in the preceding 12 months.
Topics: Acetylcholinesterase; Aged; Antifungal Agents; Antipsychotic Agents; Calcium Channel Blockers; Cholinesterase Inhibitors; Cross-Sectional Studies; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Humans; Independent Living; Sodium Potassium Chloride Symporter Inhibitors; Thyroxine
PubMed: 36123967
DOI: 10.1002/prp2.1008 -
Frontiers in Endocrinology 2024Previous studies have established that diabetes mellitus (DM) markedly raises the risk of developing erectile dysfunction (ED). Despite extensive investigations, the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Previous studies have established that diabetes mellitus (DM) markedly raises the risk of developing erectile dysfunction (ED). Despite extensive investigations, the risk factors associated with ED in diabetic men have yet to be unequivocally determined, owing to incongruent and inconclusive results reported in various studies.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the risk factors for ED in men with DM.
METHODS
A comprehensive systematic review was conducted, encompassing studies published in the PubMed, Scopus and Embase databases up to August 24th, 2023. All studies examining the risk factors of ED in patients with DM were included in the analysis. To identify significant variations among the risk factors, odds ratios (ORs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were employed. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale(NOS) for longitudinal studies and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Scale(AHRQ) for cross-sectional studies.
RESULTS
A total of 58 studies, including a substantial participant pool of 66,925 individuals diagnosed with DM, both with or without ED, were included in the meta-analysis. Mean age (OR: 1.31, 95% CI=1.24-1.37), smoking status (OR: 1.32, 95% CI=1.18-1.47), HbA1C (OR: 1.44, 95% CI=1.28-1.62), duration of DM (OR: 1.39, 95% CI=1.29-1.50), diabetic neuropathy (OR: 3.47, 95% CI=2.16-5.56), diabetic retinopathy (OR: 3.01, 95% CI=2.02-4.48), diabetic foot (OR: 3.96, 95% CI=2.87-5.47), cardiovascular disease (OR: 1.92, 95% CI=1.71-2.16), hypertension (OR: 1.74, 95% CI=1.52-2.00), microvascular disease (OR: 2.14, 95% CI=1.61-2.85), vascular disease (OR: 2.75, 95% CI=2.35-3.21), nephropathy (OR: 2.67, 95% CI=2.06-3.46), depression (OR: 1.82, 95% CI=1.04-3.20), metabolic syndrome (OR: 2.22, 95% CI=1.98-2.49), and diuretic treatment (OR: 2.42, 95% CI=1.38-4.22) were associated with increased risk factors of ED in men with DM.
CONCLUSION
Our study indicates that in men with DM, several risk factors for ED have been identified, including mean age, HbA1C, duration of DM, diabetic neuropathy, diabetic retinopathy, diabetic foot, cardiovascular disease, hypertension, microvascular disease, vascular disease, nephropathy, depression, metabolic syndrome, and diuretic treatment. By clarifying the connection between these risk factors and ED, clinicians and scientific experts can intervene and address these risk factors, ultimately reducing the occurrence of ED and improving patient management.
Topics: Humans; Male; Cardiovascular Diseases; Diabetes Mellitus; Diabetic Foot; Diabetic Neuropathies; Diabetic Retinopathy; Diuretics; Erectile Dysfunction; Glycated Hemoglobin; Hypertension; Metabolic Syndrome; Risk Factors; United States
PubMed: 38638136
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2024.1368079 -
Journal of the American Heart... Jun 2022Background Renin-angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitor-COVID-19 studies, observational in design, appear to use biased methods that can distort the interaction... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Background Renin-angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitor-COVID-19 studies, observational in design, appear to use biased methods that can distort the interaction between RAAS inhibitor use and COVID-19 risk. This study assessed the extent of bias in that research and reevaluated RAAS inhibitor-COVID-19 associations in studies without critical risk of bias. Methods and Results Searches were performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases (December 1, 2019 to October 21, 2021) identifying studies that compared the risk of infection and/or severe COVID-19 outcomes between those using or not using RAAS inhibitors (ie, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II type-I receptor blockers). Weighted hazard ratios (HR) and 95% CIs were extracted and pooled in fixed-effects meta-analyses, only from studies without critical risk of bias that assessed severe COVID-19 outcomes. Of 169 relevant studies, 164 had critical risks of bias and were excluded. Ultimately, only two studies presented data relevant to the meta-analysis. In 1 351 633 people with uncomplicated hypertension using a RAAS inhibitor, calcium channel blocker, or thiazide diuretic in monotherapy, the risk of hospitalization (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor: HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.66-0.87; <0.001; angiotensin II type-I receptor blockers: HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77-0.97; =0.015) and intubation or death (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor: HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.48-0.85; =0.002; angiotensin II type-I receptor blockers: HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.58-0.95; =0.019) with COVID-19 was lower in those using a RAAS inhibitor. However, these protective effects are probably not clinically relevant. Conclusions This study reveals the critical risk of bias that exists across almost an entire body of COVID-19 research, raising an important question: Were research methods and/or peer-review processes temporarily weakened during the surge of COVID-19 research or is this lack of rigor a systemic problem that also exists outside pandemic-based research? Registration URL: www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/; Unique identifier: CRD42021237859.
Topics: Aldosterone; Angiotensin II; Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; COVID-19; Humans; Hypertension; Renin; Renin-Angiotensin System; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 35624081
DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.122.025289 -
High Blood Pressure & Cardiovascular... Mar 2024Resistant hypertension (RHT) is characterized by persistently high blood pressure (BP) levels above the widely recommended therapeutic targets of less than 140/90 mmHg...
Resistant hypertension (RHT) is characterized by persistently high blood pressure (BP) levels above the widely recommended therapeutic targets of less than 140/90 mmHg office BP, despite life-style measures and optimal medical therapies, including at least three antihypertensive drug classes at maximum tolerated dose (one should be a diuretic). This condition is strongly related to hypertension-mediated organ damage and, mostly, high risk of hospitalization due to hypertension emergencies or acute cardiovascular events. Hypertension guidelines proposed a triple combination therapy based on renin angiotensin system blocking agent, a thiazide or thiazide-like diuretic, and a dihydropyridinic calcium-channel blocker, to almost all patients with RHT, who should also receive either a beta-blocker or a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, or both, depending on concomitant conditions and contraindications. Several other drugs may be attempted, when elevated BP levels persist in these RHT patients, although their added efficacy in lowering BP levels on top of optimal medical therapy is uncertain. Also, renal denervation has demonstrated to be a valid therapeutic alternative in RHT patients. More recently, novel drug classes and molecules have been tested in phase 2 randomised controlled clinical trials in patients with RHT on top of optimal medical therapy with at least 2-3 antihypertensive drugs. These novel drugs, which are orally administered and are able to antagonize different pathophysiological pathways, are represented by non-steroid mineralocorticorticoid receptor antagonists, selective aldosterone synthase inhibitors, and dual endothelin receptor antagonists, all of which have proven to reduce seated office and 24-h ambulatory systolic/diastolic BP levels. The main findings of randomized clinical trials performed with these drugs as well as their potential indications for the clinical management of RHT patients are summarised in this systematic review article.
Topics: Humans; Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Pressure; Drug Resistance; Drug Therapy, Combination; Hypertension; Precision Medicine; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38616212
DOI: 10.1007/s40292-024-00634-4 -
Medicine Oct 2023The optimal drug for treatment with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) was in debate. We did this network meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of different... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The optimal drug for treatment with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) was in debate. We did this network meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of different drugs for reducing testosterone levels in women with PCOS.
METHODS
We searched studies from inception until January 10, 2023, through PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library database. All studies comparing different drugs for reducing testosterone levels in women with polycystic ovary syndrome were included in this network meta-analysis. Outcomes were total testosterone levels, free testosterone levels, and withdraw due to adverse events. We calculated the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) for each treatment.
RESULTS
Finally, a total of 13 studies were finally included in this network meta-analysis. In head-to-head comparison, atorvastatin (WMD -3.1, 95% CrI: -3.7 to -2.5), metformin (WMD -2.6, 95% CrI: -3.5 to -1.6), metformin + simvastatin (WMD -2.8, 95% CrI: -4.1 to -1.5), simvastatin (WMD -2.7, 95% CrI: -4.2 to -1.3), spironolactone (WMD -3.1, 95% CrI: -4.3 to -1.9), spironolactone + metformin (WMD -3.2, 95% CrI: -4.5 to -2.0) were all more effective than the placebo, and the difference was statistically significant (P < .05). The SUCRA shows that spironolactone + metformin ranked first (SUCRA, 85.0%), Atorvastatin ranked second (SUCRA, 77.7%), Spironolactone ranked third (SUCRA, 77.2%), and metformin + simvastatin ranked the fourth. The SUCRA of different drugs for free testosterone levels shows that atorvastatin ranked first (SUCRA, 75.0%), spironolactone + metformin ranked second (SUCRA, 5.3%), metformin + simvastain ranked third (SUCRA, 62.6%), and spironolactone ranked the fourth (SUCRA, 56.4%). No statistically significant differences were found between the 2 treatment groups for withdrawn due to adverse events (P > .05).
CONCLUSIONS
Considering the network meta-analysis and rankings, atorvastatin was recommended to be the optimal drug for treatment PCOS. However, the optimal dose of atorvastatin was unknown and should be verified by more randomized controlled trials.
Topics: Humans; Female; Spironolactone; Atorvastatin; Network Meta-Analysis; Polycystic Ovary Syndrome; Metformin; Simvastatin; Testosterone
PubMed: 37832133
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000035152 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2020Several agents are used to clear secretions from the airways of people with cystic fibrosis. Mannitol increases mucociliary clearance, but its exact mechanism of action... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Several agents are used to clear secretions from the airways of people with cystic fibrosis. Mannitol increases mucociliary clearance, but its exact mechanism of action is unknown. The dry powder formulation of mannitol may be more convenient and easier to use compared with established agents which require delivery via a nebuliser. Phase III trials of inhaled dry powder mannitol for the treatment of cystic fibrosis have been completed and it is now available in Australia and some countries in Europe. This is an update of a previous review.
OBJECTIVES
To assess whether inhaled dry powder mannitol is well tolerated, whether it improves the quality of life and respiratory function in people with cystic fibrosis and which adverse events are associated with the treatment.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register which comprises references identified from comprehensive electronic databases, handsearching relevant journals and abstracts from conferences. Date of last search: 12 December 2019.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled studies comparing mannitol with placebo, active inhaled comparators (for example, hypertonic saline or dornase alfa) or with no treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, carried out data extraction and assessed the risk of bias in included studies. The quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
Six studies (reported in 36 unique publications) were included with a total of 784 participants. Duration of treatment in the included studies ranged from 12 days to six months, with open-label treatment for an additional six months in two of the studies. Five studies compared mannitol with control (a very low dose of mannitol or non-respirable mannitol) and the final study compared mannitol to dornase alfa alone and to mannitol plus dornase alfa. Two large studies had a similar parallel design and provided data for 600 participants, which could be pooled where data for a particular outcome and time point were available. The remaining studies had much smaller sample sizes (ranging from 22 to 95) and data could not be pooled due to differences in design, interventions and population. Pooled evidence from the two large parallel studies was judged to be of low to moderate quality and from the smaller studies was judged to be of low to very low quality. In all studies, there was an initial test to see if participants tolerated mannitol, with only those who could tolerate the drug being randomised; therefore, the study results are not applicable to the cystic fibrosis population as a whole. While the published papers did not provide all the data required for our analysis, additional unpublished data were provided by the drug's manufacturer and the author of one of the studies. Pooling the large parallel studies comparing mannitol to control, up to and including six months, lung function (forced expiratory volume at one second) measured in both mL and % predicted was significantly improved in the mannitol group compared to the control group (moderate-quality evidence). Beneficial results were observed in these studies in adults and in both concomitant dornase alfa users and non-users in these studies. In the smaller studies, statistically significant improvements in lung function were also observed in the mannitol groups compared to the non-respirable mannitol groups; however, we judged this evidence to be of low to very low quality. For the comparisons of mannitol and control, we found no consistent differences in health-related quality of life in any of the domains except for burden of treatment, which was less for mannitol up to four months in the two pooled studies of a similar design; this difference was not maintained at six months. It should be noted that the tool used to measure health-related quality of life was not designed to assess mucolytics and pooling of the age-appropriate tools (as done in some of the included studies) may not be valid so results were judged to be low to very low quality and should be interpreted with caution. Cough, haemoptysis, bronchospasm, pharyngolaryngeal pain and post-tussive vomiting were the most commonly reported side effects in both treatment groups. Where rates of adverse events could be compared, statistically no significant differences were found between mannitol and control groups; although some of these events may have clinical relevance for people with CF. For the comparisons of mannitol to dornase alfa alone and to mannitol plus dornase alfa, very low-quality evidence from a 12-week cross-over study of 28 participants showed no statistically significant differences in the recorded domains of health-related quality of life or measures of lung function. Cough was the most common side effect in the mannitol alone arm but there was no occurrence of cough in the dornase alfa alone arm and the most commonly reported reason of withdrawal from the mannitol plus dornase alfa arm was pulmonary exacerbations. In terms of secondary outcomes of the review (pulmonary exacerbations, hospitalisations, symptoms, sputum microbiology), evidence provided by the included studies was more limited. For all comparisons, no consistent statistically significant and clinically meaningful differences were observed between mannitol and control treatments (including dornase alfa).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is moderate-quality evidence to show that treatment with mannitol over a six-month period is associated with an improvement in some measures of lung function in people with cystic fibrosis compared to control. There is low to very low-quality evidence suggesting no difference in quality of life for participants taking mannitol compared to control. This review provides very low-quality evidence suggesting no difference in lung function or quality of life comparing mannitol to dornase alfa alone and to mannitol plus dornase alfa. The clinical implications from this review suggest that mannitol could be considered as a treatment in cystic fibrosis; but further research is required in order to establish who may benefit most and whether this benefit is sustained in the longer term. Furthermore, studies comparing its efficacy against other (established) mucolytic therapies need to be undertaken before it can be considered for mainstream practice.
Topics: Administration, Inhalation; Adult; Child; Cystic Fibrosis; Deoxyribonuclease I; Forced Expiratory Volume; Humans; Mannitol; Mucociliary Clearance; Powders; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recombinant Proteins; Respiratory Function Tests; Vital Capacity
PubMed: 32358807
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008649.pub4 -
European Review For Medical and... Apr 2021Up to 50% of patients hospitalized for acute heart failure (AHF) show resistance to diuretics. This condition contributes to a prolonged hospital length of stay and a... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Up to 50% of patients hospitalized for acute heart failure (AHF) show resistance to diuretics. This condition contributes to a prolonged hospital length of stay and a higher risk of death. This review aimed to investigate whether a diuretic therapeutic approach more effective than furosemide alone exists for patients with diuretic-resistant AHF.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We identified all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating diuretic therapy in patients with diuretic-resistant AHF. We searched Pubmed, BioMed Central, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases.
RESULTS
Six RCTs were identified, involving a total of 845 patients. The P-score ranges from 0.6663 for furosemide to 0.2294 for the tolvaptan-furosemide. We found no significant differences in efficacy for any drug comparison.
CONCLUSIONS
None of the diuretics considered in RCTs performed to date (tolvaptan, metolazone, hydrochlorothiazide, indapamide) appear to be more effective than furosemide therapy alone for the treatment of patients with diuretic-resistant AHF.
Topics: Acute Disease; Carbonic Anhydrase Inhibitors; Diuretics; Drug Resistance; Heart Failure; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 33877660
DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202104_25550 -
Journal of Hypertension Jul 2023The magnitude of blood pressure (BP)-lowering effects and decrease of the adverse effects of thiazide diuretics provided by potassium-sparing diuretics remain uncertain.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Thiazide diuretics alone or combined with potassium-sparing diuretics to treat hypertension: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
BACKGROUND
The magnitude of blood pressure (BP)-lowering effects and decrease of the adverse effects of thiazide diuretics provided by potassium-sparing diuretics remain uncertain. The aim of this study was to compare the BP-lowering efficacy and the incidence of adverse effects of high (T+) and low-dose (T-) thiazide diuretics, alone or combined with high (PS+) or low-dose (PS-) potassium-sparing diuretics in patients with primary hypertension.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus and LILACS. Randomized double-blind placebo or active-controlled trials (RCT) with 3 weeks to 1 year of follow-up were included. Sample size, mean and standard deviation from baseline, follow-up and change from baseline values were extracted by two independent reviewers. Pairwise random effect models and Bayesian network meta-analysis models were used to compare the effects of treatments. The risk of bias in individual studies was assessed using the Rob 1.0 tool. The primary outcome was the mean difference in office SBP. Secondary outcomes were the mean difference in biochemical parameters and the incidence of nonmelanoma skin cancer.
RESULTS
Two hundred and seventy-six double-blind RCTs involving 58 807 participants (mean age: 55 years; 45% women) were included. All treatment groups were more effective than placebo in lowering BP, with mean differences (MDs) of change from baseline ranging from -7.66 mmHg [95% credible interval (95% CrI), -8.53 to -6.79] for T- to -12.77 mmHg (95% CrI, -15.22 to -10.31) for T+PS-. T+ alone or combined with potassium-sparing was more effective in reducing BP than T-. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) estimated ranking showed that the best effectiveness in lowering SBP was found for T+PS- (0.69), T+PS+ (0.65) and T+ (0.54). Compared with placebo, all treatments (except T-PS-) were associated with more potassium reduction and T+ compared with all other treatments and T- when compared with T-PS-. Compared with placebo, all active treatments (except T+PS+) showed higher elevations of uric acid. The increase of plasma glucose promoted by thiazides alone was reduced by potassium-sparing agents.
CONCLUSION
Thiazides with potassium-sparing diuretics are associated with increased BP-lowering efficacy compared with thiazides alone while minimizing hypokalaemia and hyperglycaemia. These findings demonstrate that thiazide and potassium-sparing diuretic combination is preferable to thiazide alone in treating hypertension.
Topics: Humans; Female; Middle Aged; Male; Sodium Chloride Symporter Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Network Meta-Analysis; Bayes Theorem; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Hypertension; Blood Pressure; Diuretics, Potassium Sparing; Thiazides; Potassium; Diuretics
PubMed: 37016911
DOI: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000003436