-
Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation :... Oct 2023Dual renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) blockade involves dual therapy with a combination of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis),... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The association between dual RAAS inhibition and risk of acute kidney injury and hyperkalemia in patients with diabetic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
Dual renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) blockade involves dual therapy with a combination of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis), angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs), direct renin inhibitors (DRIs), or mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs). It is hypothesized that dual RAAS blockade would result in a more complete inhibition of the RAAS cascade. However, large clinical trials on dual RAAS inhibition have shown increased risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) and hyperkalemia without additional benefit on mortality, cardiovascular events, or chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression compared to RAAS inhibitor monotherapy in patients with diabetic kidney disease (DKD). The development of newer, more selective non-steroidal MRAs as cardiorenal protective therapies has created a new opportunity for dual RAAS inhibition. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the risks of AKI and hyperkalemia with dual RAAS blockade in patients with DKD.
DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, AND MEASUREMENTS
This is a systematic review and meta-analysis of the randomized controlled trials (RCT) published from 1 January 2006 to 30 May 2022. The study population included adult patients with DKD receiving dual RAAS blockade. A total of 31 RCTs and 33 048 patients were included in the systematic review. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random effects.
RESULTS
There were 208 AKI events in 2690 patients on ACEi + ARB versus 170 in 4264 patients with ACEi or ARB monotherapy (pooled RR 1.48, 95% CI: 1.23-1.39). There were 304 hyperkalemia events in 2818 patients on ACEi + ARB versus 208 in 4396 patients with ACEi or ARB monotherapy (pooled RR 1.97, 95% CI: 1.32-2.94). A non-steroidal MRA + ACEi or ARB showed no increase in the risk of AKI (pooled RR 0.97, 95% CI: 0.81-1.16) compared to ACEi or ARB monotherapy but had a 2-fold higher risk of hyperkalemia with 953 events in 7837 patients in dual therapy versus 454 events in 6895 patients in monotherapy (pooled RR 2.05, 95% CI: 1.84-2.28). A steroidal MRA + ACEi or ARB had a 5-fold higher risk of hyperkalemia with 28 events in 245 at risk in dual therapy versus five events in 248 at risk in monotherapy (pooled RR 5.42 95% CI: 2.15-13.67).
CONCLUSION
Dual therapy with RAASi is associated with an increased risk of AKI and hyperkalemia compared to RAASi monotherapy. Conversely, dual therapy with RAAS inhibitors and non-steroidal MRAs have no additional risk of AKI but a similar risk of hyperkalemia, which is lower than dual therapy with RAAS inhibitors and steroidal MRAs.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Renin-Angiotensin System; Diabetic Nephropathies; Hyperkalemia; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Acute Kidney Injury; Diabetes Mellitus
PubMed: 37309038
DOI: 10.1093/ndt/gfad101 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2018Elevated blood pressure (hypertension) affects about one billion people worldwide. It is important as it is a major risk factor for stroke and myocardial infarction.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Elevated blood pressure (hypertension) affects about one billion people worldwide. It is important as it is a major risk factor for stroke and myocardial infarction. However, it remains a challenge for the medical profession as many people with hypertension have blood pressure (BP) that is not well controlled. According to Traditional Chinese Medicine theory, acupuncture has the potential to lower BP.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture for lowering blood pressure in adults with primary hypertension.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Hypertension Group Specialised Register (February 2017); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) 2017, Issue 2; MEDLINE (February 2017); Embase (February 2017), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) (January 2015), VIP Database (January 2015), the World Health Organisation Clinical Trials Registry Platform (February 2017)and ClinicalTrials.gov (February 2017). There were no language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the clinical effects of an acupuncture intervention (acupuncture used alone or add-on) with no treatment, a sham acupuncture or an antihypertensive drug in adults with primary hypertension.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected studies according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. They extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of each trial, and telephoned or emailed the authors of the studies to ask for missing information. A third review author resolved disagreements. Outcomes included change in systolic blood pressure (SBP), change in diastolic blood pressure (DBP), withdrawal due to adverse effects, and any adverse events. We calculated pooled mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for continuous outcomes using a fixed-effect or random-effects model where appropriate.
MAIN RESULTS
Twenty-two RCTs (1744 people) met our inclusion criteria. The RCTs were of variable methodological quality (most at high risk of bias because of lack of blinding). There was no evidence for a sustained BP lowering effect of acupuncture; only one trial investigated a sustained effect and found no BP lowering effect at three and six months after acupuncture. Four sham acupuncture controlled trials provided very low quality evidence that acupuncture had a short-term (one to 24 hours) effect on SBP (change) -3.4 mmHg (-6.0 to -0.9) and DBP -1.9 mmHg (95% CI -3.6 to -0.3). Pooled analysis of eight trials comparing acupuncture with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and seven trials comparing acupuncture to calcium antagonists suggested that acupuncture lowered short-term BP better than the antihypertensive drugs. However, because of the very high risk of bias in these trials, we think that this is most likely a reflection of bias and not a true effect. As a result, we did not report these results in the 'Summary of findings' table. Safety of acupuncture could not be assessed as only eight trials reported adverse events.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
At present, there is no evidence for the sustained BP lowering effect of acupuncture that is required for the management of chronically elevated BP. The short-term effects of acupuncture are uncertain due to the very low quality of evidence. The larger effect shown in non-sham acupuncture controlled trials most likely reflects bias and is not a true effect. Future RCTs must use sham acupuncture controls and assess whether there is a BP lowering effect of acupuncture that lasts at least seven days.
Topics: Acupuncture Therapy; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Calcium Channel Blockers; Humans; Hypertension; Publication Bias; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 30480757
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008821.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2020Treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) is used to reduce proteinuria and retard the progression of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) is used to reduce proteinuria and retard the progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD). However, resolution of proteinuria may be incomplete with these therapies and the addition of an aldosterone antagonist may be added to further prevent progression of CKD. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2009 and updated in 2014.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effects of aldosterone antagonists (selective (eplerenone), non-selective (spironolactone or canrenone), or non-steroidal mineralocorticoid antagonists (finerenone)) in adults who have CKD with proteinuria (nephrotic and non-nephrotic range) on: patient-centred endpoints including kidney failure (previously know as end-stage kidney disease (ESKD)), major cardiovascular events, and death (any cause); kidney function (proteinuria, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and doubling of serum creatinine); blood pressure; and adverse events (including hyperkalaemia, acute kidney injury, and gynaecomastia).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 13 January 2020 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that compared aldosterone antagonists in combination with ACEi or ARB (or both) to other anti-hypertensive strategies or placebo in participants with proteinuric CKD.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. Data were summarised using random effects meta-analysis. We expressed summary treatment estimates as a risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes, or standardised mean difference (SMD) when different scales were used together with their 95% confidence interval (CI). Risk of bias were assessed using the Cochrane tool. Evidence certainty was evaluated using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
Forty-four studies (5745 participants) were included. Risk of bias in the evaluated methodological domains were unclear or high risk in most studies. Adequate random sequence generation was present in 12 studies, allocation concealment in five studies, blinding of participant and investigators in 18 studies, blinding of outcome assessment in 15 studies, and complete outcome reporting in 24 studies. All studies comparing aldosterone antagonists to placebo or standard care were used in addition to an ACEi or ARB (or both). None of the studies were powered to detect differences in patient-level outcomes including kidney failure, major cardiovascular events or death. Aldosterone antagonists had uncertain effects on kidney failure (2 studies, 84 participants: RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.33 to 27.65, I² = 0%; very low certainty evidence), death (3 studies, 421 participants: RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.10 to 3.50, I² = 0%; low certainty evidence), and cardiovascular events (3 studies, 1067 participants: RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.26 to 3.56; I² = 42%; low certainty evidence) compared to placebo or standard care. Aldosterone antagonists may reduce protein excretion (14 studies, 1193 participants: SMD -0.51, 95% CI -0.82 to -0.20, I² = 82%; very low certainty evidence), eGFR (13 studies, 1165 participants, MD -3.00 mL/min/1.73 m², 95% CI -5.51 to -0.49, I² = 0%, low certainty evidence) and systolic blood pressure (14 studies, 911 participants: MD -4.98 mmHg, 95% CI -8.22 to -1.75, I² = 87%; very low certainty evidence) compared to placebo or standard care. Aldosterone antagonists probably increase the risk of hyperkalaemia (17 studies, 3001 participants: RR 2.17, 95% CI 1.47 to 3.22, I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence), acute kidney injury (5 studies, 1446 participants: RR 2.04, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.97, I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence), and gynaecomastia (4 studies, 281 participants: RR 5.14, 95% CI 1.14 to 23.23, I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence) compared to placebo or standard care. Non-selective aldosterone antagonists plus ACEi or ARB had uncertain effects on protein excretion (2 studies, 139 participants: SMD -1.59, 95% CI -3.80 to 0.62, I² = 93%; very low certainty evidence) but may increase serum potassium (2 studies, 121 participants: MD 0.31 mEq/L, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.45, I² = 0%; low certainty evidence) compared to diuretics plus ACEi or ARB. Selective aldosterone antagonists may increase the risk of hyperkalaemia (2 studies, 500 participants: RR 1.62, 95% CI 0.66 to 3.95, I² = 0%; low certainty evidence) compared ACEi or ARB (or both). There were insufficient studies to perform meta-analyses for the comparison between non-selective aldosterone antagonists and calcium channel blockers, selective aldosterone antagonists plus ACEi or ARB (or both) and nitrate plus ACEi or ARB (or both), and non-steroidal mineralocorticoid antagonists and selective aldosterone antagonists.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The effects of aldosterone antagonists when added to ACEi or ARB (or both) on the risks of death, major cardiovascular events, and kidney failure in people with proteinuric CKD are uncertain. Aldosterone antagonists may reduce proteinuria, eGFR, and systolic blood pressure in adults who have mild to moderate CKD but may increase the risk of hyperkalaemia, acute kidney injury and gynaecomastia when added to ACEi and/or ARB.
Topics: Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Bias; Calcium Channel Blockers; Canrenone; Disease Progression; Eplerenone; Humans; Hyperkalemia; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists; Naphthyridines; Proteinuria; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Spironolactone
PubMed: 33107592
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007004.pub4 -
Drugs Jun 2020The advantages of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) in reducing risk of cardiovascular events (CVEs) and...
ACE Inhibitor Benefit to Kidney and Cardiovascular Outcomes for Patients with Non-Dialysis Chronic Kidney Disease Stages 3-5: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomised Clinical Trials.
BACKGROUND
The advantages of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) in reducing risk of cardiovascular events (CVEs) and delaying end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is well-known. However, the efficacy and safety of these agents in non-dialysis CKD stages 3-5 patients are still a controversial issue.
METHODS
Two investigators (Yaru Zhang and Dandan He) independently searched and identified relevant studies from MEDLINE (from 1950 to October 2018), EMBASE (from 1970 to October 2018), and the Cochrane Library database. Randomised clinical trials in non-dialysis CKD3-5 patients treated with renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors were included. We used standard criteria (Cochrane risk of bias tool) to assess the inherent risk of bias of trials. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each outcome by random-effects model. A 2-sided p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant, and all statistical analyses were performed using STATA, version 15.0. This network meta-analysis was undertaken by the frequency model.
RESULTS
Forty-four randomised clinical trials with 42,319 patients were included in our network meta-analysis. ACEIs monotherapy significantly decreased the odds of kidney events (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.41-0.73), cardiovascular events (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.64-0.84), cardiovascular death (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.63-0.86) and all-cause death (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.66-0.91) when compared to placebo. According to the cumulative ranking area (SUCRA), ACEI monotherapy had the highest probabilities of their protective effects on outcomes of kidney events (SUCRA 93.3%), cardiovascular events (SUCRA 77.2%), cardiovascular death (SUCRA 86%), and all-cause death (SUCRA 94.1%), even if there were no significant differences between ACEIs and other antihypertensive drugs, including calcium channel blockers (CCBs), β-blockers and diuretics on above outcomes except for kidney events. ARB monotherapy and combination therapy of an ACEI plus an ARB showed no more advantage than CCBs, β-blockers and diuretics in all primary outcomes. In the subgroup of non-dialysis diabetic kidney disease patients, no drugs, including ACEIs or ARBs, significantly lowered the odds of cardiovascular events and all-cause death. However, ACEIs were still better than other antihypertensive drugs including ARBs in all-cause death but not ARBs in cardiovascular events according to the SUCRA. Only ARBs had significant differences in preventing the occurrence of kidney events compared with placebo (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72-0.95). Both ACEI/ARB monotherapy and combination therapy had higher odds of hyperkalaemia. ACEIs had 3.81 times higher odds than CCBs (95% CI 1.58-9.20), ARBs had 2.08-5.10 times higher odds than placebo and CCBs and combination therapy of an ACEI and an ARB had 4.80-24.5 times higher odds than all other treatments. Compared with placebo, CCBs and β blockers, ACEI therapy significantly increased the odds of cough (OR 2.90, 95% CI 1.76-4.77; OR 8.21, 95% CI 3.13-21.54 and OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.08-3.00). There were no statistical differences in hypotension among all comparisons except ACEIs versus placebo.
CONCLUSIONS
Although ACEIs increased the odds of hyperkalaemia, cough and hypotension, they were still superior to ARBs and other antihypertensive drugs and had the highest benefits for the prevention of kidney events, cardiovascular outcomes, cardiovascular death and all-cause mortality in non-dialysis CKD3-5 patients. In patients with advanced diabetic kidney disease, ACEIs were superior to ARBs in lowering risk of all-cause death but not in kidney events and cardiovascular events.
Topics: Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Cardiovascular Diseases; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Renin-Angiotensin System
PubMed: 32333236
DOI: 10.1007/s40265-020-01290-3 -
Clinical Reviews in Allergy & Immunology Jun 2018Non-hereditary angioedema (AE) with normal C1 esterase inhibitor (C1INH) can be presumably bradykinin- or mast cell-mediated, or of unknown cause. In this systematic... (Review)
Review
Non-hereditary angioedema (AE) with normal C1 esterase inhibitor (C1INH) can be presumably bradykinin- or mast cell-mediated, or of unknown cause. In this systematic review, we searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus to provide an overview of the efficacy of different treatment options for the abovementioned subtypes of refractory non-hereditary AE with or without wheals and with normal C1INH. After study selection and risk of bias assessment, 61 articles were included for data extraction and analysis. Therapies were described for angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor-induced AE (ACEi-AE), for idiopathic AE, and for AE with wheals. Described treatments consisted of ecallantide, icatibant, C1INH, fresh frozen plasma (FFP), tranexamic acid (TA), and omalizumab. Additionally, individual studies for anti-vitamin K, progestin, and methotrexate were found. Safety information was available in 26 articles. Most therapies were used off-label and in few patients. There is a need for additional studies with a high level of evidence. In conclusion, in acute attacks of ACEi-AE and idiopathic AE, treatment with icatibant, C1INH, TA, and FFP often leads to symptom relief within 2 h, with limited side effects. For prophylactic treatment of idiopathic AE and AE with wheals, omalizumab, TA, and C1INH were effective and safe in the majority of patients.
Topics: Angioedema; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Bradykinin; Humans; Omalizumab; Progestins; Tranexamic Acid; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 27672078
DOI: 10.1007/s12016-016-8585-0 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2023The incidence and risk factors of acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients with malignancies receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are being extensively reported... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The incidence and risk factors of acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients with malignancies receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are being extensively reported with their widespread application.
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to quantify the incidence and identify risk factors of AKI in cancer patients treated with ICIs.
METHODS
We searched the electronic databases of PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane and Embase before 1 February 2023 on the incidence and risk factors of AKI in patients receiving ICIs and registered the protocol in PROSPERO (CRD42023391939). A random-effect meta-analysis was performed to quantify the pooled incidence estimate of AKI, identify risk factors with pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) and investigate the median latency period of ICI-AKI in patients treated with ICIs. Assessment of study quality, meta-regression, and sensitivity and publication bias analyses were conducted.
RESULTS
In total, 27 studies consisting of 24048 participants were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The overall pooled incidence of AKI secondary to ICIs was 5.7% (95% CI: 3.7%-8.2%). Significant risk factors were older age (OR: 1.01, 95% CI: 1.00-1.03), preexisting chronic kidney disease (CKD) (OR: 2.90, 95% CI: 1.65-5.11), ipilimumab (OR: 2.66, 95% CI: 1.42-4.98), combination of ICIs (OR: 2.45, 95% CI: 1.40-4.31), extrarenal immune-related adverse events (irAEs) (OR: 2.34, 95% CI: 1.53-3.59), and proton pump inhibitor (PPI) (OR: 2.23, 95% CI: 1.88-2.64), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) (OR: 2.61, 95% CI: 1.90-3.57), fluindione (OR: 6.48, 95% CI: 2.72-15.46), diuretic (OR: 1.78, 95% CI: 1.32-2.40) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) (pooled OR: 1.76, 95% CI: 1.15-2.68) use. Median time from ICIs initiation to AKI was 108.07 days. Sensitivity and publication bias analyses indicated robust results for this study.
CONCLUSION
The occurrence of AKI following ICIs was not uncommon, with an incidence of 5.7% and a median time interval of 108.07 days after ICIs initiation. Older age, preexisting chronic kidney disease (CKD), ipilimumab, combined use of ICIs, extrarenal irAEs, and PPI, NSAID, fluindione, diuretics and ACEI/ARB use are risk factors for AKI in patients receiving ICIs.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42023391939.
Topics: Humans; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Ipilimumab; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Incidence; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Neoplasms; Acute Kidney Injury; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal
PubMed: 37313406
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1173952 -
Cancer Causes & Control : CCC Jun 2022Antihypertensive medications may impact colorectal cancer risk. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of associations, with colorectal cancer risk, of five... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
Antihypertensive medications may impact colorectal cancer risk. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of associations, with colorectal cancer risk, of five classes of antihypertensive medications: angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), beta-blockers (BBs), calcium channel blockers (CCBs), and diuretics.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane library to identify relevant studies evaluating associations of ACEIs, ARBs, BBs, CCBs, and diuretics with colorectal cancer risk. Meta-analytic risk ratios (RRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using the inverse variance method.
RESULTS
No overall significant associations with colorectal cancer risk were observed; ACEIs (5 studies) RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.91-1.23, ARBs (5 studies) RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.80-1.11, BBs (4 studies) RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.92-1.08, CCBs (4 studies) RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.88-1.18, and diuretics (6 studies) RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.90-1.17. There was considerable heterogeneity across studies, partly explained by differences in study design and location. When stratified by study location, there was significantly reduced colorectal cancer risk for ARB use in Asian populations (2 studies, RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.58-0.83).
CONCLUSION
No significant colorectal cancer risk with ACEIs, BBs, CCBs, or diuretics was observed. ARB use may be associated with decreased risk of colorectal cancer in Asian populations, although additional studies in diverse populations are needed to confirm associations and help understand possible reasons for geographical differences.
Topics: Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Calcium Channel Blockers; Colorectal Neoplasms; Diuretics; Humans; Hypertension
PubMed: 35314908
DOI: 10.1007/s10552-022-01570-1 -
Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome 2021This study aims to synthesize evidence on dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor and mortality in COVID-19 patients and factors affecting it. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
This study aims to synthesize evidence on dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor and mortality in COVID-19 patients and factors affecting it.
METHODS
We performed a systematic literature search from PubMed, Scopus, and Embase databases from inception of databases up until 7 March 2021. Studies that met all of the following criteria were included: 1) observational studies or randomized controlled trials that report COVID-19 patients, 2) reporting DPP-4 inhibitor use, 3) mortality, and 4) mortality based on DPP-4 inhibitor use. The exposure was DPP-4 inhibitor, defined as DPP-4 inhibitor use that started prior to COVID-19 hospitalization. The control group was patients with no exposure to DPP-4 inhibitor. The outcome was mortality. The pooled effect estimate was reported as risk ratio (RR).
RESULTS
There were 4,477 patients from 9 studies in this systematic review and meta-analysis. 31% of (15%, 46%) the patients use DPP-4 inhibitor. Mortality occurs in 23% (15%, 31%) of the patients. DPP-4 inhibitor was associated with lower mortality in patients with COVID-19 (RR 0.76 [0.60, 0.97], p = 0.030, I2: 44.5%, p = 0.072). Meta-regression analysis showed that the association between DPP-4 inhibitor and mortality was significantly affected by metformin (RR 1.02 [1.00, 1.04], p = 0.048) and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ACEI/ARB) use (RR 1.04 [1.01, 1.07], p = 0.006), but not age (p = 0.759), sex (reference: male, p = 0.148), and hypertension (p = 0.218).
CONCLUSION
DPP-4 inhibitor use was associated with lower mortality in COVID-19 patients, and the association was weaker in patients who were also taking metformin and/or ACE inhibitors.
Topics: Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; COVID-19; Comorbidity; Diabetes Mellitus; Dipeptidyl-Peptidase IV Inhibitors; Female; Humans; Hypertension; Male; Metformin; Mortality; Regression Analysis; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 33838614
DOI: 10.1016/j.dsx.2021.03.027 -
Pharmacotherapy for Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor-Induced Angioedema: A Systematic Review.Otolaryngology--head and Neck Surgery :... Feb 2018Objective Angioedema is a potentially life-threatening complication of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) use, occurring in up to 0.5% of users. Although the... (Review)
Review
Objective Angioedema is a potentially life-threatening complication of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) use, occurring in up to 0.5% of users. Although the pathophysiology of ACEI-induced angioedema is attributable to elevated serum bradykinin, standard management typically includes corticosteroids and antihistamines. We sought to summarize the evidence supporting pharmacotherapy for ACEI-induced angioedema. Data Sources PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase portals. Methods A systematic literature review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. Databases were queried by 3 independent reviewers for English-language studies published between 1980 and 2017. The initial search screened for all occurrences of "angioedema" and then was further refined to include studies of ACEI-related cases and exclude hereditary angioedema. Results Five articles representing 218 cases were identified, including 3 randomized controlled trials and 2 prospective case series with historical controls. One of 2 studies of icatibant (bradykinin B2 receptor antagonist) found more rapid symptom improvement than that with a control group of corticosteroids and antihistamines. Two studies of ecallantide (plasma kallikrein inhibitor) and 1 study of C1 inhibitor replacement found no significant benefit over control. No studies were identified that compared the efficacy of corticosteroids with antihistamines, of one dose with another, of fresh frozen plasma, or of combination therapy. Conclusion The efficacy of treatment of ACEI-induced angioedema with bradykinin antagonists, kallikrein inhibitor, and C1 inhibitor warrants further study. Although consistent benefit of these medications has not been demonstrated, their use has not caused harm. One study examining off-label use of icatibant has demonstrated efficacy over control. In addition, further study is needed to establish the efficacy and mechanism of action of standard pharmacotherapy such as corticosteroids and antihistamines in treatment of this condition.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Angioedema; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Bradykinin B2 Receptor Antagonists; Histamine Antagonists; Humans
PubMed: 29112487
DOI: 10.1177/0194599817737974 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Jan 2009Up to a third of people with type 1 or 2 diabetes will develop microalbuminuria or macroalbuminuria after 20 years. (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Up to a third of people with type 1 or 2 diabetes will develop microalbuminuria or macroalbuminuria after 20 years.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of treatments in people with type 1 diabetes and early nephropathy? What are the effects of treatments in people with type 1 diabetes and late nephropathy? What are the effects of treatments in people with type 2 diabetes and early nephropathy? What are the effects of treatments in people with type 2 diabetes and late nephropathy? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to June 2008 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 15 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor antagonists, captopril, glycaemic control, protein restriction, and tight control of blood pressure.
Topics: Albuminuria; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Blood Pressure; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Nephropathies; Humans
PubMed: 19445773
DOI: No ID Found