-
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Apr 2023To compare the benefits and harms of drug treatments for adults with type 2 diabetes, adding non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (including finerenone)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To compare the benefits and harms of drug treatments for adults with type 2 diabetes, adding non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (including finerenone) and tirzepatide (a dual glucose dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP)/glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist) to previously existing treatment options.
DESIGN
Systematic review and network meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
Ovid Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central up to 14 October 2022.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES
Eligible randomised controlled trials compared drugs of interest in adults with type 2 diabetes. Eligible trials had a follow-up of 24 weeks or longer. Trials systematically comparing combinations of more than one drug treatment class with no drug, subgroup analyses of randomised controlled trials, and non-English language studies were deemed ineligible. Certainty of evidence was assessed following the GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation) approach.
RESULTS
The analysis identified 816 trials with 471 038 patients, together evaluating 13 different drug classes; all subsequent estimates refer to the comparison with standard treatments. Sodium glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors (odds ratio 0.88, 95% confidence interval 0.83 to 0.94; high certainty) and GLP-1 receptor agonists (0.88, 0.82 to 0.93; high certainty) reduce all cause death; non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, so far tested only with finerenone in patients with chronic kidney disease, probably reduce mortality (0.89, 0.79 to 1.00; moderate certainty); other drugs may not. The study confirmed the benefits of SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists in reducing cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, admission to hospital for heart failure, and end stage kidney disease. Finerenone probably reduces admissions to hospital for heart failure and end stage kidney disease, and possibly cardiovascular death. Only GLP-1 receptor agonists reduce non-fatal stroke; SGLT-2 inhibitors are superior to other drugs in reducing end stage kidney disease. GLP-1 receptor agonists and probably SGLT-2 inhibitors and tirzepatide improve quality of life. Reported harms were largely specific to drug class (eg, genital infections with SGLT-2 inhibitors, severe gastrointestinal adverse events with tirzepatide and GLP-1 receptor agonists, hyperkalaemia leading to admission to hospital with finerenone). Tirzepatide probably results in the largest reduction in body weight (mean difference -8.57 kg; moderate certainty). Basal insulin (mean difference 2.15 kg; moderate certainty) and thiazolidinediones (mean difference 2.81 kg; moderate certainty) probably result in the largest increases in body weight. Absolute benefits of SGLT-2 inhibitors, GLP-1 receptor agonists, and finerenone vary in people with type 2 diabetes, depending on baseline risks for cardiovascular and kidney outcomes (https://matchit.magicevidence.org/230125dist-diabetes).
CONCLUSIONS
This network meta-analysis extends knowledge beyond confirming the substantial benefits with the use of SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists in reducing adverse cardiovascular and kidney outcomes and death by adding information on finerenone and tirzepatide. These findings highlight the need for continuous assessment of scientific progress to introduce cutting edge updates in clinical practice guidelines for people with type 2 diabetes.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42022325948.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors; Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists; Network Meta-Analysis; Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor; Quality of Life; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Heart Failure; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37024129
DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2022-074068 -
JACC. Heart Failure Feb 2022This study sought to estimate and compare the aggregate treatment benefit of pharmacological therapy for heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
This study sought to estimate and compare the aggregate treatment benefit of pharmacological therapy for heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction.
BACKGROUND
The estimated treatment effects of various combinations of contemporary HF medical therapies are not well characterized.
METHODS
We performed a systematic network meta-analysis, using MEDLINE/EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized controlled trials published between January 1987 and January 2020. We included angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, beta-blockers (BB), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), digoxin, hydralazine-isosorbide dinitrate, ivabradine, angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNi), sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i), vericiguat, and omecamtiv-mecarbil. The primary outcome was all-cause death. We estimated the life-years gained in 2 HF populations (BIOSTAT-CHF [BIOlogy Study to TAilored Treatment in Chronic Heart Failure] and ASIAN-HF [Asian Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Registry]).
RESULTS
We identified 75 relevant trials representing 95,444 participants. A combination of ARNi, BB, MRA, and SGLT2i was most effective in reducing all-cause death (HR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.31-0.49); followed by ARNi, BB, MRA, and vericiguat (HR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.32-0.53); and ARNi, BB, and MRA (HR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.36-0.54). Results were similar for the composite outcome of cardiovascular death or first hospitalization for HF (HR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.29-0.46 for ARNi, BB, MRA, and SGLT2i; HR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.35-0.56 for ARNi, BB, MRA, and omecamtiv-mecarbil; and HR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.34-0.55 for ARNi, BB, MRA, and vericiguat). The estimated additional number of life-years gained for a 70-year-old patient on ARNi, BB, MRA, and SGLT2i was 5.0 years (2.5-7.5 years) compared with no treatment in secondary analyses.
CONCLUSIONS
In patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction, the estimated aggregate benefit is greatest for a combination of ARNi, BB, MRA, and SGLT2i.
Topics: Aged; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Heart Failure; Humans; Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists; Network Meta-Analysis; Stroke Volume
PubMed: 34895860
DOI: 10.1016/j.jchf.2021.09.004 -
The American Journal of Cardiology Jul 2023Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) are known to improve clinical outcomes in heart failure, particularly heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) are known to improve clinical outcomes in heart failure, particularly heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. However, the effect of MRAs on the incidence of and recurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF) is not well established. Therefore, databases, such as PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central, were searched from inception to September 2021 for randomized controlled trials of MRAs with AF as an outcome. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence interval (CIs) were combined using the random-effects model. A total of 10 randomized controlled trials (n = 11,356) were included. Our pooled analysis demonstrates that MRAs reduce the risk of AF occurrence by 23% compared with the control therapy (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.91, p = 0.003, I = 40%). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that MRAs reduced the risk of both new-onset AF (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.16, p = 0.28, I = 43%) and recurrent AF (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.90, p = 0.004, I = 26%) similarly; p interaction = 0.48. Our meta-analysis concludes that MRAs reduce the risk of development of AF overall, with consistent effects in new-onset and recurrent AF.
Topics: Humans; Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists; Atrial Fibrillation; Heart Failure; Incidence; Odds Ratio
PubMed: 37269781
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2023.04.038 -
Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome Oct 2022Finerenone is a novel non-steroidal mineralocorticoid antagonist (MRA) recently approved for the treatment of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in people with type 2 diabetes... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND & AIMS
Finerenone is a novel non-steroidal mineralocorticoid antagonist (MRA) recently approved for the treatment of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). We aim to conduct a systematic review of finerenone to know the efficacy and safety of finerenone in CKD with or without T2D.
METHODS
A systematic search in the electronic database of PubMed and Google Scholar was made from inception until September 09, 2022, using several MeSH keywords related to finerenone. Ongoing trials were additionally searched from ClinicalTrials.Gov.
RESULTS
Five phase 2 and three phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo- or active-controlled studies of finerenone have been published to date and several other randomized and real-world studies of finerenone are currently undergoing.
CONCLUSIONS
In short-term studies in patients with CKD and reduced ejection heart failure, with or without T2D, finerenone 20 mg appears to have a better renal outcome compared with spironolactone and a better mortality outcome compared with eplerenone, with significantly lesser hyperkalemia compared to both spironolactone and finerenone. In long-term studies in patients with CKD and T2D, finerenone 10/20 mg significantly reduces the progression of renal disease and reduced CV endpoints (especially heart failure hospitalization) compared to placebo. Finerenone has no effect on HbA1c, body weight, and sexual side effects including gynecomastia, and has only a modest effect on blood pressure. However, hyperkalemia leading to drug withdrawal was significantly higher with finerenone compared to placebo. Safety data in real-world settings is a pressing priority.
Topics: Male; Humans; Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists; Diabetic Nephropathies; Eplerenone; Spironolactone; Hyperkalemia; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Glycated Hemoglobin; Heart Failure; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36223666
DOI: 10.1016/j.dsx.2022.102638 -
JACC. Heart Failure Apr 2024Medical treatment for heart failure with preserved ejection (HFpEF) and heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) has weaker evidence compared with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Medical treatment for heart failure with preserved ejection (HFpEF) and heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) has weaker evidence compared with reduced ejection fraction, despite recent trials with an angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) and sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is).
OBJECTIVES
The authors aimed to estimate the aggregate therapeutic benefit of drugs for HFmrEF and HFpEF.
METHODS
The authors performed a systematic review of MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and Web of Science for randomized trials including patients with heart failure (HF) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) >40%, treated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (analyzed together as renin-angiotensin system inhibitors [RASi]), beta-blockers (BBs), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), digoxin, ARNI, and SGLT2i. An additive component network meta-analysis was performed. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular (CV) death and first hospitalization for heart failure (HHF); secondary outcomes were CV death, total HHF, and all-cause mortality.
RESULTS
The authors identified 13 studies with a total of 29,875 patients and a mean LVEF of 56.3% ± 8.7%. ARNI, MRA, and SGLT2i separately, but not RASi, BB, or digoxin, reduced the primary composite outcome compared with placebo. The combination of ARNI, BB, MRA, and SGLT2i was the most effective (HR: 0.47 [95% CI: 0.31-0.70]); this was largely explained by the triple combination of ARNI, MRA, and SGLT2i (HR: 0.56 [95% CI 0.43-0.71]). Results were similar for CV death (HR: 0.63 [95% CI 0.43-0.91] for ARNI, MRA, and SGLT2i) or total HHF (HR: 0.49 [95% CI 0.33-0.71] for ARNI, MRA, and SGLT2i) alone. In a subgroup analysis, only SGLT2i had a consistent benefit among all LVEF subgroups, whereas the triple combination had the greatest benefit in HFmrEF, robust benefit in patients with LVEF 50% to 59%, and a statistically marginal benefit in patients with LVEF ≥60%.
CONCLUSIONS
In patients with HF and LVEF>40%, the quadruple combination of ARNI, BB, MRA, and SGLT2i provides the largest reduction in the risk of CV death and HHF; driven by the robust effect of the triple combination of ARNI, MRA, and SGLT2i. The benefit was more pronounced in HFmrEF patients.
Topics: Humans; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Digoxin; Heart Failure; Network Meta-Analysis; Stroke Volume; Treatment Outcome; Ventricular Function, Left; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37656079
DOI: 10.1016/j.jchf.2023.07.014 -
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders Dec 2016Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) have been associated with improved patient outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) have been associated with improved patient outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) but not preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of selective and nonselective MRAs in HFrEF and HFpEF.
METHODS
We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE and EMBASE. We included randomized controlled trials (RCT) of MRAs in adults with HFpEF or HFrEF if they reported data on major adverse cardiac events or drug safety.
RESULTS
We identified 15 studies representing 16321 patients. MRAs were associated with a reduced risk of cardiovascular death (RR 0.81 [0.75-0.87], I 0%), all-cause mortality (RR 0.83 [0.77-0.88], I 0%), and cardiac hospitalizations (RR 0.80 [0.70-0.92], I 58.4%). However, an a-priori specified subgroup analysis demonstrated that these benefits were limited to HFrEF (cardiovascular death RR 0.79 [0.73-0.86], I 0%; all-cause mortality RR 0.81 [0.75-0.87], I 0%; cardiac hospitalizations RR 0.76 [0.64-0.90], I 68%), but not HFpEF (all-cause mortality RR 0.92 [0.79-1.08], I 0%; cardiac hospitalizations RR 0.91 [0.67-1.24], I 17%). MRAs increased the risk of hyperkalemia (RR 2.03 [1.78-2.31], I 0%). Nonselective MRAs, but not selective MRAs increased the risk of gynecomastia (RR 7.37 [4.42-12.30], I 0% vs. RR 0.74 [0.43-1.27], I 0%). Evidence was of moderate quality for cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality and cardiovascular hospitalizations; and high-quality for hyperkalemia and gynecomastia.
CONCLUSIONS
MRAs reduce the risk of adverse cardiac events in HFrEF but not HFpEF. MRA use in HFpEF increases the risk of harm from hyperkalemia and gynecomastia. Selective MRAs are equally effective as nonselective MRAs, without a risk of gynecomastia.
Topics: Heart Failure; Hospitalization; Humans; Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists; Stroke Volume
PubMed: 27905877
DOI: 10.1186/s12872-016-0425-x -
American Journal of Clinical Dermatology Apr 2017The management of acne in adult females is problematic, with many having a history of treatment failure and some having a predisposition to androgen excess. Alternatives... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The management of acne in adult females is problematic, with many having a history of treatment failure and some having a predisposition to androgen excess. Alternatives to oral antibiotics and combined oral contraceptives (COCs) are required.
OBJECTIVE
Our aim was to conduct a hybrid systematic review of the evidence for benefits and potential harms of oral spironolactone in the management of acne in adult females.
METHODS
The review was conducted according to a previously published protocol. Three reviewers independently selected relevant studies from the search results, extracted data, assessed the risk of bias, and rated the quality of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
RESULTS
Ten randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 21 case series were retrieved. All trials were assessed as being at a 'high risk' of bias, and the quality of evidence was rated as low or very low for all outcomes. Apart from one crossover trial that demonstrated statistical superiority of a 200 mg daily dose versus inflamed lesions compared with placebo, data from the remaining trials were unhelpful in establishing the degree of efficacy of lower doses versus active comparators or placebo. Menstrual side effects were significantly more common with the 200 mg dose; frequency could be significantly reduced by concomitant use of a COC. Pooling of results for serum potassium supported the recent recommendation that routine monitoring is not required in this patient population.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review of RCTs and case series identified evidence of limited quality to underpin the expert endorsement of spironolactone at the doses typically used (≤100 mg/day) in everyday clinical practice.
Topics: Acne Vulgaris; Administration, Oral; Adult; Androgens; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Contraceptives, Oral, Combined; Female; Humans; Hyperandrogenism; Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sebaceous Glands; Spironolactone; Treatment Failure
PubMed: 28155090
DOI: 10.1007/s40257-016-0245-x -
Diabetes, Obesity & Metabolism Jun 2023To compare the relative efficacy of sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT-2is), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) and non-steroidal... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
Comparative efficacy of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists in chronic kidney disease and type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
AIM
To compare the relative efficacy of sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT-2is), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) and non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (nsMRAs) in improving the cardiovascular and renal outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and chronic kidney disease (CKD).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library from inception through 25 November 2022. We selected randomized controlled trials that studied patients with CKD and T2D with a follow-up of at least 24 weeks and compared SGLT-2is, GLP-1RAs and nsMRAs with each other and with placebo. Primary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and composite renal outcomes (CRO). Secondary outcomes were cardiovascular death, all-cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction and heart failure hospitalization (HFH). A frequentist approach was used to pool risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS
Twenty-nine studies with 50 938 participants for MACE and 49 965 participants for CRO were included. SGLT-2is did not significantly reduce MACE but were associated with significantly lower risks of CRO compared with GLP-1RAs (RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.64-0.91; P = .003) and nsMRAs (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.68-0.90; P = .001). Compared with GLP-1RAs and nsMRAs, SGLT-2is significantly reduced risks of HFH by 31% (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.55-0.88; P = .002) and 22% (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.63-0.95; P = .016), respectively, but did not significantly reduce other secondary outcomes. There were no significant differences between GLP-1RAs and nsMRAs in lowering all outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
SGLT-2is were associated with better cardiorenal protection than GLP-1RAs and nsMRAs in patients with CKD and T2D.
Topics: Humans; Cardiovascular Diseases; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor; Glucose; Hypoglycemic Agents; Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists; Network Meta-Analysis; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Sodium; Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors; Symporters
PubMed: 36751968
DOI: 10.1111/dom.15009 -
Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) Mar 2022Since the onset of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, various potential targeted therapies for SARS-CoV-2 infection have been... (Review)
Review
Since the onset of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, various potential targeted therapies for SARS-CoV-2 infection have been proposed. The protective effects of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA) against tissue fibrosis, pulmonary and systemic vasoconstriction, and inflammation have been implicated in potentially attenuating the severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection by inhibiting the deleterious effects of aldosterone. Furthermore, spironolactone, a type of MRA, has been suggested to have a beneficial effect on SARS-CoV-2 outcomes through its dual action as an MRA and antiandrogen, resulting in reduced transmembrane protease receptor serine type 2 (TMPRSS2)-related viral entry to host cells. In this study, we sought to investigate the association between MRA antagonist therapy and mortality in SARS-CoV-2 patients via systematic review and meta-analysis. The systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched for studies that reported the incidence of mortality in patients on MRA with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of the outcome were obtained using the random-effects model. Five studies with a total of 1,388,178 subjects (80,903 subjects receiving MRA therapy) met the inclusion criteria. We included studies with all types of MRA therapy including spironolactone and canrenone and found no association between MRA therapy and mortality in SARS-CoV-2 infection (OR = 0.387, 95% CI: 0.134-1.117, = 0.079).
PubMed: 35455823
DOI: 10.3390/healthcare10040645 -
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