-
Drug Design, Development and Therapy 2020Levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel (LCIG) is a new type of administration that results in steadier levodopa plasma concentrations in advanced Parkinson's disease (PD)...
BACKGROUND
Levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel (LCIG) is a new type of administration that results in steadier levodopa plasma concentrations in advanced Parkinson's disease (PD) patients and effectively reduces poor mobility and dyskinesia.
METHODS
Electronic databases were searched up to January 1, 2018. The inclusion criteria for this review were as follows: LCIG vs oral medication in advanced PD patients.
RESULTS
Five trials, with a total of 198 patients, met all the inclusion criteria. The quality score of these studies ranged from 3 to 5. Two clinical trials showed that compared with oral medication, LCIG had a better treatment effect on on-time with troublesome dyskinesia (TSD) ( = 0.02) and on-time without TSD ( < 0.00001) in advanced PD patients. In addition, four of the 5 studies showed that the LCIG may have better efficacy than oral medication for improving the scores of the UPDRS, and two studies found that LCIG demonstrated better efficacy for improving the PDQ-39 scores. The video recording results indicated a potential decline in both dyskinesia and the "off" state in LCIG-treated patients. The incidence of adverse events was not significantly different between the LCIG and oral medication groups.
CONCLUSION
Compared with oral treatment, LCIG exerts its effectiveness, mostly by reducing the time of on-time with TSD, increasing the time of on-time without TSD and scores of UPDRS and PDQ-39. It is suggesting that LCIG was likely to be a new type of administration used in clinical applications. However, due to methodological flaws, these findings should be viewed with caution, and more RCTs are needed in the field to complement our findings.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Antiparkinson Agents; Carbidopa; Drug Combinations; Gels; Humans; Levodopa; Parkinson Disease
PubMed: 32161444
DOI: 10.2147/DDDT.S229621 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2018Antihypertensive drugs are often used in the belief that lowering blood pressure will prevent progression to more severe disease, and thereby improve pregnancy outcome.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Antihypertensive drugs are often used in the belief that lowering blood pressure will prevent progression to more severe disease, and thereby improve pregnancy outcome. This Cochrane Review is an updated review, first published in 2001 and subsequently updated in 2007 and 2014.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of antihypertensive drug treatments for women with mild to moderate hypertension during pregnancy.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (13 September 2017), and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised trials evaluating any antihypertensive drug treatment for mild to moderate hypertension during pregnancy, defined as systolic blood pressure 140 to 169 mmHg and/or diastolic blood pressure 90 to 109 mmHg. Comparisons were of one or more antihypertensive drug(s) with placebo, with no antihypertensive drug, or with another antihypertensive drug, and where treatment was planned to continue for at least seven days.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy.
MAIN RESULTS
For this update, we included 63 trials (data from 58 trials, 5909 women), with moderate to high risk of bias overall.We carried out GRADE assessments for the main 'antihypertensive drug versus placebo/no antihypertensive drug' comparison only. Evidence was graded from very low to moderate certainty, with downgrading mainly due to design limitations and imprecision.For many outcomes, trials contributing data evaluated different hypertensive drugs; while we did not downgrade for this indirectness, results should be interpreted with caution.Antihypertensive drug versus placebo/no antihypertensive drug (31 trials, 3485 women)Primary outcomes: moderate-certainty evidence suggests that use of antihypertensive drug(s) probably halves the risk of developing severe hypertension (risk ratio (RR) 0.49; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 0.60; 20 trials, 2558 women), but may have little or no effect on the risk of proteinuria/pre-eclampsia (average risk ratio (aRR) 0.92; 95% CI 0.75 to 1.14; 23 trials, 2851 women; low-certainty evidence). Moderate-certainty evidence also shows that antihypertensive drug(s) probably have little or no effect in the risk of total reported fetal or neonatal death (including miscarriage) (aRR 0.72; 95% CI 0.50 to 1.04; 29 trials, 3365 women), small-for-gestational-age babies (aRR 0.96; 95% CI 0.78 to 1.18; 21 trials, 2686 babies) or preterm birth less than 37 weeks (aRR 0.96; 95% CI 0.83 to 1.12; 15 trials, 2141 women).
SECONDARY OUTCOMES
we are uncertain of the effect of antihypertensive drug(s) on the risk of maternal death, severe pre-eclampsia, or eclampsia, orimpaired long-term growth and development of the baby in infancy and childhood, because the certainty of this evidence is very low. There may be little or no effect on the risk of changed/stopped drugs due to maternal side-effects, or admission to neonatal or intensive care nursery (low-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference in the risk of elective delivery (moderate-certainty evidence).Antihypertensive drug versus another antihypertensive drug (29 trials, 2774 women)Primary outcomes: beta blockers and calcium channel blockers together in the meta-analysis appear to be more effective than methyldopa in avoiding an episode of severe hypertension (RR 0.70; 95% CI 0.56 to 0.88; 11 trials, 638 women). There was also an increase in this risk when other antihypertensive drugs were compared with calcium channel blockers (RR 1.86; 95% CI 1.09 to 3.15; 5 trials, 223 women), but no evidence of a difference when methyldopa and calcium channel blockers together were compared with beta blockers (RR1.18, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.48; 10 trials, 692 women). No evidence of a difference in the risk of proteinuria/pre-eclampsia was found when alternative drugs were compared with methyldopa (aRR 0.78; 95% CI 0.58 to 1.06; 11 trials, 997 women), with calcium channel blockers (aRR: 1.24, 95% CI 0.70 to 2.19; 5 trials, 375 women), or with beta blockers (aRR 1.21, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.67; 12 trials, 1107 women).For the babies, we found no evidence of a difference in the risk oftotal reported fetal or neonatal death (including miscarriage) when comparing other antihypertensive drugs with methyldopa (aRR 0.77, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.14; 22 trials, 1791 babies), with calcium channel blockers (aRR 0.90, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.57; nine trials, 700 babies), or with beta blockers (aRR: 1.23, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.88; 19 trials, 1652 babies); nor in the risk for small-for-gestational age in the comparison with methyldopa (aRR 0.79, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.20; seven trials, 597 babies), with calcium channel blockers (aRR 1.05, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.73; four trials, 200 babies), or with beta blockers (average RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.60; 7 trials, 680 babies). No evidence of an overall difference among groups in the risk of preterm birth (less than 37 weeks) was found in the comparison with methyldopa (aRR: 0.91; 95% CI 0.68 to 1.22; 11 trials, 835 women), with calcium channel blockers (aRR 0.85, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.23; six trials, 330 women), or with beta blockers (aRR 1.22, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.66; 9 trials, 806 women).
SECONDARY OUTCOMES
There were no cases of maternal death andeclampsia. There is no evidence of a difference in the risk of severe pre-eclampsia, changed/stopped drug due to maternal side-effects, elective delivery, admission to neonatal or intensive care nursery when other antihypertensive drugs are compared with methyldopa, calcium channel blockers or beta blockers. Impaired long-term growth and development in infancy and childhood was not reported for these comparisons.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Antihypertensive drug therapy for mild to moderate hypertension during pregnancy reduces the risk of severe hypertension. The effect on other clinically important outcomes remains unclear. If antihypertensive drugs are used, beta blockers and calcium channel blockers appear to be more effective than the alternatives for preventing severe hypertension. High-quality large sample-sized randomised controlled trials are required in order to provide reliable estimates of the benefits and adverse effects of antihypertensive treatment for mild to moderate hypertension for both mother and baby, as well as costs to the health services, women and their families.
Topics: Antihypertensive Agents; Female; Fetal Death; Humans; Hypertension; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Premature; Infant, Small for Gestational Age; Maternal Death; Placebo Effect; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Cardiovascular; Proteinuria; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 30277556
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002252.pub4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2018Tardive dyskinesia (TD) is a disabling movement disorder associated with the prolonged use of antipsychotic medication. Several strategies have been examined in the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Tardive dyskinesia (TD) is a disabling movement disorder associated with the prolonged use of antipsychotic medication. Several strategies have been examined in the treatment of TD. Currently, however, there is no clear evidence of the effectiveness of these drugs in TD and they have been associated with many side effects. One particular strategy would be to use pharmaceutical agents which are known to influence the catecholaminergic system at various junctures.
OBJECTIVES
1. To determine the effects of any of the following drugs for antipsychotic-induced TD in people with schizophrenia or other chronic mental illnesses.i. Drugs which influence the noradrenergic system.ii. Dopamine receptor agonists.iii. Dopamine receptor antagonists.iv. Dopamine-depletor drugs.v. Drugs that increase the production or release of dopamine.2. To examine whether any improvement occurred with short periods of intervention (less than 6 weeks) and, if this did occur, whether this effect was maintained at longer periods of follow-up.3. To examine if there was a differential effect for the various compounds.4. To examine whether the use of non-antipsychotic catecholaminergic drugs are most effective in those with more recent onset TD (less than five years).
SEARCH METHODS
We retrieved 712 references from searching the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (July 2015 and April 2017). We also inspected references of all identified studies for further trials and contacted authors of trials for additional information.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We selected studies if they were randomised controlled trials focusing on people with schizophrenia or other chronic mental illnesses and antipsychotic-induced tardive dyskinesia. We compared the use of catecholaminergic interventions versus placebo, no intervention, or any other intervention for the treatment of antipsychotic-induced tardive dyskinesia.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We independently extracted data from these trials and we estimated risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assumed that people who left the studies early had no improvement.
MAIN RESULTS
There are 10 included trials (N = 261) published between 1973 and 2010; eight are new from the 2015 and 2017 update searches. Forty-eight studies are excluded. Participants were mostly chronically mentally ill inpatients in their 50s, and studies were primarily of short (2 to 6 weeks) duration. The overall risk of bias in these studies was unclear, mainly due to poor reporting of allocation concealment and generation of the sequence. Studies were also not clearly blinded and we are unsure if data are incomplete or selectively reported, or if other biases were operating.One small, three-arm trial found that both alpha-methyldopa (N = 20; RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.80; low-quality evidence) and reserpine (N = 20; RR 0.52 95% CI 0.29 to 0.96; low-quality evidence) may lead to a clinically important improvement in tardive dyskinesia symptoms compared with placebo after 2 weeks' treatment, but found no evidence of a difference between alpha-methyldopa and reserpine (N = 20; RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.86; very low quality evidence). Another small trial compared tetrabenazine and haloperidol after 18 weeks' treatment and found no evidence of a difference on clinically important improvement in tardive dyskinesia symptoms (N = 13; RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.95; very low quality evidence). No study reported on adverse events.For remaining outcomes there was no evidence of a difference between any of the interventions: alpha-methyldopa versus placebo for deterioration of tardive dyskinesia symptoms (1 RCT; N = 20; RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.02 to 7.32; very low quality evidence), celiprolol versus placebo for leaving the study early (1 RCT; N = 35; RR 5.28, 95% CI 0.27 to 102.58; very low quality evidence) and quality of life (1 RCT; N = 35; RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.12; very low quality evidence), alpha-methyldopa versus reserpine for deterioration of tardive dyskinesia symptoms (1 RCT; N = 20; not estimable, no reported events; very low quality evidence), reserpine or carbidopa/levodopa versus placebo for deterioration of tardive dyskinesia symptoms (2 RCTs; N = 37; RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.35 to 3.99; very low quality evidence), oxypertine versus placebo for deterioration of mental state (1 RCT; N = 42; RR 2.20, 95% CI 0.22 to 22.45; very low quality evidence), dopaminergic drugs (amantadine, bromocriptine, tiapride, oxypertine, carbidopa/levodopa) versus placebo for leaving the study early (6 RCTs; N = 163; RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.54; very low quality evidence), and tetrabenazine versus haloperidol for deterioration of tardive dyskinesia symptoms (1 RCT; N = 13; RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.09 to 14.92) and leaving the study early (1 RCT; N = 13; RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.00).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Although there has been a large amount of research in this area, many studies were excluded due to inherent problems in the nature of their cross-over designs. Usually data are not reported before the cross-over and the nature of TD and its likely response to treatments make it imprudent to use this data. The review provides little usable information for service users or providers and more well-designed and well-reported studies are indicated.
Topics: Adrenergic Uptake Inhibitors; Anti-Dyskinesia Agents; Antipsychotic Agents; Celiprolol; Disease Progression; Dopamine Antagonists; Dyskinesia, Drug-Induced; Haloperidol; Humans; Methyldopa; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Reserpine; Tetrabenazine; Tiapamil Hydrochloride
PubMed: 29342497
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000458.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2017Hypertension is an important risk factor for adverse cardiovascular events including stroke, myocardial infarction, heart failure and renal failure. The main goal of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Hypertension is an important risk factor for adverse cardiovascular events including stroke, myocardial infarction, heart failure and renal failure. The main goal of treatment is to reduce these events. Systematic reviews have shown proven benefit of antihypertensive drug therapy in reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality but most of the evidence is in people 60 years of age and older. We wanted to know what the effects of therapy are in people 18 to 59 years of age.
OBJECTIVES
To quantify antihypertensive drug effects on all-cause mortality in adults aged 18 to 59 years with mild to moderate primary hypertension. To quantify effects on cardiovascular mortality plus morbidity (including cerebrovascular and coronary heart disease mortality plus morbidity), withdrawal due adverse events and estimate magnitude of systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) lowering at one year.
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane Hypertension Information Specialist searched the following databases for randomized controlled trials up to January 2017: the Cochrane Hypertension Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We contacted authors of relevant papers regarding further published and unpublished work.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized trials of at least one year' duration comparing antihypertensive pharmacotherapy with a placebo or no treatment in adults aged 18 to 59 years with mild to moderate primary hypertension defined as SBP 140 mmHg or greater or DBP 90 mmHg or greater at baseline, or both.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
The outcomes assessed were all-cause mortality, total cardiovascular (CVS) mortality plus morbidity, withdrawals due to adverse events, and decrease in SBP and DBP. For dichotomous outcomes, we used risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) and a fixed-effect model to combine outcomes across trials. For continuous outcomes, we used mean difference (MD) with 95% CI and a random-effects model as there was significant heterogeneity.
MAIN RESULTS
The population in the seven included studies (17,327 participants) were predominantly healthy adults with mild to moderate primary hypertension. The Medical Research Council Trial of Mild Hypertension contributed 14,541 (84%) of total randomized participants, with mean age of 50 years and mean baseline blood pressure of 160/98 mmHg and a mean duration of follow-up of five years. Treatments used in this study were bendrofluazide 10 mg daily or propranolol 80 mg to 240 mg daily with addition of methyldopa if required. The risk of bias in the studies was high or unclear for a number of domains and led us to downgrade the quality of evidence for all outcomes.Based on five studies, antihypertensive drug therapy as compared to placebo or untreated control may have little or no effect on all-cause mortality (2.4% with control vs 2.3% with treatment; low quality evidence; RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.13). Based on 4 studies, the effects on coronary heart disease were uncertain due to low quality evidence (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.19). Low quality evidence from six studies showed that drug therapy may reduce total cardiovascular mortality and morbidity from 4.1% to 3.2% over five years (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.91) due to reduction in cerebrovascular mortality and morbidity (1.3% with control vs 0.6% with treatment; RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.64). Very low quality evidence from three studies showed that withdrawals due to adverse events were higher with drug therapy from 0.7% to 3.0% (RR 4.82, 95% CI 1.67 to 13.92). The effects on blood pressure varied between the studies and we are uncertain as to how much of a difference treatment makes on average.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Antihypertensive drugs used to treat predominantly healthy adults aged 18 to 59 years with mild to moderate primary hypertension have a small absolute effect to reduce cardiovascular mortality and morbidity primarily due to reduction in cerebrovascular mortality and morbidity. All-cause mortality and coronary heart disease were not reduced. There is lack of good evidence on withdrawal due to adverse events. Future trials in this age group should be at least 10 years in duration and should compare different first-line drug classes and strategies.
Topics: Adult; Antihypertensive Agents; Bendroflumethiazide; Blood Pressure; Cause of Death; Coronary Disease; Humans; Hypertension; Methyldopa; Middle Aged; Myocardial Infarction; Patient Dropouts; Propranolol; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stroke; Young Adult
PubMed: 28813123
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008276.pub2 -
Journal of Hypertension Nov 2017Although medication is generally avoided wherever possible during pregnancy, pharmacotherapy is required for the treatment of pregnancy associated hypertension, which... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Although medication is generally avoided wherever possible during pregnancy, pharmacotherapy is required for the treatment of pregnancy associated hypertension, which remains a leading cause of maternal and fetal morbidity and mortality. The long-term effects to the child of in-utero exposure to antihypertensive agents remains largely unknown.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to systematically review published studies on adverse outcomes to the child associated with in-utero exposure to antihypertensive medications.
METHODS
OVID, Scopus, EBSCO Collections, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched for relevant publications published between January 1950 and October 2016 and a total of 688 potentially eligible studies were identified.
RESULTS
Following review, 47 primary studies were eligible for inclusion. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist was used to assess study quality. Five studies were of excellent quality; the remainder were either mediocre or poor. Increased risk of low birth weight, low size for gestational age, preterm birth, and congenital defects following in-utero exposure to all antihypertensive agents were identified. Two studies reported an increased risk of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder following exposure to labetalol, and an increased risk of sleep disorders following exposure to methyldopa and clonidine.
CONCLUSION
The current systematic review demonstrates a paucity of relevant published high-quality studies. A small number of studies suggest possible increased risk of adverse child health outcomes; however, most published studies have methodological weaknesses and/or lacked statistical power thus preventing any firm conclusions being drawn.
Topics: Antihypertensive Agents; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity; Birth Weight; Child; Child Health; Female; Gestational Age; Humans; Hypertension, Pregnancy-Induced; Infant, Low Birth Weight; Infant, Newborn; Labetalol; Maternal Exposure; Pregnancy; Premature Birth
PubMed: 28661961
DOI: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000001456 -
BJOG : An International Journal of... Sep 2014Pregnant and postpartum women with severe hypertension are at increased risk of stroke and require blood pressure (BP) reduction. Parenteral antihypertensives have been... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Pregnant and postpartum women with severe hypertension are at increased risk of stroke and require blood pressure (BP) reduction. Parenteral antihypertensives have been most commonly studied, but oral agents would be ideal for use in busy and resource-constrained settings.
OBJECTIVES
To review systematically, the effectiveness of oral antihypertensive agents for treatment of severe pregnancy/postpartum hypertension.
SEARCH STRATEGY
A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library was performed.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials in pregnancy and postpartum with at least one arm consisting of a single oral antihypertensive agent to treat systolic BP ≥ 160 mmHg and/or diastolic BP ≥ 110 mmHg.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Cochrane RevMan 5.1 was used to calculate relative risk (RR) and weighted mean difference by random effects.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 15 randomised controlled trials (915 women) in pregnancy and one postpartum trial. Most trials in pregnancy compared oral/sublingual nifedipine capsules (8-10 mg) with another agent, usually parenteral hydralazine or labetalol. Nifedipine achieved treatment success in most women, similar to hydralazine (84% with nifedipine; relative risk [RR] 1.07, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.98-1.17) or labetalol (100% with nifedipine; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.95-1.09). Less than 2% of women treated with nifedipine experienced hypotension. There were no differences in adverse maternal or fetal outcomes. Target BP was achieved ~ 50% of the time with oral labetalol (100 mg) or methyldopa (250 mg) (47% labetelol versus 56% methyldopa; RR 0.85 95% CI 0.54-1.33).
CONCLUSIONS
Oral nifedipine, and possibly labetalol and methyldopa, are suitable options for treatment of severe hypertension in pregnancy/postpartum.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Antihypertensive Agents; Female; Humans; Hydralazine; Hypertension, Pregnancy-Induced; Labetalol; Methyldopa; Nifedipine; Postpartum Period; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Cardiovascular; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome; Vasodilator Agents
PubMed: 24832366
DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.12737 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2009Hypertension is associated with an increased risk of stroke, myocardial infarction and congestive heart failure. Methyldopa is a centrally acting antihypertensive agent,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Hypertension is associated with an increased risk of stroke, myocardial infarction and congestive heart failure. Methyldopa is a centrally acting antihypertensive agent, which was commonly used in the 1970's and 80's for blood pressure control. Its use at present has largely been replaced by antihypertensive drug classes with less side effects, but it is still used in developing countries due to its low cost. A review of its relative effectiveness compared to placebo on surrogate and clinical outcomes is justified.
OBJECTIVES
To quantify the effect of methyldopa compared to placebo in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on all cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, serious adverse events, myocardial infarctions, strokes, withdrawals due to adverse effects and blood pressure in patients with primary hypertension.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the following databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (1960-June 2009), MEDLINE (2005-June 2009), and EMBASE (2007-June 2009). Bibliographic citations from retrieved studies were also reviewed. No language restrictions were applied.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We selected RCTs studying patients with primary hypertension. We excluded studies of patients with secondary hypertension or gestational hypertension.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed trial quality using the risk of bias tool. Data synthesis and analysis was performed using RevMan 5. Data for blood pressure were combined using the generic inverse variance method.
MAIN RESULTS
Twelve trials (N=595) met the inclusion criteria for this review. None of these studies evaluated the effects of methyldopa compared to placebo on mortality and morbidity outcomes. Data for withdrawals due to adverse effects were not reported in a way that permitted meaningful meta-analysis. Data from six of the twelve trials (N=231) were combined to evaluate the blood pressure lowering effects of methyldopa compared to placebo. This meta-analysis shows that methyldopa at doses ranging from 500-2250 mg daily lowers systolic and diastolic blood pressure by a mean of 13 (95%CI 6-20) / 8 (95% CI 4-13) mmHg. Overall, the risk of bias was considered moderate.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Methyldopa lowers blood pressure to varying degrees compared to placebo for patients with primary hypertension. Its effect on clinical outcomes, however, remains uncertain.
Topics: Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Pressure; Humans; Hypertension; Methyldopa; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 19821316
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003893.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... 2000Hypertension is a common complication of pregnancy. Antihypertensive drugs are widely used in the belief these will improve outcome for both the woman (such as... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Hypertension is a common complication of pregnancy. Antihypertensive drugs are widely used in the belief these will improve outcome for both the woman (such as decreasing the risk of stroke or eclampsia) and her baby (such as decreasing the risk of preterm birth and its complications). Beta-blockers are a popular choice of antihypertensive agent during pregnancy; other choices include methyldopa and calcium channel blockers.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this review is to assess whether oral beta-blockers are overall better than placebo, or no beta-blocker, for women with mild-moderate hypertension during pregnancy, and to assess whether oral beta-blockers have any advantages over other antihypertensive agents for women with mild-moderate hypertension during pregnancy. Both maternal outcomes (e.g., the incidence of severe hypertension) and perinatal outcomes (e.g., mortality) were of interest.
SEARCH STRATEGY
Register of trials maintained by the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group, MEDLINE 1966-97, bibliographies of retrieved papers, personal files. Date of last search: June 2000.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Trials comparing beta-blockers with (i) placebo or no therapy, or (ii) other antihypertensive agents, for women with mild-moderate pregnancy hypertension (i.e., blood pressure under 170 mm Hg systolic, or 110 mm Hg diastolic).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
All data were extracted independently by two investigators, who were not blinded to outcome or other trial characteristics. Whenever possible, missing data were obtained by personal communication with authors. Discrepancies were resolved by discussion. The overview was divided into two comparisons: (i) beta-blockers versus placebo or no therapy, and (ii) beta-blockers versus other antihypertensives.
MAIN RESULTS
Twenty-seven trials, involving just under 2400 women, are included in this review. Fourteen trials (1516 women) compared beta-blockers with placebo/no beta blocker. Oral beta-blockers decrease the risk of severe hypertension (relative risk (RR) 0.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26-0.53) and the need for additional antihypertensive drugs (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.31-0.62). There are insufficient data for any conclusions about the effect on perinatal mortality or preterm delivery. Beta-blockers seem to be associated with an increase in small for gestational age infants (RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.01-1.79). Maternal hospital admission may be decreased, neonatal bradycardia increased and respiratory distress syndrome decreased, but these outcomes are only reported in a very small proportion of trials. Eleven trials (787 women) compared beta-blockers with methyldopa. Beta-blockers appear to be no more effective and probably equally as safe (from maternal and perinatal perspectives) as methyldopa. Single small trials have compared beta-blockers with hydralazine and with nicardipine. It is unusual for women to change drugs due to side effects.
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS
The improvement in control of maternal blood pressure with use of beta-blockers would be worthwhile only if it were reflected in other more substantive benefits for the mother and/or baby, and none have yet been clearly demonstrated. The effect of beta-blockers on perinatal outcome is uncertain, given that the worrying trend to an increase in small for gestational age infants is partly dependent on one small outlying trial. Large, randomised controlled trials are needed to determine whether antihypertensive therapy in general (rather than beta-blocker therapy specifically) results in benefits that outweigh the risks for treatment of mild-moderate pregnancy hypertension. If so, then it would be appropriate to look at which antihypertensive is best. Beta-blockers would remain a candidate class of agents.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; Antihypertensive Agents; Female; Humans; Hypertension; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Cardiovascular; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 11034777
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002863