...
首页> 外文期刊>Iranian journal of public health. >Comparing the Efficacy of Angiotensin Converting Enzyme In-hibitors with Calcium Channel Blockers on the Treatment of Di-abetic Nephropathy: A Meta-Analysis
【24h】

Comparing the Efficacy of Angiotensin Converting Enzyme In-hibitors with Calcium Channel Blockers on the Treatment of Di-abetic Nephropathy: A Meta-Analysis

机译:比较血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂与钙通道阻滞剂治疗糖尿病肾病的疗效:荟萃分析

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Background: The angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) could improve the symptoms of diabetic nephropathy. Whether the calcium channel blockers (CCBs) could be as effective as ACEIs on treating diabetic nephropathy is controversial. Here, we aimed to compare the efficacy of ACEIs with CCBs on the treatment of diabetic nephropathy by performing a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods: The Pubmed, Medline, Embase and The Cochrane Database were searched up to July 2017 for eligible randomized clinical trials studies. Effect sizes were summarized as mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (P-value0.05). Results: Seven RCTs involving 430 participants comparing ACEIs with CCBs were included. No benefit was seen in comparative group of ACEIs on systolic blood pressure(SBP) (MD=1.05 mmHg; 95% CI: -0.97 to 3.08, P=0.31), diastolic blood pressure (DBP) (MD= -0.34 mmHg; 95% CI: -1.2 to 0.51, P=0.43), urinary albumin excretion rates (UAER) (MD=1.91μg/min; 95% CI: -10.3 to 14.12, P=0.76), 24-h urine protein (24-UP) (SMD=-0.26; 95%CI: -0.55 to 0.03, P=0.08), glomerular filtration rate (GFR) (SMD=0.01; 95% CI: -0.38 to 0.41, P=0.95). On safety aspect, the risk of adverse reactions between ACEIs group and CCBs group are similar (RR=1.18; 95% CI: 0.61 to 2.28; P=0.61). Conclusion: Both ACEIs and CCBs could improve the BP, UAER, 24h-UP, and GFR of diabetic nephropathy to a similar extent.
机译:背景:血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂(ACEIs)可以改善糖尿病肾病的症状。钙通道阻滞剂(CCBs)在治疗糖尿病性肾病方面是否能与ACEIs一样有效。在这里,我们旨在通过进行随机对照试验(RCT)的荟萃分析,比较ACEIs与CCBs在治疗糖尿病性肾病中的功效。方法:检索截至2017年7月的Pubmed,Medline,Embase和Cochrane数据库以进行合格的随机临床试验研究。效应大小总结为均值差异(MD)或标准均值差异(SMD),置信区间为95%(P值<0.05)。结果:包括7个RCT,涉及430位参与者,比较了ACEI和CCB。在ACEIs的比较组中,收缩压(MD = 1.05 mmHg; 95%CI:-0.97至3.08,P = 0.31),舒张压(DBP)(MD = -0.34 mmHg; 95)无益处%CI:-1.2至0.51,P = 0.43),尿白蛋白排泄率(UAER)(MD =1.91μg/ min; 95%CI:-10.3至14.12,P = 0.76),24小时尿蛋白(24- UP)(SMD = -0.26; 95%CI:-0.55至0.03,P = 0.08),肾小球滤过率(GFR)(SMD = 0.01; 95%CI:-0.38至0.41,P = 0.95)。在安全方面,ACEIs组和CCBs组之间发生不良反应的风险相似(RR = 1.18; 95%CI:0.61至2.28; P = 0.61)。结论:ACEIs和CCBs均可在相似程度上改善糖尿病肾病的BP,UAER,24h-UP和GFR。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号