系統性回顧 related to this topic

loading
7 References (7 articles) loading Revert Studify

Systematic review

Unclassified

期刊 The Cochrane database of systematic reviews
Year 2020
Loading references information
BACKGROUND: Approximately half of people with heart failure have chronic kidney disease (CKD). Pharmacological interventions for heart failure in people with CKD have the potential to reduce death (any cause) or hospitalisations for decompensated heart failure. However, these interventions are of uncertain benefit and may increase the risk of harm, such as hypotension and electrolyte abnormalities, in those with CKD. OBJECTIVES: This review aims to look at the benefits and harms of pharmacological interventions for HF (i.e., antihypertensive agents, inotropes, and agents that may improve the heart performance indirectly) in people with HF and CKD. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies through 12 September 2019 in consultation with an Information Specialist and 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 of any pharmacological intervention for acute or chronic heart failure, among people of any age with chronic kidney disease of at least three months duration. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently screened the records to identify eligible studies and extracted data on the following dichotomous outcomes: death, hospitalisations, worsening heart failure, worsening kidney function, hyperkalaemia, and hypotension. We used random effects meta-analysis to estimate treatment effects, which we expressed as a risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane tool. We applied the GRADE methodology to rate the certainty of evidence. MAIN RESULTS: One hundred and twelve studies met our selection criteria: 15 were studies of adults with CKD; 16 studies were conducted in the general population but provided subgroup data for people with CKD; and 81 studies included individuals with CKD, however, data for this subgroup were not provided. The risk of bias in all 112 studies was frequently high or unclear. Of the 31 studies (23,762 participants) with data on CKD patients, follow-up ranged from three months to five years, and study size ranged from 16 to 2916 participants. In total, 26 studies (19,612 participants) reported disaggregated and extractable data on at least one outcome of interest for our review and were included in our meta-analyses. In acute heart failure, the effects of adenosine A1-receptor antagonists, dopamine, nesiritide, or serelaxin on death, hospitalisations, worsening heart failure or kidney function, hyperkalaemia, hypotension or quality of life were uncertain due to sparse data or were not reported. In chronic heart failure, the effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) (4 studies, 5003 participants: RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.02; I2 = 78%; low certainty evidence), aldosterone antagonists (2 studies, 34 participants: RR 0.61 95% CI 0.06 to 6.59; very low certainty evidence), and vasopressin receptor antagonists (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.89; 2 studies, 1840 participants; low certainty evidence) on death (any cause) were uncertain. Treatment with beta-blockers may reduce the risk of death (any cause) (4 studies, 3136 participants: RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.79; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). Treatment with ACEi or ARB (2 studies, 1368 participants: RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.90; I2 = 97%; very low certainty evidence) had uncertain effects on hospitalisation for heart failure, as treatment estimates were consistent with either benefit or harm. Treatment with beta-blockers may decrease hospitalisation for heart failure (3 studies, 2287 participants: RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.05; I2 = 87%; low certainty evidence). Aldosterone antagonists may increase the risk of hyperkalaemia compared to placebo or no treatment (3 studies, 826 participants: RR 2.91, 95% CI 2.03 to 4.17; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence). Renin inhibitors had uncertain risks of hyperkalaemia (2 studies, 142 participants: RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.49; I2 = 0%; very low certainty). We were unable to estimate whether treatment with sinus node inhibitors affects the risk of hyperkalaemia, as there were few studies and meta-analysis was not possible. Hyperkalaemia was not reported for the CKD subgroup in studies investigating other therapies. The effects of ACEi or ARB, or aldosterone antagonists on worsening heart failure or kidney function, hypotension, or quality of life were uncertain due to sparse data or were not reported. Effects of anti-arrhythmic agents, digoxin, phosphodiesterase inhibitors, renin inhibitors, sinus node inhibitors, vasodilators, and vasopressin receptor antagonists were very uncertain due to the paucity of studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The effects of pharmacological interventions for heart failure in people with CKD are uncertain and there is insufficient evidence to inform clinical practice. Study data for treatment outcomes in patients with heart failure and CKD are sparse despite the potential impact of kidney impairment on the benefits and harms of treatment. Future research aimed at analysing existing data in general population HF studies to explore the effect in subgroups of patients with CKD, considering stage of disease, may yield valuable insights for the management of people with HF and CKD.

Systematic review

Unclassified

期刊 British journal of anaesthesia
Year 2015
Loading references information
系统评价的目的是总结关于腰椎间盘手术后生物心理社会危险因素预测价值的科学依据。使用医学和心理数据库查找潜在的相关文章,从而选择了11项研究。这些研究中的每一项都有一个前瞻性设计,检查术前变量对腰椎间盘手术结果的预测价值。结果表明,社会人口,临床,工作相关以及心理因素预测腰椎间盘手术结局。结果相对一致地表明,较低的教育水平,术前疼痛水平较高,工作满意度较低,病假持续时间更长,心理投诉水平更高,被动回避应对能力较强,作为疼痛预后不佳的预测因子,残疾,工作能力,或这些结果措施的组合。这项审查的结果提供了初步机会,选择有风险的患者不利的结果。然而,需要进一步的系统和方法学高质量的研究,特别是对于可以受到多学科干预的积极影响的那些预测因子。

Systematic review

Unclassified

期刊 BMJ (Clinical research ed.)
Year 2015
Loading references information
颈痛是英国四大最常报道的肌肉骨骼疾病之一。关于哪个单独的颈部疼痛患者继续有复发,持续或不能治疗的颈部疼痛知之甚少。非特异性颈部症状的发展和持续性被认为与多种因素有关。这项系统评估调查了可能构成患有非特异性颈部疼痛的患者复发,持续或不能治疗的问题的预后因素。它包括至少1年随访期的前瞻性研究,并排除了横断面和病例对照研究。包括九项研究。八个被评估为高质量和一个质量较差。这项审查发现有很强的证据表明与老年人相关的不利结果,目前的颈痛发作时间较长,以前的颈部问题,共存的肩部问题和其他肌肉骨骼疾病。有矛盾的证据表明疼痛和残疾的基线测量预测结果。有强有力的证据表明,定期运动预测会有很好的结果。关于预后指标的这一证据可以指导临床医生提供咨询或治疗,这可能有助于预防持续的颈部问题。没有高质量的研究调查心理和社会人口学因素的预测性质。这对临床实践和研究都有影响。

Systematic review

Unclassified

期刊 Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Year 2014
Loading references information
背景:洋地黄甙有更长的200多年来一直在临床用于心脏衰竭(HF)的治疗。在最近几年,一些试验已经进行,以解决有关它们的功效和毒性问题。 目的:检查患者的正常窦性心律心衰治疗洋地黄苷的有效性。审查洋地黄在服用利尿剂和血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂的患者的影响;在患者的不同严重程度和疾病的持续时间;患者事先接触洋地黄对没有事先接触;和患者的“高频因心脏收缩功能障碍”与“高频射血分数”。 搜索方法:临床对照试验科克伦中央登记册(中环),医学文献,文摘和论文摘要:搜索以下数据库2013年5月进行了更新。美国心脏协会,美国心脏病学院和欧洲心脏病学会年会上摘要进行了全面搜查,从1996年至2013年3月。此外,制药业(葛兰素史克和Covis制药)提供的参考文献目录。 选择标准:包括随机不论男女有症状的心衰谁进行了研究七个星期或更长的时间20个或更多成年参与者安慰剂对照试验。排除是试验,其中心房颤动的患病率为2%或更大,或其中任何心律失常可能损害心脏功能或HF的任何潜在的可逆原因如急性缺血性心脏疾病或心肌炎在场。 数据收集和分析:从上述选择搜索中的文章该评价作者的共同努力进行了评价。科克伦心集团的工作人员跑了对照试验,MEDLINE和医学文摘搜查的科克伦中央登记册。 主要结果:没有新的研究,确定在更新的搜索。十三项研究(7896人)都包括在内,和死亡率,住院和临床状况的主要终点,分别基于8,4,并且这些选择的研究12,记录和分析。数据显示没有证据在治疗组和对照组之间的死亡率的差异,而洋地黄疗法既与住院和临床恶化率较低有关。最大的研究,其中大多数参与者服用血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂,表现出“其他心脏”的死亡,可能是由于心律失常一个显著上升。但是总的来说,这些研究结果的基础上研究β-阻断剂,以及血管紧张素受体阻滞剂和醛固酮拮抗剂之前完成的,被广泛用于治疗的HF。 作者的结论:文献表明,洋地黄可能具有在心衰患者谁是正常窦性心律的治疗有益的作用。需要新的试验,以阐明洋地黄的剂量和其在β-阻断剂和显示出可有效地治疗心力衰竭的其它试剂的时代用处的重要性。

Systematic review

Unclassified

期刊 Journal of cardiac failure
Year 2004
Loading references information
背景:本文综述洋地黄治疗充血性心脏衰竭患者窦性心律的随机试验的当前状态。方法和结果7周或以上的20人或以上的成年患者的随机双盲安慰剂对照试验。我们确定了13个试验符合纳入标准,共包括了7896例。这个数字,7755例患者死亡率的信息作出了贡献,7262住院信息恶化心脏衰竭,和1096临床状态的信息。与洋地黄治疗的患者与安慰剂相比有胜算比为0.98的死亡率和置信区间(0.89,1.09)​​,住院为0.68(0.61,0.75),0.31临床状况恶化的程度较轻(0.21,0.43 )。结论:文献表明,该药具有长期死亡率没有影响,但降低了住院率,有症状的病人的临床状况的积极作用。药物有症状,尽管适当使用利尿剂和血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂治疗的患者谁留的有利影响。然而,与β-受体阻滞剂,螺内酯和缬沙坦合用效果仍然不明朗。

Systematic review

Unclassified

期刊 European journal of clinical pharmacology
Year 1994
Loading references information
我们研究磷酸二酯酶抑制剂(PDIS)的影响上有明显的慢性心脏衰竭患者的死亡率。共有13个随机,安慰剂对照试验涉及2808名患者的私人驾驶教师被选定。Meta分析,所有患者使用的数据,表明有非显着(P = 0.16)增加约17%,收到1交车[比值比(OR)1.17,95%置信区间的患者的死亡率( CI)0.94-1.46]。然而,观察治疗效果被发现是异类,由于维司力农的试验结果。异质性变得不显着(p = 0.77)时,这些试验被拆除,在死亡率显着增加,与其他私人驾驶教师的待遇(OR 1.41,95%CI 1.11-1.79)下观察。在治疗的患者或无需额外的血管扩张(VD)的子群中,类似的结果观察(交车,差饷物业估价署:1.3,95%CI 1.03-1.7;没有VD的交车或2.04,95%CI为1.1-3.8)。这些结果表明,私人驾驶教师(除与维司力农)不应该被公开慢性心脏衰竭患者长期使用规定。其他血管扩张剂治疗慢性心脏衰竭患者接受私人驾驶教师没有解释私人驾驶教师看到的死亡率增加。这种毒性,因此,必须通过其他机制产生。需要进一步的实验和临床评估,以确认维司力农对慢性心脏衰竭患者的生存是有利的影响,并确定机制(S)区别于其他私人驾驶教师,本剂的治疗效果。

Systematic review

Unclassified

作者 Jaeschke R , Oxman AD , Guyatt GH
期刊 The American journal of medicine
Year 1990
Loading references information
目的:重新评估地高辛的有效性为充血性心脏衰竭(CHF)患者窦性心律的治疗在光从最近发表的随机对照试验的数据和定量评估其实用性。研究识别:Medline数据库的计算机搜查,执行,每个检索文章的参考文献列表进行了审查。 研究选择:回顾超过360引文和参考文献目录19评论文章和61可能相关的文章透露七人包括在此概述的双盲随机对照试验。 数据抽取:研究质量评估和有关研究人群,具体的干预措施,以及临床相关结果测量的描述性信息提取。 资料综合业绩:常见的比值比为CHF恶化而接受地高辛与安慰剂为0.28,与0.16〜0.49 95%的置信区间。地高辛效益预测因素包括三分之一心脏的声音存在和瑞士法郎的严重程度和持续时间。 结论:从高方法学质量七项试验数据表明,平均而言,一出九CHF患者和窦性心律派生自的地高辛临床上重要的好处(以1/33〜1/5,95%置信区间)。