1.
Efficacy and safety of dual vs single renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockade in chronic kidney disease: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Zhao, M, Qu, H, Wang, R, Yu, Y, Chang, M, Ma, S, Zhang, H, Wang, Y, Zhang, Y
Medicine. 2021;(35):e26544
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND To lower albuminuria and to achieve blood pressure (BP) goals, dual renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors are sometimes used in clinical practice for the treatment of CKD. However, the efficacy and safety of dual RAAS blockade therapy remains controversial. METHODS PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched, and random effects model was used to calculate the effect sizes of eligible studies. Potential sources of heterogeneity were detected by meta-regression and subgroup analysis. RESULTS The present meta-analysis of 72 randomized controlled trials with 10,296 patients demonstrated that dual RAAS blockade therapy was superior to monotherapy in reducing the urine albumin excretion, urine protein excretion, and BP. These beneficial effects were related to the decrease of glomerular filtration rate, the increase of serum potassium level, and higher rates of hyperkalemia and hypotension. Meanwhile, these effects did not lead to improvements in short-term or long-term outcomes, including doubling of serum creatinine, acute kidney injury, end-stage renal disease, mortality, and hospitalization. Compared with the single therapy, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) in combination with angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARB) was a better dual therapy than ACEI or ARB in combination with renin inhibitor or aldosterone receptor antagonist in decreasing urine albumin excretion, urine protein excretion and BP, and the combination was not associated with a lower glomerular filtration rate. CONCLUSION Compared with the single therapy, ACEI in combination with ARB was a better dual therapy than ACEI or ARB in combination with renin inhibitor or aldosterone receptor antagonist. Although ACEI in combination with ARB was associated with higher incidences of hyperkalemia and hypotension, careful individualized management and potassium binders may further expand its application (PROSPERO number CRD42020179398).
2.
Genetic associations between genes in the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system and renal disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Smyth, LJ, Cañadas-Garre, M, Cappa, RC, Maxwell, AP, McKnight, AJ
BMJ open. 2019;(4):e026777
Abstract
BACKGROUND Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is defined by abnormalities in kidney structure and/or function present for more than 3 months. Worldwide, both the incidence and prevalence rates of CKD are increasing. The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) regulates fluid and electrolyte balance through the kidney. RAAS activation is associated with hypertension, which is directly implicated in causation and progression of CKD. RAAS blockade, using drugs targeting individual RAAS mediators and receptors, has proven to be renoprotective. OBJECTIVES To assess genomic variants present within RAAS genes, ACE, ACE2, AGT, AGTR1, AGTR2 and REN, for association with CKD. DESIGN AND DATA SOURCES A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational research was performed to evaluate the RAAS gene polymorphisms in CKD using both PubMed and Web of Science databases with publication date between the inception of each database and 31 December 2018. Eligible articles included case-control studies of a defined kidney disease and included genotype counts. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA Any paper was removed from the analysis if it was not written in English or Spanish, was a non-human study, was a paediatric study, was not a case-control study, did not have a renal disease phenotype, did not include data for the genes, was a gene expression-based study or had a pharmaceutical drug focus. RESULTS A total of 3531 studies were identified, 114 of which met the inclusion criteria. Genetic variants reported in at least three independent publications for populations with the same ethnicity were determined and quantitative analyses performed. Three variants returned significant results in populations with different ethnicities at p<0.05: ACE insertion, AGT rs699-T allele and AGTR1 rs5186-A allele; each variant was associated with a reduced risk of CKD development. CONCLUSIONS Further biological pathway and functional analyses of the RAAS gene polymorphisms will help define how variation in components of the RAAS pathway contributes to CKD.
3.
Pivotal clinical trials, meta-analyses and current guidelines in the treatment of hyperkalemia.
Bianchi, S, Regolisti, G
Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association. 2019;(Suppl 3):iii51-iii61
Abstract
Hyperkalemia (HK) is the most common electrolyte disturbance observed in patients with advanced stages of chronic kidney disease (CKD), is a potentially life-threatening clinical condition due to an increased risk of fatal arrhythmias, and strongly impacts the quality of life and prognosis of CKD patients. Moreover, while renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASIs) represent the most cardio-nephro-protective drugs used in clinical practice, the treatment with these drugs per se increases serum potassium (sK) values, particularly when heart failure and diabetes mellitus coexist. In fact, the onset or recurrence of HK is frequently associated with not starting, down-titrating or withdrawing RAASIs, and is an indication to begin renal replacement treatment in end-stage renal disease. Current strategies aimed at preventing and treating chronic HK are still unsatisfactory, as evidenced by the relatively high prevalence of HK also in patients under stable nephrology care, and even in the ideal setting of randomized clinical trials. Indeed, dietary potassium restriction, the use of sodium bicarbonate or diuretics, the withdrawal or down-titration of RAASIs, or the administration of old potassium binders, namely sodium polystyrene sulphonate and calcium polystyrene sulphonate, have limited efficacy and are poorly tolerated; therefore, these strategies are not suitable for long-term control of sK. As such, there is an important unmet need for novel therapeutic options for the chronic management of patients at risk for HK. The development of new potassium binders may change the treatment landscape in the near future. This review summarizes the current evidence on the treatment of chronic HK in cardio-renal patients.
4.
Efficacy and Safety of Dual Blockade of the Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System in Diabetic Kidney Disease: A Meta-Analysis.
Feng, Y, Huang, R, Kavanagh, J, Li, L, Zeng, X, Li, Y, Fu, P
American journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions. 2019;(3):259-286
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Current guidelines recommend renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors in the treatment of diabetic kidney disease (DKD). However, evidence suggests that the combined use of RAAS blockers may be associated with increased rates of adverse events. OBJECTIVES Our objective was to examine the efficacy and safety of dual blockade of the RAAS in patients with DKD. METHODS This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between January 1990 and January 2018 sourced via the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. RCTs were included if they investigated the efficacy and safety of dual blockade therapy compared with monotherapy in patients with DKD. Random effects models were used in meta-analysis to account for heterogeneities in effect sizes across the reviewed studies. Analyses were stratified by blood pressure and albuminuria. We further conducted subgroup analyses by considering various combinations of RAAS inhibitors. RESULTS Based on 42 RCTs with 14,576 patients, dual RAAS blockade therapy was associated with significant decreases in blood pressure, albuminuria, and proteinuria. However, dual therapy was not superior to monotherapy in terms of reductions in all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, or progression to end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Significant increases in serum potassium and rates of hyperkalemia and hypotension were more common in patients treated with dual therapy. However, glomerular filtration rates (GFR) did not decrease significantly with dual therapy. In subgroup analysis, an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) plus an angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARB) or a direct renin inhibitor (DRI) plus an ACEI/ARB did not significantly increase the risk of hyperkalemia, hypotension, and adverse events, and the risk of hypotension increased significantly within the normotensive subgroup but not within the hypertensive subgroup. The risk of hyperkalemia increased significantly in patients with DKD with macroalbuminuria but not in those with microalbuminuria. CONCLUSION Dual inhibition therapy is superior to monotherapy for blood pressure control and urine protein reduction, though such superiority does not translate into improvements in longer-term outcomes, such as reduced progression to ESRD, all-cause mortality, and cardiovascular mortality. An ACEI plus an ARB or a DRI plus an ACEI/ARB may be a safe and effective therapy for patients with DKD, and combination therapy may be suitable for patients with DKD and hypertension and microalbuminuria.
5.
First-line drugs inhibiting the renin angiotensin system versus other first-line antihypertensive drug classes for hypertension.
Chen, YJ, Li, LJ, Tang, WL, Song, JY, Qiu, R, Li, Q, Xue, H, Wright, JM
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2018;(11):CD008170
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND This is the first update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2015. Renin angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors include angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and renin inhibitors. They are widely prescribed for treatment of hypertension, especially for people with diabetes because of postulated advantages for reducing diabetic nephropathy and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Despite widespread use for hypertension, the efficacy and safety of RAS inhibitors compared to other antihypertensive drug classes remains unclear. OBJECTIVES To evaluate the benefits and harms of first-line RAS inhibitors compared to other first-line antihypertensive drugs in people with hypertension. SEARCH METHODS The Cochrane Hypertension Group Information Specialist searched the following databases for randomized controlled trials up to November 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 also contacted authors of relevant papers regarding further published and unpublished work. The searches had no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomized, active-controlled, double-blinded studies (RCTs) with at least six months follow-up in people with elevated blood pressure (≥ 130/85 mmHg), which compared first-line RAS inhibitors with other first-line antihypertensive drug classes and reported morbidity and mortality or blood pressure outcomes. We excluded people with proven secondary hypertension. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two authors independently selected the included trials, evaluated the risks of bias and entered the data for analysis. MAIN RESULTS This update includes three new RCTs, totaling 45 in all, involving 66,625 participants, with a mean age of 66 years. Much of the evidence for our key outcomes is dominated by a small number of large RCTs at low risk for most sources of bias. Imbalances in the added second-line antihypertensive drugs in some of the studies were important enough for us to downgrade the quality of the evidence.Primary outcomes were all-cause death, fatal and non-fatal stroke, fatal and non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), fatal and non-fatal congestive heart failure (CHF) requiring hospitalizations, total cardiovascular (CV) events (fatal and non-fatal stroke, fatal and non-fatal MI and fatal and non-fatal CHF requiring hospitalization), and end-stage renal failure (ESRF). Secondary outcomes were systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and heart rate (HR).Compared with first-line calcium channel blockers (CCBs), we found moderate-certainty evidence that first-line RAS inhibitors decreased heart failure (HF) (35,143 participants in 5 RCTs, risk ratio (RR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 0.90, absolute risk reduction (ARR) 1.2%), and that they increased stroke (34,673 participants in 4 RCTs, RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.32, absolute risk increase (ARI) 0.7%). Moderate-certainty evidence showed that first-line RAS inhibitors and first-line CCBs did not differ for all-cause death (35,226 participants in 5 RCTs, RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.09); total CV events (35,223 participants in 6 RCTs, RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.02); and total MI (35,043 participants in 5 RCTs, RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.09). Low-certainty evidence suggests they did not differ for ESRF (19,551 participants in 4 RCTs, RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.05).Compared with first-line thiazides, we found moderate-certainty evidence that first-line RAS inhibitors increased HF (24,309 participants in 1 RCT, RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.31, ARI 1.0%), and increased stroke (24,309 participants in 1 RCT, RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.28, ARI 0.6%). Moderate-certainty evidence showed that first-line RAS inhibitors and first-line thiazides did not differ for all-cause death (24,309 participants in 1 RCT, RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.07); total CV events (24,379 participants in 2 RCTs, RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.11); and total MI (24,379 participants in 2 RCTs, RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.01). Low-certainty evidence suggests they did not differ for ESRF (24,309 participants in 1 RCT, RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.37).Compared with first-line beta-blockers, low-certainty evidence suggests that first-line RAS inhibitors decreased total CV events (9239 participants in 2 RCTs, RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.98, ARR 1.7%), and decreased stroke (9193 participants in 1 RCT, RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.88, ARR 1.7% ). Low-certainty evidence suggests that first-line RAS inhibitors and first-line beta-blockers did not differ for all-cause death (9193 participants in 1 RCT, RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.01); HF (9193 participants in 1 RCT, RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.18); and total MI (9239 participants in 2 RCTs, RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.27).Blood pressure comparisons between first-line RAS inhibitors and other first-line classes showed either no differences or small differences that did not necessarily correlate with the differences in the morbidity outcomes.There is no information about non-fatal serious adverse events, as none of the trials reported this outcome. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS All-cause death is similar for first-line RAS inhibitors and first-line CCBs, thiazides and beta-blockers. There are, however, differences for some morbidity outcomes. First-line thiazides caused less HF and stroke than first-line RAS inhibitors. First-line CCBs increased HF but decreased stroke compared to first-line RAS inhibitors. The magnitude of the increase in HF exceeded the decrease in stroke. Low-quality evidence suggests that first-line RAS inhibitors reduced stroke and total CV events compared to first-line beta-blockers. The small differences in effect on blood pressure between the different classes of drugs did not correlate with the differences in the morbidity outcomes.