Comparison of all types of loop-diuretics for chronic heart failure: A protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Sami Taleghani, Jasmin Dam Lukoschewitz, Sandra Tonning, Ida Arentz Taraldsen, Janus C Jakobsen, Johannes Grand
{"title":"Comparison of all types of loop-diuretics for chronic heart failure: A protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.","authors":"Sami Taleghani, Jasmin Dam Lukoschewitz, Sandra Tonning, Ida Arentz Taraldsen, Janus C Jakobsen, Johannes Grand","doi":"10.1111/aas.70005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) experience congestion-related symptoms such as dyspnoea and oedema, both of which are associated with poor outcomes. Loop diuretics are the cornerstone to treat congestion and to maintain euvolemia. While furosemide is the most used loop diuretic, other loop diuretics may exhibit theoretical advantages. We aim to compare all types of loop diuretics for patients with CHF.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This protocol for a systematic review is conducted with guidance from the Cochrane Handbook and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols. We will include randomised clinical trials (RCTs) of loop diuretics with other loop diuretics, placebo, or standard of care in CHF patients. The search will be conducted across the major medical databases (including Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials). The searches will begin in February 2025. The primary outcome will be all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes will be all-cause hospitalization, serious adverse events (SAEs), and changes in body weight (kg). Data will be analysed by traditional meta-analyses, Trial Sequential Analyses (TSA), and network meta analysis. The risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool-version 2. The certainty of the evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) and Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINEMA) approach.</p>","PeriodicalId":6909,"journal":{"name":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","volume":"69 3","pages":"e70005"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.70005","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) experience congestion-related symptoms such as dyspnoea and oedema, both of which are associated with poor outcomes. Loop diuretics are the cornerstone to treat congestion and to maintain euvolemia. While furosemide is the most used loop diuretic, other loop diuretics may exhibit theoretical advantages. We aim to compare all types of loop diuretics for patients with CHF.

Methods: This protocol for a systematic review is conducted with guidance from the Cochrane Handbook and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols. We will include randomised clinical trials (RCTs) of loop diuretics with other loop diuretics, placebo, or standard of care in CHF patients. The search will be conducted across the major medical databases (including Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials). The searches will begin in February 2025. The primary outcome will be all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes will be all-cause hospitalization, serious adverse events (SAEs), and changes in body weight (kg). Data will be analysed by traditional meta-analyses, Trial Sequential Analyses (TSA), and network meta analysis. The risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool-version 2. The certainty of the evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) and Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINEMA) approach.

慢性心力衰竭所有类型利尿剂的比较:一项系统评价和网络荟萃分析方案。
背景:慢性心力衰竭(CHF)患者会出现充血相关症状,如呼吸困难和水肿,这两种症状都与不良预后相关。循环利尿剂是治疗充血和维持血液充血的基础。虽然速尿是最常用的循环利尿剂,但其他循环利尿剂可能在理论上具有优势。我们的目的是比较所有类型的循环利尿剂用于CHF患者。方法:本系统评价方案在Cochrane手册以及系统评价和元分析方案首选报告项目的指导下进行。我们将纳入循环利尿剂与其他循环利尿剂、安慰剂或标准护理在CHF患者中的随机临床试验(rct)。搜索将在主要的医学数据库中进行(包括Medline、Embase和Cochrane中央对照试验登记处)。搜寻工作将于2025年2月开始。主要结果将是全因死亡率。次要结局将是全因住院、严重不良事件(SAEs)和体重(kg)的变化。数据将通过传统的元分析、试验序列分析(TSA)和网络元分析进行分析。偏倚风险将使用Cochrane风险偏倚工具第2版进行评估。证据的确定性将使用推荐、评估、发展和评估分级(GRADE)和网络元分析置信度(CINEMA)方法进行评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
9.50%
发文量
157
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica publishes papers on original work in the fields of anaesthesiology, intensive care, pain, emergency medicine, and subjects related to their basic sciences, on condition that they are contributed exclusively to this Journal. Case reports and short communications may be considered for publication if of particular interest; also letters to the Editor, especially if related to already published material. The editorial board is free to discuss the publication of reviews on current topics, the choice of which, however, is the prerogative of the board. Every effort will be made by the Editors and selected experts to expedite a critical review of manuscripts in order to ensure rapid publication of papers of a high scientific standard.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信