Efficacy and Renal Tolerability of Ultrafiltration in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review of 19 Randomized Controlled Trials

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q4 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Ya-jie Liu, Xin Yuan
{"title":"Efficacy and Renal Tolerability of Ultrafiltration in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review of 19 Randomized Controlled Trials","authors":"Ya-jie Liu, Xin Yuan","doi":"10.15212/cvia.2021.0020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Background: Acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) is a life-threatening and costly disease. Controversy remainsregarding the efficacy and renal tolerability of ultrafiltration for treating ADHF. We therefore performed thismeta-analysis to evaluate this clinical issue.Methods: A search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane database of controlled trials was performed from inceptionto March 2021 for relevant randomized controlled trials. The quality of the included trials and outcomes wasevaluated with the use of the risk of bias assessment tool and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Developmentand Evaluation (GRADE) approach, respectively. The risk ratio and the standardized mean difference (SMD) or weighted mean difference (WMD) were computed and pooled with fixed-effects or random-effects models.Results: This meta-analysis included 19 studies involving 1281 patients. Ultrafiltration was superior to the controltreatments for weight loss (WMD 1.24 kg, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38–2.09 kg, P = 0.004) and fluid removal(WMD 1.55 L, 95% CI 0.51–2.59 l, P = 0.003) and was associated with a significant increase in serum creatinine levelcompared with the control treatments (SMD 0.15 mg/dL, 95% CI 0.00–0.30 mg/dL, P = 0.04). However, no significanteffects were found for serum N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide level, length of hospital stay, all-causemortality, or all-cause rehospitalization in the ultrafiltration group.Conclusions: The use of ultrafiltration in patients with ADHF is superior to the use of the control treatments for weight loss and fluid removal, but has adverse renal effects and lacks significant effects on long-term prognosis, indicatingthat this approach to decongestion in ADHF patients is efficient for fluid management but less safe renally.\n","PeriodicalId":41559,"journal":{"name":"Cardiovascular Innovations and Applications","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardiovascular Innovations and Applications","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15212/cvia.2021.0020","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) is a life-threatening and costly disease. Controversy remainsregarding the efficacy and renal tolerability of ultrafiltration for treating ADHF. We therefore performed thismeta-analysis to evaluate this clinical issue.Methods: A search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane database of controlled trials was performed from inceptionto March 2021 for relevant randomized controlled trials. The quality of the included trials and outcomes wasevaluated with the use of the risk of bias assessment tool and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Developmentand Evaluation (GRADE) approach, respectively. The risk ratio and the standardized mean difference (SMD) or weighted mean difference (WMD) were computed and pooled with fixed-effects or random-effects models.Results: This meta-analysis included 19 studies involving 1281 patients. Ultrafiltration was superior to the controltreatments for weight loss (WMD 1.24 kg, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38–2.09 kg, P = 0.004) and fluid removal(WMD 1.55 L, 95% CI 0.51–2.59 l, P = 0.003) and was associated with a significant increase in serum creatinine levelcompared with the control treatments (SMD 0.15 mg/dL, 95% CI 0.00–0.30 mg/dL, P = 0.04). However, no significanteffects were found for serum N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide level, length of hospital stay, all-causemortality, or all-cause rehospitalization in the ultrafiltration group.Conclusions: The use of ultrafiltration in patients with ADHF is superior to the use of the control treatments for weight loss and fluid removal, but has adverse renal effects and lacks significant effects on long-term prognosis, indicatingthat this approach to decongestion in ADHF patients is efficient for fluid management but less safe renally.
超滤治疗急性失代偿性心力衰竭的疗效和肾脏耐受性:19项随机对照试验的荟萃分析和系统评价
背景:急性失代偿性心力衰竭(ADHF)是一种危及生命且代价高昂的疾病。关于超滤治疗ADHF的疗效和肾耐受性仍有争议。因此,我们进行了这项荟萃分析来评估这一临床问题。方法:检索PubMed、EMBASE和Cochrane对照试验数据库,从开始到2021年3月检索相关随机对照试验。分别使用偏倚风险评估工具和推荐、评估、发展和评价分级(GRADE)方法对纳入的试验和结果的质量进行评估。计算风险比和标准化平均差(SMD)或加权平均差(WMD),并采用固定效应或随机效应模型进行合并。结果:本荟萃分析纳入19项研究,涉及1281例患者。超滤组在减重(WMD 1.24 kg, 95%可信区间[CI] 0.38-2.09 kg, P = 0.004)和排液(WMD 1.55 L, 95% CI 0.51-2.59 L, P = 0.003)方面优于对照组,且血清肌酐水平显著高于对照组(SMD 0.15 mg/dL, 95% CI 0.00-0.30 mg/dL, P = 0.04)。超滤组血清脑利钠肽n端激素原水平、住院时间、全因死亡率、全因再住院均无显著影响。结论:ADHF患者超滤治疗优于对照组的减重、排液治疗,但对肾脏有不良影响,且对远期预后影响不显著,提示该方法对ADHF患者去充血的液体管理有效,但对肾脏的安全性较差。
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
Cardiovascular Innovations and Applications
Cardiovascular Innovations and Applications CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
20.00%
发文量
222
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信