ACE inhibitor treatment in diabetic nephropathy

Antihypertensives for kidney transplant recipients: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

In nontransplant populations, effects of different antihypertensive drug classes vary. Relative effects in kidney transplant recipients are uncertain. We performed a systematic review including random effects meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, using Cochrane Collaboration methodology. We identified 60 trials, enrolling 3802 recipients. Twenty-nine trials (2262 patients) compared calcium channel blockers (CCB) with placebo or no treatment, 10 trials (445 patients) compared angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) with placebo or no treatment, and seven studies (405 patients) compared CCB with ACEi. CCB compared with placebo or no treatment (plus additional agents in either arm as required) reduced graft loss (risk ratio [RR] 0.75, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.57-0.99) and improved glomerular filtration rate (GFR; mean difference [MD] 4.5 mL/min, 95% CI 2.2-6.7). Data on ACEi versus placebo or no treatment were inconclusive for GFR (MD -8.1 mL/min, 95% CI -18.6-2.4) and inconsistent for graft loss, precluding meta-analysis. In direct comparison with CCB, ACEi decreased GFR (MD 11.5 mL/min, 95% CI 7.2-15.8), proteinuria (MD 0.28 g/day, 95% CI 0.10-0.47), hemoglobin (MD 11.5 g/L, 95% CI 7.2-15.8), and increased hyperkalemia (RR 3.7, 95% CI 1.9-7.7). Graft loss data were inconclusive (RR 7.4, 95% CI 0.4-140). These data suggest that CCB may be preferred as first-line agents for hypertensive kidney transplant recipients.

Antihypertensive treatment for kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

In some nontransplant populations, effects of different antihypertensive drug classes vary. Relative effects in kidney transplant recipients are uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess comparative effects of different classes of antihypertensive agents in kidney transplant recipients.

SEARCH STRATEGY

MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, conference proceedings and reference lists of identified studies were searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of any antihypertensive agent applied to kidney transplant recipients for at least two weeks were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data was extracted by two investigators independently. Study quality, transplant outcomes and other patient centred outcomes were assessed using random effects meta-analysis. Risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes, both with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Stratified analyses and meta-regression were used to investigate heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 60 studies, enrolling 3802 recipients. Twenty-nine studies (2262 participants) compared calcium channel blockers (CCB) to placebo/no treatment, 10 studies (445 participants) compared angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) to placebo/no treatment and seven studies (405 participants) compared CCB to ACEi. CCB compared to placebo/no treatment (plus additional agents in either arm as required) reduced graft loss (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.99) and improved glomerular filtration rate (GFR), (MD, 4.45 mL/min, 95% CI 2.22 to 6.68). Data on ACEi versus placebo/no treatment were inconclusive for GFR (MD -8.07 mL/min, 95% CI -18.57 to 2.43), and variable for graft loss, precluding meta-analysis. In direct comparison with CCB, ACEi decreased GFR (MD -11.48 mL/min, 95% CI -5.75 to -7.21), proteinuria (MD -0.28 g/24 h, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.10), haemoglobin (MD -12.96 g/L, 95% CI -5.72 to -10.21) and increased hyperkalaemia (RR 3.74, 95% CI 1.89 to 7.43). Graft loss data were inconclusive (RR 7.37, 95% CI 0.39 to 140.35). Other drug comparisons were compared in small numbers of participants and studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that CCB may be preferred as first line agents for hypertensive kidney transplant recipients. ACEi have some detrimental effects in kidney transplant recipients. More high quality studies reporting patient centred outcomes are required.

Trends in incidence of treated end-stage renal disease, overall and by primary renal disease, in persons aged 20?64�years in Europe, Canada and the Asia-Pacific region, 1998?2002

AIMS

To determine if rates of diabetic and non-diabetic end-stage renal disease (ESRD), which had been rising in young and middle-aged adults in all populations up to the mid-1990s, had started to decline, and if so, whether improvement had occurred in respect of each of the principal primary renal diseases causing ESRD.

METHODS

Poisson regression of age- and sex-standardized incidence of ESRD for persons aged 20-64 years in 18 populations from Europe, Canada and the Asia-Pacific region, for 1998-2002.

RESULTS

In persons from 12 European descent (Europid) populations combined, there was a small downward trend in all-cause ESRD (-1.7% per year, P = 0.001), with type 1 diabetic ESRD falling by 7.8% per year (P < 0.001), glomerulonephritic ESRD by 3.1% per year (P = 0.001), and 'all other non-diabetic' ESRD by 2.5% per year (P = 0.02). The reductions in ESRD attributed to hypertensive (-2.2% per year) and polycystic renal disease (-1.5% per year) and unknown diagnosis (-0.2% per year) were not statistically significant. On the other hand, the incidence of type 2 diabetic ESRD rose by 9.9% per year (P < 0.001) in the combined Europid population, although that of (principally type 2) diabetic ESRD remained unchanged in the pooled data from the four non-Europid populations.

CONCLUSION

Recent preventive strategies, probably chiefly modern renoprotective treatment, appear to have been effective for tertiary prevention of ESRD caused by the proteinuric nephropathies other than type 2 diabetic nephropathy, for which the continuing increase in Europid populations represents a failure of prevention and/or a change in the nephropathic potential of type 2 diabetes.