RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Renal denervation has been associated with substantial and sustained blood pressure reduction and is considered to serve as an alternative treatment for patients with resistant hypertension. However, the first published SHAM-controlled trial assessing RDN safety and efficacy showed no difference between groups. AIM: We aimed to perform a meta-analysis quantifying the magnitude of blood pressure decrease secondary to renal denervation in patients with resistant hypertension. METHODS: Databases were searched for RCTs that compared RDN therapy to SHAM procedure and reported the outcomes of (1) 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure; (2) Office systolic blood pressure; (3) Daytime systolic blood pressure; and (4) Night-time systolic blood pressure. Mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was examined with I² statistics. P values of < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Statistical analyses were performed using RStudio 4.2.3. RESULTS: Nine studies and 1622 patients were included. The AMBP [MD -3.72 95%CI -5.44, -2.00 p < 0.001; I²=34%] and DSBP [MD -4.10 95%CI -5.84, -2.37 p < 0.001; I²=0%] were significantly reduced in the RDN arm. ODBP [MD -6.04 95%CI -11.31, -0.78 p = 0.024; I²=90%] and NSBP [MD -1.81 95%CI -3.90, 0.27 p = 0.08; I²=0%] did not reach a statistically significant difference between groups. CONCLUSION: Renal denervation demonstrates greater efficacy in reducing 24-hour ambulatory and daytime systolic blood pressure in patients diagnosed with resistant hypertension.
Assuntos
Placebos , Terapêutica , Hipertensão , Pressão Sanguínea , DenervaçãoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Renal denervation has been associated with substantial and sustained blood pressure reduction and is considered to serve as an alternative treatment for patients with resistant hypertension. However, the first published SHAM-controlled trial assessing RDN safety and efficacy showed no difference between groups. AIM: We aimed to perform a meta-analysis quantifying the magnitude of blood pressure decrease secondary to renal denervation in patients with resistant hypertension. METHODS: Databases were searched for RCTs that compared RDN therapy to SHAM procedure and reported the outcomes of (1) 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure; (2) Office systolic blood pressure; (3) Daytime systolic blood pressure; and (4) Night-time systolic blood pressure. Mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was examined with I² statistics. P values of < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Statistical analyses were performed using RStudio 4.2.3. RESULTS: Nine studies and 1622 patients were included. The AMBP [MD -3.72 95%CI -5.44, -2.00 p < 0.001; I²=34%] and DSBP [MD -4.10 95%CI -5.84, -2.37 p < 0.001; I²=0%] were significantly reduced in the RDN arm. ODBP [MD -6.04 95%CI -11.31, -0.78 p = 0.024; I²=90%] and NSBP [MD -1.81 95%CI -3.90, 0.27 p = 0.08; I²=0%] did not reach a statistically significant difference between groups. CONCLUSION: Renal denervation demonstrates greater efficacy in reducing 24-hour ambulatory and daytime systolic blood pressure in patients diagnosed with resistant hypertension.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Paclitaxel and carboplatin is the standard chemotherapy for the treatment of advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer. However, the benefit of adding programmed cell death 1 (PD-1)/programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors to chemotherapy is still unclear. METHOD: We searched PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases for randomized controlled trials that investigated PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus carboplatin and paclitaxel compared with carboplatin and paclitaxel in primary advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer. We computed hazard ratios (HRs) or risk ratios (RRs) for binary endpoints, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used DerSimonian and Laird random-effect models for all endpoints. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics. R, version 4.2.3, was used for statistical analyses. RESULTS: A total of three studies and 1,431 patients were included. Compared with carboplatin plus paclitaxel-based chemotherapy, progression-free survival (PFS) rate (HR 0.32; 95% CI 0.23-0.44; p < 0.001) and overall survival (OS) at 30 months (RR 3.13; 95% CI 1.26-7.78; p = 0.01) were significant in favor of the PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus carboplatin and paclitaxel group in the mismatch repair-deficient subgroup. However, there were no significant differences in the mismatch repair-proficient subgroup for PFS (HR 0.74; 95% CI 0.50-1.08; p = 0.117) or OS at 30 months (RR 2.24; 95% CI 0.79-6.39; p = 0.13). CONCLUSION: Immunotherapy plus carboplatin-paclitaxel increased significantly PFS and OS among patients with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer, with a significant benefit in the mismatch repair-deficient and high microsatellite instability population.