Richy Florent F, Laurent Stephane
Department of Public Health, Epidemiology and Health Economics, University of Liege Faculty of Medicine, Belgium.
Blood Press. 2011 Feb;20(1):54-9. doi: 10.3109/08037051.2010.518670. Epub 2010 Oct 14.
Abstract The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety profile of manidipine 20 mg with that of amlodipine 10 mg. A systematic research of quantitative data produced or published between 1995 and 2009 was performed. Head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of 12 months minimum duration reporting comparative efficacy (changes in systolic and diastolic blood pressure) and safety (total adverse events and ankle oedema), were included. Four high-quality RCTs, accounting for 838 patients (436 received manidipine and 402 received amlodipine) were included. The efficacy of manidipine and amlodipine was statistically equivalent: effect size for DBP = -0.08 (p = 0.22) and SBP = -0.01 (p = 0.83). The global safety of manidipine was significantly better than amlodipine: the relative risk (RR) for adverse event was 0.69 (0.56-0.85), and particularly for ankle oedema RR was 0.35 (0.22-0.54). Publication bias was not significant and the robustness of the analyses was good. These data suggest a better efficacy/safety ratio of manidipine over amlodipine.
摘要 本荟萃分析的目的是比较20毫克马尼地平与10毫克氨氯地平的疗效和安全性。对1995年至2009年期间产生或发表的定量数据进行了系统研究。纳入了至少持续12个月的头对头随机对照试验(RCT),这些试验报告了比较疗效(收缩压和舒张压的变化)和安全性(总不良事件和踝部水肿)。纳入了四项高质量的RCT,共838例患者(436例接受马尼地平,402例接受氨氯地平)。马尼地平和氨氯地平的疗效在统计学上相当:舒张压的效应量为-0.08(p = 0.22),收缩压的效应量为-0.01(p = 0.83)。马尼地平的总体安全性显著优于氨氯地平:不良事件的相对风险(RR)为0.69(0.56 - 0.85),尤其是踝部水肿的RR为0.35(0.22 - 0.54)。发表偏倚不显著,分析的稳健性良好。这些数据表明马尼地平的疗效/安全性比优于氨氯地平。