Shamon Sandy D, Perez Marco I
Medical Clinic, 11 George St South, Cambridge, ON, Canada, N1S 2N3.
Department of Anesthesiology, Pharmacology and Therapeutics, University of British Columbia, 2176 Health Science Mall, Vancouver, BC, Canada, V6T 1Z3.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Dec 21;12(12):CD007655. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007655.pub3.
Many antihypertensive agents exist today for the treatment of primary hypertension (systolic blood pressure ≥ 140 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure ≥ 90 mmHg, or both). Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been carried out to investigate the evidence for these agents. There is, for example, strong RCT evidence that thiazides reduce mortality and morbidity. Some of those trials used reserpine as a second-line therapy. However, the dose-related blood pressure reduction with this agent is not known.
The primary objective of this review was to quantify the dose-related efficacy of reserpine versus placebo or no treatment in reducing systolic blood pressure (SBP) or diastolic blood pressure (DBP), or both.We also aimed to evaluate the dose-related effects of reserpine on mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR), as well as the dose-related effects on withdrawals due to adverse events.
We searched the Cochrane Hypertension Group Specialised Register (January 1946 to October 2016), CENTRAL (2016, Issue 10), MEDLINE (January 1946 to October 2016), Embase (January 1974 to October 2016), and ClinicalTrials.gov (all dates to October 2016). We also traced citations in the reference sections of the retrieved studies.
Included studies were truly randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing reserpine monotherapy to placebo or no treatment in participants with primary hypertension.
We assessed methods of randomisation and concealment. We extracted and analysed data on blood pressure reduction, heart rate, and withdrawal due to adverse effects.
We found four RCTs (with a total of 237 participants) that met the inclusion criteria, none of which we found through the 2016 update search. The overall pooled effect demonstrates a statistically significant systolic blood pressure (SBP) reduction in participants taking reserpine compared with placebo (weighted mean difference (WMD) -7.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) -14.05 to -1.78). Because of significant heterogeneity across the trials, a significant effect in diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), and heart rate (HR) could not be found. A dose of reserpine 0.5 mg/day or greater achieved the SBP effects. However, we could not determine the dose-response pattern because of the small number of trials. We did not combine data from the trial that investigated Rauwiloid against placebo with reserpine data from the remaining three trials. This is because Rauwiloid is a different alkaloid extract of the plant Rauwolfia serpentina, and the dose used is not comparable to reserpine. None of the included trials reported withdrawals due to adverse effects.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Reserpine is effective in reducing SBP roughly to the same degree as other first-line antihypertensive drugs. However, we could not make definite conclusions regarding the dose-response pattern because of the small number of included trials. More RCTs are needed to assess the effects of reserpine on blood pressure and to determine the dose-related safety profile before the role of this drug in the treatment of primary hypertension can be established.
目前有多种抗高血压药物用于治疗原发性高血压(收缩压≥140mmHg或舒张压≥90mmHg,或两者兼有)。已经开展了随机对照试验(RCT)来研究这些药物的证据。例如,有强有力的RCT证据表明噻嗪类药物可降低死亡率和发病率。其中一些试验使用利血平作为二线治疗药物。然而,该药物与剂量相关的血压降低情况尚不清楚。
本综述的主要目的是量化利血平与安慰剂或不治疗相比,在降低收缩压(SBP)或舒张压(DBP)或两者方面与剂量相关的疗效。我们还旨在评估利血平对平均动脉压(MAP)和心率(HR)的剂量相关影响,以及对因不良事件导致的撤药的剂量相关影响。
我们检索了Cochrane高血压组专业注册库(1946年1月至2016年10月)、CENTRAL(2016年,第10期)、MEDLINE(1946年1月至2016年10月)、Embase(1974年1月至2016年10月)和ClinicalTrials.gov(截至2016年10月的所有日期)。我们还追溯了检索到的研究的参考文献部分中的引用文献。
纳入的研究为真正的随机对照试验(RCT),比较利血平单药治疗与安慰剂或不治疗在原发性高血压患者中的效果。
我们评估了随机化和隐藏方法。我们提取并分析了关于血压降低、心率以及因不良反应导致的撤药的数据。
我们发现四项符合纳入标准的RCT(共237名参与者),在2016年更新检索中均未找到。总体汇总效应显示,与安慰剂相比,服用利血平的参与者收缩压(SBP)有统计学意义的降低(加权平均差(WMD)-7.92,95%置信区间(CI)-14.05至-1.78)。由于各试验间存在显著异质性,未发现舒张压(DBP)、平均动脉压(MAP)和心率(HR)有显著影响。每日0.5mg或更高剂量的利血平可产生SBP效应。然而,由于试验数量较少,我们无法确定剂量反应模式。我们未将研究劳维诺(Rauwiloid)与安慰剂对照的试验数据与其余三项试验的利血平数据合并。这是因为劳维诺是萝芙木(Rauwolfia serpentina)植物的一种不同生物碱提取物,其使用剂量与利血平不可比。纳入的试验均未报告因不良反应导致的撤药情况。
利血平在降低SBP方面的效果与其他一线抗高血压药物大致相同。然而,由于纳入试验数量较少,我们无法就剂量反应模式得出明确结论。需要更多的RCT来评估利血平对血压的影响,并在确定该药物在原发性高血压治疗中的作用之前确定其与剂量相关的安全性概况。