• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Comparative risk of new-onset diabetes mellitus for antihypertensive drugs in elderly: A Bayesian network meta-analysis.比较老年人群中抗高血压药物新发糖尿病的风险:贝叶斯网络荟萃分析。
J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2019 Aug;21(8):1082-1090. doi: 10.1111/jch.13598. Epub 2019 Jun 26.
2
Comparative efficacy of different antihypertensive drug classes for stroke prevention: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.不同类别降压药物预防卒中的比较疗效:一项随机对照试验的网状Meta分析
PLoS One. 2025 Feb 21;20(2):e0313309. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0313309. eCollection 2025.
3
Beta-blockers for hypertension.用于治疗高血压的β受体阻滞剂。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jan 20;1(1):CD002003. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002003.pub5.
4
Increasing complexity: which drug class to choose for treatment of hypertension in the elderly?不断增加的复杂性:老年高血压患者的治疗应选择哪种药物类别?
Clin Interv Aging. 2014 Mar 24;9:459-75. doi: 10.2147/CIA.S40154. eCollection 2014.
5
The effects of calcium channel blockers in the prevention of stroke in adults with hypertension: a meta-analysis of data from 273,543 participants in 31 randomized controlled trials.钙通道阻滞剂在预防高血压成年人中风中的作用:来自 31 项随机对照试验的 273543 名参与者的数据的荟萃分析。
PLoS One. 2013;8(3):e57854. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0057854. Epub 2013 Mar 6.
6
Antihypertensive drugs and risk of cancer: network meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses of 324,168 participants from randomised trials.降压药物与癌症风险:来自随机试验的 324168 名参与者的网络荟萃分析和试验序贯分析。
Lancet Oncol. 2011 Jan;12(1):65-82. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70260-6. Epub 2010 Nov 29.
7
The development of new-onset type 2 diabetes associated with choosing a calcium channel blocker compared to a diuretic or beta-blocker.与选择利尿剂或β受体阻滞剂相比,选择钙通道阻滞剂与新发2型糖尿病的发生有关。
Curr Med Res Opin. 2007 Jun;23(6):1239-44. doi: 10.1185/030079907X188044. Epub 2007 Apr 23.
8
Long-term effects of antihypertensive drugs on the risk of new-onset diabetes in elderly Taiwanese hypertensives.抗高血压药物对台湾老年高血压患者新发糖尿病风险的长期影响。
Int Heart J. 2008 Mar;49(2):205-11. doi: 10.1536/ihj.49.205.
9
Comparative effectiveness of renin-angiotensin system blockers and other antihypertensive drugs in patients with diabetes: systematic review and bayesian network meta-analysis.血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂和血管紧张素Ⅱ受体拮抗剂与其他降压药物治疗糖尿病患者的疗效比较:系统评价和贝叶斯网状meta 分析。
BMJ. 2013 Oct 24;347:f6008. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f6008.
10
First-line diuretics versus other classes of antihypertensive drugs for hypertension.一线利尿剂与其他类别降压药治疗高血压的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Jul 13;7(7):CD008161. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008161.pub3.

引用本文的文献

1
Effectiveness and safety of chronic diuretic use in older adults: an umbrella review of recently published systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized-controlled trials.老年人长期使用利尿剂的有效性和安全性:对近期发表的随机对照试验系统评价和荟萃分析的综合评价
Eur Geriatr Med. 2025 May 25. doi: 10.1007/s41999-025-01229-5.
2
American Association of Clinical Endocrinology Clinical Practice Guideline: Developing a Diabetes Mellitus Comprehensive Care Plan-2022 Update.美国临床内分泌学会临床实践指南:制定糖尿病综合护理计划-2022 更新版。
Endocr Pract. 2022 Oct;28(10):923-1049. doi: 10.1016/j.eprac.2022.08.002. Epub 2022 Aug 11.

本文引用的文献

1
Comparative risk of new-onset diabetes mellitus for antihypertensive drugs: A network meta-analysis.抗高血压药物引发新发糖尿病的比较风险:一项网状Meta分析。
J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2017 Dec;19(12):1348-1356. doi: 10.1111/jch.13108. Epub 2017 Oct 25.
2
Usual Blood Pressure and Risk of New-Onset Diabetes: Evidence From 4.1 Million Adults and a Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies.常规血压与新发糖尿病风险:来自410万成年人的证据及前瞻性研究的荟萃分析
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015 Oct 6;66(14):1552-1562. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.07.059.
3
Cost-utility of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor-based treatment compared with thiazide diuretic-based treatment for hypertension in elderly Australians considering diabetes as comorbidity.对于合并糖尿病的澳大利亚老年人,基于血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂的治疗与基于噻嗪类利尿剂的治疗在高血压治疗中的成本效益比较。
Medicine (Baltimore). 2015 Mar;94(9):e590. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000000590.
4
Eplerenone and new-onset diabetes in patients with mild heart failure: results from the Eplerenone in Mild Patients Hospitalization and Survival Study in Heart Failure (EMPHASIS-HF).依普利酮和轻度心力衰竭患者新发糖尿病:心力衰竭患者依普利酮住院和生存研究(EMPHASIS-HF)的结果。
Eur J Heart Fail. 2012 Aug;14(8):909-15. doi: 10.1093/eurjhf/hfs067. Epub 2012 May 19.
5
Combination therapy for hypertension in the elderly: a sub-analysis of the Combination Therapy of Hypertension to Prevent Cardiovascular Events (COPE) Trial.老年高血压的联合治疗:预防心血管事件的联合降压治疗试验(COPE 试验)的亚分析。
Hypertens Res. 2012 Apr;35(4):441-8. doi: 10.1038/hr.2011.216. Epub 2012 Jan 26.
6
Graphical methods and numerical summaries for presenting results from multiple-treatment meta-analysis: an overview and tutorial.呈现多处理荟萃分析结果的图形方法和数值总结:概述和教程。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2011 Feb;64(2):163-71. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.03.016. Epub 2010 Aug 5.
7
Comparative assessment of angiotensin receptor blockers in different clinical settings.不同临床环境中血管紧张素受体阻滞剂的比较评估。
Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2009;5:939-48. doi: 10.2147/vhrm.s7263. Epub 2009 Nov 16.
8
Hydrochlorothiazide, but not Candesartan, aggravates insulin resistance and causes visceral and hepatic fat accumulation: the mechanisms for the diabetes preventing effect of Candesartan (MEDICA) Study.氢氯噻嗪而非坎地沙坦会加重胰岛素抵抗并导致内脏和肝脏脂肪堆积:坎地沙坦预防糖尿病作用机制(MEDICA)研究
Hypertension. 2008 Dec;52(6):1030-7. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.108.119404. Epub 2008 Nov 3.
9
Mechanistic insights into diuretic-induced insulin resistance.利尿剂诱发胰岛素抵抗的机制性见解。
Hypertension. 2008 Dec;52(6):1009-11. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.108.120923. Epub 2008 Nov 3.
10
First-line antihypertensive treatment in patients with pre-diabetes: rationale, design and baseline results of the ADaPT investigation.糖尿病前期患者的一线降压治疗:ADaPT研究的理论依据、设计及基线结果
Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2008 Jul 24;7:22. doi: 10.1186/1475-2840-7-22.

比较老年人群中抗高血压药物新发糖尿病的风险:贝叶斯网络荟萃分析。

Comparative risk of new-onset diabetes mellitus for antihypertensive drugs in elderly: A Bayesian network meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Endocrinology, Linyi Central Hospital, Linyi City, China.

出版信息

J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2019 Aug;21(8):1082-1090. doi: 10.1111/jch.13598. Epub 2019 Jun 26.

DOI:10.1111/jch.13598
PMID:31241860
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8030293/
Abstract

There is no study to compare different class of antihypertensive drugs on new-onset diabetes mellitus (NOD) in elderly. We aimed to investigate the risk of antihypertensive drugs on NOD in elderly patients. The databases were retrieved in an orderly manner from the dates of their establishment to October, 2018, including Medline, Embase, Clinical Trials, and the Cochrane Database, to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of different antihypertensive drugs in elderly patients (age > 60 years). Then, a network meta-analysis was conducted using R and Stata 12.0 softwares. A total of 14 RCTs involving 74 042 patients were included. The relative risk of NOD mellitus associated with six classes of antihypertensive drugs was analyzed, including placebo, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), calcium channel blockers (CCBs), diuretics, and β blockers. Patients with ACEIs or ARBs appeared to have significantly reduced risk of NOD compare with placebo: ACEIs (OR = 0.49, 95% CrI 0.28-0.85), ARBs (OR = 0.37, 95% CrI 0.26-0.52), while CCBs, diuretics, and β blockers appeared to have not significantly reduced risk of NOD mellitus compare with placebo: CCBs (OR = 1.10, 95% CrI 0.85-1.60), diuretics (OR = 1.40, 95% CrI 0.92-2.50), β blockers (OR = 1.40, 95% CrI 0.93-2.10). The SUCRA of placebo, ACEIs, ARBs, CCBs, diuretics, and β blockers was, respectively, 65.3%, 69.3%, 92.3%, 44.1%, 12.1%, and 16.5%. According to the evidence, ARBs have an advantage over the other treatments in reducing the risk of NOD in elderly patients.

摘要

目前尚无研究比较不同类别的降压药物在老年新发糖尿病(NOD)方面的作用。本研究旨在探讨降压药物对老年患者 NOD 的影响。系统检索了建库至 2018 年 10 月 Medline、Embase、ClinicalTrials 及 Cochrane 等数据库,收集了降压药物治疗老年患者(年龄>60 岁)的随机对照试验(RCT),采用 R 和 Stata 12.0 软件进行网状 Meta 分析。共纳入 14 项 RCT,涉及 74042 例患者。分析了 6 类降压药物与 NOD 相关的相对风险,包括安慰剂、血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂(ACEI)、血管紧张素Ⅱ受体阻滞剂(ARB)、钙通道阻滞剂(CCB)、利尿剂和β受体阻滞剂。与安慰剂相比,ACEI 或 ARB 可显著降低 NOD 风险:ACEI(OR=0.49,95%CrI 0.28-0.85),ARB(OR=0.37,95%CrI 0.26-0.52),而 CCB、利尿剂和β受体阻滞剂与安慰剂相比并未显著降低 NOD 风险:CCB(OR=1.10,95%CrI 0.85-1.60),利尿剂(OR=1.40,95%CrI 0.92-2.50),β受体阻滞剂(OR=1.40,95%CrI 0.93-2.10)。安慰剂、ACEI、ARB、CCB、利尿剂和β受体阻滞剂的 SUCRA 分别为 65.3%、69.3%、92.3%、44.1%、12.1%和 16.5%。ARB 可能降低老年患者 NOD 风险优于其他治疗。