Zang Hongbin, Zhang Qiongyu, Li Xiaodong
Department of Cardiology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning 110004, P.R. China.
Department of Neurology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning 110004, P.R. China.
Exp Ther Med. 2019 Jul;18(1):85-98. doi: 10.3892/etm.2019.7566. Epub 2019 May 9.
Contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) is caused by intravascular administration of contrast agent. The efficacy of adenosine antagonists (AAs) in preventing CIN remains controversial, and its elucidation was the objective of the present meta-analysis. A trial sequential analysis (TSA) to assess the reliability of the pooled results was also performed. The Medline, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane databases were searched to retrieve all published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing AAs with controls in preventing CIN. Heterogeneity, publication bias and quality of studies were assessed. Sensitivity, cumulative and subgroup analyses were also performed. The risk of random errors was evaluated by TSA. A total of 17 trials with 1,483 subjects were included. Pooled results indicated that AAs significantly reduced the incidence of CIN [risk ratio, 0.53; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.29-0.95; P=0.034] and the serum creatinine (SCr) level after contrast media (CM) administration (standardized mean difference, -0.24; 95% CI, -0.44 to -0.04; P=0.019). Meta-regression did not identify any significant source of heterogeneity. In the subgroup analyses, AAs tended to exhibit a greater prevention efficacy in trials with sample sizes of ≥70, baseline SCr of <1.5 mg/dl and low study quality. TSA on the incidence of CIN indicated that the required information size determined as n=1,778 was not reached, and that the cumulative Z-curve did not cross the TSA boundary. In conclusion, the present meta-analysis of data from current RCTs suggested that AAs reduce the incidence of CIN and the SCr levels after CM administration. However, TSA showed that the risk of having a false-positive result was greater than 5% in the meta-analysis of the incidence of CIN, indicating that more evidence is required to ensure the benefit of AAs in preventing CIN.
对比剂肾病(CIN)由血管内注射对比剂引起。腺苷拮抗剂(AAs)预防CIN的疗效仍存在争议,本荟萃分析旨在阐明这一问题。还进行了试验序贯分析(TSA)以评估汇总结果的可靠性。检索了Medline、Embase、Web of Science和Cochrane数据库,以获取所有已发表的比较AAs与对照组预防CIN的随机对照试验(RCT)。评估了研究的异质性、发表偏倚和质量。还进行了敏感性、累积和亚组分析。通过TSA评估随机误差风险。共纳入17项试验,1483名受试者。汇总结果表明,AAs显著降低了CIN的发生率[风险比,0.53;95%置信区间(CI),0.29 - 0.95;P = 0.034]以及造影剂(CM)注射后血清肌酐(SCr)水平(标准化均差,-0.24;95% CI,-0.44至-0.04;P = 0.019)。Meta回归未发现任何显著的异质性来源。在亚组分析中分析中,AAs在样本量≥70、基线SCr < 1.5 mg/dl和研究质量较低的试验中往往表现出更大的预防效果。关于CIN发生率的TSA表明,确定所需信息量为n = 1778未达到,累积Z曲线未越过TSA边界。总之,当前RCT数据的本荟萃分析表明,AAs降低了CIN的发生率以及CM注射后的SCr水平。然而,TSA表明在CIN发生率的荟萃分析中出现假阳性结果的风险大于5%,这表明需要更多证据来确保AAs在预防CIN方面的益处。