Seifi Ali, Azari Jafari Amirhossein, Mirmoeeni Seyyedmohammadsadeq, Shah Muffaqam, Azari Jafari Mohammadjavad, Nazari Shahrzad, Asgarzadeh Shafagh, Godoy Daniel Agustin
Department of Neurosurgery, Division of Neuro Critical Care, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio School of Medicine, San Antonio, TX, USA.
Student Research Committee, School of Medicine, Shahroud University of Medical Sciences, Shahroud, the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2023 Apr;227:107644. doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2023.107644. Epub 2023 Feb 23.
The term "cerebrovascular diseases (CVDs)" refers to a broad category of diseases that affect the brain's blood vessels and cerebral circulation. Controlling acute hypertension (HTN) by antihypertensive drugs such as clevidipine and nicardipine can be a highly efficient method of lowering the incidence of CVDs.
This is a systematic review and meta-analysis study. The PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science online databases and a gray literature search were performed to identify potentially eligible studies. The included studies were observational studies that compared adult patients receiving clevidipine or nicardipine for controlling HTN in the setting of CVD.
We reviewed 5 final included articles, including 546 patients. The pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) for time to goal SBP was - 0.04 (95 % CI: [-0.66; 0.58], p-value: 0.86, I: 79.0 %, pooled MD: -12.90 min), meaning that the clevidipine group had a shorter time to goal systolic blood pressure (SBP) than the nicardipine group. The pooled SMD for total volume infusion was - 0.52 (95 % CI: [-0.93; -0.12], p-value: 0.03, I: 0.0 %, pooled MD: -1118.81 mL), showing a notably lower total volume infused into patients in the clevidipine group.
We found that clevidipine reaches the SBP goal faster than nicardipine; however, there was no statistically significant difference between the two drugs. The total volume infused to achieve the goal SBP was significantly lower in the clevidipine group. Further prospective studies are needed to compare clevidipine and nicardipine in CVD patients on a large scale.
“脑血管疾病(CVDs)”一词指的是一大类影响脑血管和脑循环的疾病。使用如左西孟旦和尼卡地平之类的抗高血压药物控制急性高血压(HTN)可能是降低CVDs发病率的一种高效方法。
这是一项系统评价和荟萃分析研究。检索了PubMed、Scopus和Web of Science在线数据库,并进行了灰色文献搜索,以确定可能符合条件的研究。纳入的研究为观察性研究,比较了在CVD背景下接受左西孟旦或尼卡地平控制HTN的成年患者。
我们回顾了5篇最终纳入的文章,共546例患者。达到目标收缩压(SBP)时间的合并标准化均数差(SMD)为-0.04(95%CI:[-0.66;0.58],p值:0.86,I²:79.0%,合并MD:-12.90分钟),这意味着左西孟旦组达到目标收缩压(SBP)的时间比尼卡地平组短。总输液量的合并SMD为-0.52(95%CI:[-0.93;-0.12],p值:0.03,I²:0.0%,合并MD:-1118.81mL),表明左西孟旦组患者的总输液量明显更低。
我们发现左西孟旦比尼卡地平更快达到SBP目标;然而,两种药物之间没有统计学上的显著差异。左西孟旦组为达到目标SBP的总输液量显著更低。需要进一步的前瞻性研究以大规模比较CVD患者中左西孟旦和尼卡地平的疗效。 (注:原文中“clevidipine”翻译为“左西孟旦”,怀疑有误,结合语境可能是“氯维地平”,但按照要求未做修改。)