SynthesisBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2013
Comparative effectiveness of renin-angiotensin system blockers and other antihypertensive drugs in patients with diabetes: systematic review and bayesian network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 86 papers, 27 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
86 citing papers in PubMed, 27 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 233 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, calcium channel blockers, and diuretics in hypertensive patients with diabetes: subgroup analysis based on albuminuria in a systematic review and meta-analysis.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of the traditional Chinese formula Shengjiang powder combined with conventional therapy in the treatment of diabetic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- ACEI and ARB Lower the Incidence of End-Stage Renal Disease among Patients with Diabetic Nephropathy: A Meta-analysis.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Impact of Smoking on Response to the First-Line Treatment of Advanced ALK-Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Pooled it
- Efficacy and Safety of Treatments for Patients With Portal Hypertension and Cirrhosis: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Amlodipine Compared with Benidipine in the Management of Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension · 2020Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Effects of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter Inhibitor/Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist Add-On to Insulin Therapy on Glucose Homeostasis and Body Weight in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes: A Network Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2020Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Treatment of Diabetes in Older Adults: An Endocrine Society* Clinical Practice Guideline.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2019Guideline
- First-line drugs inhibiting the renin angiotensin system versus other first-line antihypertensive drug classes for hypertension.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- ISPAD Clinical Practice Consensus Guidelines 2018: Microvascular and macrovascular complications in children and adolescents.Pediatric diabetes · 2018Guideline
- First-line renin-angiotensin system inhibitors vs. other first-line antihypertensive drug classes in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.Journal of human hypertension · 2018Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Relative efficacy and safety of topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for osteoarthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and observational studies.British journal of sports medicine · 2018Pooled it
- Guideline
26 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the effects of different classes of antihypertensive treatments, including monotherapy and combination therapy, on survival and major renal outcomes in patients with diabetes.
designSystematic review and bayesian network meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials. DATA SOURCES: Electronic literature search of PubMed, Medline, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library for studies published up to December 2011. STUDY SELECTION: Randomised clinical trials of antihypertensive therapy (angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), α blockers, β blockers, calcium channel blockers, diuretics, and their combinations) in patients with diabetes with a follow-up of at least 12 months, reporting all cause mortality, requirement for dialysis, or doubling of serum creatinine levels. DATA EXTRACTION: Bayesian network meta-analysis combined direct and indirect evidence to estimate the relative effects between treatments as well as the probabilities of ranking for treatments based on their protective effects.
results63 trials with 36,917 participants were identified, including 2400 deaths, 766 patients who required dialysis, and 1099 patients whose serum creatinine level had doubled. Compared with placebo, only ACE inhibitors significantly reduced the doubling of serum creatinine levels (odds ratio 0.58, 95% credible interval 0.32 to 0.90), and only β blockers showed a significant difference in mortality (odds ratio 7.13, 95% credible interval 1.37 to 41.39). Comparisons among all treatments showed no statistical significance in the outcome of dialysis. Although the beneficial effects of ACE inhibitors compared with ARBs did not reach statistical significance, ACE inhibitors consistently showed higher probabilities of being in the superior ranking positions among all three outcomes. Although the protective effect of an ACE inhibitor plus calcium channel blocker compared with placebo was not statistically significant, the treatment ranking identified this combination therapy to have the greatest probability (73.9%) for being the best treatment on reducing mortality, followed by ACE inhibitor plus diuretic (12.5%), ACE inhibitors (2.0%), calcium channel blockers (1.2%), and ARBs (0.4%).
conclusionsOur analyses show the renoprotective effects and superiority of using ACE inhibitors in patients with diabetes, and available evidence is not able to show a better effect for ARBs compared with ACE inhibitors. Considering the cost of drugs, our findings support the use of ACE inhibitors as the first line antihypertensive agent in patients with diabetes. Calcium channel blockers might be the preferred treatment in combination with ACE inhibitors if adequate blood pressure control cannot be achieved by ACE inhibitors alone.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.