SynthesisPloS one2022
Alprostadil for hypertensive nephropathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Association between polypharmacy and chronic kidney disease among community-dwelling older people: a longitudinal study in southern China.BMC nephrology · 2024Article
- Therapeutic effect of YiQi HuoXue BuShen decoction combined with Western medicine on hypertensive nephropathy: a meta-analysis.American journal of translational research · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of alprostadil in the treatment of hypertensive nephropathy. Seven online databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure [CNKI] database, Wanfang Data Knowledge Service Platform, VIP Information Resource Integration Service Platform [cqVIP], and China Biology Medicine Disc [SinoMed]) were searched from inception to January 31, 2022, and a set of clinical indicators for hypertensive nephropathy was selected. The main indicators were 24-h urinary protein, serum creatinine, endogenous serum creatinine clearance rate, blood urea nitrogen, cystatin C, and mean arterial pressure. The methodological quality of the included trials was analyzed using a risk of bias assessment according to the Cochrane Manual guidelines, and a meta-analysis was performed. A random-effects model was implemented to pool the results. A total of 20 randomized controlled trials involving 1441 patients with hypertensive nephropathy were included in this review. Our findings showed that alprostadil had a positive effect on 24-h urinary protein (mean difference [MD] = -0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] [-1.16, -0.42], P < 0.0001), serum creatinine (MD = -13.83, 95% CI [-19.34, -8.32], P < 0.00001), endogenous serum creatinine clearance rate (MD = 6.09, 95% CI [3.59, 8.59], P < 0.00001), blood urea nitrogen (MD = -6.42, 95% CI [-8.63, -4.21], P < 0.00001), cystatin C (MD = -0.26, 95% CI [-0.34, -0.18], P < 0.00001), and mean arterial pressure levels(MD = -13.65, 95% CI [-16.08, -11.21], P < 0.00001). Compared to conventional treatment alone, alprostadil combined with conventional treatment can improve renal function in patients with hypertensive nephropathy more effectively. However, additional large-scale, multicenter, rigorously designed randomized controlled trials are needed to verify these results. This is the first meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of alprostadil for hypertensive nephropathy, and the results may guide clinical practice.
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.