SynthesisBMC cardiovascular disorders2025
Antihypertensive drugs for hyperuricemia in patients with hypertension: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of Chinese trials.
Synthesis in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Drug-induced hyperuricemia: multi-pathway regulation, causative drugs, and individualized management strategies.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to compare and rank antihypertensive agents based on their urate-lowering effects in patients with hypertension and hyperuricemia.
methodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, and the Wanfang databases for eligible trials published up to September 2023. Randomized controlled trials that directly compared different antihypertensive agents in hypertensive patients with hyperuricemia were included. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were conducted using odds ratios and weighted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals. The surface under the cumulative ranking area (SUCRA) was used to rank the efficacy of the antihypertensive treatments.
resultsA total of 172 trials involving 16,226 hypertensive patients with hyperuricemia were included in the final analysis. According to SUCRA values, losartan plus amlodipine (SUCRA: 96%), valsartan plus amlodipine (SUCRA: 90%), and allisartan (SUCRA: 90%) showed relatively superior effects in reducing serum uric acid levels. Additionally, irbesartan plus amlodipine (SUCRA: 94%), losartan plus amlodipine (SUCRA: 92%), and losartan (SUCRA: 84%) were associated with higher effective rates.
conclusionBased on the only available eligible evidence, the combination of losartan and amlodipine was the optimal dual therapy for Chinese patients with hypertension and hyperuricemia, while allisartan and losartan were the most effective monotherapies for lowering serum uric acid. These findings are not generalizable to non-Chinese populations, reflecting a gap in global evidence rather than intentional study scope restriction.
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.