The effects of diuretic deprescribing in adult patients: A systematic review to inform an evidence-based diuretic deprescribing guideline.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY British journal of clinical pharmacology Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-08 DOI:10.1111/bcp.16189
Eveline van Poelgeest, Luca Paoletti, Serdar Özkök, Ezgi Pinar, Gülistan Bahat, Vincent Vuong, Eva Topinková, Joost Daams, Lisa McCarthy, Wade Thompson, Nathalie van der Velde
{"title":"The effects of diuretic deprescribing in adult patients: A systematic review to inform an evidence-based diuretic deprescribing guideline.","authors":"Eveline van Poelgeest, Luca Paoletti, Serdar Özkök, Ezgi Pinar, Gülistan Bahat, Vincent Vuong, Eva Topinková, Joost Daams, Lisa McCarthy, Wade Thompson, Nathalie van der Velde","doi":"10.1111/bcp.16189","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this systematic review, we report on the effects of diuretic deprescribing compared to continued diuretic use. We included clinical studies reporting on outcomes such as mortality, heart failure recurrence, tolerability and feasibility. We assessed risk of bias and certainty of the evidence using the GRADE framework. We included 25 publications from 22 primary studies (15 randomized controlled trials; 7 nonrandomized studies). The mean number of participants in the deprescribing groups was 35, and median/mean age 64 years. In patients with heart failure, there was no clear evidence that diuretic deprescribing was associated with increased mortality compared to diuretic continuation (low certainty evidence). The risk of cardiovascular composite outcomes associated with diuretic deprescribing was inconsistent (studies showing lower risk for diuretic deprescribing, or comparable risk with diuretic continuation; very low certainty evidence). The effect on heart failure recurrence after diuretic deprescribing in patients with diuretics for heart failure, and of hypertension in patients with diuretics for hypertension was inconsistent across the included studies (low certainty evidence). In patients with diuretics for hypertension, diuretic deprescribing was well tolerated (moderate certainty evidence), while in patients with diuretics for heart failure, deprescribing diuretics can result in complaints of peripheral oedema (very low certainty evidence). The overall risk of bias was generally high. In summary, this systematic review suggests that diuretic discontinuation could be a safe and feasible treatment option for carefully selected patients. However, there isa lack of high-quality evidence on its feasibility, safety and tolerability of diuretic deprescribing, warranting further research.</p>","PeriodicalId":9251,"journal":{"name":"British journal of clinical pharmacology","volume":" ","pages":"38-54"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British journal of clinical pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bcp.16189","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this systematic review, we report on the effects of diuretic deprescribing compared to continued diuretic use. We included clinical studies reporting on outcomes such as mortality, heart failure recurrence, tolerability and feasibility. We assessed risk of bias and certainty of the evidence using the GRADE framework. We included 25 publications from 22 primary studies (15 randomized controlled trials; 7 nonrandomized studies). The mean number of participants in the deprescribing groups was 35, and median/mean age 64 years. In patients with heart failure, there was no clear evidence that diuretic deprescribing was associated with increased mortality compared to diuretic continuation (low certainty evidence). The risk of cardiovascular composite outcomes associated with diuretic deprescribing was inconsistent (studies showing lower risk for diuretic deprescribing, or comparable risk with diuretic continuation; very low certainty evidence). The effect on heart failure recurrence after diuretic deprescribing in patients with diuretics for heart failure, and of hypertension in patients with diuretics for hypertension was inconsistent across the included studies (low certainty evidence). In patients with diuretics for hypertension, diuretic deprescribing was well tolerated (moderate certainty evidence), while in patients with diuretics for heart failure, deprescribing diuretics can result in complaints of peripheral oedema (very low certainty evidence). The overall risk of bias was generally high. In summary, this systematic review suggests that diuretic discontinuation could be a safe and feasible treatment option for carefully selected patients. However, there isa lack of high-quality evidence on its feasibility, safety and tolerability of diuretic deprescribing, warranting further research.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
成人患者停用利尿剂的影响:系统性回顾,为基于证据的利尿剂处方指南提供信息。
在这篇系统性综述中,我们报告了与继续使用利尿剂相比,停用利尿剂的效果。我们纳入了报告死亡率、心衰复发、耐受性和可行性等结果的临床研究。我们采用 GRADE 框架对证据的偏倚风险和确定性进行了评估。我们纳入了来自 22 项主要研究(15 项随机对照试验;7 项非随机研究)的 25 篇论文。去处方组的平均参与人数为 35 人,中位数/平均年龄为 64 岁。在心力衰竭患者中,没有明确证据表明,与继续使用利尿剂相比,停用利尿剂会增加死亡率(低确定性证据)。与停用利尿剂相关的心血管综合结果风险并不一致(研究显示停用利尿剂的风险较低,或与继续使用利尿剂的风险相当;确定性极低的证据)。对于因心力衰竭而使用利尿剂的患者,停用利尿剂后对心力衰竭复发的影响,以及因高血压而使用利尿剂的患者,停用利尿剂后对高血压的影响,纳入研究的结果不一致(证据确定性低)。在使用利尿剂治疗高血压的患者中,停用利尿剂的耐受性良好(中等确定性证据),而在使用利尿剂治疗心衰的患者中,停用利尿剂可能导致外周水肿(极低确定性证据)。总体偏倚风险普遍较高。总之,本系统综述表明,对于经过仔细筛选的患者,停用利尿剂可能是一种安全可行的治疗方案。然而,目前缺乏有关停用利尿剂的可行性、安全性和耐受性的高质量证据,因此需要进一步研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
8.80%
发文量
419
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Published on behalf of the British Pharmacological Society, the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology features papers and reports on all aspects of drug action in humans: review articles, mini review articles, original papers, commentaries, editorials and letters. The Journal enjoys a wide readership, bridging the gap between the medical profession, clinical research and the pharmaceutical industry. It also publishes research on new methods, new drugs and new approaches to treatment. The Journal is recognised as one of the leading publications in its field. It is online only, publishes open access research through its OnlineOpen programme and is published monthly.
期刊最新文献
Optimizing preclinical models of ageing for translation to clinical trials. Frailty in clinical drug trials: Frailty assessments, subgroup analyses and outcomes. Innovations in pharmacovigilance studies of medicines in older people. Mobile applications on app stores for deprescribing: A scoping review. The effects of diuretic deprescribing in adult patients: A systematic review to inform an evidence-based diuretic deprescribing guideline.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1