Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Farmacoterapia para la hiperuricemia en pacientes con hipertensión

Esta versión no es la más reciente

Información

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008652.pub3Copiar DOI
Base de datos:
  1. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Versión publicada:
  1. 13 abril 2017see what's new
Tipo:
  1. Intervention
Etapa:
  1. Review
Grupo Editorial Cochrane:
  1. Grupo Cochrane de Hipertensión

Copyright:
  1. Copyright © 2017 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cifras del artículo

Altmetric:

Citado por:

Citado 0 veces por enlace Crossref Cited-by

Contraer

Autores

Contributions of authors

Drafting the protocol

Pedro Gois and Edison Souza

Developing and running the search strategy

Pedro Gois

Obtaining copies of studies

Pedro Gois

Selecting which studies to include

Pedro Gois and Edison Souza

Extracting data from studies

Pedro Gois and Edison Souza

Entering data into RevMan

Pedro Gois

Carrying out the analysis

Pedro Gois

Interpreting the analysis

Pedro Gois and Edison Souza

Drafting the final review

Pedro Gois

Updating the review

Pedro Gois

Declarations of interest

Nothing to declare.

Acknowledgements

This protocol of this systematic review was based on a work undertaken as part of the postgraduate course in Evidence‐Based Health, which was organized by Sírio‐Libanês Hospital‐Sao Paulo/Brazil. We are sincerely grateful to the Cochrane Hypertension Review Group (specially to Mr Doug Salzwedel for the valuable contribution with the search strategies, as well as to Mr Ciprian Jauca and Dr. James M Wright for their inestimable assistance). We are grateful to Prof. Dr Daniel O'Connor (in memoriam) and Prof. Dr Sucheta Vaingankar for providing us with the conclusion of the study "Febuxostat in prehypertensive individuals". We also thank Prof. Dr Antonio Carlos Seguro for reading this manuscript.

Version history

Published

Title

Stage

Authors

Version

2020 Sep 02

Pharmacotherapy for hyperuricaemia in hypertensive patients

Review

Pedro Henrique França Gois, Edison Regio de Moraes Souza

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008652.pub4

2017 Apr 13

Pharmacotherapy for hyperuricemia in hypertensive patients

Review

Pedro Henrique França Gois, Edison Regio de Moraes Souza

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008652.pub3

2013 Jan 31

Pharmacotherapy for hyperuricemia in hypertensive patients

Review

Pedro Henrique França Gois, Edison Regio de Moraes Souza

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008652.pub2

2010 Aug 04

Pharmacotherapy for hyperuricemia in hypertensive patients

Protocol

Pedro Henrique França Gois, Edison Regio de Moraes Souza, Carolina Urbini dos Santos

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008652

Differences between protocol and review

The affiliation and contact information for the review contact person changed. We amended the study protocol to allow the inclusion of studies involving prehypertensive individuals. Due to lack of data, we were unable to perform subgroup and sensitivity analyses in this review. GRADE was incorporated into this review update to assess the quality of evidence. Two new databases, clinical trials registry platform (WHO) and database of abstracts of reviews of effectiveness (DARE), were searched for this review update.

Keywords

MeSH

PICO

Population
Intervention
Comparison
Outcome

El uso y la enseñanza del modelo PICO están muy extendidos en el ámbito de la atención sanitaria basada en la evidencia para formular preguntas y estrategias de búsqueda y para caracterizar estudios o metanálisis clínicos. PICO son las siglas en inglés de cuatro posibles componentes de una pregunta de investigación: paciente, población o problema; intervención; comparación; desenlace (outcome).

Para saber más sobre el uso del modelo PICO, puede consultar el Manual Cochrane.

Flow diagram of the study selection
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 1

Flow diagram of the study selection

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 2

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 3

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Uric acid (UA)‐lowering drug vs. placebo, outcome: 1.1 systolic 24‐hour ambulatory blood pressure.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 4

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Uric acid (UA)‐lowering drug vs. placebo, outcome: 1.1 systolic 24‐hour ambulatory blood pressure.

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Uric acid (UA)‐lowering drug vs. placebo, outcome: 1.2 diastolic 24‐hour ambulatory blood pressure.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 5

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Uric acid (UA)‐lowering drug vs. placebo, outcome: 1.2 diastolic 24‐hour ambulatory blood pressure.

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Uric acid (UA)‐lowering drug vs. placebo, outcome: 1.3 Clinic systolic blood pressure.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 6

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Uric acid (UA)‐lowering drug vs. placebo, outcome: 1.3 Clinic systolic blood pressure.

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Uric acid (UA)‐lowering drug vs. placebo, outcome: 1.4 clinic diastolic blood pressure.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 7

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Uric acid (UA)‐lowering drug vs. placebo, outcome: 1.4 clinic diastolic blood pressure.

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Uric acid (UA)‐lowering drug vs. placebo, outcome: 1.5 serum uric acid.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 8

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Uric acid (UA)‐lowering drug vs. placebo, outcome: 1.5 serum uric acid.

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Uric acid (UA)‐lowering drug vs placebo, outcome: 1.6 Withdrawals due to adverse effects.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 9

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Uric acid (UA)‐lowering drug vs placebo, outcome: 1.6 Withdrawals due to adverse effects.

Comparison 1 Uric acid (UA) lowering drug vs placebo, Outcome 1 24h‐Systolic Blood Pressure.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Uric acid (UA) lowering drug vs placebo, Outcome 1 24h‐Systolic Blood Pressure.

Comparison 1 Uric acid (UA) lowering drug vs placebo, Outcome 2 24h‐Diastolic Blood Pressure.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Uric acid (UA) lowering drug vs placebo, Outcome 2 24h‐Diastolic Blood Pressure.

Comparison 1 Uric acid (UA) lowering drug vs placebo, Outcome 3 Clinic Systolic Blood Pressure.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Uric acid (UA) lowering drug vs placebo, Outcome 3 Clinic Systolic Blood Pressure.

Comparison 1 Uric acid (UA) lowering drug vs placebo, Outcome 4 Clinic Diastolic Blood Pressure.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Uric acid (UA) lowering drug vs placebo, Outcome 4 Clinic Diastolic Blood Pressure.

Comparison 1 Uric acid (UA) lowering drug vs placebo, Outcome 5 Serum uric acid.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Uric acid (UA) lowering drug vs placebo, Outcome 5 Serum uric acid.

Comparison 1 Uric acid (UA) lowering drug vs placebo, Outcome 6 Withdrawals due to adverse effects.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1 Uric acid (UA) lowering drug vs placebo, Outcome 6 Withdrawals due to adverse effects.

Summary of findings for the main comparison. Uric acid (UA) lowering drug compared to placebo for hyperuricemia in hypertensive patients

Uric acid (UA)‐lowering drug compared to placebo for hyperuricemia in hypertensive patients

Patient or population: hyperuricemia in hypertensive patients
Setting: several sites in the USA
Intervention: uric acid (UA)‐lowering drug
Comparison: placebo

Outcomes

Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

№ of participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Risk with placebo

Risk with Uric acid (UA) lowering drug

24h‐Systolic Blood Pressure

MD 6.19 lower
(12.82 lower to 0.45 higher)

MD ‐6.2 (‐12.8, 0.5)

229
(3 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOW 1 2

24h‐Diastolic Blood Pressure

MD 3.92 lower
(9.19 lower to 1.36 higher)

MD ‐3.9 (‐9.2, 1.4)

229
(3 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOW 1 2

Clinic Systolic Blood Pressure

MD 8.43 lower
(15.24 lower to 1.62 lower)

MD ‐8.4 (‐15.2, ‐1.6)

120
(2 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOW 1 2

Clinic Diastolic Blood Pressure

MD 6.45 lower
(13.6 lower to 0.7 higher)

MD ‐6.5 (‐13.6, 0.7)

120
(2 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOW 1 2

Serum uric acid

MD 3.09 lower
(3.76 lower to 2.43 lower)

MD ‐3.1 (‐3.8, ‐2.4)

223
(3 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊕⊕
HIGH

Withdrawals due to adverse effects

18 per 1,000

34 per 1,000
(8 to 147)

RR 1.86
(0.43 to 8.10)

241
(3 RCTs)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
VERY LOW 1 3 4

NCT01496469 reported only one withdrawal due to adverse events. However, four adverse events were described in the febuxostat group, which might be drug‐related. Therefore, we decided to include all four cases in the assessment of RR for this study.

*The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).

CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio; OR: Odds ratio; RCT: Randomized controlled trial.

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect
Moderate quality: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different
Low quality: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: The true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect
Very low quality: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect

1 Downgraded for wide CIs

2 Downgraded for high unexplained heterogeneity

3 Downgraded for small number of events and incomplete reporting

4 Unclear randomisation processes in the largest trial (highest weight in meta‐analysis)

Figuras y tablas -
Summary of findings for the main comparison. Uric acid (UA) lowering drug compared to placebo for hyperuricemia in hypertensive patients
Comparison 1. Uric acid (UA) lowering drug vs placebo

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 24h‐Systolic Blood Pressure Show forest plot

3

229

Mean Difference (Random, 95% CI)

‐6.19 [‐12.82, 0.45]

2 24h‐Diastolic Blood Pressure Show forest plot

3

229

Mean Difference (Random, 95% CI)

‐3.92 [‐9.19, 1.36]

3 Clinic Systolic Blood Pressure Show forest plot

2

120

Mean Difference (Random, 95% CI)

‐8.43 [‐15.24, ‐1.62]

4 Clinic Diastolic Blood Pressure Show forest plot

2

120

Mean Difference (Random, 95% CI)

‐6.45 [‐13.60, 0.70]

5 Serum uric acid Show forest plot

3

223

Mean Difference (Random, 95% CI)

‐3.09 [‐3.76, ‐2.43]

6 Withdrawals due to adverse effects Show forest plot

3

241

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.86 [0.43, 8.10]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Uric acid (UA) lowering drug vs placebo