Copyright
©The Author(s) 2021.
World J Methodol. Jul 20, 2021; 11(4): 187-198
Published online Jul 20, 2021. doi: 10.5662/wjm.v11.i4.187
Published online Jul 20, 2021. doi: 10.5662/wjm.v11.i4.187
Table 1 Characteristics and main findings of included studies
Ref. | Population | Sample size | Intervention | Duration of follow-up | Main findings |
Owan et al[10], 2008 | ADHF with renal dysfunction | 72 | Standard therapy vs standard therapy plus nesiritide (bolus of 0.2 mcg/kg followed by 0.01 mcg/kg per min) | 72 h | Nesiritide produced greater reduction in blood pressure and preserved renal function |
Bart et al[11], 2012 | ADHF with worsened renal function | 188 | Ultrafiltration therapy vs stepped pharmacologic therapy (intravenous diuretics) | 96 h | Stepped pharmacologic-therapy with intravenous diuretics was superior to ultrafiltration |
Fedele et al[12], 2014 | ADHF and renal impairment | 21 | Levosimendan (loading dose 6 μg/kg + 0.1 μg/kg per min) for 24 h vs placebo | 72 h | Levosimendan improves the laboratory markers of renal function and renal hemodynamic parameters |
Chen et al[13], 2013 | AHF and renal dysfunction | 360 | Low dose dopamine (2 μg/kg per min for 72 h) vs low dose nesiritide (0.005 μg/kg per min for 72 h) vs placebo | 72 h | Neither low dose dopamine nor low dose nesiritide improved renal function when added to diuretic therapy |
Inomata et al[14], 2017 | HF with diuretic resistance and renal impairment | 81 | Additive tolvaptan (≤ 15 mg/d) vs increased furosemide (≤ 40 mg/d) | 7 d | Additive tolvaptan increased urine volume compared with patients receiving an increased dose of furosemide |
Lannemyr et al[15], 2018 | Chronic HF and impaired renal function | 32 | Levosimendan (loading dose 12 μg/kg + 0.1 μg/kg per min) vs dobutamine (7.5 μg/kg per min) for 75 min | 60 mo and 75 mo after treatment | Levosimendan is the preferred inotropic agent compared to dobutamine |
Table 2 Changes in clinical parameters of the included studies
Intervention | Clinical parameters evaluated | ||||||||
Ref. | Creatinine (mg/dL) | Change in BUN (mg/dL) | Cystatin C (mg/L) | Weight loss (kg) | Cumulative urine volume (mL) | ||||
Baseline | Mean changes | Baseline | Mean changes | Baseline | Mean changes | Mean changes | |||
Nesiritide | Owan et al[10], 2008 | 1.85 ± 0.71 | 0.04 ± 0.44 | 44.8 ± 23.3 | -1.3 ± 12.8 | NA | NA | -2.75 ± 3.27 | NA |
Owan et al[10], 2008 (placebo) | 1.65 ± 0.42 | 0.09 ± 0.25 | 38.3 ± 16.6 | 2.4 ± 6.8 | NA | NA | -4.25 ± 3.42 | NA | |
Chen et al[13], 2013 | 1.65 | 0.02 | NA | NA | 1.66 | 0.07 | NA | 8574 | |
Chen et al[13], 2013 (placebo) | 1.70 | 0.02 | NA | NA | 1.86 | 0.11 | NA | 8296 |
Table 3 Changes in clinical parameters of the included studies
Intervention | Clinical parameters evaluated | ||||||||||
Ref. | Creatinine (mg/dL) | Change in BUN (mg/dL) | Cystatin C (mg/L) | Weight loss (kg) | Urine output (mL/d) | ||||||
Baseline | Mean changes | Baseline | Mean changes | Baseline | Mean changes | Baseline | Mean changes | Baseline | Mean changes | ||
Furosemide | Inomata et al[14], 2017 | 1.6 | 0.20 ± 0.27 | NA | NA | NA | NA | 61 | -2.1 ± 2.6 | 1251 ± 540 | 79 ± 341 |
Table 4 Changes in clinical parameters of the included studies
Intervention | Clinical parameters evaluated | ||||||||||
Ref. | Creatinine (mg/dL) | Change in BUN (mg/dL) | Cystatin C (mg/L) | GFR (mL/min) | Urine output (mL/d) | ||||||
Baseline | 72 h | Baseline | 72 h | Baseline | 72 h | Baseline | 72 h | Baseline | 72 h | ||
Levosimendan | Fedele et al[12], 2014 | 1.76 ± 0.37 | 1.51 ± 0.5 | 45.08 ± 22.19 | 33.14 ± 16.63 | 2577.5 ± 700.6 | 2083 ± 731.4 | 38.71 ± 7.94 | 53.34 ± 14.93 | 1766.4 ± 514.2 | 2663.5 ± 721.2 |
Fedele et al[12], 2014 (placebo) | 1.6 ± 0.2 | 1.7 ± 0.2 | 44.4 ± 13.1 | 47 ± 12.8 | 2498.5 ± 262 | 2470 ± 409.9 | 43.33 ± 7.99 | 40.24 ± 6.58 | 1571.4 ± 125.3 | 1778.51 ± 798.1 | |
Ref. | Creatinine (mg/dL) | Change in BUN (mg/dL) | RBF (mL/min) | GFR (mL/min) | FF | ||||||
Baseline | Treatment | Baseline | Treatment | Baseline | Treatment | Baseline | Treatment | Baseline | Treatment | ||
Inomata et al[14], 2017 | NA | NA | NA | NA | 426 ± 197 | 518 ± 276 | 36.5 ± 18.3 | 44.5 ± 19.0 | 0.146 ± 0.080 | 0.143 ± 0.069 |
Table 5 Changes in clinical parameters of the included studies
Intervention | Clinical parameters evaluated | ||||||||||
Ref. | Creatinine (mg/dL) | Change in BUN (mg/dL) | Cystatin C (mg/L) | Weight loss (kg) | Cumulative urine volume (mL) | ||||||
Baseline | Mean changes | Baseline | Mean changes | Baseline | Mean changes | Baseline | Mean changes | ||||
Dopamine/dobutamine | Chen et al[13], 2013 (dopamine) | 1.59 | 0.00 | NA | NA | 1.71 | 0.12 | NA | NA | 8524 | |
Chen et al[13], 2013 (placebo) | 1.63 | 0.02 | NA | NA | 1.66 | 0.11 | NA | NA | 8296 | ||
Ref. | Creatinine (mg/dL) | Change in BUN (mg/dL) | RBF (mL/min) | GFR (mL/min) | FF | ||||||
Baseline | Treatment | Baseline | Treatment | Baseline | Treatment | Baseline | Treatment | Baseline | Treatment | ||
Lannemyr et al[15], 2018 (dobutamine) | NA | NA | NA | NA | 397 ± 121 | 499 ± 154 | 47.1 ± 14.5 | 47.3 ± 16.9 | 0.193 ± 0.070 | 0.161 ± 0.075 |
Table 6 Changes in clinical parameters of the included studies
Intervention | Clinical parameters evaluated | ||||||||||
Study | Creatinine (mg/dL) | Change in BUN (mg/dL) | Cystatin C (mg/L) | Weight loss (kg) | Urine output (mL/d) | ||||||
Baseline | Mean changes | Baseline | Mean changes | Baseline | Mean changes | Baseline | Mean changes | Baseline | Mean changes | ||
Tolvaptan | Inomata et al[14], 2017 | 1.5 | 0.06 ± 0.32 | NA | NA | NA | NA | 62 | -2.1 ± 1.8 | 1306 ± 494 | 459 ± 514 |
Table 7 Changes in clinical parameters of the included studies
Intervention | Clinical parameters evaluated | |||||||||
Study | Creatinine (mg/dL) | Change in BUN (mg/dL) | GFR (mL/min per 1.73 m2) | Weight loss (Ib) | Urine output (mL/d) | |||||
Baseline | Mean changes | Baseline | Mean changes | Mean changes | Baseline | Mean changes | Baseline | Mean changes | ||
Ultrafiltration | Bart et al[11], 2012 | 2.09 | -0.04 ± 0.53 | 50.5 | 5.68 ± 18.29 | 1.67 ± 10.94 | 234 | 12.1 ± 11.3 | NA | NA |
Bart et al[11], 2012 (pharmaco-logic therapy) | 1.90 | +0.23 ± 0.70 | 48.7 | 12.54 ± 24.81 | 0.93 ± 14.60 | 207 | 12.6 ± 8.5 | NA | NA |
- Citation: Ong LT. Evidence based review of management of cardiorenal syndrome type 1. World J Methodol 2021; 11(4): 187-198
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2222-0682/full/v11/i4/187.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5662/wjm.v11.i4.187