MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3008179040 · doi:10.1177/2054358120906974

Pharmacologic Therapies for Aortic Stiffness in End-Stage Renal Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020· review· en· W3008179040 on OpenAlexafffund
R Rodriguez, Matthew Spence, Richard Hae, Mohsen Agharazii, Kevin D. Burns

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversité LavalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsMedicinePulse wave velocityArterial stiffnessInternal medicineEnd stage renal diseaseRandomized controlled trialPlaceboHemodialysisBlood pressureKidney diseaseCardiologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Increased carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cf-PWV), a surrogate of increased aortic stiffness, is a risk factor for cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality in end-stage renal disease (ESRD). To minimize the deleterious effects of an increased aortic stiffness in ESRD patients, several interventions have been developed and cf-PWV has been used to monitor responses. Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the effects of pharmacologic interventions that target aortic stiffness on cf-PWV and systolic blood pressure (SBP) in adults with ESRD. Study design: This study implements a systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central, Health Technology Assessment, and EBM databases were searched. Study eligibility, participants, and interventions: Randomized and non-randomized studies involving adults (>18 years) with ESRD of any duration, receiving or not renal replacement therapy (hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis) and exposed to a pharmacologic intervention whose effects were assessed by cf-PWV. Methods: Study screening, selection, data extraction, and quality assessments were performed by 2 independent reviewers. Narrative synthesis and quantitative data analysis summarized the review. Results: We included 1027 ESRD participants from 13 randomized and 5 non-randomized studies. Most pharmacologic interventions targeted bone mineral metabolism disorder or hypertension. Treatment with vitamin D analogues or cinacalcet did not decrease cf-PWV or SBP over placebo or matched controls ( P > .05). Calcium-channel blockers (CCB) decreased cf-PWV and SBP compared with placebo or standard care ( P < .05). Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors did not show any advantage over placebo in decreasing cf-PWV ( P > .05). Limitations: Quality of evidence ranged from very low to moderate. Overall evidence was limited by the low number of studies, small sample sizes, and methodological inconsistencies. Conclusions: Pharmacologic interventions targeting aortic stiffness in ESRD have mixed effects on reducing cf-PWV, with some strategies suggesting potential benefit. The quality of evidence, however, is insufficient to draw definitive conclusions on their use to slow progression of aortic stiffness in ESRD. Further well-designed studies are needed to confirm these associations and their impact on cardiovascular outcomes in ESRD. Registered in PROSPERO (CRD42016033463)

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0180.027
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.085
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.307 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Kidney Health and DiseaseSame topicCardiovascular Health and Disease PreventionFrench-language works237,207