Comparison of enalapril and losartan in the treatment of posttransplant erythrocytosis

Effect of angiotensin II type-1 receptor blockers on stable allograft kidneys: prospective randomized study

OBJECTIVE

Is assess the effects of angiotensin II type-I receptor blockers on outcomes in renal transplant recipients without proteinuria or posttransplantation erythrocytosis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifty renal transplant recipients (30 men and 20 women, with a mean [SD] age of 40 [13] years) were randomized into 2 groups of 25 patients each; 1 group was treated with losartan for 1 year, and the other was not (control group). Blood pressure and other biochemical parameters were measured at baseline and at 6 and 12 months posttransplantation.

RESULTS

After 1 year, the losartan group had significantly lower systolic blood pressure (113 [22] mm Hg vs 126 [18] mm Hg; P = .04) and hemoglobin concentration (12.8 [1.9] g/dL vs 14.5 [2.1] g/dL; P = .006) and significantly higher serum high-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentration (58 [22] mg/dL vs 47 [10] mg/dL; P = .03) compared with the control group; however the incidence of anemia did not differ (37% vs 20%; P = .20). In the losartan group, there were significant changes in hemoglobin concentration between baseline and 6 months (14.5 [1.6] g/dL vs 12.9 [1.49] g/dL; P < .001), but not between 6 and 12 months (12.9 [1.49] g/dL vs 12.8 [1.96] g/dL; P = .43). After 1 year, there were no significant between-group differences in diastolic hypertension, serum creatinine concentration, creatinine clearance, and serum potassium, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglyceride, and uric acid concentrations.

CONCLUSION

Losartan significantly increased high-density lipoprotein concentration and significantly decreased systolic hypertension. Although losartan decreased the hemoglobin concentration during the first 6 months, its effect did not progress with longer use. To determine the effect of losartan on renal function, additional studies with longer follow-up are needed.

Antihypertensives for kidney transplant recipients: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

In nontransplant populations, effects of different antihypertensive drug classes vary. Relative effects in kidney transplant recipients are uncertain. We performed a systematic review including random effects meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, using Cochrane Collaboration methodology. We identified 60 trials, enrolling 3802 recipients. Twenty-nine trials (2262 patients) compared calcium channel blockers (CCB) with placebo or no treatment, 10 trials (445 patients) compared angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) with placebo or no treatment, and seven studies (405 patients) compared CCB with ACEi. CCB compared with placebo or no treatment (plus additional agents in either arm as required) reduced graft loss (risk ratio [RR] 0.75, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.57-0.99) and improved glomerular filtration rate (GFR; mean difference [MD] 4.5 mL/min, 95% CI 2.2-6.7). Data on ACEi versus placebo or no treatment were inconclusive for GFR (MD -8.1 mL/min, 95% CI -18.6-2.4) and inconsistent for graft loss, precluding meta-analysis. In direct comparison with CCB, ACEi decreased GFR (MD 11.5 mL/min, 95% CI 7.2-15.8), proteinuria (MD 0.28 g/day, 95% CI 0.10-0.47), hemoglobin (MD 11.5 g/L, 95% CI 7.2-15.8), and increased hyperkalemia (RR 3.7, 95% CI 1.9-7.7). Graft loss data were inconclusive (RR 7.4, 95% CI 0.4-140). These data suggest that CCB may be preferred as first-line agents for hypertensive kidney transplant recipients.

Antihypertensive treatment for kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

In some nontransplant populations, effects of different antihypertensive drug classes vary. Relative effects in kidney transplant recipients are uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess comparative effects of different classes of antihypertensive agents in kidney transplant recipients.

SEARCH STRATEGY

MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, conference proceedings and reference lists of identified studies were searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of any antihypertensive agent applied to kidney transplant recipients for at least two weeks were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data was extracted by two investigators independently. Study quality, transplant outcomes and other patient centred outcomes were assessed using random effects meta-analysis. Risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes, both with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Stratified analyses and meta-regression were used to investigate heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 60 studies, enrolling 3802 recipients. Twenty-nine studies (2262 participants) compared calcium channel blockers (CCB) to placebo/no treatment, 10 studies (445 participants) compared angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) to placebo/no treatment and seven studies (405 participants) compared CCB to ACEi. CCB compared to placebo/no treatment (plus additional agents in either arm as required) reduced graft loss (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.99) and improved glomerular filtration rate (GFR), (MD, 4.45 mL/min, 95% CI 2.22 to 6.68). Data on ACEi versus placebo/no treatment were inconclusive for GFR (MD -8.07 mL/min, 95% CI -18.57 to 2.43), and variable for graft loss, precluding meta-analysis. In direct comparison with CCB, ACEi decreased GFR (MD -11.48 mL/min, 95% CI -5.75 to -7.21), proteinuria (MD -0.28 g/24 h, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.10), haemoglobin (MD -12.96 g/L, 95% CI -5.72 to -10.21) and increased hyperkalaemia (RR 3.74, 95% CI 1.89 to 7.43). Graft loss data were inconclusive (RR 7.37, 95% CI 0.39 to 140.35). Other drug comparisons were compared in small numbers of participants and studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that CCB may be preferred as first line agents for hypertensive kidney transplant recipients. ACEi have some detrimental effects in kidney transplant recipients. More high quality studies reporting patient centred outcomes are required.