口服硝苯地平与静脉注射拉贝洛尔治疗重度妊娠期高血压的系统评价与Meta分析

• 药品评价-循证医学研究 • 上一篇下一篇

口服硝苯地平与静脉注射拉贝洛尔治疗重度妊娠期高血压的系统评价与Meta分析

庞国勋,马银玲,邱志宏,高瑾,董占军

河北省人民医院,河北省人民医院,河北省人民医院,河北省人民医院,河北省人民医院

收稿日期:2018-06-25 修回日期:2018-07-09 出版日期:2018-10-25 发布日期:2018-10-25

Oral nifedipine versus intravenous labetalol for severe hypertension during pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PANG Guo-Xun,,, and

Heibei General hospital,Hebei Shijiazhuang,Heibei General hospital,Hebei Shijiazhuang,Heibei General hospital,Hebei Shijiazhuang,Heibei General hospital,Hebei Shijiazhuang,Heibei General hospital,Hebei Shijiazhuang

Received:2018-06-25 Revised:2018-07-09 Online:2018-10-25 Published:2018-10-25

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的：系统评价口服硝苯地平与静脉注射拉贝洛尔治疗重度妊娠期高血压的有效性及安全性。方法：检索Cochrane library、PubMed、EMBASE、SinoMed、CNKI、VIP、万方，均从建库日期检索至2017年12月，纳入口服硝苯地平与静脉注射拉贝洛尔治疗重度妊娠期高血压的随机对照试验（RCT），由2名评价员独立提取资料，并对其方法学质量进行评价。对符合纳入标准的研究采用RevMan 5.3软件进行Meta分析。结果：纳入9个研究，共737名孕妇，根据给药剂量的不同进行亚组分析，Meta分析结果显示：口服硝苯地平较静脉注射拉贝洛尔达到目标血压所需时间（WMD=-10.45，95% CI：-10.45~-4.06，P=0.001）更短，但二者达到目标血压所用最大剂量与初始剂量的比值（WMD=-0.57，95% CI：-1.16~0.03，P=0.06）无统计学意义。安全性方面，孕妇不良反应的发生率（RR=0.92，95% CI：0.54~1.58，P=0.77）及5 min新生儿Apgar评分<7(RR=0.67，95% CI：0.39~1.17，P=0.16)比较，差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。结论：现有研究显示口服硝苯地平与静脉注射拉贝洛尔治疗重度妊娠期高血压作用显著，且安全性较好。硝苯地平组达到目标血压的时间更少，但仍需要更多高质量、多中心的随机对照研究，提供更真实、可靠的证据。

Abstract: Objective：To determine the efficacy and safety of oral nifedipine for treatment of severe hypertension of pregnancy compared with intravenous labetalol. Methods： Retrieval with computer from the Cochrane Library， PubMed， EMBASE， SinoMed， CNKI， VIP， Wanfang databases were performed to collect randomized controlled trials(RCTs) on the treatment of severe hypertension during pregnancy using oral nifedipine or intravenous labetalol from their establishments up to December， 2017. Two reviewers analyzed these data independently. The included studies were evaluated according to the Cochrane systematic review. The results of RCTs were analyzed by Rev Man 5.3 software. Results： According to the initial dosing scheme and maximum doses of different subgroup analysis， the pooled analysis of nine trials consisting of 737 woman-infant pairs showed that oral nifedipine was associated with less time to target blood pressure(MD=-11.48， 95% CI：-13.72 ~-9.24， P=0.000 2)， however， the ratio of the maximum dose and initial dose(MD=-0.57， 95% CI：-1.16 ~ 0.03 P<0.000 01) was no significant difference. In terms of safety， there was reported maternal side effects（OR=0.94，95% CI：0.43~2.04，P=0.008）and the 5 mins APGAR score less than 7(OR=0.64，95% CI：0.35~1.19，P=0.93) not reach statistical signi?cance. Conclusion： Current evidence demonstrates that oral nifedipine is as efficacious and safe as intravenous labetalol， oral nifedipine was associated with less time to target blood pressure but it needs further studies to provide more sufficient evidence.

庞国勋,马银玲,邱志宏,高瑾,董占军. 口服硝苯地平与静脉注射拉贝洛尔治疗重度妊娠期高血压的系统评价与Meta分析[J]. .

PANG Guo-Xun,,, and. Oral nifedipine versus intravenous labetalol for severe hypertension during pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. .

参考文献

[1]Roberts JM, Pearson GD, Cutler JA, Lindheimer MD, National Heart Lung and Blood Institute. Summary of the NHLBI working group on research on hypertension during pregnancy[J]. Hypertens Pregnancy 2003;22:109–27.
[2]中华医学会妇产科学分会妊娠期高血压疾病学组.妊娠期高血压疾病诊治指南(2015)[J].中华妇产科杂志,2015,50(10):721-728.
[3]Queensland Clinical Guidelines (Translating evidence into bestclinical practice).Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy[J]. Queensland Health,2016.
[4]National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence. Hypertension in pregnancy. The management of hypertensive disorders during pregnancy. Clinical guidelines CG107. Issued: August 2010 [Internet]. [http://www.nice.org.uk/]. Accessed 20 June 2014.
[5]Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement[J]. J Clin Epidemiol, 2009, 62(10): 1006－1012.
[6]Higgins J, Green S(editors). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions[OL]. Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochranehandbook.org.
[7]Vermillion ST, Scardo JA, Newman RB,et al. A randomized, double-blind trial of oral nifedipine and intravenous labetalol in hypertensive emergencies of pregnancy [J].Am J Obstet Gynecol,1999,181:858–861.
[8]Raheem IA, Saaid R, Omar SZ, Tan PC. Oral nifedipine versus intravenous labetalol for acute blood pressure control in hypertensive emergencies of pregnancy: a randomisedtrial[J]. BJOG, 2012,119:78–85.
[9]Lakshmi BS, Dasari P. Oral nifedipine versus intravenous labetalol in hypertensive urgencies and emergencies of pregnancy: a randomized clinical trial[J]. Obstet Med Med Pregnancy, 2012, 5:171–175.
[10]Dhali B, Bhattacharya S, Ganguly R, Bandyopadhyay S, MondalM,Dutta M. A randomized trial of intravenous labetalol and oral nifedipine in severe pregnancy-induced hypertension[J]. Int J ReprodContraceptObstetGynecol,2012,1:42.
[11]Shekhar S, Sharma C, Thakur S, Verma S. Oral nifedipine or intravenous labetalol for hypertensive emergency in pregnancy: a randomized controlled trial[J]. ObstetGynecol, 2013,122:1057–1063.
[12]Swapan D, Swagata B, Prakash D, et al. Comparative Study of Intravenous Labetalol and Oral Nifedipine for Control of Blood Pressure in Severe Preeclampsia[J]. IOSR Journal of Dental and Medical Sciences.2015,14(10):22-27.
[13]Dhananjaya BS, and JamunaR. Oral Nifedipine versus Intravenous Labetalol in Hypertensive Emergencies of Pregnancy: A Randomised Trial [J].Research Journal of Pharmaceutical Biological and Chemical Sciences,2015,6 (2):1673-1681.
[14]Mukherjee S, Khan S, Jain U,et al. A comparative evaluation of intravenous labetalol versus oral nifedipine for control of severe pregnancy-inducedhypertension with low-dose regimen [J]. International Journal of Medical Science and Public Health, 2015,1183-1186.
[15]Shi D, Yang F, Zhou L and Wang N.Oral nifedipine vs. intravenous labetalol for treatment of pregnancy-inducedsevere pre-eclampsia[J]. Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics 2016;41(6):657-661.