Abstract
Background
The comparative effects of specific blood pressure (BP) lowering treatments on patient‐important outcomes following kidney transplantation are uncertain. Our 2009 Cochrane review found that calcium channel blockers (CCBs) improved graft function and prevented graft loss, while the evidence for other BP‐lowering treatments was limited. This is an update of the 2009 Cochrane review.
Objectives
To compare the benefits and harms of different classes and combinations of antihypertensive drugs in kidney transplant recipients.
Search methods
We contacted the Information Specialist and searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 3 July 2024 using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register were identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.
Selection criteria
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi‐RCTs evaluating any BP‐lowering agent in recipients of a functioning kidney transplant for at least two weeks were eligible.
Data collection and analysis
Two authors independently assessed the risks of bias and extracted data. Treatment estimates were summarised using the random‐effects model and expressed as relative risk (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Evidence certainty was assessed using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) processes. The primary outcomes included all‐cause death, graft loss, and kidney function.
Main results
Ninety‐seven studies (8706 participants) were included. One study evaluated treatment in children. The overall risk of bias was unclear to high across all domains.
Compared to placebo or standard care alone, CCBs probably reduce all‐cause death (23 studies, 3327 participants: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.95; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty evidence) and graft loss (24 studies, 3577 participants: RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.95; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). CCBs may make little or no difference to estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (11 studies, 2250 participants: MD 1.89 mL/min/1.73 m2, 95% CI ‐0.70 to 4.48; I2 = 48%; low certainty evidence) and acute rejection (13 studies, 906 participants: RR 10.8, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.35; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). CCBs may reduce systolic BP (SBP) (3 studies, 329 participants: MD ‐5.83 mm Hg, 95% CI ‐10.24 to ‐1.42; I2 = 13%; low certainty evidence) and diastolic BP (DBP) (3 studies, 329 participants: MD ‐3.98 mm Hg, 95% CI ‐5.98 to ‐1.99; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence). CCBs have uncertain effects on proteinuria.
Compared to placebo or standard care alone, angiotensin‐converting‐enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) may make little or no difference to all‐cause death (7 studies, 702 participants: RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.58 to 2.21; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence), graft loss (6 studies, 718 participants: RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.13; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence), eGFR (4 studies, 509 participants: MD ‐2.46 mL/min/1.73 m2, 95% CI ‐7.66 to 2.73; I2 = 64%; low certainty evidence) and acute rejection (4 studies, 388 participants: RR 1.75, 95% CI 0.76 to 4.04; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence). ACEi may reduce proteinuria (5 studies, 441 participants: MD ‐0.33 g/24 hours, 95% CI ‐0.64 to ‐0.01; I2 = 67%; low certainty evidence) but had uncertain effects on SBP and DBP.
Compared to placebo or standard care alone, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) may make little or no difference to all‐cause death (6 studies, 1041 participants: RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.31; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence), eGRF (5 studies, 300 participants: MD ‐1.91 mL/min/1.73 m2, 95% CI ‐6.20 to 2.38; I2 = 57%; low certainty evidence), and acute rejection (4 studies, 323 participants: RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.29; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence). ARBs may reduce graft loss (6 studies, 892 participants: RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.84; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence), SBP (10 studies, 1239 participants: MD ‐3.73 mm Hg, 95% CI ‐7.02 to ‐0.44; I2 = 63%; moderate certainty evidence) and DBP (9 studies, 1086 participants: MD ‐2.75 mm Hg, 95% CI ‐4.32 to ‐1.18; I2 = 47%; moderate certainty evidence), but has uncertain effects on proteinuria.
The effects of CCBs, ACEi or ARB compared to placebo or standard care alone on cardiovascular outcomes (including fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction, fatal or nonfatal stroke) or other adverse events were uncertain.
The comparative effects of ACEi plus ARB dual therapy, alpha‐blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists compared to placebo or standard care alone were rarely evaluated.
Head‐to‐head comparisons of ACEi, ARB or thiazide versus CCB, ACEi versus ARB, CCB or ACEi versus alpha‐ or beta‐blockers, or ACEi plus CCB dual therapy versus ACEi or CCB monotherapy were scarce. No studies reported outcome data for cancer or life participation.
Authors' conclusions
For kidney transplant recipients, the use of CCB therapy to reduce BP probably reduces death and graft loss compared to placebo or standard care alone, while ARB may reduce graft loss. The effects of ACEi and ARB compared to placebo or standard care on other patient‐centred outcomes were uncertain. The effects of dual therapy, alpha‐blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists compared to placebo or standard care alone and the comparative effects of different treatments were uncertain.