4.6 Review

Carvedilol for portal hypertension in cirrhosis: systematic review with meta-analysis

Journal

BMJ OPEN
Volume 6, Issue 5, Pages -

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010902

Keywords

CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY; GENERAL MEDICINE (see Internal Medicine)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective To assess the clinical and haemodynamic effects of carvedilol for patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension. Design A systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources We searched PubMed, Cochrane library databases, EMBASE and the Science Citation Index Expanded through December 2015. Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Outcome measure We calculated clinical outcomes (all-cause mortality, bleeding-related mortality, upper gastrointestinal bleeding) as well as haemodynamic outcomes (hepatic venous pressure (HVPG) reduction, haemodynamic response rate, post-treatment arterial blood pressure (mean arterial pressure; MAP) and adverse events). Results 12 RCTs were included. In 7 trials that looked at haemodynamic outcomes compared carvedilol versus propranolol, showing that carvedilol was associated with a greater reduction (%) of HVPG within 6months (mean difference -8.49, 95% CI -12.36 to -4.63) without a greater reduction in MAP than propranolol. In 3 trials investigating differences in clinical outcomes between carvedilol versus endoscopic variceal band ligation (EVL), no significant differences in mortality or variceal bleeding were demonstrated. 1 trial compared clinical outcomes between carvedilol versus nadolol plus isosorbide-5-mononitrate (ISMN), and showed that no significant difference in mortality or bleeding had been found. 1 trial comparing carvedilol versus nebivolol showed a greater reduction in HVPG after 14days follow-up in the carvedilol group. Conclusions Carvedilol may be more effective in decreasing HVPG than propranolol or nebivolol and it may be as effective as EVL or nadolol plus ISMN in preventing variceal bleeding. However, the overall quality of evidence is low. Further large-scale randomised studies are required before we can make firm conclusions. Trial registration number CRD42015020542.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available