Dataset Information

Effect of low-protein diet on kidney function in diabetic nephropathy: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To evaluate the effect of low-protein diet on kidney function in patients with diabetic nephropathy.

Design

A systematic review and a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Data sources

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) Register and University Hospital Medical Information Network-Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN-CTR) from inception to 10 December 2012. Internet searches were also carried out with general search engines (Google and Google Scholar).

Study selection

Randomised controlled trials that compared low-protein diet versus control diet and assessed the effects on kidney function, proteinuria, glycaemic control or nutritional status.

Primary and secondary outcome measures and data synthesis

The primary outcome was a change in the glomerular filtration rate (GFR). The secondary outcomes were changes in proteinuria, post-treatment value of glycated haemoglobin A1C (HbA1c) and post-treatment value of serum albumin. The results were summarised as the mean difference for continuous outcomes and pooled by the random effects model. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were conducted regarding patient characteristics, intervention period, methodological quality and assessment of diet compliance. The assessment of diet compliance was performed based on the actual protein intake ratio (APIR) of the low-protein diet group to the control group.

Results

We identified 13 randomised controlled trials enrolling 779 patients. A low-protein diet was associated with a significant improvement in GFR (5.82 ml/min/1.73 m(2), 95% CI 2.30 to 9.33, I(2)=92%; n=624). This effect was consistent across the subgroups of type of diabetes, stages of nephropathy and intervention period. However, GFR was improved only when diet compliance was fair (8.92, 95% CI 2.75 to 15.09, I(2)=92% for APIR <0.9 and 0.03, 95% CI -1.49 to 1.56, I(2)=90% for APIR ?0.9). Proteinuria and serum albumin were not differed between the groups. HbA1c was slightly but significantly decreased in the low-protein diet group (-0.26%, 95% CI -0.35 to -0.18, I(2)=0%; n=536).

Conclusions

Low-protein diet was significantly associated with improvement of diabetic nephropathy. The adverse effects of low-protein diet were not apparent such as worsening of glycaemic control and malnutrition.

SUBMITTER: Nezu U

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3664345 | biostudies-literature | 2013 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effect of low-protein diet on kidney function in diabetic nephropathy: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Nezu Uru U Kamiyama Hiroshi H Kondo Yoshinobu Y Sakuma Mio M Morimoto Takeshi T Ueda Shinichiro S

BMJ open 20130528 5

<h4>Objective</h4>To evaluate the effect of low-protein diet on kidney function in patients with diabetic nephropathy.<h4>Design</h4>A systematic review and a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.<h4>Data sources</h4>MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) Register and University Hospital Medical Information Network-Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN-CTR) from inception to 10 December 2012. Internet searches w ...[more]

PMID: 23793703

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo provide a broad evaluation of the efficacy and safety of oral Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) as an adjunctive treatment for diabetic kidney disease (DKD), including mortality, progression to end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), albuminuria, proteinuria and kidney function.DesignA systematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing oral CHM with placebo as an additional intervention to conventional treatments were retrieved from five English (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database and Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature) and four Chinese databases (China BioMedical Literature, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chonqing VIP and Wanfang) from inception to May 2018. RCTs recruiting adult DKD patients induced by primary diabetes were considered eligible, regardless of the form and ingredients of oral CHM. Mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) was used to analyse continuous variables and RR for dichotomous data.ResultsFrom 7255 reports retrieved, 20 eligible studies involving 2719 DKD patients were included. CHM was associated with greater reduction of albuminuria than placebo, regardless of whether renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors were concurrently administered (SMD -0.56, 95% CI [-1.04 to -0.08], I2=64%, p=0.002) or not (SMD -0.92, 95% CI [-1.35 to -0.51], I2=87%, p<0.0001). When CHM was used as an adjunct to RAS inhibitors, estimated glomerular filtration rate was higher in the CHM than placebo group (MD 6.28 mL/min; 95% CI [2.42 to 10.14], I2=0%, p=0.001). The effects of CHM on progression to ESKD and mortality were uncertain due to low event rates. The reported adverse events in CHM group included digestive disorders, elevated liver enzyme level, infection, anaemia, hypertension and subarachnoid haemorrhage, but the report rates were low and similar to control groups. The favourable results of CHM should be balanced with the limitations of the included studies such as high heterogeneity, short follow-up periods, small numbers of clinical events and older patients with less advanced disease.ConclusionsBased on moderate to low quality evidence, CHM may have beneficial effects on renal function and albuminuria beyond that afforded by conventional treatment in adults with DKD. Further well-conducted, adequately powered trials with representative DKD populations are warranted to confirm the long-term effect of CHM, particularly on clinically relevant outcomes.Prospero registration numberCRD42015029293.

Project description:BackgroundRecent data pose the question whether conservative management of chronic kidney disease (CKD) by means of a low-protein diet can be a safe and effective means to avoid or defer transition to dialysis therapy without causing protein-energy wasting or cachexia. We aimed to systematically review and meta-analyse the controlled clinical trials with adequate participants in each trial, providing rigorous contemporary evidence of the impact of a low-protein diet in the management of uraemia and its complications in patients with CKD.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE (PubMed) and other sources for controlled trials on CKD to compare clinical management of CKD patients under various levels of dietary protein intake or to compare restricted protein intake with other interventions. Studies with similar patients, interventions, and outcomes were included in the meta-analyses.ResultsWe identified 16 controlled trials of low-protein diet in CKD that met the stringent qualification criteria including having 30 or more participants. Compared with diets with protein intake of >0.8 g/kg/day, diets with restricted protein intake (<0.8 g/kg/day) were associated with higher serum bicarbonate levels, lower phosphorus levels, lower azotemia, lower rates of progression to end-stage renal disease, and a trend towards lower rates of all-cause death. In addition, very-low-protein diets (protein intake <0.4 g/kg/day) were associated with greater preservation of kidney function and reduction in the rate of progression to end-stage renal disease. Safety and adherence to a low-protein diet was not inferior to a normal protein diet, and there was no difference in the rate of malnutrition or protein-energy wasting.ConclusionsIn this pooled analysis of moderate-size controlled trials, a low-protein diet appears to enhance the conservative management of non-dialysis-dependent CKD and may be considered as a potential option for CKD patients who wish to avoid or defer dialysis initiation and to slow down the progression of CKD, while the risk of protein-energy wasting and cachexia remains minimal.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Randomised controlled trials (RCT) are the gold standard to provide unbiased data. However, when patients have a treatment preference, randomisation may influence participation and outcomes (eg, external and internal validity). The aim of this study was to assess the influence of patients' preference in RCTs by analysing partially randomised patient preference trials (RPPT); an RCT and preference cohort combined. DESIGN:Systematic review and meta-analyses. DATA SOURCES:MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES:RPPTs published between January 2005 and October 2018 reporting on allocation of patients to randomised and preference cohorts were included. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS:Two independent reviewers extracted data. The main outcomes were the difference in external validity (participation and baseline characteristics) and internal validity (lost to follow-up, crossover and the primary outcome) between the randomised and the preference cohort within each RPPT, compared in a meta-regression using a Wald test. Risk of bias was not assessed, as no quality assessment for RPPTs has yet been developed. RESULTS:In total, 117 of 3734 identified articles met screening criteria and 44 were eligible (24 873 patients). The participation rate in RPPTs was >95% in 14 trials (range: 48%-100%) and the randomisation refusal rate was >50% in 26 trials (range: 19%-99%). Higher education, female, older age, race and prior experience with one treatment arm were characteristics of patients declining randomisation. The lost to follow-up and cross-over rate were significantly higher in the randomised cohort compared with the preference cohort. Following the meta-analysis, the reported primary outcomes were comparable between both cohorts of the RPPTs, mean difference 0.093 (95% CI -0.178 to 0.364, p=0.502). CONCLUSIONS:Patients' preference led to a substantial proportion of a specific patient group refusing randomisation, while it did not influence the primary outcome within an RPPT. Therefore, RPPTs could increase external validity without compromising the internal validity compared with RCTs. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42019094438.

Project description:ObjectiveTo analyse the benefits and harms of statins in patients with chronic kidney disease (pre-dialysis, dialysis, and transplant populations).DesignMeta-analysis.Data sourcesCochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, Embase, and Renal Health Library (July 2006).Study selectionRandomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of statins compared with placebo or other statins in chronic kidney disease.Data extraction and analysisTwo reviewers independently assessed trials for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed trial quality. Differences were resolved by consensus. Treatment effects were summarised as relative risks or weighted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals by using a random effects model.ResultsFifty trials (30 144 patients) were included. Compared with placebo, statins significantly reduced total cholesterol (42 studies, 6390 patients; weighted mean difference -42.28 mg/dl (1.10 mmol/l), 95% confidence interval -47.25 to -37.32), low density lipoprotein cholesterol (39 studies, 6216 patients; -43.12 mg/dl (1.12 mmol/l), -47.85 to -38.40), and proteinuria (g/24 hours) (6 trials, 311 patients; -0.73 g/24 hour, -0.95 to -0.52) but did not improve glomerular filtration rate (11 studies, 548 patients; 1.48 ml/min (0.02 ml/s), -2.32 to 5.28). Fatal cardiovascular events (43 studies, 23 266 patients; relative risk 0.81, 0.73 to 0.90) and non-fatal cardiovascular events (8 studies, 22 863 patients; 0.78, 0.73 to 0.84) were reduced with statins, but statins had no significant effect on all cause mortality (44 studies, 23 665 patients; 0.92, 0.82 to 1.03). Meta-regression analysis showed that treatment effects did not vary significantly with stage of chronic kidney disease. The side effect profile of statins was similar to that of placebo. Most of the available studies were small and of suboptimal quality; mortality data were provided by a few large trials only.ConclusionStatins significantly reduce lipid concentrations and cardiovascular end points in patients with chronic kidney disease, irrespective of stage of disease, but no benefit on all cause mortality or the role of statins in primary prevention has been established. Reno-protective effects of statins are uncertain because of relatively sparse data and possible outcomes reporting bias.

Dataset Information

Effect of low-protein diet on kidney function in diabetic nephropathy: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Objective

Design

Data sources

Study selection

Primary and secondary outcome measures and data synthesis

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Effect of low-protein diet on kidney function in diabetic nephropathy: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets