Dataset Information

Low-protein diet for conservative management of chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled trials.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Recent 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.

Methods

We 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.

Results

We 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.

Conclusions

In 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.

SUBMITTER: Rhee CM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5879959 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of low-protein diet on kidney function in patients with diabetic nephropathy.DesignA systematic review and a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Data sourcesMEDLINE, 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 selectionRandomised 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 synthesisThe 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.ResultsWe 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).ConclusionsLow-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.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the proportion of chronic low back pain patients who achieve a clinically meaningful response from different pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments.Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and gray literature search.Study selectionPublished randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported a responder analysis of adults with chronic low back pain treated with any of the following 15 interventions: oral or topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), exercise, acupuncture, spinal manipulation therapy, corticosteroid injections, acetaminophen, oral opioids, anticonvulsants, tricyclic antidepressants, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, cannabinoids, oral muscle relaxants, or topical rubefacients.SynthesisA total of 63 RCTs were included. There was moderate certainty that exercise (risk ratio [RR] of 1.71; 95% CI 1.37 to 2.15; number needed to treat [NNT] of 7), oral NSAIDs (RR = 1.44; 95% CI 1.17 to 1.78; NNT = 6), and SNRIs (duloxetine; RR = 1.25; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.38; NNT = 10) provide clinically meaningful benefits to patients with chronic low back pain. Exercise was the only intervention with sustained benefit (up to 48 weeks). There was low certainty that spinal manipulation therapy and topical rubefacients benefit patients. The benefit of acupuncture disappeared in higher-quality, longer (> 4 weeks) trials. Very low-quality evidence demonstrated that corticosteroid injections are ineffective. Patients treated with opioids had a greater likelihood of discontinuing treatment owing to an adverse event (number needed to harm of 5) than continuing treatment to derive any clinically meaningful benefit (NNT = 16), while those treated with SNRIs (duloxetine) had a similar likelihood of continuing treatment to attain benefit (NNT = 10) as those discontinuing the medication owing to an adverse event (number need to harm of 11). One trial each of anticonvulsants and topical NSAIDs found similar benefit to that of placebo. No RCTs of acetaminophen, cannabinoids, muscle relaxants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or tricyclic antidepressants met the inclusion criteria.ConclusionExercise, oral NSAIDs, and SNRIs (duloxetine) provide a clinically meaningful reduction in pain, with exercise being the only intervention that demonstrated sustained benefit after the intervention ended. Future high-quality trials that report responder analyses are required to provide a better understanding of the benefits and harms of interventions for patients with chronic low back pain.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of conservative management (except drug therapy) for acute Whiplash Associated Disorder (WAD) II.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) using a pre-defined protocol. Two independent reviewers searched information sources, decided eligibility of studies, and assessed risk of bias (RoB) of included trials. Data were extracted by one reviewer and checked by the other. A third reviewer mediated any disagreements throughout. Qualitative trial and RoB data were summarised descriptively. Quantitative syntheses were conducted across trials for comparable interventions, outcome measures and assessment points. Meta-analyses compared effect sizes with random effects, using STATA version 12.Data sourcesPEDro, Medline, Embase, AMED, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library with manual searching in key journals, reference lists, British National Bibliography for Report Literature, Center for International Rehabilitation Research Information & Exchange, and National Technical Information Service were searched from inception to 15th April 2015. Active researchers in the field were contacted to determine relevant studies.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesRCTs evaluating acute (<4 weeks) WADII, any conservative intervention, with outcome measures important to the International Classification of Function, Disability and Health.ResultsFifteen RCTs all assessed as high RoB (n=1676 participants) across 9 countries were included. Meta-analyses enabled 4 intervention comparisons: conservative versus standard/control, active versus passive, behavioural versus standard/control, and early versus late. Conservative intervention was more effective for pain reduction at 6 months (95%CI: -20.14 to -3.38) and 1-3 years (-25.44 to -3.19), and improvement in cervical mobility in the horizontal plane at <3 months (0.43 to 5.60) compared with standard/control intervention. Active intervention was effective for pain alleviation at 6 months (-17.19 to -3.23) and 1-3 years (-26.39 to -10.08) compared with passive intervention. Behavioural intervention was more effective than standard/control intervention for pain reduction at 6 months (-15.37 to -1.55), and improvement in cervical movement in the coronal (0.93 to 4.38) and horizontal planes at 3-6 months (0.43 to 5.46). For early (<4 days) versus late (>10 days) interventions, there were no statistically significant differences in all outcome measures between interventions at any time.ConclusionsConservative and active interventions may be useful for pain reduction in patients with acute WADII. Additionally, cervical horizontal mobility could be improved by conservative intervention. The employment of a behavioural intervention (e.g. act-as-usual, education and self-care including regularly exercise) could have benefits for pain reduction and improvement in cervical movement in the coronal and horizontal planes. The evidence was evaluated as low/very low level according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system.

Project description:ObjectiveThe benefits of a low-salt diet for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of a low-salt diet on major clinical outcomes.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMEDLINE by Ovid, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library databases.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesWe included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that assessed the effect of a low-salt diet on the renal composite outcomes (more than 50% decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) during follow-up, doubling of serum creatinine or end-stage renal disease), rate of eGFR decline, change in proteinuria, all-cause mortality events, cardiovascular (CV) events, and changes in systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure.Data extraction and synthesisTwo independent researchers extracted data and evaluated their quality. Relative risks (RRs) with 95% CIs were used for dichotomous data. Differences in means (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% CIs were used to pool continuous data. We used the Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tool to evaluate the quality of RCTs, and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to evaluate the quality of cohort studies.ResultsWe found 9948 potential research records. After removing duplicates, we reviewed the titles and abstracts, and screened the full text of 230 publications. Thirty-three studies with 101 077 participants were included. A low-salt diet produced a 28% reduction in renal composite outcome events (RR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.58 to 0.89). No significant effects were found in terms of changes in proteinuria (SMD: -0.71; 95% CI: -1.66 to 0.24), rate of eGFR (decline MD: 1.16; 95% CI: -2.02 to 4.33), risk of all-cause mortality (RR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.58 to 1.46) and CV events (RR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.46 to 2.22).ConclusionA low-salt diet seems to reduce the risk for renal composite outcome events in patients with CKD. However, no compelling evidence indicated that such a diet would reduce the eGFR decline rate, proteinuria, incidence of all-cause mortality and CV events. Further, more definitive studies are needed.Prospero registration numberCRD42017072395.

Project description:BackgroundOlder adults with chronic kidney disease stage 5 may be offered a choice between dialysis and conservative management. Few studies have explored patients' reasons for choosing conservative management and none have compared the views of those who have chosen different treatments across renal units.Study designQualitative study with semistructured interviews.Settings & participantsPatients 75 years or older recruited from 9 renal units. Units were chosen to reflect variation in the scale of delivery of conservative management.MethodologySemistructured interviews audiorecorded and transcribed verbatim.Analytical approachData were analyzed using thematic analysis.Results42 interviews were completed, 4 to 6 per renal unit. Patients were sampled from those receiving dialysis, those preparing for dialysis, and those choosing conservative management. 14 patients in each group were interviewed. Patients who had chosen different treatments held varying beliefs about what dialysis could offer. The information that patients reported receiving from clinical staff differed between units. Patients from units with a more established conservative management pathway were more aware of conservative management, less often believed that dialysis would guarantee longevity, and more often had discussed the future with staff. Some patients receiving conservative management reported that they would have dialysis if they became unwell in the future, indicating the conditional nature of their decision.LimitationsRecruitment of older adults with frailty and comorbid conditions was difficult and therefore transferability of findings to this population is limited.ConclusionsOlder adults with chronic kidney disease stage 5 who have chosen different treatment options have contrasting beliefs about the likely outcomes of dialysis for those who are influenced by information provided by renal units. Supporting renal staff in discussing conservative management as a valid alternative to dialysis for a subset of patients will aid informed decision making. There is a need for better evidence about conservative management to support shared decision making for older people with chronic kidney failure.

Project description:ObjectiveThis systematic review aims to investigate the efficacy and safety of moxibustion for chronic kidney disease (CKD).MethodsNine databases were searched to identify relevant evidence up to March 8, 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that tested moxibustion + basic treatments versus basic treatments alone for patients with CKD and reported, at least, one of the outcomes of interest were included. In the meta-analyses, the mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to measure the effect size.ResultsTwenty-three RCTs (n = 1571) with a moderate to high risk of bias were included. The pooled estimates showed that compared with the controls, patients after moxibustion had a significant reduction in serum creatinine (MD -17.34 μmol/L, 95% CI -28.44 to -6.23; I 2 = 87%), 24-hour urine protein excretion (MD -0.75 g/h, 95% CI -1.07 to -0.42; I 2 = 84%), and blood urea nitrogen (MD -0.63 mmol/L, 95% CI -1.09 to -0.18; I 2 = 37%) and a significant improvement in the quality of life (MD 10.18, 95% CI 3.67 to 16.69; I 2 = 57%). Moxibustion did not show a significant effect on the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), creatinine clearance, or hemoglobin. The subgroup analyses showed that a longer course of moxibustion (>8 weeks) and indirect moxibustion had a greater effect on reducing serum creatinine. The effect of moxibustion on blood urea nitrogen changed to be nonsignificant after excluding RCTs with a high risk of bias (MD -0.96 mmol/L, 95% CI -2.96 to 1.03). Only one adverse event of burn was reported.ConclusionsThis systematic review suggests that, as an adjuvant therapy, moxibustion may improve serum creatinine, urinary protein excretion, blood urea nitrogen, and quality of life in patients with CKD. Moxibustion may not have effects on eGFR, creatinine clearance, or hemoglobin. The quality of evidence is weakened by the limitations of risk of bias, heterogeneity, and imprecision.