A meta-analysis of phosphate binders lanthanum carbonate versus sevelamer hydrochloride in patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing hemodialysis

Background and Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of phosphate binders lanthanum carbonate (LC) versus sevelamer hydrochloride (SH) in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients undergoing hemodialysis. Methods: Studies including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) compari...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:African health sciences 2018-09, Vol.18 (3), p.689-696
Hauptverfasser: Zhou, Tianbiao, Li, Hongyan, Xie, Weiji, Lin, Zhijun
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background and Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of phosphate binders lanthanum carbonate (LC) versus sevelamer hydrochloride (SH) in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients undergoing hemodialysis. Methods: Studies including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing phosphate binders lanthanum carbonate versus sevelamer hydrochloride, in ESRD patients undergoing hemodialysis, were identified using a pre-defined search strategy. Phosphate, calcium, calcium-phosphorus product, intact parathyroid hormone, alkaline phosphatase, total cholesterol, and triglyceride were extracted and compared by RevMan 5.1 (The Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). Results: Six studies were identified. Meta-analysis showed that SH treatment reduced levels of phosphate, intact parathyroid hormone, and total serum alkaline phosphatase (ALP) when compared with LC treatment. Furthermore, patients on SH treatment tended to have reduced calcium levels, calcium-phosphorus product, total cholesterol, and triglyceride when compared to patients treated with LC, but there was no statistical difference. Conclusion: SH treatment of patients with ESRD is more effective compared to LC treatment. However, more well-designed random control trails are required for confirmation.
ISSN:1680-6905
1729-0503
1680-6905
DOI:10.4314/ahs.v18i3.27