Objective To compare the efficacy of icodextrin-based solution (ico) and glucose-based solution (GLU) in peritoneal dialysis patients. Methods Pubmed (1996-2016.12), MEDLINE (1996-2016.12), Embase (1974-2016.12) and Cochrane library were searched by two independent investigators who conducted quality assessment and data mining and performed Meta-analysis using RevMan 5.2. Results Ten randomized controlled trials with 825 participants were included in this study, and 661 patients completed the trials at last. The Meta-analysis showed that there were no significant differences in body weight (WMD=-1.88, 95%CI:-4.68-0.93, P=0.19), fasting plasma glucose (WMD=-0.76, 95%CI:-1.79-0.28, P=0.15), plasma triglycerides (WMD=-0.56, 95%CI:-1.18-0.06, P=0.08), plasma total cholesterol (WMD=-0.17, 95%CI:-0.63-0.29, P=0.47) and adverse events (RR=1.06, 95%CI:0.86-1.29, P=0.59) between ICO group and GLU group. The peritoneal creatinine clearance (WMD=0.48, 95%CI:0.27-0.68,P<0.001) and peritoneal urea clearance (WMD=0.44, 95%CI:0.23-0.66, P<0.001) were better in ICO group than those of GLU group. Conclusion ICO can provide a better peritoneal creatinine clearance and peritoneal urea clearance, and which has the same safety compared with GLU.%目的 比较艾考糊精腹透液(ICO)与葡萄糖腹透液(GLU)在腹膜透析患者中的治疗效果.方法 2位研究者检索Pubmed(1996—2016.12)、MEDLINE(1966—2016.12)、Embase(1974—2016.12)、Cochrane library等期刊数据库,独立对纳入的文献进行质量评价和数据提取,使用RevMan 5.2进行Meta分析.结果 10项随机对照试验(RCT)被纳入,共纳入患者825例,最终完成研究661例.Meta分析结果显示:与对照组(GLU组)相比,ICO组在体质量(WMD=-1.88,95%CI:-4.68~0.93,P=0.19)、空腹血糖(WMD=-0.76,95%CI:-1.79~0.28,P=0.15)、三酰甘油(WMD=-0.56,95%CI:-1.18~0.06,P=0.08)、总胆固醇(WMD=-0.17,95%CI:-0.63~0.29,P=0.47)及不良事件发生率(RR=1.06,95%CI:0.86~1.29,P=0.59)方面无差异,ICO组在腹膜肌酐清除率(WMD=0.48,95%CI:0.27~0.68,P<0.001)及尿素清除率(WMD=0.44,95%CI:0.23~0.66,P<0.001)优于对照组.结论 艾考糊精腹透液能够提供更好的腹膜肌酐和尿素清除率,且具有与葡萄糖腹透液相同的安全性.
展开▼
