RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Nephroprotective effects of cilastatin in people at risk of acute kidney injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2024.03.06.24303823
DO 10.1101/2024.03.06.24303823
A1 Acharya, Dilaram
A1 Ghanim, Fanar
A1 Harrison, Tyrone G.
A1 Scory, Tayler Dawn
A1 Shommu, Nusrat
A1 Ronksley, Paul E.
A1 Elliott, Meghan J.
A1 Collister, David
A1 Pannu, Neesh
A1 James, Matthew T.
YR 2024
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/04/15/2024.03.06.24303823.abstract
AB Rationale & Objective Cilastatin is an inhibitor of drug metabolism in the proximal tubule that demonstrates nephroprotective effects in animals. It has been used in humans in combination with the antibiotic imipenem to prevent imipenem’s degradation. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the nephroprotective effects of cilastatin in humans.Study Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of observational (comparative effectiveness) studies or randomized clinical trials (RCTs)Setting & Study Populations People of any age at risk of acute kidney injury (AKI).Selection Criteria for Studies We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials registry from database inception to November 2023 for observational studies or RCTs that compared kidney outcomes among groups treated with cilastatin, either alone or as combination imipenem-cilastatin, versus an inactive or active control group not treated with cilastatin.Data Extraction Two reviewers independently evaluated studies for inclusionand risk of bias.Analytical Approach Treatment effects were estimated using random effects models and heterogeneity was quantified using the I2 statistic.Results We identified 10 studies (five RCTs, n=531 patients; 5 observational studies, n=6,321 participants) that met the inclusion criteria, including 6 studies with comparisons of imipenem-cilastatin to an inactive control and 4 studies with comparisons to alternate antibiotics. Based on pooled results from 5 studies, the risk of AKI was lower with imipenem-cilastatin (risk ratio [RR] 0.53 [95% CI, 0.38 to 0.74]; I2=42.2%), with consistent results observed from randomized trials (two trials, RR 0.30 [95% CI, 0.09 to 1.00]; I2=62.8%) and observational studies (three studies, RR 0.55 [95% CI, 0.38 to 0.81]; I2=62.8%). Based on results from six studies, kidney function was also better with imipenem-cilastatin than comparators (weighted mean difference [WMD] in serum creatinine -0.14 mg/dL [95% CI, -0.21 to -0.07]; I2=0%). The overall certainty of the evidence was low due to heterogeneity of the results, high risk of bias, and indirectness among the identified studies.Limitations Clinical and statistical heterogeneity could not be fully explained due to a limited number of studies.Conclusion Patients treated with imipenem-cilastatin developed AKI less frequently and had better short-term kidney function than control groups or those receiving comparator antibiotics. Larger clinical trials with less risk of detection bias due to lack of allocation concealment and blinding are needed to establish the efficacy of cilastatin for AKI prevention.Registration International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) database (ID: CRD42023488809)Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical Protocols https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=488809 Funding StatementThe study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Team Grant: Intervention Trial in Inflammation for Chronic Conditions - Evidence to Impact; Funding Reference Number LI3 189373.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The study used only openly available aggregated information from published studies.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.