Hydralazine for treatment of severe hypertension in pregnancy: meta-analysis
Top Cited Papers
- 25 October 2003
- Vol. 327 (7421) , 955-60
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.327.7421.955
Abstract
Objective To review outcomes in randomised controlled trials comparing hydralazine against other antihypertensives for severe hypertension in pregnancy. Study design Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (published between 1966 and September 2002) of short acting antihypertensives for severe hypertension in pregnancy. Independent data abstraction by two reviewers. Data were entered into RevMan software for analysis (fixed effects model, relative risk and 95% confidence interval); in a secondary analysis, risk difference was also calculated. Results Of 21 trials (893 women), eight compared hydralazine with nifedipine and five with labetalol. Hydralazine was associated with a trend towards less persistent severe hypertension than labetalol (relative risk 0.29 (95% confidence interval 0.08 to 1.04); two trials), but more severe hypertension than nifedipine or isradipine (1.41 (0.95 to 2.09); four trials); there was significant heterogeneity in outcome between trials and differences in methodological quality. Hydralazine was associated with more maternal hypotension (3.29 (1.50 to 7.23); 13 trials); more caesarean sections (1.30 (1.08 to 1.59); 14 trials); more placental abruption (4.17 (1.19 to 14.28); five trials); more maternal oliguria (4.00 (1.22 to 12.50); three trials); more adverse effects on fetal heart rate (2.04 (1.32 to 3.16); 12 trials); and more low Apgar scores at one minute (2.70 (1.27 to 5.88); three trials). For all but Apgar scores, analysis by risk difference showed heterogeneity between trials. Hydralazine was associated with more maternal side effects (1.50 (1.16 to 1.94); 12 trials) and with less neonatal bradycardia than labetalol (risk difference -0.24 (-0.42 to -0.06); three trials). Conclusions The results are not robust enough to guide clinical practice, but they do not support use of hydralazine as first line for treatment of severe hypertension in pregnancy. Adequately powered clinical trials are needed, with a comparison of labetalol and nifedipine showing the most promise.Keywords
This publication has 40 references indexed in Scilit:
- Auswirkungen von Urapidil in der antihypertensiven Therapie bei Präeklampsie auf die NeugeborenenZentralblatt Fur Gynakologie, 2001
- Comparison of active treatment and placebo in older Chinese patients with isolated systolic hypertensionJournal Of Hypertension, 1998
- The haemodynamic effects of ketanserin versus dihydralazine in severe early-onset hypertension in pregnancyBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1998
- Calcium-Channel Blockers for Hypertension — Uncertainty ContinuesNew England Journal of Medicine, 1998
- Dihydralazine or ketanserin for severe hypertension in pregnancy?European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 1997
- Use of glucagon to treat neonatal low-output congestive heart failure after maternal labetalol therapyThe Journal of Pediatrics, 1995
- Oral nifedipine therapy in the management of severe preeclampsiaInternational Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 1995
- The combination of magnesium sulphate and nifedipine: a cause of neuromuscular blockadeBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1994
- Hypertension in pregnancyThe Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, 1993
- Antihypertensive Drug Effects on Placental Flow Velocity Waveforms in Pregnant Women with Severe HypertensionAustralian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1992