↓ Skip to main content

Consequences of continuing renin angiotensin aldosterone system antagonists in the preoperative period: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Anesthesiology, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Consequences of continuing renin angiotensin aldosterone system antagonists in the preoperative period: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
BMC Anesthesiology, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12871-018-0487-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Qiong Ling, Yu Gu, Jiaxin Chen, Yansheng Chen, Yongyong Shi, Gaofeng Zhao, Qianqian Zhu

Abstract

Patients who use angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) are prone to developing side effects like hypotension and even refractory hypotension during anesthesia use, and whether ACEIs/ARBs should be continued or discontinued in such patients remains debatable. The present systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to clarify the consequences of continuing or withholding these drugs, especially with regards to the incidence of intraoperative hypotension, in patients who continue to use ACEIs/ARBs on the day of their scheduled surgery. Studies with data pertinent to the incidence of intraoperative hypotension during anesthesia use in patients who continued the use of ACEIs/ARBs on the day of their scheduled surgery were considered for inclusion. Thirteen studies reporting on the incidences of intraoperative hypotension between patients who continued receiving ACEIs/ARBs and those who did not on the day of their surgical procedure were included. The pooled effects showed that hypotension during anesthesia was more likely to develop in patients who continued to take ACEIs/ARBs when compared to those who did not (RR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.21-1.64). However, there were no significant differences between these groups of patients with regards to postoperative complications including ST-T abnormalities, myocardial injury, myocardial infarction, stroke, major adverse cardiac events, acute kidney injury, or death (RR = 1.25, 95% CI: 0.76-2.04). The differences remained similar in subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses. No sufficient available evidence to recommend discontinuing ACEIs/ARBs on the day of surgery was found in this literature review and meta-analysis. However, anesthetists should be cautious about the risk for intraoperative hypotension in patients chronically receiving ACEIs/ARBs, and should know how to treat it effectively.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 14%
Student > Bachelor 5 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Researcher 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 11 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 59%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 11 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 June 2018.
All research outputs
#12,871,062
of 23,025,074 outputs
Outputs from BMC Anesthesiology
#353
of 1,510 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,409
of 330,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Anesthesiology
#11
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,025,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,510 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,211 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.