scholarly journals Comparative effectiveness of ACE inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers in patients with prior myocardial infarction

Open Heart ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. e001010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dennis Ko ◽  
Paymon Azizi ◽  
Maria Koh ◽  
Alice Chong ◽  
Peter Austin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Ace Inhibitors ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Angiotensin Receptor Blockers ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Cardiovascular Death ◽  
Angiotensin Receptor ◽  
Prior Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Receptor Blockers

ObjectiveAlthough ACE inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are commonly prescribed for patients with coronary artery disease, whether these medications are similarly effective is still a subject of intense debate. Our objective was to compare the clinical effectiveness of ACEIs and ARBs in patients with prior myocardial infarction (MI).MethodsAll residents older than 65 years, alive on 1 April 2012, with a prior MI were included. Propensity weighting was used to balance potentially confounding baseline covariates between the treatment groups. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, hospitalisation for MI or unstable angina at 3 years.ResultsOur cohort included 59 353 patients with MI; their mean age was 77 years and 40% were women. In the propensity-weighted cohort, the primary outcome occurred in 6.5% in the ACEI group and 5.7% in the ARB group at 1 year (HR comparing ACEI with ARB 1.14, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.23, p<0.001). At 3 years, the primary outcome occurring in 16.0% with ACEIs and 15.1% with ARBs (HR 1.07; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.12; p<0.001). A significant interaction with sex was observed, with women prescribed ACEIs having a higher hazards (HR 1.17; 95% CI 1.10 to 1.26) compared with ARBs, while no significant difference was seen among men (HR 1.00; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.06, interaction p<0.001).ConclusionsDespite previous concerns regarding ARBs, we found that they had slightly lower rates of adverse clinical cardiovascular outcomes among older patients with MI compared with ACEIs. The observed difference in clinical outcomes may be related to a sex difference in effectiveness.

Angiotensin Receptor Blockers versus ACE Inhibitors: Prevention of Death and Myocardial Infarction in High-Risk Populations

2005 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 470-480 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin J Epstein ◽  
John G Gums
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Ace Inhibitors ◽  
Angiotensin Receptor Blockers ◽  
Biomedical Literature ◽  
Angiotensin Receptor ◽  
Vascular Events ◽  
Medline Search ◽  
High Risk Populations ◽  
Receptor Blockers

OBJECTIVE: To determine, through a review of the medical literature, whether there is adequate evidence to support the use of angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in place of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors in high-risk populations, focusing on the prevention of death and myocardial infarction (MI). DATA SOURCES: Original investigations, reviews, and meta-analyses were identified from the biomedical literature via a MEDLINE search (1966–August 2004). Published articles were also cross-referenced for pertinent citations, and recent meeting abstracts were searched for relevant data. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: All articles identified during the search were evaluated. Preference was given to prospective, randomized, controlled trials that evaluated major cardiovascular endpoints and compared ARBs with ACE inhibitors, active controls, or placebo. DATA SYNTHESIS: The renin—angiotensin system plays a pivotal role in the continuum of cardiovascular disease and represents a major therapeutic target in the treatment of patients at risk for vascular events. While ACE inhibitors have been definitively shown to prevent death and MI, studies with ARBs in similar populations have not reduced these endpoints. In clinical trials that enrolled patients with heart failure, post-MI, diabetes, and hypertension, ARBs did not prevent MI or prolong survival compared with ACE inhibitors, other antihypertensives, or placebo. CONCLUSIONS: ACE inhibitors and ARBs should not be considered interchangeable, even among patients with a documented history of ACE inhibitor intolerance. ARBs can be considered a second-line alternative in such patients with the realization that they have not been shown to prevent MI or prolong survival.

scholarly journals Association of outpatient ACE inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers and outcomes of acute respiratory illness: a retrospective cohort study

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. e044010
Author(s):  
Molly Moore Jeffery ◽  
Nathan W Cummins ◽  
Timothy M Dempsey ◽  
Andrew H. Limper ◽  
Nilay D Shah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ace Inhibitors ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Angiotensin Receptor Blockers ◽  
Cohort Analysis ◽  
Respiratory Illness ◽  
Angiotensin Receptor ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Receptor Blockers

ObjectivesEvaluate associations between ACE inhibitors (ACEis) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and clinical outcomes in acute viral respiratory illness (AVRI).DesignRetrospective cohort analysis of claims data.SettingThe USA; 2018–2019 influenza season.ParticipantsMain cohort: people with hypertension (HTN) taking an ACEi, ARB or other HTN medications, and experiencing AVRI. Falsification cohort: parallel cohort receiving elective knee or hip replacement.Main outcome measuresMain cohort: hospital admission, intensive care unit, acute respiratory distress (ARD), ARD syndrome and all-cause mortality. Falsification cohort: complications after surgery and all-cause mortality.ResultsThe main cohort included 236 843 episodes of AVRI contributed by 202 629 unique individuals. Most episodes were in women (58.9%), 81.4% in people with Medicare Advantage and 40.3% in people aged 75+ years. Odds of mortality were lower in the ACEi (0.78 (0.74 to 0.83)) and ARB (0.64 (0.61 to 0.68)) cohorts compared with other HTN medications. On all other outcomes, people taking ARBs (but not ACEis) had a >10% reduction in odds of inpatient stays compared with other HTN medications.In the falsification analysis (N=103 353), both ACEis (0.89 (0.80 to 0.98)) and ARBs (0.82 (0.74 to 0.91)) were associated with decreased odds of complications compared with other HTN medications; ARBs (0.64 (0.47 to 0.87)) but not ACEis (0.79 (0.60 to 1.05)) were associated with lower odds of death compared with other HTN medications.ConclusionsOutpatient use of ARBs was associated with better outcomes with AVRI compared with other medications for HTN. ACEis were associated with reduced risk of death, but with minimal or no reduction in risk of other complications. A falsification analysis conducted to provide context on the possible causal implications of these findings did not provide a clear answer. Further analysis using observational data will benefit from additional approaches to assess causal relationships between these drugs and outcomes in AVRI.

scholarly journals COVID-19 PANDEMIC AND MANAGEMENT OF HYPERTENSION

2021 ◽  
Vol 54 (3) ◽  
pp. 275-276
Author(s):  
Kanwal Ashiq ◽  
Sana Ashiq
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Ace Inhibitors ◽  
Angiotensin Receptor Blockers ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Lung Cells ◽  
Converting Enzyme ◽  
Angiotensin Receptor ◽  
Receptor Blockers ◽  
Hypertensive Therapy

Dear Editor, In December 2019, a new virus which is known as SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19) was identified. In a short period, this virus spread rapidly and caused significant morbidities and mortalities across the earth. On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared a pandemic due to the logarithmic expansion of COVID-19 cases globally.1 Various guidelines were issued, and a complete lockdown has been observed on a large scale to stop the spread of the virus. Currently, there is no specific treatment for COVID-19 is available. Throughout the year 2020, scientists struggled a lot to find the COVID-19 cure, and many vaccines are successfully developed which would be helpful in the prevention of disease. Nevertheless, the emergence of virus variants remains an issue. The epidemiological trends and clinical features of this disease have been reported in several publications.2 Due to comorbidities, COVID-19 disease can exacerbate and may result in increased severity and deadly consequences. In a study, the most common comorbidities in COVID-19 patients were reported as following; diabetes (19%), hypertension (30%), and coronary heart disease (8%). In hypertension, blood pressure elevates from the threshold level. The occurrence of hypertension is not necessarily to be associated with COVID-19 as hypertension is quite frequent in geriatric patients, and these patients are at higher risk of being infected with COVID-19.3,4 Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors are widely prescribed for the cure of hypertension and other cardiovascular-related diseases. On the other hand, the COVID-19 virus binds with ACE2 to gain entry into the lung cells. ACE inhibitors and ARBs escalate ACE2 that could hypothetically increase the chance of COVID-19 binding to lung cells and could headway to more damage. Conversely, in experimental studies, ACE2 showed a protective effect against lung injury. Due to the anti-inflammatory potential of ACE inhibitors and ARBs, these agents can reduce the incidence of developing myocarditis and acute respiratory distress syndrome in COVID-19 patients. There is no evidence that hypertension is linked with the COVID-19 and anti-hypertensive medicines (ACE inhibitors and ARBs) are either harmful or beneficial during the COVID-19 pandemic.5 During this unprecedented situation, the Council on Hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology released a statement that “The Council on Hypertension strongly recommends that physicians and patients should continue treatment with their usual anti-hypertensive therapy because there is no clinical or scientific evidence to suggest that treatment with ACEIs or ARBs should be discontinued because of the COVID-19 infection.” After this announcement, many other societies also recommend that patients should continue using their current hypertensive therapy and if necessary, after careful assessment, changes can be made in the hypertensive regimen.6 According to estimation, globally, 1.5 billion people can suffer from hypertension by 2025 which may contribute approximately 75% of stroke risk and 50% of heart disease risk. CVDs accounts almost 38% of deaths related to the non-communicated disease (NCDs). In Pakistan, hypertension is a chief health concern that leads to significant morbidity and mortality. Blood pressure can be control with medications and lifestyle modifications. One of the best approaches to control and improve blood pressure is team-based care consisting of doctors, pharmacists, and nurses. During COVID-19, collaborative efforts are required to improve patient’s quality of life and to reduce the healthcare burden.7,8 Keywords: COVID-19, Hypertension, Pandemic, ACE inhibitors References Ashiq K, Bajwa MA, Ashiq S. COVID-19 Pandemic and its Impact on Pharmacy Education. Turkish J Pharma Sci. 2021;18(2):122. Ashiq K, Ashiq S, Bajwa MA, Tanveer S, Qayyum M. Knowledge, attitude and practices among the inhabitants of Lahore, Pakistan towards the COVID-19 pandemic: an immediate online based cross-sectional survey while people are under the lockdown. Bangladesh J Med Sci. 2020:69-S 76. Zhou F, Yu T, Du R, Fan G, Liu Y, Liu Z, et al. Clinical course and risk factors for mortality of adult inpatients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet. 2020;395(10229):1054-62. Ashiq S, Ashiq K. The Role of Paraoxonase 1 (PON1) Gene Polymorphisms in Coronary Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Biochem Genet. 2021:1-21. Schiffrin EL, Flack JM, Ito S, Muntner P, Webb RC. Hypertension and COVID-19. Am J Hypertens. 2020;33(5):373–374. Patel AB, Verma A. COVID-19 and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers: what is the evidence? JAMA. 2020;323(18):1769-70. Riaz M, Shah G, Asif M, Shah A, Adhikari K, Abu-Shaheen A. Factors associated with hypertension in Pakistan: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2021;16(1):e0246085. Zarei L, Karimzadeh I, Moradi N, Peymani P, Asadi S, Babar Z-U-D. Affordability assessment from a static to dynamic concept: a scenario-based assessment of cardiovascular medicines. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(5):1710.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document