-
Journal of the American Medical... Jul 2021To systematically review and synthesize the evidence on differential associations between antihypertensive medication (AHM) classes and the risk of incident dementia. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To systematically review and synthesize the evidence on differential associations between antihypertensive medication (AHM) classes and the risk of incident dementia.
DESIGN
Systematic review and random effects frequentist network meta-analysis. Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane library were searched from origin to December 2019.
SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies that compared associations of different AHM classes with incident all-cause dementia and/or Alzheimer's disease over at least 1 year of follow-up.
MEASURES
All cause dementia and/or Alzheimer's disease.
RESULTS
Fifteen observational studies and 7 RCTs were included. Data on AHM classes were available for 649,790 participants and dementia occurred in 19,600 (3.02%). Network meta-analysis showed that in observational studies, treatment with either calcium channel blockers (CCBs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) was associated with lower dementia risks than treatment with other antihypertensives: CCBs vs angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE inhibitors) (HR=0.84, 95% CI 0.74-0.95), beta blockers (HR=0.83, 95% CI 0.73-0.95) and diuretics (HR=0.89, 95% CI 0.78-1.01) and ARBs vs ACE inhibitors (HR=0.88, 95% CI 0.81-0.97), beta blockers (HR=0.87, 95% CI 0.77-0.99), and diuretics (HR=0.93, 95% CI 0.83-1.05). There were insufficient RCTs to create a robust network based on randomized data alone.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
Recommending CCBs or ARBs as preferred first-line antihypertensive treatment may significantly reduce the risk of dementia. If corroborated in a randomized setting, these findings reflect a low-cost and scalable opportunity to reduce dementia incidence worldwide.
Topics: Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Calcium Channel Blockers; Dementia; Humans; Hypertension; Network Meta-Analysis
PubMed: 33460618
DOI: 10.1016/j.jamda.2020.12.019 -
European Journal of Preventive... Dec 2017Background There are few reviews comparing the long-term outcomes of the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers in a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Background There are few reviews comparing the long-term outcomes of the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers in a hypertensive population because both are effective in reducing blood pressure. None of them compared angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers with a placebo group in patients with essential hypertension, because few studies exist with this design. Methods A systematic search of PUBMED, LILACS, SCIELO, ICTRP, Cochrane, EMBASE and ClinicalTrials.gov from 1 January 2000 until 31 December 2015 selected prospective studies that reported an association between the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers in the following cardiovascular outcomes: heart failure/hospitalisation, stroke, acute myocardial infarction, total cardiovascular deaths, total deaths and total outcomes. Summary odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were combined by using a fixed-effects model. Results Seventeen studies ( n = 73,761) were included of which 12 studies were randomly assigned to angiotensin II receptor blocker therapy ( n = 24,697) and five to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors ( n = 12,170). Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors proved to be significant in reducing total deaths (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.78-0.93) and cardiovascular deaths (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.69-0.87). Angiotensin II receptor blocker therapy did not show a reduction in total deaths (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.96-1.09) or cardiovascular deaths (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.86-1.06). For acute myocardial infarction, stroke and heart failure/hospitalisation, the reductions were significant for both classes. Conclusion Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin II receptor blocker use is similar in preventing major cardiovascular outcomes regarding acute myocardial infarction, stroke and heart failure/hospitalisation. However, the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors is more effective in reducing total deaths and cardiovascular deaths than angiotensin II receptor blockers.
Topics: Aged; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Pressure; Cause of Death; Chi-Square Distribution; Essential Hypertension; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Odds Ratio; Renin-Angiotensin System; Risk Factors; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28862020
DOI: 10.1177/2047487317728766 -
Expert Opinion on Drug Safety May 2021: Sacubitril-valsartan is a recently approved drug. However, there are few data regarding safety issues. We aimed to summarize the available evidence regarding... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
: Sacubitril-valsartan is a recently approved drug. However, there are few data regarding safety issues. We aimed to summarize the available evidence regarding sacubitril-valsartan's safety and tolerability.: We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) enrolling patients receiving sacubitril-valsartan for any condition, compared with standard therapy or placebo. Database search was performed in October 2019. Outcomes were adverse events (AEs), serious AEs (SAEs), discontinuation due to AEs, and five AEs of special interest. Data were reported using risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI).: We included 20 RCTs (22510 participants). When compared with active controls, there were no differences in SAEs (RR=0.93, 95%CI 0.86-1.01) and AEs (RR=1.00, 95%CI 0.97-1.03). However, sacubitril-valsartan resulted in an 8% risk reduction in discontinuation due to AEs (95%CI 0.85-0.99) and an increased risk of hypotension (RR=1.45, 95%CI 1.27-1.67). The risk of angioedema was higher with follow-ups greater than 12 months (RR=2.36, 95%CI 1.29-4.33). There were no further significant differences in the remaining AEs' risk.: Sacubitril-valsartan was at least as safe and tolerable as active control, with a similar need of administration cautiousness, except for a higher risk of hypotension. However, one should consider the study's limitations.
Topics: Aminobutyrates; Angioedema; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Biphenyl Compounds; Drug Combinations; Humans; Hypotension; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk; Tetrazoles; Valsartan
PubMed: 33459086
DOI: 10.1080/14740338.2021.1877658 -
Archives of Medical Science : AMS 2023Heart failure (HF) is still a major cause of morbidity and mortality all over the world. Aim of the study was to assess the benefits and harms of sacubitril/valsartan... (Review)
Review
Efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in heart failure compared to renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
INTRODUCTION
Heart failure (HF) is still a major cause of morbidity and mortality all over the world. Aim of the study was to assess the benefits and harms of sacubitril/valsartan (S/V) compared to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) in patients with HF.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
We systematically searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating S/V vs. ACEI or ARB in acute or chronic HF in August 2021. Primary outcomes were HF hospitalisations and cardiovascular (CV) mortality; secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, biomarkers, and renal function.
RESULTS
We selected 11 RCTs ( = 18766) with 2-48 months follow-up. Five RCTs had ACEIs as control, 5 RCTs had ARBs as control, and one RCT had both ACEI and ARB as control. Compared to ACEI or ARB, S/V reduced HF hospitalisations by 20% (HR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.68-0.94; 3 RCTs; = 65%; high CoE), CV mortality by 14% (HR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.73-1.01; 2 RCTs; = 57%; high CoE), and all-cause mortality by 11% (HR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.78-1.00; 3 RCTs; = 36%; high CoE). S/V reduced NTproBNP (SMD = -0.34, 95% CI: -0.52 to -0.16; 3 RCTs; = 62%) and hs-TNT (ratio of differences = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.79-0.88; 2 RCTs; = 0%), and caused a decline in renal function by 33% (HR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.39-1.14; 2 RCTs; = 78%; high CoE). S/V increased hypotension (RR = 1.69, 95% CI: 1.33-2.15; 9 RCTs; = 65%; high CoE). Hyperkalaemia and angioedema events were similar. Effects were in the same direction when stratified by type of control (ACEI vs. ARB).
CONCLUSIONS
Sacubitril/valsartan had better clinical, intermediate, and renal outcomes in HF in comparison to ACEI or ARB. There was no difference in angioedema and hyperkalaemia events, but there were more hypotension events.
PubMed: 37313196
DOI: 10.5114/aoms/159113 -
Journal of Clinical Hypertension... May 2021Angiotensin-receptor blockers are often considered insufficiently efficacious in reducing blood pressure. However, newer angiotensin-receptor blockers may be more... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Is the newest angiotensin-receptor blocker azilsartan medoxomil more efficacious in lowering blood pressure than the older ones? A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Angiotensin-receptor blockers are often considered insufficiently efficacious in reducing blood pressure. However, newer angiotensin-receptor blockers may be more effective than the older ones. A network meta-analysis was performed to compare the efficacy of various angiotensin-receptor blockers in reducing office and ambulatory blood pressure in hypertensive patients. Relevant literature was searched from English and Chinese databases for randomized controlled trials involving angiotensin-receptor blockers in hypertension. Efficacy variables included systolic and diastolic blood pressure either in the office or on ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Absolute blood pressure reductions at 6-12 weeks of treatment and their credible intervals were reported. A total of 34 publications provided adequate data for analysis (n = 14 859). In 28 studies on office systolic blood pressure (n = 12 731), against the common comparator valsartan 80 mg, the differences in systolic blood pressure were in favor of azilsartan medoxomil (20-80 mg), irbesartan (300 mg), olmesartan (20-40 mg), telmisartan (80 mg), and valsartan (160-320 mg), but not candesartan (8-16 mg), losartan (50-100 mg), irbesartan (150 mg), olmesartan (10 mg), and telmisartan (40 mg). The ranking plot shows that azilsartan medoxomil 80 mg had a possibility of 99% being the best in the class. Similar results were observed for office diastolic blood pressure and from 13 studies for 24-hour ambulatory systolic and diastolic blood pressure. In conclusion, angiotensin-receptor blockers had different blood pressure lowering efficacy. The newest angiotensin-receptor blocker azilsartan medoxomil at the dose of 80 mg seemed to be most efficacious in reducing both systolic and diastolic blood pressure in the office and on ambulatory measurement.
Topics: Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensins; Antihypertensive Agents; Benzimidazoles; Blood Pressure; Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory; Humans; Hypertension; Network Meta-Analysis; Olmesartan Medoxomil; Oxadiazoles; Tetrazoles
PubMed: 33609077
DOI: 10.1111/jch.14227 -
Cancer Causes & Control : CCC Sep 2015We aim to investigate the association between angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) therapy and colorectal cancer (CRC)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
We aim to investigate the association between angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) therapy and colorectal cancer (CRC) by conducting a systematic review with meta-analysis.
METHODS
Literature was searched on PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane library to identify relevant studies evaluating ACEIs/ARBs therapy and risk of CRC incidence or survival of CRC patients. Pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals was calculated for the association between ACEIs/ARBs and CRC risk and mortality.
RESULTS
Eleven observational studies were included in the systematic review. A meta-analysis of six studies totaling 113,048 individuals indicated a 6% decreased risk of CRC in ACEIs/ARBs users compared to non-users (95% CI 0.89-0.98). In the four case-control studies, individuals using ACEIs/ARBs were associated with a 6% decreased risk of CRC (95% CI 0.90-0.99). The meta-analysis of three studies investigating the relationship between ACEIs/ARBs and survival of CRC did not show a significantly decreased mortality in ACEIs/ARBs users (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.60-1.09). Seven studies evaluated the dose-response relationship between ACEIs/ARBs therapy and CRC, and two of them showed that the association was related to longer duration and higher dose.
CONCLUSIONS
CEIs/ARBs therapy might be associated with a reduce risk of CRC development, but whether use of these medications improves the outcomes of CRC remains unknown. Large-scale and more robust studies are needed to further explore this association.
Topics: Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Colorectal Neoplasms; Humans; Hypertension; Incidence; Risk
PubMed: 26081426
DOI: 10.1007/s10552-015-0617-1 -
Protein and Peptide Letters 2020Bipolar Disorder (BD) is a chronic a multifactorial psychiatric illness that affects mood, cognition, and functioning. BD is associated with several psychiatric...
Bipolar Disorder (BD) is a chronic a multifactorial psychiatric illness that affects mood, cognition, and functioning. BD is associated with several psychiatric conditions as well clinical comorbidities, particularly cardiovascular diseases. The neurobiology of BD is complex and multifactorial and several systems have been implicated. Considering that the Renin Angiotensin System (RAS) plays an important role in cardiovascular diseases and that recently evidence has suggested its role in psychiatric disorders, the aim of the present study is to summarize and to discuss recent findings related to the modulation of RAS components in BD. A systematic search of the literature using the electronic databases MEDLINE and LILACS was conducted through March 2019. The search terms were: "Bipolar Disorder"; "Renin Angiotensin System"; "Angiotensin 2"; "Angiotensin receptors"; "Angiotensin 1-7"; "ACE"; "ACE2"; "Mas Receptor". We included original studies assessing RAS in BD patients. Two hundred twenty-two citations were initially retrieved. Eleven studies were included in our systematic review. In the majority of studies (6 of 8), the ACE insertion/deletion (I/D) polymorphism did not differ between BD patients and controls. BD patients presented higher plasma renin activity in comparison with controls. The studies evaluating the RAS molecules in BD are very scarce and heterogeneous. The literature suggests a potential role of RAS in BD. Further studies are necessary to investigate this relationship.
Topics: Bipolar Disorder; Humans; INDEL Mutation; Peptidyl-Dipeptidase A; Renin; Renin-Angiotensin System
PubMed: 32003654
DOI: 10.2174/0929866527666200127115059 -
Journal of the American Heart... Jun 2022Background Renin-angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitor-COVID-19 studies, observational in design, appear to use biased methods that can distort the interaction... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Background Renin-angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitor-COVID-19 studies, observational in design, appear to use biased methods that can distort the interaction between RAAS inhibitor use and COVID-19 risk. This study assessed the extent of bias in that research and reevaluated RAAS inhibitor-COVID-19 associations in studies without critical risk of bias. Methods and Results Searches were performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases (December 1, 2019 to October 21, 2021) identifying studies that compared the risk of infection and/or severe COVID-19 outcomes between those using or not using RAAS inhibitors (ie, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II type-I receptor blockers). Weighted hazard ratios (HR) and 95% CIs were extracted and pooled in fixed-effects meta-analyses, only from studies without critical risk of bias that assessed severe COVID-19 outcomes. Of 169 relevant studies, 164 had critical risks of bias and were excluded. Ultimately, only two studies presented data relevant to the meta-analysis. In 1 351 633 people with uncomplicated hypertension using a RAAS inhibitor, calcium channel blocker, or thiazide diuretic in monotherapy, the risk of hospitalization (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor: HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.66-0.87; <0.001; angiotensin II type-I receptor blockers: HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77-0.97; =0.015) and intubation or death (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor: HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.48-0.85; =0.002; angiotensin II type-I receptor blockers: HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.58-0.95; =0.019) with COVID-19 was lower in those using a RAAS inhibitor. However, these protective effects are probably not clinically relevant. Conclusions This study reveals the critical risk of bias that exists across almost an entire body of COVID-19 research, raising an important question: Were research methods and/or peer-review processes temporarily weakened during the surge of COVID-19 research or is this lack of rigor a systemic problem that also exists outside pandemic-based research? Registration URL: www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/; Unique identifier: CRD42021237859.
Topics: Aldosterone; Angiotensin II; Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; COVID-19; Humans; Hypertension; Renin; Renin-Angiotensin System; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 35624081
DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.122.025289 -
Journal of Human Hypertension Feb 2024Blood pressure (BP) management reduces the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) plays an important role in regulating... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Blood pressure (BP) management reduces the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) plays an important role in regulating and maintaining blood volume and pressure. This analysis aimed to investigate the effect of exercise training on plasma renin, angiotensin-II and aldosterone, epinephrine, norepinephrine, urinary sodium and potassium, BP and heart rate (HR). We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library of Controlled Trials until 30 November 2022. The search strategy included RAAS key words in combination with exercise training terms and medical subject headings. Manual searching of reference lists from systematic reviews and eligible studies completed the search. A random effects meta-analysis model was used. Eighteen trials with a total of 803 participants were included. After exercise training, plasma angiotensin-II (SMD -0.71; 95% CI -1.24, -0.19; p = 0.008; n = 9 trials), aldosterone (SMD -0.37; 95% CI -0.65, -0.09; p = 0.009; n = 8 trials) and norepinephrine (SMD -0.82; 95% CI -1.18, -0.46; p < 0.001; n = 8 trials) were reduced. However, plasma renin activity, epinephrine, and 24-h urinary sodium and potassium excretion remained unchanged with exercise training. Systolic BP was reduced (MD -6.2 mmHg; 95% CI -9.9, -2.6; p = 0.001) as was diastolic BP (MD -4.5 mmHg; 95% CI -6.9, -2.1; p < 0.001) but not HR (MD -3.0 bpm; 95% CI -6.0, 0.4; p = 0.053). Exercise training may reduce some aspects of RAAS and sympathetic nervous system activity, and this explains some of the anti-hypertensive response.
Topics: Humans; Renin-Angiotensin System; Renin; Aldosterone; Blood Pressure; Norepinephrine; Epinephrine; Angiotensin II; Potassium; Sodium; Exercise
PubMed: 38017087
DOI: 10.1038/s41371-023-00872-4 -
Advances in Nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) Nov 2014The potential cost-effectiveness and feasibility of dietary interventions aimed at reducing hypertension risk are of considerable interest and significance in public... (Review)
Review
The potential cost-effectiveness and feasibility of dietary interventions aimed at reducing hypertension risk are of considerable interest and significance in public health. In particular, the effectiveness of restricted sodium or increased potassium intake on mitigating hypertension risk has been demonstrated in clinical and observational research. The role that modified sodium or potassium intake plays in influencing the renin-angiotensin system, arterial stiffness, and endothelial dysfunction remains of interest in current research. Up to the present date, no known systematic review has examined whether the sodium-to-potassium ratio or either sodium or potassium alone is more strongly associated with blood pressure and related factors, including the renin-angiotensin system, arterial stiffness, the augmentation index, and endothelial dysfunction, in humans. This article presents a systematic review and synthesis of the randomized controlled trials and observational research related to this issue. The main findings show that, among the randomized controlled trials reviewed, the sodium-to-potassium ratio appears to be more strongly associated with blood pressure outcomes than either sodium or potassium alone in hypertensive adult populations. Recent data from the observational studies reviewed provide additional support for the sodium-to-potassium ratio as a superior metric to either sodium or potassium alone in the evaluation of blood pressure outcomes and incident hypertension. It remains unclear whether this is true in normotensive populations and in children and for related outcomes including the renin-angiotensin system, arterial stiffness, the augmentation index, and endothelial dysfunction. Future study in these populations is warranted.
Topics: Blood Pressure; Diet; Humans; Hypertension; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Observational Studies as Topic; Potassium; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sodium
PubMed: 25398734
DOI: 10.3945/an.114.006783