-
JMIR Cardio Dec 2023Suboptimal adherence to cardiac pharmacotherapy, recommended by the guidelines after acute coronary syndrome (ACS) has been recognized and is associated with adverse... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Suboptimal adherence to cardiac pharmacotherapy, recommended by the guidelines after acute coronary syndrome (ACS) has been recognized and is associated with adverse outcomes. Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown that eHealth technologies are useful in reducing cardiovascular risk factors. However, little is known about the effect of eHealth interventions on medication adherence in patients following ACS.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study is to examine the efficacy of the eHealth interventions on medication adherence to selected 5 cardioprotective medication classes in patients with ACS.
METHODS
A systematic literature search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted between May and October 2022, with an update in October 2023 to identify RCTs that evaluated the effectiveness of eHealth technologies, including texting, smartphone apps, or web-based apps, to improve medication adherence in patients after ACS. The risk of bias was evaluated using the modified Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for RCTs. A pooled meta-analysis was performed using a fixed-effect Mantel-Haenszel model and assessed the medication adherence to the medications of statins, aspirin, P2Y12 inhibitors, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers, and β-blockers.
RESULTS
We identified 5 RCTs, applicable to 4100 participants (2093 intervention vs 2007 control), for inclusion in the meta-analysis. In patients who recently had an ACS, compared to the control group, the use of eHealth intervention was not associated with improved adherence to statins at different time points (risk difference [RD] -0.01, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03 at 6 months and RD -0.02, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.02 at 12 months), P2Y12 inhibitors (RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.02 and RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.02), aspirin (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.07 and RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.06), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.02 and RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.05), and β-blockers (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03 and RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.03). The intervention was also not associated with improved adherence irrespective of the adherence assessment method used (self-report or objective).
CONCLUSIONS
This review identified limited evidence on the effectiveness of eHealth interventions on adherence to guideline-recommended medications after ACS. While the pooled analyses suggested a lack of effectiveness of such interventions on adherence improvement, further studies are warranted to better understand the role of different eHealth approaches in the post-ACS context.
PubMed: 38113072
DOI: 10.2196/52697 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2023IgA nephropathy may recur in patients receiving kidney transplantation due to IgA nephropathy induced renal failure. The risk factors for recurrence are still at issue.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
IgA nephropathy may recur in patients receiving kidney transplantation due to IgA nephropathy induced renal failure. The risk factors for recurrence are still at issue. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess risk factors and outcomes for IgA nephropathy recurrence.
METHODS
We used PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, CNKI, WanFang, VIP and CBM to search for relevant studies published in English and Chinese. Cohort or case-control studies reporting risk factors or outcomes for IgA nephropathy recurrence were included.
RESULTS
Fifty-eight studies were included. Compare to no recurrence group, those with IgAN recurrence had younger age (mean difference [MD]=-4.27 years; risk ratio [RR]=0.96), younger donor age (MD=-2.19 years), shorter time from IgA nephropathy diagnosis to end stage renal disease (MD=-1.84 years; RR=0.94), shorter time on dialysis (MD=-3.14 months), lower human leukocyte-antigen (HLA) mismatches (MD=-0.11) and HLA-DR mismatches (MD=-0.13). HLA-B46 antigen (RR=0.39), anti-IL-2-R antibodies induction (RR=0.68), mycophenolate mofetil (RR=0.69), and pretransplant tonsillectomy (RR=0.43) were associated with less IgAN recurrence. Of note, male recipient gender (RR=1.17), related donor (RR=1.53), retransplantation (RR=1.43), hemodialysis (RR=1.68), no induction therapy (RR=1.73), mTOR inhibitor (RR=1.51), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin-receptor blockers (RR=1.63) were risk factors for IgAN recurrence. Recurrence increased the risk of graft loss (RR=2.19).
CONCLUSIONS
This study summarized the risk factors for recurrence of IgA nephropathy after kidney transplantation. Well-designed prospective studies are warranted for validation.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=377480, identifier CRD42022377480.
Topics: Humans; Male; Glomerulonephritis, IGA; Kidney Transplantation; Risk Factors; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Mycophenolic Acid
PubMed: 38090563
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1277017 -
Open Heart Dec 2023The first expert consensus documents on management of patients with spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) were published in 2018. Worldwide quality of care, as... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIM
The first expert consensus documents on management of patients with spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) were published in 2018. Worldwide quality of care, as measured by adherence to these recommendations, has not been systematically reviewed. We aim to review the proportion of patients with SCAD receiving consensus recommendations globally, regionally and, determine differences in practice before and after 2018.
METHODS AND RESULTS
A systematic review was performed by searching four main databases (Medline, Embase, SCOPUS, CINAHL) from their inception to 16 June 2022. Studies were selected if they included patients with SCAD and reported at least one of the consensus document recommendations. 53 studies, n=8456 patients (mean 50.1 years, 90.6% female) were included. On random effects meta-analysis, 92.1% (95% CI 89.3 to 94.8) received at least one antiplatelet, 78.0% (CI 73.5 to 82.4) received beta-blockers, 58.7% (CI 52.3 to 65.1) received ACE inhibitors or aldosterone receptor blockers (ACEIs/ARBs), 54.4% (CI 45.4 to 63.5) were screened for fibromuscular dysplasia (FMD), and 70.2% (CI 60.8 to 79.5) were referred to cardiac rehabilitation. Except for cardiac rehabilitation referral and use of ACEIs/ARBs, there was significant heterogeneity in all other quality-of-care parameters, across geographical regions. No significant difference was observed in adherence to recommendations in studies published before and after 2018, except for lower cardiac rehabilitation referrals after 2018 (test of heterogeneity, p=0.012).
CONCLUSION
There are significant variations globally in the management of patients with SCAD, particularly in FMD screening. Raising awareness about consensus recommendations and further prospective evidence about their effect on outcomes may help improve the quality of care for these patients.
Topics: Humans; Female; Male; Coronary Vessels; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Consensus; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors
PubMed: 38056913
DOI: 10.1136/openhrt-2023-002379 -
ESC Heart Failure Feb 2024Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) has improved outcomes in patients with heart failure, including the use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The efficacy and safety of new potassium binders on renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor optimization in heart failure patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) has improved outcomes in patients with heart failure, including the use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors, which can hinder the excretion of potassium, resulting in hyperkalaemia. New potassium binders (NPBs) can prevent this adverse effect; however, the efficacy and safety of NPB for this indication have not been fully established. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis synthesizing randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which were retrieved by systematically searching PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane through 26 April 2023. The risk of bias assessment was conducted, following Cochrane's updated Risk of Bias 2 assessment tool. We used the fixed-effects model to pool dichotomous data using risk ratio (RR) and continuous data using mean difference (MD), with a 95% confidence interval (CI) (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023426113). We included six RCTs with a total of 1432 patients. NPB was significantly associated with successful mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) optimization [RR: 1.13 with 95% CI (1.02-1.25), P = 0.02], decreased patients with MRA at less than the target dose [RR: 0.72 with 95% CI (0.57-0.90), P = 0.004], and decreased hyperkalaemic episodes [RR: 0.42 with 95% CI (0.24-0.72), P = 0.002]. However, there was no difference between NPB and placebo regarding angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi)/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB)/angiotensin receptor/neprilysin inhibitor (ANRi) optimization [RR: 1.02 with 95% CI (0.89-1.17), P = 0.76] and serum potassium change [MD: -0.31 with 95% CI (-0.61 to 0.00), P = 0.05], with an acceptable safety profile except for the increased incidence of hypokalaemia with NPB [RR: 1.57 with 95% CI (1.12-2.21), P = 0.009]. NPB has been shown to improve GDMT outcomes by enhancing MRA optimization and reducing hyperkalaemic episodes. However, there are limited data on the effects of NPB on ACEi/ARB/ANRi optimization. Future RCTs should investigate ACEi/ARB/ANRi optimization and conduct head-to-head comparisons of NPB (patiromer and sodium zirconium cyclosilicate).
Topics: Humans; Aldosterone; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Heart Failure; Hyperkalemia; Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists; Potassium; Renin-Angiotensin System
PubMed: 38012095
DOI: 10.1002/ehf2.14588 -
Alternative Therapies in Health and... Apr 2024Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a prevalent and clinically significant condition characterized by limited treatment options. In this context,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a prevalent and clinically significant condition characterized by limited treatment options. In this context, the objective of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan compared to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in managing HFpEF.
METHODS
A systematic search of relevant studies was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. Randomized controlled trials comparing sacubitril/valsartan to ACEIs or ARBs in HFpEF patients were included. Inclusion criteria: LVEF>45%, NYHA II-IV, Sac/Val vs ACEI/ARB, RCTs, treatment duration >3 months, sample size ≥25 per group. Exclusion criteria: Animal studies, unclear/missing data, poor quality, case studies/expert opinions.Hospitalization for heart failure and cardiovascular mortality were the primary outcomes, while the additional results included mortality from all causes, improvement of NYHA class, modifications in NT-proBNP, and with LVEF.
RESULTS
Sacubitril/valsartan substantially reduced heart failure hospitalization rates compared to ACEIs and ARBs, according to a total of six studies involving 5,201 participants (Relative Risk, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.85; P = .001). Nonetheless, there were no significant improvements in mortality due to cardiovascular disease (Relative Risk, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.79-1.12; P = .563). Sacubitril/valsartan did not affect total mortality from all causes significantly (Relative Risk, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.84-1.09; P = .453), but it did enhance NYHA classification (Relative Risk, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.10-1.43; P = .001). NT-proBNP levels decreased substantially (Weighted Mean Difference, -266.67; 95% CI, -525.86 to -7.47), whereas there had been little major shift in LVEF (Weighted Mean Difference, 1.49; 95% CI, -1.33 to 4.21; P = .342).
CONCLUSIONS
Sacubitril/valsartan may provide superior benefits in reducing heart failure hospitalization rates, NT-proBNP levels, and improving NYHA classification in patients with HFpEF compared to ACEIs and ARBs. Sacubitril/valsartan might be considered as a preferred treatment option for HFpEF patients due to its benefits in reducing heart failure hospitalization rates and improving symptom severity.
Topics: Humans; Valsartan; Heart Failure; Biphenyl Compounds; Aminobutyrates; Drug Combinations; Stroke Volume; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Tetrazoles; Aged; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors
PubMed: 37917889
DOI: No ID Found -
PloS One 2023Diabetic kidney disease (DKD) is a health burden of rising importance. Slowing progression to end stage kidney disease is the main goal of drug treatment. The aim of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Diabetic kidney disease (DKD) is a health burden of rising importance. Slowing progression to end stage kidney disease is the main goal of drug treatment. The aim of this analysis is to compare drug treatments of DKD by means of a systemic review and a network meta-analysis.
METHODS
We searched Medline, CENTRAL and clinicaltrials.gov for randomized, controlled studies including adults with DKD treated with the following drugs of interest: single angiotensin-converting-enzyme-inhibitor or angiotensin-receptor-blocker (single ACEi/ARB), angiotensin-converting-enzyme-inhibitor and angiotensin-receptor-blocker combination (ACEi+ARB combination), aldosterone antagonists, direct renin inhibitors, non-steroidal mineralocorticoid-receptor-antagonists (nsMRA) and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i). As primary endpoints, we defined: overall mortality and end-stage kidney disease, as secondary endpoints: renal composite outcome and albuminuria and as safety endpoints: acute kidney injury, hyperkalemia and hypotension. Under the use of a random effects model, we computed the overall effect estimates using the statistic program R4.1 and the corresponding package "netmeta". Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 tool and the quality of evidence of each pairwise comparison was rated according to GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation).
RESULTS
Of initial 3489 publications, 38 clinical trials were found eligible, in total including 42346 patients. Concerning the primary endpoints overall mortality and end stage kidney disease, SGLT2i on top of single ACEi/ARB compared to single ACEi/ARB was the only intervention significantly reducing the odds of mortality (OR 0.81, 95%CI 0.70-0.95) and end-stage kidney disease (OR 0.69, 95%CI 0.54-0.88). The indirect comparison of nsMRA vs SGLT2i in our composite endpoint suggests a superiority of SGLT2i (OR 0.60, 95%CI 0.47-0.76). Concerning safety endpoints, nsMRA and SGLT2i showed benefits compared to the others.
CONCLUSIONS
As the only drug class, SGLT2i showed in our analysis beneficial effects on top of ACEi/ARB treatment regarding mortality and end stage kidney disease and by that reconfirmed its position as treatment option for diabetic kidney disease. nsMRA reduced the odds for a combined renal endpoint and did not raise any safety concerns, justifying its application.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Diabetic Nephropathies; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Network Meta-Analysis; Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Angiotensins; Diabetes Mellitus
PubMed: 37917640
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0293183 -
JID Innovations : Skin Science From... Nov 2023Acting on the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-Is) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are mechanisms of some of... (Review)
Review
Acting on the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-Is) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are mechanisms of some of the most prescribed medications in the world. In addition to their routine use for the treatment of hypertension, such agents have gained attention for their influence on the angiotensin receptor pathway in fibrotic skin disorders, including scars and keloids. To evaluate the current level of evidence supporting the use of these agents, a systematic review related to ACE-Is/ARBs and cutaneous scarring was conducted. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus from database inception through January 26, 2022. Two independent reviewers identified eligible studies for inclusion and extracted data. Data were insufficient for meta-analysis and are presented narratively. Of 461 citations identified, seven studies were included (199 patients). The studies included two randomized clinical trials, one comparative observation study, and four case reports. All the included studies reported statistically significant improvement in cutaneous scarring in patients using ACE-Is/ARBs compared with that in those treated with placebo/control using various outcome measures such as scar size and scar scales. However, much of the literature on this subject to date is limited by study design.
PubMed: 37840767
DOI: 10.1016/j.xjidi.2023.100231 -
Heart & Lung : the Journal of Critical... 2024Given the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, it is crucial to prioritize the management of underlying diseases in infected patients, with hypertension being one of the most... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Given the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, it is crucial to prioritize the management of underlying diseases in infected patients, with hypertension being one of the most common conditions. However, there lies a complicated correlation between antihypertensive agents and COVID-19 infection.
OBJECTIVES
This study is to systematically evaluate the impact of continuing or discontinuing antihypertensive agents on mortality and infection severity in hospitalized patients with both hypertension and COVID-19.
METHODS
A systematic electronic search was conducted on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify relevant clinical trials published between 1948 and September 2022. Two independent reviewers assessed the quality of the included studies and extracted relevant data. The primary outcome of interest was the relationship between in-hospital mortality and administration of antihypertensive agents.
RESULTS
The meta-analysis revealed that continuous administration of antihypertensive agents, compared with discontinuation, significantly reduced in-hospital mortality among hypertension patients with COVID-19 infection [OR=0.49, 95 %CI (0.38, 0.65), p < 0.001, I=65.3 %]. Specifically, patients receiving ACEI/ARB type agents had even lower mortality rates. Meta-regression analyses were conducted to examine the impact of publication date, sample size, study design, and mean age of the patients, and the results showed that the number of participants in the included studies was the primary source of heterogeneity (p = 0.032). The findings indicated a clear association between the use of antihypertensive agents and reduced mortality in these patients.
CONCLUSION
nder the current circumstance of the sustained COVID-19 pandemic, it is recommended to continue the use of antihypertensive agents for patients with hypertension during COVID-19 infection, as it can help reduce the risk of mortality.
Topics: Humans; Antihypertensive Agents; COVID-19; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Pandemics; Hypertension
PubMed: 37826924
DOI: 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2023.10.001 -
Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology Jan 2024Sepsis and septic shock are life-threatening conditions that are associated with high mortality and considerable health care costs. The association between prior... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Prior Use of Angiotensin-converting Enzyme Inhibitors or Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers and Clinical Outcomes of Sepsis and Septic Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Sepsis and septic shock are life-threatening conditions that are associated with high mortality and considerable health care costs. The association between prior angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) use and outcomes after sepsis is elusive. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of the prior use of ACEi or ARBs and outcomes after sepsis and septic shock. A relevant literature review was performed in 4 databases from inception until July 2022. Independent reviewers first screened the title, abstract, and full text, and then, data extraction and analysis were performed. One post hoc analysis of a trial and 6 retrospective cohort studies were included in this review. There were 22% lower odds of in-hospital/30-day mortality among patients who have used ACEi/ARBs in the past [23.83% vs. 37.20%; odds ratio (OR), 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.64-0.96], and reduced 90-day mortality (OR, 0.80, 95% CI, 0.69-0.92). ACEi/ARBs users were found to have 31% lesser odds of developing acute kidney injury as compared with nonusers (OR, 0.69, 95% CI, 0.63-0.76). There was no significant difference in the length of hospital stay (MD 1.26, 95% CI, ‒7.89 to 10.42), need for renal replacement therapy (OR, 0.71, 95% CI, 0.13-3.92), mechanical ventilation (OR, 1.10, 95% CI, 0.88-1.37) or use of vasopressors (OR, 1.21, 95% CI, 0.91-1.61). Based on this analysis, prior use of ACEi/ARBs lowers the risk of mortality and adverse renal events in patients with sepsis and septic shock.
Topics: Humans; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Shock, Septic; Retrospective Studies; Kidney
PubMed: 37815234
DOI: 10.1097/FJC.0000000000001491 -
European Heart Journal. Cardiovascular... Jan 2024Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have assessed the effects of renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockers in adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have assessed the effects of renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockers in adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This meta-analysis provides estimates of the safety and efficacy of treatment with (vs. without) RAS blockers from these trials.
METHODS
PubMed, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched (1 March-12 April 2023). Event/patient numbers were extracted, comparing angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor/angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARB) treatment with no treatment, for the outcomes: intensive care unit (ICU) admission, mechanical ventilation, vasopressor use, acute kidney injury (AKI), renal replacement therapy (RRT), acute myocardial infarction, stroke/transient ischaemic attack, heart failure, thromboembolic events, and all-cause death. Fixed-effects meta-analysis estimates were pooled.
RESULTS
Sixteen RCTs including 3492 patients were analysed. Compared with discontinuation of RAS blockers, continuation was not associated with increased risk of ICU [risk ratio (RR) 0.96, 0.66-1.41], ventilation (RR 0.77, 0.55-1.09), vasopressors (RR 0.92, 0.58-1.44), AKI (RR 1.01, 0.40-2.56), RRT (RR 1.01, 0.46-2.21), or thromboembolic events (RR 1.07, 0.36-3.19). RAS blocker initiation was not associated with increased risk of ICU (RR 0.71, 0.47-1.08), ventilation (RR 1.12, 0.91-1.38), AKI (RR 1.28, 0.89-1.86), RRT (RR 1.66, 0.89-3.12), or thromboembolic events (RR 1.20, 0.06-23.70), although vasopressor use increased (RR 1.27, 1.02-1.57). The RR for all-cause death in the continuation/discontinuation trials was 1.24 (0.80-1.92), and 1.22 (0.96-1.55) in the initiation trials. In patients with severe/critical COVID-19, RAS blocker initiation increased the risk of all-cause death (RR 1.31, 1.01-1.72).
CONCLUSION
ACE inhibitors and ARBs may be continued in non-severe COVID-19 infection, where indicated. Conversely, initiation of RAS blockers may be harmful in critically ill patients.PROSPERO registration number: CRD42023408926.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Acute Kidney Injury; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Angiotensins; COVID-19; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Renin-Angiotensin System
PubMed: 37740450
DOI: 10.1093/ehjcvp/pvad067