-
Exploratory Research in Clinical and... Sep 2023Hypertension has affected over 1.13 billion people worldwide in 2015 and it's one of the most preventable risk-factors for morbidity and mortality. Antihypertensives... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Hypertension has affected over 1.13 billion people worldwide in 2015 and it's one of the most preventable risk-factors for morbidity and mortality. Antihypertensives significantly reduce cardiovascular risks. Several studies on antihypertensives' prescribing patterns were conducted worldwide, and guidelines were developed on hypertension management. However, no systematic reviews were conducted globally to synthesize the evidence from these studies. This review aims to evaluate antihypertensives' prescription patterns, and adherence to international guidelines for hypertension management worldwide.
METHODS
Full-text antihypertensives' prescribing patterns evaluation studies were included. Reviews, commentaries, guidelines, and editorials were excluded. Various databases were searched including PubMed, Embase, and others. Studies were limited to English only and to articles published from (01/01/2010) to (20/03/2020). Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool (CCAT) was used for quality assessment.
RESULTS
The most commonly prescribed antihypertensives as monotherapy in adult patients with no comorbidities were ACEIs/ARBs (Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors/Angiotensin receptor blockers), followed by CCBs (Calcium channel blockers), and BBs (Beta Blockers). Most commonly prescribed dual combinations were thiazide diuretics+ACEIs/ARBs, BBs + CCBs and CCBs+ACEIs/ARBs. Among diabetic patients, the most common agents were ACEIs/ARBs. Among patients with heart diseases, CCBs were prescribed frequently. While patients with kidney diseases, CCBs and ARBs were most prescribed. Of the 40 studies included in the review, only four studies directly assessed the prescribing patterns of antihypertensives in adherence to clinical practice guidelines. And only two studies confirmed adherence to guidelines. Furthermore, the quality of the majority of studies was moderate (50%), while 25% of articles were reported as either high or low quality.
CONCLUSION
This review revealed that there are areas for improvement for prescribing practices of antihypertensives in concordance with the latest evidence and with clinical practice guidelines.
PubMed: 37635839
DOI: 10.1016/j.rcsop.2023.100315 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2023To systematically assess the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan (SV) by comparison with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin...
The efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan compared with ACEI/ARB in the treatment of heart failure following acute myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
To systematically assess the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan (SV) by comparison with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) for the treatment of heart failure caused by acute myocardial infarction (HF-AMI) based on current randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Several electronic databases were searched up to 27 May 2023. Primary endpoints were the efficacy including the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD), N-terminal pro-B type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and 6-min walk test (6MWT) and secondary endpoints were the safety including the major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) and adverse reaction (AE). A total of 14 RCTs were included and all patients were from China. Among included 1,991 patients, 997 patients received SVs and 994 patients received ACEIs/ARBs. The pooled results demonstrated that patients in the SV group showed significantly better efficacy representing as increased LVEF [weighted mean difference (WMD): 4.43%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.84%-6.02%, < 0.001] and 6MWT (WMD: 30.84 m, 95% CI: 25.65 m-36.03 m, < 0.001) and decreased LVEDD (WMD: -3.24 mm, 95% CI: -4.96 mm ∼ -1.52 mm, < 0.001) and NT-proBNP (WMD: -188.12 pg/mL, 95% CI: -246.75 pg/mL ∼ 129.49 pg/mL, < 0.001), which was also verified by subgroup analysis based on the history of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Besides, the SV group showed significantly lower incidence rate of MACE [relative risk (RR): 0.60, 95% CI: 0.47-0.75, < 0.001] and patients receiving SVs in the non-PCI group also showed lower incidence of AE (RR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.20-0.71, = 0.002). For the treatment of HF-AMI, SV is more effective and safer than ACEI/ARB based on current evidence, but more high-quality RCTs are still needed to verify above findings.
PubMed: 37601056
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1237210 -
Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) Jul 2023There are significant considerations about the prevention of cardiotoxicity caused by trastuzumab therapy in patients with breast cancer, leading to discontinuation.... (Review)
Review
There are significant considerations about the prevention of cardiotoxicity caused by trastuzumab therapy in patients with breast cancer, leading to discontinuation. Recently, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have evaluated the effects of early commitment of beta-blockers (BBs), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) during trastuzumab chemotherapy in order to prevent the related cardiotoxicity. The present systematic review and meta-analysis of six RCTs included patients who have predominantly non-metastatic, HER2-positive, breast cancer and received trastuzumab as primary or adjuvant therapy. Those patients did not have any obvious cardiac dysfunction or any previous therapy with cardioprotective agent. We evaluated the efficacy of the aforementioned medications for primary prevention of cardiotoxicity, using random effects models. Any preventive treatment did not reduce cardiotoxicity occurrence compared to controls (Odds ratios (OR) = 0.92, 95% CI 0.54-1.56, = 0.75). Results were similar for ACEIs/ARBs and beta-blockers. Treatment with ACEIs/ARBs led to a slight, but significant, increase in LVEF in patients compared to the placebo group. Only two studies reported less likelihood of discontinuation of trastuzumab treatment. More adequately powered RCTs are needed to determine the efficacy of routine prophylactic therapy.
PubMed: 37513895
DOI: 10.3390/ph16070983 -
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Jun 2023Angiotensin II-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and selective angiotensin II receptor antagonists (ARAIIs) are widely used antihypertensive agents. Their use has... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Angiotensin II-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and selective angiotensin II receptor antagonists (ARAIIs) are widely used antihypertensive agents. Their use has generated controversy due to their possible influence on the health status of chronic patients infected with COVID-19. The objective of this work is to analyze the influence of COVID-19 on chronic hypertensive patients treated with ACEI and ARAII inhibitors. A systematic review and meta-analysis in the databases Pubmed, Pro-Quest and Scopus were carried out. The systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The search equation descriptors were obtained from the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) thesaurus. The search equation was: "Older AND hypertension AND (COVID-19 OR coronavirus) AND primary care" and its equivalent in Spanish. Nineteen articles were obtained, with n = 10,806,159 subjects. Several studies describe the COVID-19 association with ACEI or ARAII treatment in hypertension patients as a protective factor, some as a risk factor, and others without a risk association. In the case of ACEI vs. ARAII, the risk described for the former has an odds ratio (OR) of 0.55, and for ARAII, an OR of 0.59. Some authors talk about mortality associated with COVID-19 and ACEI with a half ratio (HR) of 0.97, and also associated ARAIIs with an HR of 0.98. It is recommended to maintain the use of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone axis in the context of the COVID-19 disease.
Topics: Humans; Aged; COVID-19; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; SARS-CoV-2; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Hypertension
PubMed: 37512012
DOI: 10.3390/medicina59071200 -
Clinical Cardiology Aug 2023This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of single-pill combination (SPC) antihypertensive drugs in patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension. Through Searching... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of single-pill combination (SPC) antihypertensive drugs in patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension. Through Searching Pubmed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science collected only randomized controlled trials on the efficacy of single-pill combination antihypertensive drugs in people with uncontrolled essential hypertension. The search period is from the establishment of the database to July 2022. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment, and statistical analyses were performed using Review Manage 5.3 and Stata 15.1 software. This review ultimately included 32 references involving 16 273 patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension. The results of the network meta-analysis showed that a total of 11 single-pill combination antihypertensive drugs were included, namely: Amlodipine/valsartan, Telmisartan/amlodipine, Losartan/HCTZ, Candesartan/HCTZ, Amlodipine/benazepril, Telmisartan/HCTZ, Valsartan/HCTZ, Irbesartan/amlodipine, Amlodipine/losartan, Irbesartan/HCTZ, and Perindopril/amlodipine. According to SUCRA, Irbesartan/amlodipine may rank first in reducing systolic blood pressure (SUCRA: 92.2%); Amlodipine/losartan may rank first in reducing diastolic blood pressure (SUCRA: 95.1%); Telmisartan/amlodipine may rank first in blood pressure control rates (SUCRA: 83.5%); Amlodipine/losartan probably ranks first in diastolic response rate (SUCRA: 84.5%). Based on Ranking Plot of the Network, we can conclude that single-pill combination antihypertensive drugs are superior to monotherapy, and ARB/CCB combination has better advantages than other SPC in terms of systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, blood pressure control rate, and diastolic response rate. However, due to the small number of some drug studies, the lack of relevant studies has led to not being included in this study, which may impact the results, and readers should interpret the results with caution.
Topics: Humans; Antihypertensive Agents; Losartan; Hypertension; Telmisartan; Irbesartan; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Network Meta-Analysis; Hydrochlorothiazide; Valine; Drug Therapy, Combination; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Amlodipine; Valsartan; Tetrazoles; Blood Pressure; Essential Hypertension
PubMed: 37432701
DOI: 10.1002/clc.24082 -
Journal of Clinical Hypertension... Aug 2023Studies have shown that angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) are superior in primary and secondary prevention for cardiac mortality and morbidity to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Studies have shown that angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) are superior in primary and secondary prevention for cardiac mortality and morbidity to angiotensin receptor blocker (ARBs). One of the common side effects from ACEI is dry cough. The aims of this systematic review, and network meta-analysis are to rank the risk of cough induced by different ACEIs and between ACEI and placebo, ARB or calcium channel blockers (CCB). We performed a systematic review, and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to rank the risk of cough induced by each ACEI and between ACEI and placebo, ARB or CCB. A total of 135 RCTs with 45,420 patients treated with eleven ACEIs were included in the analyses. The pooled estimated relative risk (RR) between ACEI and placebo was 2.21 (95% CI: 2.05-2.39). ACEI had more incidences of cough than ARB (RR 3.2; 95% CI: 2.91, 3.51), and pooled estimated of RR between ACEI and CCB was 5.30 (95% CI: 4.32-6.50) Moexipril ranked as number one for inducing cough (SUCRA 80.4%) and spirapril ranked the least (SUCRA 12.3%). The order for the rest of the ACEIs are as follows: ramipril (SUCRA 76.4%), fosinopril (SUCRA 72.5%), lisinopril (SUCRA 64.7%), benazepril (SUCRA 58.6%), quinapril (SUCRA 56.5%), perindopril (SUCRA 54.1%), enalapril (SUCRA 49.7%), trandolapril (SUCRA 44.6%) and, captopril (SUCRA 13.7%). All ACEI has the similar risk of developing a cough. ACEI should be avoided in patients who have risk of developing cough, and an ARB or CCB is an alternative based on the patient's comorbidity.
Topics: Humans; Antihypertensive Agents; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Network Meta-Analysis; Cough; Hypertension; Calcium Channel Blockers
PubMed: 37417783
DOI: 10.1111/jch.14695 -
Heart Failure Reviews Nov 2023Anthracyclines and trastuzumab are widely used to treat breast cancer but increase the risk of cardiomyopathy and heart failure. With the use of trastuzumab and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Anthracyclines and trastuzumab are widely used to treat breast cancer but increase the risk of cardiomyopathy and heart failure. With the use of trastuzumab and anthracycline-containing medications, this study intends to evaluate the effectiveness and security of current treatments against cardiotoxicity. We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which used at least one angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI), angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), or beta-blocker (BB) to prevent cardiotoxicity of antineoplastic agents for breast cancer, in 4 databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science) from inception to 11 May 2022, without language restrictions. The outcome of interest was left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and adverse events. Stata 15 and R software 4.2.1 were used to perform all statistical analyses. The Cochrane version 2 of the risk of bias tool was used to assess the risk of bias, and the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) assessment was used to appraise the quality of the evidence. Fifteen randomized clinical studies with a total of 1977 patients were included in the analysis. The included studies demonstrated statistically significant LVEF in the ACEI/ARB and BB treatment groups (χ = 184.75, I = 88.6%, p = 0.000; SMD 0.556, 95% CI 0.299 to 0.813). In an exploratory subgroup analysis, the benefit of experimental agents on LVEF, whether anthracyclines or trastuzumab, was prominent in patients treated with ACEIs, ARBs, and BBs. Compared to placebo, ACEI/ARB and BB treatments in breast cancer patients protect against cardiotoxicity after trastuzumab and anthracycline-containing medication treatment, indicating a benefit for both.
Topics: Humans; Female; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Cardiotoxicity; Antineoplastic Agents; Breast Neoplasms; Trastuzumab; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Antibiotics, Antineoplastic; Anthracyclines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37414918
DOI: 10.1007/s10741-023-10328-z -
Hellenic Journal of Cardiology : HJC =... 2023Duchenne muscular dystrophy is a fatal X-linked recessive disease affecting approximately 1 in 3500 births. It is characterized by a genetic lack of dystrophin, which is... (Review)
Review
Duchenne muscular dystrophy is a fatal X-linked recessive disease affecting approximately 1 in 3500 births. It is characterized by a genetic lack of dystrophin, which is an essential protein for maintaining muscle integrity. The lack of dystrophin plays a pathophysiological role in the development of dilated cardiomyopathy in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Currently, no consensus exists on specific pharmacological therapy guidelines for these patients; however, it centers around the guidelines for heart failure management. This systematic review investigated 12 randomized control trials dating back to 2005 in the pharmacotherapy of patients with dilated cardiomyopathy Duchenne muscular dystrophy. This review specifically included angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, aldosterone receptor blockers, angiotensin receptor/neprilysin inhibitors, beta-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. Despite their limitations, these studies have shown promising effects in improving the overall heart function and prognosis in patients with this condition. However, to attain higher statistical significance, future studies should investigate larger populations and for longer periods.
Topics: Humans; Cardiomyopathy, Dilated; Muscular Dystrophy, Duchenne; Dystrophin; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Adrenergic beta-Antagonists
PubMed: 37406964
DOI: 10.1016/j.hjc.2023.06.007 -
Diabetology International Jul 2023Cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy (CAN) is a debilitating complication of diabetes mellitus. To date, there is no systematic review on all the available drug... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy (CAN) is a debilitating complication of diabetes mellitus. To date, there is no systematic review on all the available drug treatments for CAN in diabetic patients, except for one review focusing on aldose reductase inhibitors.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate available drug treatment options for CAN in diabetic patients.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted with a search of CENTRAL, Embase, PubMed and Scopus from database inception till 14th May 2022. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of diabetic patients with CAN that investigated the effect of treatment on blood pressure, heart rate variability, heart rate or QT interval were included.
RESULTS
Thirteen RCTs with a total of 724 diabetic patients with CAN were selected. There was a significant improvement in the autonomic indices of diabetic patients with CAN given angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) for 24 weeks (<0.05) to two years (<0.001), angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARB) for one year (<0.05), single dose of beta blocker (BB) (<0.05), omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) for three months (<0.05), alpha-lipoic acid (ALA) for four months ( < 0.05) to six months (=0.048), vitamin B12 in combination with ALA, acetyl L‑carnitine (ALC), superoxide dismutase (SOD) for one year (=0.001) and near significant improvement in the autonomic indices of diabetic patients with CAN given vitamin E for four months ( = 0.05) compared to the control group. However, there was no significant improvement in the autonomic indices of patients given vitamin B12 monotherapy ( ≥ 0.05).
CONCLUSION
ACEI, ARB, BB, ALA, omega-3 PUFAs, vitamin E, vitamin B12 in combination with ALA, ALC and SOD could be effective treatment options for CAN, while vitamin B12 monotherapy might be unlikely to be recommended for the treatment of CAN due to its lack of efficacy.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13340-023-00629-x.
PubMed: 37397902
DOI: 10.1007/s13340-023-00629-x -
Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics Nov 2023The risk-to-benefit ratio of cardioprotective medications in frail older adults is uncertain. The objective was to systematically review prescribing of... (Review)
Review
AIMS
The risk-to-benefit ratio of cardioprotective medications in frail older adults is uncertain. The objective was to systematically review prescribing of guideline-recommended cardioprotective medications following myocardial infarction (MI) in people who are frail.
DATA SOURCES
Ovid Medline, PubMed and Cochrane were searched from inception to October 2022 for studies that reported prescribing of one or more cardioprotective medication classes post-MI or acute coronary syndromes in people with frailty.
STUDY SELECTION
We included observational studies that reported prescribing of cardioprotective medications post-MI stratified by frailty status.
RESULTS
Overall, 16 cohort studies published from 2013 to 2022 that used seven different frailty scales were included. Prescribing of all cardioprotective medication classes following MI was lower in frail compared to non-frail people, with absolute rates of prescribing varying substantially across studies. Median prescribing in frail and non-frail people, respectively, was 88.9% (IQR 81.5-96.2) and 93.1% (IQR 92.0-98.9) for aspirin; 68.1% (IQR 61.9-91.2) and 86.7% (IQR 79.5-92.8) for P2Y12-inhibitors; 83.1% (IQR 76.9-91.3) and 94.0% (IQR 87.1-95.9) for lipid-lowering therapy; 67.9% (IQR 60.6-74.0) and 74.7% (IQR 71.3-84.5) for angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blockers; and 74.1% (IQR 69.2-79) and 77.6% (IQR 71.8-85.9) for beta-blockers.
CONCLUSION
People who were frail were less likely to be prescribed guideline recommended medication classes post-MI than those who were non-frail. Further research is needed into treatment benefits and risks in frail people to avoid unnecessarily withholding treatment in this high-risk population, while also minimising potential for medication related harm.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Frailty; Myocardial Infarction; Acute Coronary Syndrome; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Risk Factors
PubMed: 37356114
DOI: 10.1016/j.archger.2023.105106