Is Sacubitril/Valsartan a Superior Agent in Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction? A Review of Randomized Comparative Trials

IF 0.8 Q4 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Hospital Pharmacy Pub Date : 2023-12-06 DOI:10.1177/00185787231212619
J. Rindone, Chadwick K. Mellen, Megan Goldenstein
{"title":"Is Sacubitril/Valsartan a Superior Agent in Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction? A Review of Randomized Comparative Trials","authors":"J. Rindone, Chadwick K. Mellen, Megan Goldenstein","doi":"10.1177/00185787231212619","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The PARADIGM HF trial showed sacubitril/valsartan (SV) to be superior to enalapril in patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Since its publication, several other randomized trials have compared SV to either an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) in HFrEF which showed conflicting results regarding mortality, hospitalizations, and quality of life scoring. Objective: To review randomized comparative trials of SV to either ACEI or ARB in patients with HFrEF. Methods: PubMed and Embase databases were used to identify randomized comparative trials. The text terms sacubitril, angiotensin neprilysin, and LCZ696 were used for both searches. Meta-analysis, retrospective, adhoc, and cohort studies were excluded. Results: 1476 and 3983 citations were reviewed on PubMed and Embase, respectively. Of these, 11 randomized comparative trials to either ACEI or ARB were included for analysis. The mortality/quality of life benefits of SV over enalapril in the PARADIGM HF were not corroborated in any of the other trials. The effect of hospitalizations for heart failure was inconsistent among trials. Exercise tolerance was not improved with SV versus enalapril. Conclusion: The results of the PARADIGM HF trial have largely not been confirmed in subsequent randomized comparative trials.","PeriodicalId":13002,"journal":{"name":"Hospital Pharmacy","volume":"67 31","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hospital Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00185787231212619","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The PARADIGM HF trial showed sacubitril/valsartan (SV) to be superior to enalapril in patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Since its publication, several other randomized trials have compared SV to either an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) in HFrEF which showed conflicting results regarding mortality, hospitalizations, and quality of life scoring. Objective: To review randomized comparative trials of SV to either ACEI or ARB in patients with HFrEF. Methods: PubMed and Embase databases were used to identify randomized comparative trials. The text terms sacubitril, angiotensin neprilysin, and LCZ696 were used for both searches. Meta-analysis, retrospective, adhoc, and cohort studies were excluded. Results: 1476 and 3983 citations were reviewed on PubMed and Embase, respectively. Of these, 11 randomized comparative trials to either ACEI or ARB were included for analysis. The mortality/quality of life benefits of SV over enalapril in the PARADIGM HF were not corroborated in any of the other trials. The effect of hospitalizations for heart failure was inconsistent among trials. Exercise tolerance was not improved with SV versus enalapril. Conclusion: The results of the PARADIGM HF trial have largely not been confirmed in subsequent randomized comparative trials.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
沙库比普利/缬沙坦是治疗射血分数减低型心力衰竭的最佳药物吗?随机对比试验综述
背景:PARADIGM HF试验显示,在射血分数(HFrEF)降低的患者中,苏比里尔/缬沙坦(SV)优于依那普利。自其发表以来,其他几项随机试验将SV与血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂(ACEI)或血管紧张素受体阻滞剂(ARB)在HFrEF中进行了比较,结果显示在死亡率、住院率和生活质量评分方面存在矛盾。目的:回顾SV对ACEI或ARB治疗HFrEF患者的随机对照试验。方法:使用PubMed和Embase数据库识别随机比较试验。文本术语sacubitril,血管紧张素neprilysin和LCZ696被用于这两个搜索。荟萃分析、回顾性研究、特别研究和队列研究被排除在外。结果:PubMed和Embase分别检索了1476篇和3983篇引文。其中,纳入了11项ACEI或ARB随机对照试验进行分析。在PARADIGM HF中,SV对依那普利的死亡率/生活质量的益处在任何其他试验中都没有得到证实。心力衰竭住院治疗的影响在试验中是不一致的。与依那普利相比,SV并没有改善运动耐受性。结论:PARADIGM HF试验的结果在随后的随机比较试验中基本上没有得到证实。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Hospital Pharmacy
Hospital Pharmacy PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
63
期刊介绍: Hospital Pharmacy is a monthly peer-reviewed journal that is read by pharmacists and other providers practicing in the inpatient and outpatient setting within hospitals, long-term care facilities, home care, and other health-system settings The Hospital Pharmacy Assistant Editor, Michael R. Cohen, RPh, MS, DSc, FASHP, is author of a Medication Error Report Analysis and founder of The Institute for Safe Medication Practices (ISMP), a nonprofit organization that provides education about adverse drug events and their prevention.
期刊最新文献
Cefepime/Enmetazobactam. Impact of a Medication Reconciliation Improvement Package on Adherence to Medication Reconciliation Among Internal Medicine Physicians: A Quality Improvement Project in a Lower-Middle Income Country. Implementing Research Into Practice as a Clinical Based New Practitioner Pharmacist. Phytonadione Utilization and the Risk of Bleeding in Chronic Liver Disease. Safety and Efficacy of Switching Patients With Type 2 Diabetes From Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists to Tirzepatide: A Case Series.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1