血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂(ACEIs)和血管紧张素受体阻滞剂(ARBs)在高危心血管事件患者中的应用:10项随机安慰剂对照试验的荟萃分析

Hean Teik Ong, Loke Meng Ong, Jacqueline Judith Ho
{"title":"血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂(ACEIs)和血管紧张素受体阻滞剂(ARBs)在高危心血管事件患者中的应用:10项随机安慰剂对照试验的荟萃分析","authors":"Hean Teik Ong,&nbsp;Loke Meng Ong,&nbsp;Jacqueline Judith Ho","doi":"10.1155/2013/478597","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Context. Whether angiotensin converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARB) are useful in high risk patients without heart failure is unclear. We perform a meta-analysis of prospective randomized placebo-controlled ACEI or ARB trials studying patients with a combination of risk factors to assess treatment impact on all cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke. Method. A PubMed search was made for placebo-controlled trials recruiting at least 1,200 high risk patients randomized to either ACEI or ARB, with follow-up of at least 2 years. Meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan 5 program and Mantel-Haenszel analysis was done with a fixed effects model. Results. Ten trials recruiting 77,633 patients were reviewed. All cause mortality was significantly reduced by ACEI (RR 0.89; P = 0.0008), but not by ARB treatment (RR 1.00; P = 0.89). Cardiovascular mortality and nonfatal MI were also reduced in the ACEI trials but not with ARB therapy. Stroke was significantly reduced in the ACEI trials (RR 0.75; P < 0.00001) and more modestly reduced in the ARB trials (RR 0.90; P = 0.01). Conclusion. ACEI treatment reduced stroke, nonfatal MI, cardiovascular and total mortality in high risk patients, while ARB modestly reduced stroke with no effect on nonfatal MI, cardiovascular and total mortality. </p>","PeriodicalId":73519,"journal":{"name":"ISRN cardiology","volume":"2013 ","pages":"478597"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2013/478597","citationCount":"28","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors (ACEIs) and Angiotensin-Receptor Blockers (ARBs) in Patients at High Risk of Cardiovascular Events: A Meta-Analysis of 10 Randomised Placebo-Controlled Trials.\",\"authors\":\"Hean Teik Ong,&nbsp;Loke Meng Ong,&nbsp;Jacqueline Judith Ho\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2013/478597\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Context. Whether angiotensin converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARB) are useful in high risk patients without heart failure is unclear. We perform a meta-analysis of prospective randomized placebo-controlled ACEI or ARB trials studying patients with a combination of risk factors to assess treatment impact on all cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke. Method. A PubMed search was made for placebo-controlled trials recruiting at least 1,200 high risk patients randomized to either ACEI or ARB, with follow-up of at least 2 years. Meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan 5 program and Mantel-Haenszel analysis was done with a fixed effects model. Results. Ten trials recruiting 77,633 patients were reviewed. All cause mortality was significantly reduced by ACEI (RR 0.89; P = 0.0008), but not by ARB treatment (RR 1.00; P = 0.89). Cardiovascular mortality and nonfatal MI were also reduced in the ACEI trials but not with ARB therapy. Stroke was significantly reduced in the ACEI trials (RR 0.75; P < 0.00001) and more modestly reduced in the ARB trials (RR 0.90; P = 0.01). Conclusion. ACEI treatment reduced stroke, nonfatal MI, cardiovascular and total mortality in high risk patients, while ARB modestly reduced stroke with no effect on nonfatal MI, cardiovascular and total mortality. </p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73519,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ISRN cardiology\",\"volume\":\"2013 \",\"pages\":\"478597\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-11-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2013/478597\",\"citationCount\":\"28\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ISRN cardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/478597\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ISRN cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/478597","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 28

摘要

上下文。血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂(ACEI)和血管紧张素受体阻滞剂(ARB)是否对无心力衰竭的高危患者有用尚不清楚。我们对前瞻性随机安慰剂对照ACEI或ARB试验进行了荟萃分析,研究具有多种危险因素的患者,以评估治疗对全因死亡率、心血管死亡率、非致死性心肌梗死(MI)和卒中的影响。方法。PubMed检索了安慰剂对照试验,招募了至少1200名高风险患者,随机分配到ACEI或ARB,随访至少2年。meta分析采用RevMan 5程序,Mantel-Haenszel分析采用固定效应模型。结果。纳入77,633例患者的10项试验进行了回顾。ACEI显著降低了全因死亡率(RR 0.89;P = 0.0008),但与ARB治疗无关(RR 1.00;P = 0.89)。在ACEI试验中,心血管死亡率和非致死性心肌梗死也降低了,但ARB治疗没有降低。卒中在ACEI试验中显著减少(RR 0.75;P < 0.00001),并且在ARB试验中更为温和地降低(RR 0.90;P = 0.01)。结论。ACEI治疗降低了高危患者的卒中、非致死性心肌梗死、心血管和总死亡率,而ARB治疗适度降低了卒中,但对非致死性心肌梗死、心血管和总死亡率没有影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors (ACEIs) and Angiotensin-Receptor Blockers (ARBs) in Patients at High Risk of Cardiovascular Events: A Meta-Analysis of 10 Randomised Placebo-Controlled Trials.

Context. Whether angiotensin converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARB) are useful in high risk patients without heart failure is unclear. We perform a meta-analysis of prospective randomized placebo-controlled ACEI or ARB trials studying patients with a combination of risk factors to assess treatment impact on all cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke. Method. A PubMed search was made for placebo-controlled trials recruiting at least 1,200 high risk patients randomized to either ACEI or ARB, with follow-up of at least 2 years. Meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan 5 program and Mantel-Haenszel analysis was done with a fixed effects model. Results. Ten trials recruiting 77,633 patients were reviewed. All cause mortality was significantly reduced by ACEI (RR 0.89; P = 0.0008), but not by ARB treatment (RR 1.00; P = 0.89). Cardiovascular mortality and nonfatal MI were also reduced in the ACEI trials but not with ARB therapy. Stroke was significantly reduced in the ACEI trials (RR 0.75; P < 0.00001) and more modestly reduced in the ARB trials (RR 0.90; P = 0.01). Conclusion. ACEI treatment reduced stroke, nonfatal MI, cardiovascular and total mortality in high risk patients, while ARB modestly reduced stroke with no effect on nonfatal MI, cardiovascular and total mortality.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Open versus Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm in the Elective and Emergent Setting in a Pooled Population of 37,781 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Mouse bone marrow-derived endothelial progenitor cells do not restore radiation-induced microvascular damage. Abdominal aortic aneurysms and coronary artery disease in a small country with high cardiovascular burden. Exclusion of left atrial appendage thrombus using single phase coronary computed tomography as compared to transesophageal echocardiography in patients undergoing pulmonary vein isolation. Myocardial injury in critically ill children: a case control study.
×
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