Savarese Gianluigi, Edner Magnus, Dahlström Ulf, Perrone-Filardi Pasquale, Hage Camilla, Cosentino Francesco, Lund Lars H
Karolinska Institute, Department of Medicine, Cardiology Unit, Stockholm, Sweden; Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, Federico II University, Naples, Italy.
Karolinska Institute, Department of Medicine, Cardiology Unit, Stockholm, Sweden.
Int J Cardiol. 2015 Nov 15;199:415-23. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.07.051. Epub 2015 Jul 21.
Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-Is) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are recommended in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFREF), but there is limited data on ARB vs. ACE-I and their combination in unselected populations. The purpose of this study was to compare the associations between the use of ACE-I, ARB and their combination, and outcomes in HFREF.
We prospectively studied 22,947 patients with HFREF (ejection fraction<40%) enrolled in the Swedish Heart Failure Registry who received ACE-I but not ARB (n=15,801, 69%), ARB but not ACE-I (n=4335, 19%), their combination (n=571, 2%) or neither (n=2240, 10%). As compared with ACE-I alone, the hazard ratios (HRs) for ARB alone for all-cause mortality was 0.97 (95% CI=0.91-1.03; p=0.27), for HF hospitalization 1.08 (CI=1.02-1.15; p<0.01) and for the composite outcome 1.03 (CI=0.99-1.08; p=0.15). ACE-I and ARB combination had for death HR=0.98 (95% CI=0.84-1.14; p=0.76), for HF hospitalization HR=1.49 (CI=1.33-1.68; p<0.01) and for the composite outcome HR=1.35 (CI=1.21-1.50; p<0.01). Use of neither ACE-I nor ARB was associated with HR for death 1.41 (CI=1.33-1.50; p<0.01), for HF hospitalization 1.16 (CI=1.08-1.25; p<0.01) and for the composite outcome 1.28 (CI=1.21-1.35; p<0.01).
This large generalizable analysis confirms the current recommendation of using ACE-I as first choice in HFREF. ARB can be considered an alternative in patients who cannot use ACE-I but should not routinely replace ACE-I. The combination of ACE-I and ARB was not associated with additional benefit over either one alone, and may potentially be harmful.
血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂(ACE-Is)和血管紧张素受体阻滞剂(ARBs)被推荐用于射血分数降低的心力衰竭(HFREF)患者,但在未选择的人群中,关于ARB与ACE-I及其联合使用的数据有限。本研究的目的是比较ACE-I、ARB及其联合使用与HFREF患者预后之间的关联。
我们对瑞典心力衰竭登记处登记的22947例HFREF患者(射血分数<40%)进行了前瞻性研究,这些患者接受了ACE-I但未接受ARB(n=15801,69%)、ARB但未接受ACE-I(n=4335,19%)、两者联合使用(n=571,2%)或两者均未使用(n=2240,10%)。与单独使用ACE-I相比,单独使用ARB的全因死亡率风险比(HRs)为0.97(95%CI=0.91-1.03;p=0.27),心力衰竭住院风险比为1.08(CI=1.02-1.15;p<0.01),复合结局风险比为1.03(CI=0.99-1.08;p=0.15)。ACE-I和ARB联合使用的死亡HR=0.98(95%CI=0.84-1.14;p=0.76),心力衰竭住院HR=1.49(CI=1.33-1.68;p<0.01),复合结局HR=1.35(CI=1.21-1.50;p<0.01)。既不使用ACE-I也不使用ARB与死亡HR为1.41(CI=1.33-1.50;p<0.01)、心力衰竭住院HR为1.16(CI=1.08-1.25;p<0.01)、复合结局HR为1.28(CI=1.21-1.35;p<0.01)相关。
这项大型可推广分析证实了目前在HFREF中使用ACE-I作为首选的建议。对于不能使用ACE-I的患者,ARB可被视为一种替代药物,但不应常规替代ACE-I。ACE-I和ARB联合使用与单独使用其中任何一种相比,并未带来额外益处,且可能有潜在危害。