Department of Medicine and Clinical Science, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Department of Advanced Cardiovascular Therapeutics, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan.
Hypertens Res. 2019 May;42(5):641-649. doi: 10.1038/s41440-018-0167-5. Epub 2019 Apr 5.
Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) are considered primary drugs for the secondary prevention of myocardial infarction (MI), and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are used when ACEIs cannot be tolerated. However, it is unclear whether ACEIs or ARBs are more appropriate first-line drugs in hypertensive patients with MI or heart failure (HF). The present study aimed to compare the effects of ACEIs and those of ARBs in these patients. Sixty randomized controlled trails (RCTs) that compared the effects of ACEIs and ARBs in patients with MI or HF were extracted by searching PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Database, and the Medical Central Journal database according to the PRISMA guidelines. We finally selected six eligible RCTs and identified three systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The proportion of hypertensive patients ranged from 36 to 69%. Meta-analyses were performed for recurrence or new onset of MI (risk ratio 0.97 [95% confidence interval: 0.88, 1.06]), hospitalization for HF (0.98 [0.84, 1.14]), cardiovascular or total mortality (0.98 [0.91, 1.05]), cardiovascular events or stroke (1.02 [0.94, 1.11]), and adverse events (1.40 [1.11, 1.77]). There were no significant differences between ACEIs and ARBs for all outcomes, except adverse events. Study discontinuation owing to adverse events was significantly more common with ACEIs than with ARBs. Among hypertensive patients with MI or HF, it appears desirable to select the most appropriate drugs, ACEIs or ARBs, in each case by considering the function level, patient background, comorbidity presence, blood pressure target, drug price and other such factors comprehensively in addition to considering tolerability.
血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂(ACEI)被认为是心肌梗死(MI)二级预防的主要药物,当不能耐受 ACEI 时使用血管紧张素受体阻滞剂(ARB)。然而,对于 MI 或心力衰竭(HF)合并高血压的患者,ACEI 或 ARB 作为一线药物哪一种更合适尚不清楚。本研究旨在比较 ACEI 和 ARB 在这些患者中的作用。根据 PRISMA 指南,通过搜索 PubMed/MEDLINE、Cochrane 数据库和 Medical Central 期刊数据库,提取了 60 项比较 ACEI 和 ARB 在 MI 或 HF 患者中作用的随机对照试验(RCT)。最终选择了 6 项合格的 RCT,并确定了 3 项系统评价和荟萃分析。高血压患者的比例为 36%至 69%。对 MI 复发或新发(风险比 0.97 [95%置信区间:0.88,1.06])、HF 住院(0.98 [0.84,1.14])、心血管或总死亡率(0.98 [0.91,1.05])、心血管事件或中风(1.02 [0.94,1.11])和不良事件(1.40 [1.11,1.77])进行了荟萃分析。除不良事件外,ACEI 和 ARB 之间所有结果均无显著差异。由于不良事件而停药的情况 ACEI 明显多于 ARB。对于 MI 或 HF 合并高血压的患者,除了考虑耐受性之外,似乎还需要综合考虑功能水平、患者背景、合并症存在、血压目标、药物价格等因素,选择最合适的药物,ACEI 或 ARB。