Suppr超能文献

冠状动脉旁路移植术后血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂和血管紧张素受体阻滞剂的疗效比较。

Comparative Efficacy of Angiotensin Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers after Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting.

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Heart Vascular Stroke Institute, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

出版信息

Sci Rep. 2020 Feb 3;10(1):1716. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-58705-0.

Abstract

Although angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are considered as an alternative for those with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) intolerance, the comparative effectiveness of ARBs and ACEi remains controversial in patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). We aimed to compare the clinical effects of the two types of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors in patients who underwent CABG. From January 2001 to January 2015, among the 5456 patients, data from 1198 (20.1%) patients who used a RAAS inhibitor at discharge were analyzed. These 1198 patients were classified into ACEi (N = 900) and ARB (N = 298) groups. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) during a median follow-up period of 48 months. Propensity-matched analysis revealed that the incidence of MACCE over a 48 month follow-up period did not differ between the groups (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.36-1.21; p = 0.17), but it was significantly lower in the ARB group during the 12 month follow-up period (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.22-0.96; p = 0.04). In conclusion, ARBs may have comparable protective effects to ACEi and be a reasonable alternative for intolerant patients after CABG. The beneficial effects of ARBs depending on follow-up period require further investigation.

摘要

尽管血管紧张素受体阻滞剂 (ARBs) 被认为是血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂 (ACEi) 不耐受患者的替代药物,但在接受冠状动脉旁路移植术 (CABG) 的患者中,ARB 和 ACEi 的比较效果仍存在争议。我们旨在比较两种肾素-血管紧张素-醛固酮系统 (RAAS) 抑制剂在接受 CABG 的患者中的临床效果。从 2001 年 1 月至 2015 年 1 月,在 5456 名患者中,分析了 1198 名(20.1%)出院时使用 RAAS 抑制剂患者的数据。这些 1198 名患者分为 ACEi(N=900)和 ARB(N=298)组。主要终点是中位随访 48 个月期间的主要不良心血管和脑血管事件 (MACCE)。倾向性匹配分析显示,两组在 48 个月随访期间的 MACCE 发生率无差异(HR,0.65;95%CI,0.36-1.21;p=0.17),但 ARB 组在 12 个月随访期间的发生率显著降低(HR,0.46;95%CI,0.22-0.96;p=0.04)。总之,ARB 可能与 ACEi 具有相当的保护作用,是 CABG 后不耐受患者的合理替代药物。ARB 的有益效果取决于随访时间,需要进一步研究。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/674f/6997426/0d97f1fc35ae/41598_2020_58705_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验