Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, China; and.
Medical Center of the Graduate School, Nanchang University, Nanchang, China.
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 2021 May 1;77(5):650-659. doi: 10.1097/FJC.0000000000001001.
Whether LCZ696 (neprilysin inhibitor + valsartan) has greater advantages of blood pressure (BP) lowering than angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers (ARBs) is unclear. To provide more detailed information about the benefits of LCZ696, we conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LCZ696 for short-term management of hypertension compared with ARBs. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov, using relevant keywords. We used a random or fixed effects model to calculate the weighted mean difference (WMD) of changes in BP and the risk ratio (RR) for BP control rates and adverse events (AEs). In this meta-analysis, 9 studies were incorporated. Compared with ARBs, LCZ696 revealed a significant reduction in mean sitting systolic BP [msSBP; WMD -4.79 mm Hg; 95% confidence interval (CI): -5.46 to -4.11 mm Hg], mean sitting diastolic BP (msDBP; WMD -2.12 mm Hg; 95% CI: -2.53 to -1.71 mm Hg), mean sitting pulse pressure (msPP; WMD -2.79 mm Hg; 95% CI: -3.52 to -2.07 mm Hg), and mean ambulatory pulse pressure (maPP; WMD -2.96 mm Hg; 95% CI: -3.35 to -2.57 mm Hg). LCZ696 had a higher BP control rate than ARBs (OR = 1.55; 95% CI: 1.39 to 1.73). There was no significant difference between LCZ696 and ARBs in the incidence of AEs (RR = 1.10; 95% CI: 0.96 to 1.25) and discontinuations because of AEs (RR = 0.97; 95% CI: 0.54 to 1.32). Overall, in short-term treatment, LCZ696 has greater advantages of antihypertensive efficacy and the safety is not inferior to ARBs. Further long-term studies are required to rule out the potential risks of beta amyloid accumulation and the potential for Alzheimer's disease.
LCZ696(脑啡肽酶抑制剂+缬沙坦)在降低血压方面是否比血管紧张素 II 型 1 型受体阻滞剂(ARB)具有更大的优势尚不清楚。为了提供关于 LCZ696 益处的更详细信息,我们进行了一项荟萃分析,以评估 LCZ696 短期治疗高血压的疗效和安全性与 ARB 相比。我们使用相关的关键词在 PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane 图书馆和 ClinicalTrials.gov 进行了搜索。我们使用随机或固定效应模型计算 BP 变化的加权均数差(WMD)和 BP 控制率和不良事件(AE)的风险比(RR)。在这项荟萃分析中,纳入了 9 项研究。与 ARB 相比,LCZ696 显著降低了平均坐位收缩压[msSBP;WMD-4.79mmHg;95%置信区间(CI):-5.46 至-4.11mmHg]、平均坐位舒张压(msDBP;WMD-2.12mmHg;95%CI:-2.53 至-1.71mmHg)、平均坐位脉压(msPP;WMD-2.79mmHg;95%CI:-3.52 至-2.07mmHg)和平均动态脉压(maPP;WMD-2.96mmHg;95%CI:-3.35 至-2.57mmHg)。LCZ696 的 BP 控制率高于 ARB(OR=1.55;95%CI:1.39 至 1.73)。LCZ696 与 ARB 之间不良事件(AE)的发生率(RR=1.10;95%CI:0.96 至 1.25)和因 AE 而停药(RR=0.97;95%CI:0.54 至 1.32)无显著差异。总体而言,在短期治疗中,LCZ696 在降压疗效方面具有更大的优势,且安全性不逊于 ARB。需要进一步的长期研究来排除β淀粉样蛋白蓄积的潜在风险和阿尔茨海默病的潜在风险。