Renin inhibitors versus angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors for primary hypertension

被引:12
|
作者
Wang, Gan Mi [1 ]
Li, Liang Jin [1 ]
Tang, Wen Lu [1 ]
Wright, James M. [2 ]
机构
[1] Fudan Univ, Sch Pharm, Dept Pharmacol, Shanghai, Peoples R China
[2] Univ British Columbia, Dept Anesthesiol Pharmacol & Therapeut, Vancouver, BC, Canada
来源
COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS | 2020年 / 10期
关键词
CHRONIC HEART-FAILURE; SYSTOLIC HYPERTENSION; DOUBLE-BLIND; ALISKIREN; RAMIPRIL; EFFICACY; SAFETY; SYSTEM; TOLERABILITY; STIFFNESS;
D O I
10.1002/14651858.CD012569.pub2
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background Renin inhibitors (RIs) reduce blood pressure more than placebo, with the magnitude of this effect thought to be similar to that for angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors. However, a drug's efficacy in lowering blood pressure cannot be considered as a definitive indicator of its effectiveness in reducing mortality and morbidity. The effectiveness and safety of RIs compared to ACE inhibitors in treating hypertension is unknown. Objectives To evaluate the benefits and harms of renin inhibitors compared to ACE inhibitors in people with primary hypertension. Search methods The Cochrane Hypertension Group Information Specialist searched the following databases for randomized controlled trials up to August 2020: the Cochrane Hypertension Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also contacted authors of relevant papers about further published and unpublished work. The searches had no language restrictions. Selection criteria We included randomized, active-controlled, double-blinded studies (RCTs) with at least four weeks follow-up in people with primary hypertension, which compared renin inhibitors with ACE inhibitors and reported morbidity, mortality, adverse events or blood pressure outcomes. We excluded people with proven secondary hypertension. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently selected the included trials, evaluated the risks of bias and entered the data for analysis. Main results We include 11 RCTs involving 13,627 participants, with a mean baseline age from 51.5 to 74.2 years. Follow-up duration ranged from four weeks to 36.6 months. There was no difference between RIs and ACE inhibitors for the outcomes: all-cause mortality: risk ratio (RR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 1.18; 5 RCTs, 5962 participants; low-certainty evidence; total myocardial infarction: RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.22 to 3.39; 2 RCTs, 957 participants; very low-certainty evidence; adverse events: RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.03; 10 RTCs, 6007 participants; moderate-certainty evidence; serious adverse events: RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.64; 10 RTCs, 6007 participants; low-certainty evidence; and withdrawal due to adverse effects: RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.06; 10 RTCs, 6008 participants; low-certainty evidence. No data were available for total cardiovascular events, heart failure, stroke, end-stage renal disease or change in heart rate. Low-certainty evidence suggested that RIs reduced systolic blood pressure: mean difference (MD) -1.72, 95% CI -2.47 to -0.97; 9 RCTs, 5001 participants; and diastolic blood pressure: MD -1.18, 95% CI -1.65 to -0.72; 9 RCTs, 5001 participants, to a greater extent than ACE inhibitors, but we judged this to be more likely due to bias than a true effect. Authors' conclusions For the treatment of hypertension, we have low certainty that renin inhibitors (RI) and angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors do not differ for all-cause mortality and myocardial infarction. We have low to moderate certainty that they do not differ for adverse events. Small reductions in blood pressure with renin inhibitors compared to ACE inhibitors are of low certainty. More independent, large, long-term trials are needed to compare RIs with ACE inhibitors, particularly assessing morbidity and mortality outcomes, but also on blood pressure-lowering effect. Plain language summary How renin inhibitors (RIs) compare with angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors for treating hypertension Review question We determined how renin inhibitors (RIs) compared with angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors for treating hypertension. Background Hypertension is a worldwide public-health challenge associated with high levels of occurrence and risks of circulatory and kidney disease. RIs were introduced into clinical use for hypertension in 2007. ACE inhibitors are widely prescribed for hypertension. However, the comparative effectiveness and safety of RIs and ACE inhibitors is not known. Search date We searched for evidence up to August 2020. Study characteristics We included randomized, active-controlled, double-blinded studies (RCTs) for this review. We include 11 RCTs involving 13,627 participants, with an average age from 51 to 74 years. Length of follow-up ranged from four weeks to 36 months. Key results and certainty of evidence Low-certainty evidence showed no difference between RIs and ACE inhibitors for deaths from any cause, for heart attacks, for serious side effects or for leaving the study because of side effects. Low-certainty evidence suggested that RIs reduce blood pressure more than ACE inhibitors do, but this could have been due to bias in the design and conduct of the studies. More independent RCTs are needed to assess illnesses and deaths, and to see if the difference in blood pressure-lowering is real.
引用
收藏
页数:52
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in patients with vascular disease
    Pitt, Bertram
    EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL, 2009, 30 (11) : 1307 - 1309
  • [22] Angiotensin-Converting-Enzyme 2 and Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitors in COVID-19: An Update
    Shukla, Ashwin Kumar
    Banerjee, Monisha
    HIGH BLOOD PRESSURE & CARDIOVASCULAR PREVENTION, 2021, 28 (02) : 129 - 139
  • [23] Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in antihypertensive therapy
    Luft F.C.
    Current Hypertension Reports, 2000, 2 (2) : 165 - 166
  • [24] Stability and permeation profiling of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors
    Helal, F.
    Lane, M. E.
    Hadgraft, J.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COSMETIC SCIENCE, 2012, 34 (04) : 371 - 371
  • [25] CARDIOPROTECTIVE POTENTIAL OF ANGIOTENSIN CONVERTING ENZYME-INHIBITORS
    GAVRAS, H
    GAVRAS, I
    JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION, 1991, 9 (05) : 385 - 392
  • [26] Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors versus angiotensin receptor blockers for diabetic nephropathy: a retrospective comparison
    Roberto Robles, Nicolas
    Romero, Baldomero
    Fernandez-Carbonero, Enrique
    Sanchez-Casado, Emilio
    Jose Cubero, Juan
    JOURNAL OF THE RENIN-ANGIOTENSIN-ALDOSTERONE SYSTEM, 2009, 10 (04) : 195 - 200
  • [27] Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers in atherosclerosis
    Lonn E.
    Current Atherosclerosis Reports, 2002, 4 (5) : 363 - 372
  • [28] Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) outperform angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors on ischemic stroke prevention in patients with hypertension and diabetes - A real-world population study in Taiwan
    Pai, Pei-Ying
    Muo, Chih-Hsin
    Sung, Fung-Chang
    Ho, Hung-Chi
    Lee, Yuan-Teh
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 2016, 215 : 114 - 119
  • [29] Different Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and the Associations With Overall and Cause-Specific Mortalities in Patients With Hypertension
    Chang, Chia-Hsuin
    Lin, Jou-Wei
    Caffrey, James L.
    Wu, Li-Chiu
    Lai, Mei-Shu
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION, 2015, 28 (06) : 823 - 830
  • [30] Patients With Newly Diagnosed Hypertension Treated With the Renin Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Azilsartan Medoxomil vs Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors: The Prospective EARLY Registry
    Schmieder, Roland E.
    Potthoff, Sebastian A.
    Bramlage, Peter
    Baumgart, Peter
    Mahfoud, Felix
    Buhck, Hartmut
    Ouarrak, Taoufik
    Ehmen, Martina
    Senges, Jochen
    Gitt, Anselm K.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL HYPERTENSION, 2015, 17 (12) : 947 - 953