Comparison Between Beta-Blockers with Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Beta-Blockers with Angiotensin II Type I Receptor Blockers in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction After Successful Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with Drug-Eluting Stents

Management of Hypertension in the Asia-Pacific Region: A Structured Review

This article reviews available evidence regarding hypertension management in the Asia-Pacific region, focussing on five research questions that deal with specific aspects: blood pressure (BP) control, guideline recommendations, role of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors in clinical practice, pharmacological management and real-world adherence to guideline recommendations. A PubMed search identified 2537 articles, of which 94 were considered relevant. Compared with Europeans, Asians have higher systolic/diastolic/mean arterial BP, with a stronger association between BP and stroke. Calcium channel blockers are the most-commonly prescribed monotherapy in Asia, with significant variability between countries in the rates of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis)/angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) and single-pill combination (SPC) use. In clinical practice, ARBs are used more commonly than ACEis, despite the absence of recommendation from guidelines and clinical evidence supporting the use of one class of drug over the other. Ideally, antihypertensive treatment should be tailored to the individual patient, but currently there are limited data on the characteristics of hypertension in Asia-Pacific individuals. Large outcome studies assessing RAAS inhibitor efficacy and safety in multi-national Asian populations are lacking. Among treated patients, BP control rates were ~ 35 to 40%; BP control in Asia-Pacific is suboptimal, and disproportionately so compared with Western nations. Strategies to improve the management of hypertension include wider access/availability of affordable treatments, particularly SPCs (which improve adherence), effective public health screening programs targeting patients to drive health-seeking behaviours, an increase in physician/patient awareness and early implementation of lifestyle changes. A unified Asia-Pacific guideline on hypertension management with pragmatic recommendations, particularly in resource-limited settings, is essential.

Validating the Prognostic Utility of the ABCD-GENE Score in Asian Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients on Clopidogrel

Background

The ABCD-GENE score, which links cytochrome P450 2C19 (CYP2C19) phenotype and high platelet reactivity (HPR) to the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in clopidogrel users, has been validated in white and Japanese populations. The prognostic implications of the score in other Asian cohorts, however, have been largely unchartered. The aim of this study was to validate the prognostic utility of the ABCD-GENE score in a heterogeneous Asian acute coronary syndrome (ACS) cohort.

Methods and Results

In this single-centre, retrospective cohort evaluation of 423 ACS patients, the objectives were to characterise the best cut-off score for MACE prognostication by comparing the adjusted 1-year risk of MACE between groups above and below the candidate cut-off scores using Cox regression; and for on-clopidogrel HPR prediction using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and Youden's index. In the adjusted Cox model, an ABCD-GENE score cut-off at 10 points significantly predicts the 1-year risk of MACE (adjusted HR 3.771; 95% CI [1.041-13.661]). Female sex, baseline LDL, history of ACS and angiotensin receptor blocker use were additional independent predictors of MACE. On ROC analysis the ideal cut-off for HPR prediction was 7 points. However, that did not independently predict the 1-year risk of MACE (adjusted HR 1.595; 95% CI [0.425-5.989]).

Conclusion

The original ABCD-GENE score 10-point cut-off moderately predicts MACE in a heterogeneous, Asian ACS population at 1 year. Additional predictors of MACE were also identified in the present cohort, and these findings should be prospectively validated in larger ACS cohorts.

The Combination of Beta-Blockers and ACE Inhibitors Across the Spectrum of Cardiovascular Diseases

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of mortality worldwide, affecting a wide range of patients at different stages across the cardiovascular continuum. Hypertension is one of the earliest risk factors in this continuum and can be controlled in most patients with currently available antihypertensive agents. However, goals are often not met because treatments are not optimized in terms of tailoring therapy to individual patients based on their hypertension subclass and cardiovascular risk profile and initiating early use of adapted-dose, single-pill combinations. In this context, beta-blockers in combination with angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors are of special interest as a result of their complementary actions on the sympathetic nervous system and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, two interlinked pathways that influence cardiovascular risk and disease outcomes. In addition to their antihypertensive actions, beta-blockers are used to manage arrhythmias and treat angina pectoris and heart failure, while ACE inhibitors provide cardioprotection in patients with acute coronary syndromes and treat congestive heart failure. A broad range of patients may therefore receive the combination in routine clinical practice. This paper examines the supporting evidence for beta-blockers and ACE inhibitors in each of the above indications and considers the rationale for combining these agents into a single pill, using data from bisoprolol and perindopril randomized controlled trials as supporting evidence. Combining these established antihypertensive agents into a single pill continues to provide effective blood pressure lowering and improved cardiovascular outcomes while allowing a greater proportion of patients to rapidly achieve treatment targets.

Rutin and quercetagetin enhance the regeneration potential of young and aging bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells in the rat infarcted myocardium

Myocardial infarction (MI) damages cardiomyocytes permanently and compromises cardiac function. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) with the potential to differentiate into multiple lineages are considered as one of the best options for the treatment of MI. However, aging affects their regeneration capability. With age, reactive oxygen species (ROS) accumulate in cells ultimately causing cell death. To successfully utilize these stem cells in clinic, novel strategies to improve their functional capability should be explored. In this study, we aimed to enhance the cardiac regeneration potential of bone marrow MSCs derived from aging rats by treating them with antioxidants, rutin or quercetagetin in separate in vivo experiments. Oxidative stress was induced by treating MSCs of young and aging rats with different concentrations of H₂O₂ which resulted in an increase in the ROS level. MSCs were treated with rutin or quercetagetin at varying concentrations and exposed to H₂O₂. It was observed that both antioxidants significantly (P < 0.001) suppressed H₂O₂-induced intracellular ROS accumulation in a dose-dependent manner. An optimized concentration of 10 µM rutin or quercetagetin was used for the in vivo experiments. MI models were developed in aging rats by ligation of left anterior descending artery and treated MSCs were transplanted in the MI models. Echocardiography was performed after 2 and 4 weeks of cell transplantation to evaluate the functional status of the infarcted heart and histological analysis was performed after 4 weeks to assess cardiac regeneration. Significant improvement was observed in cardiac parameters including LVEF% (P < 0.001), LVFS% (P < 0.01 and P < 0.001), LVIDd (P < 0.01 and P < 0.001), LVIDs (P < 0.001), LVEDV (P < 0.001) and LVESV (P < 0.001) in the treated young as well as aging MSCs. It is concluded from these findings that rutin and quercetagetin treatment enhance the regeneration efficiency of young and aging MSCs in vivo. These antioxidants can be effectively utilized to improve cellular therapy for myocardial infarction by suppressing ROS production.

The Efficacy and Safety of Bisoprolol in the Treatment of Myocardial Infarction with Cardiac Insufficiency

Background

Bisoprolol is commonly used to treat moderate or severe chronic stable heart failure, coronary heart disease, and hypertension. This study is aimed at analyzing the efficacy of bisoprolol in the treatment of myocardial infarction with cardiac insufficiency and its effect on cardiac function, Hcy, and CRP through meta-analysis.

Methods

A total of 120 patients with myocardial infarction and cardiac insufficiency from February 2020 to February 2021 were selected and randomly divided into two groups (control and the observation, n = 60) according to the random number table method. The control group was given conventional treatment. The observation group was given bisoprolol on the basis of control group. The clinical efficacy, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, heart rate, cardiac function indexes, homocysteine (Hcy), and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were compared between the two groups before and after treatment through data analysis. Adverse reactions were observed during treatment.

Results

Compared with the control group, the total effective rate of the observation group was significantly increased (p < 0.05). After treatment, the levels of heart rate, left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV), and left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) and serum Hcy and CRP levels in the observation group were significantly lower than those in the control group (p < 0.05). Meanwhile, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) level in the observation group after treatment was higher than that of the control group (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Bisoprolol combined with conventional treatment can reduce serum Hcy and CRP levels in patients with myocardial infarction and cardiac insufficiency and improve cardiac function. Moreover, there are no obvious adverse reactions during the treatment.

LncRNA SCIRT is downregulated in atherosclerosis and suppresses the proliferation of human aortic smooth muscle cells (HAOSMCs) by sponging miR-146a in cytoplasm

Background

SCIRT has been characterized as a key player in cancer biology, while its role in other human diseases is unclear. This study explored its role in atherosclerosis, with a specific focus on its interaction with SCIRT and miR-146a.

Methods

The expression of SCIRT and miR-146a in atherosclerosis-affected tissues and healthy tissues from 56 atherosclerosis patients were analyzed by RT-qPCR. The expression of SCIRT in nuclear and cytoplasm samples was detected by RNA fractionation assay. The direct interaction between SCIRT and miR-146a was detected by RNA pull-down assay. SCIRT and miR-146a were overexpressed in human aortic smooth muscle cells (HAOSMCs) to study the crosstalk between them. The role of SCIRT and miR-146a in the proliferation of HAOSMCs was analyzed with BrdU assay.

Results

SCIRT was downregulated by atherosclerosis, while miR-146a was upregulated by atherosclerosis. SCIRT was detected in both cytoplasm and nuclear samples, and it directly interacted with miR-146a. In HAOSMCs, overexpression of SCIRT and miR-146a did not affect the expression of each other. Interestingly, SCIRT suppressed the proliferation of HAOSMCs and reduced the enhancing effects of miR-146a on cell proliferation.

Conclusion

Therefore, SCIRT is downregulated in atherosclerosis and it suppresses the proliferation of HAOSMCs by sponging miR-146a in cytoplasm.

The Number of Pills, Rather Than the Type of Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitor, Predicts Ambulatory Blood Pressure Control in Essential Hypertensives on Triple Therapy: A Real-Life Cross-Sectional Study

Introduction

We evaluated the prevalence and predictors of ambulatory blood pressure (BP) control in patients taking a triple antihypertensive therapy (renin–angiotensin system inhibitor + calcium channel blocker + thiazide/thiazide-like diuretic, in either free or fixed-dose combinations) containing an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) or an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB).

Methods

We performed an observational cross-sectional study on 520 consecutive patients with essential hypertension taking a stable triple therapy in whom 24-h ambulatory BP was evaluated. Both number of pills and antihypertensive treatment intensity (ATI), as possible pharmacological predictors of ambulatory BP control, were taken into account.

Results

A total of 189 (36.3%) patients were taking triple therapy with ACEi and 331 (63.7%) patients were taking triple therapy with ARB. Mean age was 62.7 ± 12.2 years. Patients on triple therapy with ACEi had a significantly lower ATI and took fewer antihypertensive pills than patients on triple therapy with ARB (22.2% of patients took a single-pill triple fixed-dose combination). Patients taking triple therapy with ACEi had higher prevalence of both 24-h (54.8% vs 44.0%; p = 0.019) and daytime BP control (61.8% vs 49.2%; p = 0.006) than patients taking triple therapy with ARB, even after adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, smoking habit, type 2 diabetes mellitus, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and ATI [OR 1.5 (95% CI 1.1–2.2) and OR 1.6 (95% CI 1.1–2.4), respectively]. However, these independent associations with ambulatory BP control were lost when the number of antihypertensive pills was included in the model.

Conclusion

The higher prevalence of ambulatory BP control found in patients taking a triple therapy with ACEi was affected by the lower number of antihypertensive pills taken, which was also the key predictor of ambulatory BP control in our study. This confirms the importance of fixed-dose combinations in the management of essential hypertension.

Outcomes in prediabetes vs. diabetes in patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous intervention

OBJECTIVE

The comparative long-term clinical outcomes between patients with prediabetes and diabetes in patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and multivessel disease (MVD) who were undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are not well known. We therefore compared the 2-year clinical outcomes in such patients.

METHODS

A total of 2963 patients with NSTEMI and MVD [normoglycemia (group A, n = 629), prediabetes (group B, n = 802), and diabetes (group C, n = 1532)] were evaluated. The primary outcomes were the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction (Re-MI), and any repeat revascularization. The secondary outcome was stent thrombosis.

RESULTS

The cumulative incidence of MACE as well as for death or MI in group B and C were similar when compared to each other. However, they (P = 0.048 and P = 0.017, respectively and P = 0.022 and P = 0.001, respectively) were significantly higher than in group A. The cumulative incidence of all-cause death in group B (P = 0.042) and all-cause death and cardiac death in group C (P = 0.001 and P = 0.028, respectively) were significantly higher than in group A. However, those of all-cause death, cardiac death, Re-MI, any repeat revascularization, and ST were not significantly different between groups B and C.

CONCLUSION

In this study, patients with NSTEMI and MVD who underwent successful implantation of newer-generation DES and were prediabetic had worse outcomes compared to normoglycemics and comparable to those with diabetes.

Effectiveness of Perindopril/Indapamide Single-Pill Combination in Uncontrolled Patients with Hypertension: A Pooled Analysis of the FORTISSIMO, FORSAGE, ACES and PICASSO Observational Studies

INTRODUCTION

Our objective was to determine the effectiveness of a perindopril/indapamide (Per/Ind) single-pill combination (SPC) in a broad range of patient profiles, including subgroups with varying hypertension severity, age and cardiovascular risk profiles.

METHODS

Patient data from four large prospective observational studies (FORTISSIMO, FORSAGE, PICASSO, ACES) were pooled. In each study, patients already treated for hypertension were switched to Per/Ind 10/2.5 mg SPC and systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP/DBP) measured at the 1-month (M1) and 3-month (M3) visits. Study endpoints included change in SBP and DBP from baseline to M1 and M3 and the percentage of patients achieving BP control (SBP/DBP < 140/90 mmHg for patients without diabetes or < 140/85 mmHg for patients with diabetes).

RESULTS

A total of 16,763 patients were enrolled and received Per/Ind (94% received the full dose of 10/2.5). Mean patient age was 61.4 years (36% were ≥ 65 years old), 57% were women, and 16% had isolated systolic hypertension (ISH). Mean baseline office SBP/DBP was 162/94 mmHg, and mean duration of hypertension was 11 years. Cardiovascular risk factors and comorbid conditions were common in this population. Significant mean reductions in SBP (- 23 mmHg) and DBP (- 11 mmHg) were observed at M1 compared with baseline (P < 0.001), which were maintained at M3 (- 30 mmHg and - 14 mmHg, respectively). At M3, BP control was achieved by 70% of patients (78% for ISH). In patients with SBP ≥ 180 mmHg at baseline (grade III hypertension), the mean SBP/DBP decrease was - 51/- 20 mmHg and 53% achieved BP control. Per/Ind was well tolerated with an overall rate of adverse events of 1.3%, most frequently cough and dizziness at rates of 0.3% and 0.2%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In this hypertensive population including difficult-to-control patient subgroups, switching to Per/Ind 10/2.5 mg SPC led to rapid and important reductions in BP. BP control was achieved in 70% of patients overall in an everyday practice context.

Two-Year Clinical Outcomes Between Prediabetic and Diabetic Patients With STEMI and Multivessel Disease Who Underwent Successful PCI Using Drug-Eluting Stents

To evaluate clinical implication of prediabetes, we compared a 2-year major clinical outcome including patient-oriented composite outcomes (POCOs), stent thrombosis (ST), and stroke between prediabetes and diabetes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel disease (MVD). A total of 4097 patients with STEMI and MVD (normoglycemia [group A: 1001], prediabetes [group B: 1518], and diabetes [group C: 1578]) who received drug-eluting stents were evaluated. Patient-oriented composite outcomes were defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction (MI), or any repeat revascularization. The cumulative incidences of POCOs, ST, and stroke were similar between groups B and C. The cumulative incidences of all-cause death (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.483; 95% CI: 1.027-2.143; P = .036) and all-cause death or MI (aHR: 1.429, 95% CI: 1.034-1.974; P = .031) were higher in group B than in group A. The cumulative incidences of all-cause death (aHR: 1.563; 95% CI: 1.089-2.243; P = .015), cardiac death (aHR: 1.661; 95% CI: 1.123-2.457; P = .011), and all-cause death or MI were higher in group C than in group A. In conclusion, prediabetes could potentially have a similar impact as diabetes on major clinical outcomes in patients with STEMI and MVD.

Comparison of Durable-Polymer- and Biodegradable-Polymer-Based Newer-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction and Prediabetes After Successful Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Hyperglycemia is an important risk factor for poor clinical outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The relative superiority of the long-term clinical outcomes of durable-polymer (DP) -based and biodegradable-polymer (BP) -based newer-generation drug-eluting stents (DESs) after successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with AMI and prediabetes is not well established. We compared the clinical outcomes in such patients between DP-based and BP-based newer-generation DESs.A total of 4,377 patients with AMI and prediabetes were divided into the following two groups: the DP-DES group (n = 3,775; zotarolimus-eluting stents [ZES; n = 1,546] and everolimus-eluting stents [EES; n = 2,229]) and the BP-DES group (n = 602; biolimus-eluting stents [BES]). The primary endpoint was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction (re-MI), or any repeat revascularization. The secondary endpoint was the occurrence of stent thrombosis (ST).The 2-year adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of MACEs for ZES versus EES, ZES versus BES, EES versus BES, and ZES/EES versus BES (aHR: 1.125; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.834-1.518; P = 0.440) were similar. The cumulative incidence of ST was also comparable between the DP-DES and BP-DES groups (aHR: 1.407; 95% CI, 0.476-4.158; P = 0.537). Moreover, the 2-year aHRs of all-cause death, CD, re-MI, target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR), and non-TVR were similar.Patients with AMI and prediabetes who received DP-DES or BP-DES during PCI showed comparable safety and efficacy during the 2-year follow-up period.

Different Statin Effects of ST-elevation Versus Non-ST-Elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction After Stent Implantation

BACKGROUND

Intensive statin therapy reduces cardiovascular events in acute coronary syndrome. The data concerning the long-term clinical impacts of statin therapy between ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-STEMI (NSTEMI) after drug-eluting stent implantation are limited. We compared the 2-year clinical outcomes between these 2 groups after statin therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 30,616 Korean patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) were enrolled. Among them, 13,686 patients were classified as group A (STEMI statin user), 3,824 patients were as group B (STEMI statin nonuser), 10,398 patients were as group C (NSTEMI statin user), and 2,708 patients were as group D (NSTEMI statin nonuser). The major clinical endpoint was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction (re-MI), and any repeat revascularization during a 2-year follow-up period.

RESULTS

After adjustment, the cumulative risks of MACE (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 1.112 [1.002-1.235]; P = 0.047), all-cause death (aHR = 1.271 [1.054-1.532]; P = 0.012), and target vessel revascularization (TVR, aHR = 1.262 [1.049-1.518]; P = 0.014) in group C were significantly higher than group A. The cumulative risks of MACE, all-cause death, and cardiac death of the statin nonuser group (groups B and D) were significantly higher compared with statin user group (groups A and C).

CONCLUSIONS

Statin therapy was more effective in reducing the cumulative risks of MACE, all-cause death, and TVR in the STEMI group than NSTEMI group in Korean patients with AMI after successful drug-eluting stent implantation.

A comparison between statin with ACE inhibitor or ARB therapy in STEMI patients who underwent successful PCI with drug-eluting stents

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Studies of the comparative clinical outcomes between statin with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients are limited. We compared 2-year clinical outcomes between statin with ACEI or ARB therapy in STEMI patients after successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES).

METHODS

A total of 11,706 STEMI patients were enrolled and separated into two groups: the ACEI group (statin + ACEI, n = 8705) and the ARB group (statin + ARB, n = 3001). The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as all-cause death, recurrent MI (re-MI), and any coronary revascularization. Secondary endpoints were the individual components of MACE and target vessel failure (TVF).

RESULTS

After propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis, two PSM groups (2729 pairs, n = 5458, C-statistic = 0.675) were generated. The cumulative incidences of MACE, re-MI, and any coronary revascularization were similar between the two groups. However, the cumulative incidences of all-cause death (hazard ratio [HR], 1.548; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.091-2.197; p = 0.014) and cardiac death (HR, 1.850; 95% CI, 1.218-2.811; p = 0.004) were significantly higher in the ARB group compared with the ACEI group after PSM analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of statin with ACEI may be the preferred treatment strategy to reduce mortality rates in STEMI patients after successful PCI with DES rather than statin with ARB in this study during a 2-year follow-up period.