Prospective evaluation comparing the effects of enalapril and losartan in left ventricular remodeling after acute myocardial infarction

Mechanisms for the development of heart failure and improvement of cardiac function by angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors

Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, which prevent the conversion of angiotensin I to angiotensin II, are well-known for the treatments of cardiovascular diseases, such as heart failure, hypertension and acute coronary syndrome. Several of these inhibitors including captopril, enalapril, ramipril, zofenopril and imidapril attenuate vasoconstriction, cardiac hypertrophy and adverse cardiac remodeling, improve clinical outcomes in patients with cardiac dysfunction and decrease mortality. Extensive experimental and clinical research over the past 35 years has revealed that the beneficial effects of ACE inhibitors in heart failure are associated with full or partial prevention of adverse cardiac remodeling. Since cardiac function is mainly determined by coordinated activities of different subcellular organelles, including sarcolemma, sarcoplasmic reticulum, mitochondria and myofibrils, for regulating the intracellular concentration of Ca2+ and myocardial metabolism, there is ample evidence to suggest that adverse cardiac remodelling and cardiac dysfunction in the failing heart are the consequence of subcellular defects. In fact, the improvement of cardiac function by different ACE inhibitors has been demonstrated to be related to the attenuation of abnormalities in subcellular organelles for Ca2+-handling, metabolic alterations, signal transduction defects and gene expression changes in failing cardiomyocytes. Various ACE inhibitors have also been shown to delay the progression of heart failure by reducing the formation of angiotensin II, the development of oxidative stress, the level of inflammatory cytokines and the occurrence of subcellular defects. These observations support the view that ACE inhibitors improve cardiac function in the failing heart by multiple mechanisms including the reduction of oxidative stress, myocardial inflammation and Ca2+-handling abnormalities in cardiomyocytes.

Captopril Attenuates Cardiovascular and Renal Disease in a Rat Model of Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), a prevalent form of heart failure, is frequently accompanied by the metabolic syndrome and kidney disease. Because current treatment options of HFpEF are limited, evaluation of therapies in experimental models of HFpEF with the metabolic syndrome and kidney disease is needed. In this study, we evaluated the effects of captopril, furosemide, and their combination in aged, obese ZSF1 rats, an animal model of HFpEF with the metabolic syndrome and chronic kidney disease as comorbidities. Captopril (100 mg/kg), furosemide (50 mg/kg), or their combination was administered orally to obese ZSF1 rats aged 20 to 44 weeks. Untreated ZSF1 rats served as controls. After 24 weeks of treatment, captopril significantly lowered systemic blood pressure and attenuated HFpEF as evidenced by significantly reduced left ventricular end diastolic pressures (10.5 ± 1.4 vs. 4.9 ± 1.3 mm Hg in Control vs. Captopril, respectively) and significantly lower left ventricular relaxation time constants (28.1 ± 2.9 vs. 18.3 ± 3.1 ms in Control vs. Captopril, respectively). The captopril-induced improvement in left ventricular function was associated with reduced cardiac hypertrophy, ischemia, necrosis, and vasculitis. Captopril also increased renal blood flow and glomerular filtration rate, reduced renal vascular resistance and proteinuria, and improved renal histology (ie, reduced renal hypertrophy, glomerulosclerosis, and tubular atrophy/dilation). Furosemide alone provided little benefit; moreover, furosemide did not augment the therapeutic benefits of captopril. This study suggests that chronic administration of captopril, but not furosemide, could be beneficial in patients with HFpEF, particularly in those with comorbidities such as obesity, diabetes, and dyslipidemias.

Effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor versus valsartan on cellular signaling events in heart transplant

BACKGROUND

Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) provide similar biologic effects in model systems and similar clinical impacts in humans. The changes in the cardiac angiotensin system signaling pathways in the human heart in response to ACE inhibitors versus ARBs have been incompletely studied.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effects of ACE inhibitors versus valsartan on the angiotensin II signal transduction pathways in the transplanted human heart.

METHODS

Twenty-seven stable cardiac transplant recipients were randomized to remain on ACE inhibitor therapy (n = 8) or to receive valsartan (n = 19). Two additional endomyocardial biopsy samples were obtained at baseline and after 9 months of therapy. The expression of cardiac angiotensin type I and II receptors and atrial natriuretic factor (ANF) was measured by quantitative polymerase chain reaction. The expression and phosphorylation levels of selected signal transduction pathways were analyzed by immunoblotting.

RESULTS

The mean dose of valsartan was 114 +/- 41 mg/day. The use of valsartan resulted in a similar impact on blood pressure and biochemistry profile. There were no significant changes in the expression of angiotensin type I and II receptors and ANF with valsartan. Similarly, no significant changes in the expression and phosphorylation of Jun N-terminal kinase, extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1 and 2, and p38 mitogen-activated protein kinases or AKT, and mammalian target of rapamycin was observed in the valsartan-treated group.

CONCLUSIONS

Valsartan use is associated with similar clinical and molecular cardiac effects as ACE inhibitor therapy in stable long-term cardiac transplant recipients.

Baseline glucose and left ventricular remodeling after acute myocardial infarction

In patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), the mechanisms behind the increased mortality related to glucose levels (GL) are poorly understood. The main purpose of this study is to analyze the relationship between baseline glucose and left ventricular enlargement (LVE). We analyzed 52 patients with a first ST-elevation AMI <24 h of evolution. Glucose levels were obtained upon admission (median time, 3 h after the beginning of chest pain). The median GL was 123.5 mg/dl, and patients above this limit were considered hyperglycemic (n=26). Left ventricular enlargement was analyzed comparing two radionuclide ventriculographies, the first obtained within 4 days post-AMI (median, 55 h) and the second 6 months later (median, 188.5 days), taking into account the difference in the obtained end-systolic volumes. Myocardial reperfusion was evaluated comparing ST resolution between a first ECG done immediately upon hospital arrival with a second ECG performed 2 h after treatment. By univariate analysis, LVE correlated significantly with baseline hyperglycemia (P<.001), failed reperfusion by ECG criteria (P<.001), and no use of ACE inhibitors or AT1 blockers (P=.046) and aspirin (P=.046). A history of previous diabetes did not correlate significantly with LVE at 6 months. In the adjusted model, basal hyperglycemia (P<.001) and failed reperfusion (P=.001) were the only variables independently correlated with LVE. In conclusion, baseline glucose is a powerful and independent predictor of LVE after AMI, which reinforces the importance of a tight glucose control during the initial phase of the disease.

Review of the molecular pharmacology of Losartan and its possible relevance to stroke prevention in patients with hypertension

BACKGROUND

The Losartan Intervention For End-point reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study found that a losartan-based regimen, compared with an atenolol-based regimen, resulted in a significantly lower risk of stroke in hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy, despite similar reductions in blood pressure.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this review was to examine the molecular and pharmacologic mechanisms that may be associated with the different outcomes observed in the LIFE study.

METHODS

A PubMed/MEDLINE search of English-language articles (1990 to February 2006) with the terms angiotensin II antagonists or AIIAs or angiotensin receptor blockers or losartan or atenolol or beta blocker and terms including, but not limited to, atherosclerosis, left ventricular hypertrophy, carotid artery hypertrophy, fatty streaks, atrial fibrillation, arrhythmias, endothelial function, myocyte hypertrophy, myocardial fibrosis, platelet aggregation, tissue factor, plasminogen activator inhibitor-1, PAI-1, anti-inflammatory, uric acid, or oxidative stress.

RESULTS

Losartan's significant effect on stroke may be related to several possible mechanisms that are independent of blood-pressure reductions. These include improvements in endothelial function and vascular structure; decreases in vascular oxidative stress; reductions in left ventricular hypertrophy, reductions in myocardial fibrosis, or both; and modulation of atherosclerotic disease progression. Although some of these effects may be shared by other angiotensin II receptor antagonists (AIIAs), and perhaps other anti-hypertensive classes (eg, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors), the ability of losartan to lower serum uric acid levels-a proposed independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease-appears to be a molecule-specific effect. Alternative explanations of the results of the LIFE study have also been hypothesized, including inappropriate choice of atenolol as an active comparator and differences in central pulse pressures between study groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This review of the literature suggests that losartan (and perhaps other AIIAs) may possess a number of properties, independent of its antihypertensive effects, that may be associated with decreased vulnerability of the plaque, myocardium, and blood.

Blockade of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system: a key therapeutic strategy to reduce renal and cardiovascular events in patients with diabetes

Diabetes (particularly type 2 diabetes) represents a global health problem of epidemic proportions. Individuals with diabetes are not only more likely to develop hypertension, dyslipidemia, and obesity, but are also at a significantly higher risk for coronary heart disease, peripheral vascular disease, and stroke. Angiotensin II plays a key pathophysiological role in the progression of diabetic renal disease, and blockade of the renin-angiotensin system with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) or angiotensin II antagonists has therefore become an important therapeutic strategy to reduce renal and cardiovascular events in patients with diabetes. Several studies have demonstrated the effects of angiotensin II antagonists on the reduction of albuminuria and the progression of renal disease from microalbuminuria to macroalbuminuria. More importantly, several endpoint trials have shown that the antiproteinuric effects of losartan and irbesartan translate into cardiovascular and renoprotective benefits beyond blood pressure lowering, thereby delaying the need for dialysis or kidney transplantation by several years. These and other studies indicate that angiotensin II antagonists not only improve survival and quality of life of patients with diabetic nephropathy, but also have the potential to reduce the substantial healthcare burden associated with managing these patients. ACEi also appear to exert similar beneficial effects in diabetic patients, but whether clinically significant differences in renoprotection or mortality exist between angiotensin II antagonists and ACEi in patients with type 2 diabetes remains to be fully investigated in appropriate head-to-head studies.

Enalapril suppresses ventricular remodeling more effectively than losartan in patients with acute myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

Ventricular remodeling after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. ELITE II study showed that losartan, an angiotensin receptor blocker, shows a survival benefit to the same degree as captopril, an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, does in patients with heart failure. However, recent OPTIMAAL study showed that clinical outcomes after losartan are not superior to those after captopril in patients with AMI. We examined the effect of losartan on ventricular remodeling after AMI comparatively with that of enalapril.

METHODS

We enrolled 203 consecutive patients with AMI (mean age 62 +/- 11 years). All patients underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention and were randomly assigned to losartan (25-50 mg, n = 101) or enalapril (2.5-10 mg, n = 102) treatment. Biplane left ventriculography was performed just after primary percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (acute phase) and 6 months after the onset of AMI.

RESULTS

Any of the maximal creatine kinase level, left ventricular end-diastolic volume index, end-systolic volume index, and ejection fraction measured at acute phase was not different between losartan and enalapril groups. However, changes in left ventricular end-diastolic index (18 +/- 25 vs 8 +/- 24 mL/m2) and left ventricular end-systolic volume index (10 +/- 20 vs 2 +/- 18 mL/m2) from acute phase to 6 months were significantly greater in losartan than in enalapril group. Change in left ventricular ejection fraction (0.2% +/- 10.3% vs 3.4% +/- 11.6%) from acute phase to 6 months was significantly smaller in losartan than in enalapril group. The plasma level of brain natriuretic peptide at 6 months was significantly higher in losartan than in enalapril group (all P < .05).

CONCLUSION

These indicate that enalapril suppresses ventricular remodeling after AMI more effectively than losartan.