Impact of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors on COVID-19

Prognostic significance of hypertension history and blood pressure on admission in Japanese patients with coronavirus disease 2019: integrative analysis from the Japan COVID-19 Task Force

The effect of preexisting hypertension on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) prognosis remains controversial. Additionally, no studies have compared the association between blood pressure (BP) indices on admission and COVID-19 outcomes using preexisting hypertension status. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the association between preexisting hypertension and COVID-19 outcomes in Japanese patients with COVID-19 and assess the impact of BP indices on admission on clinical outcomes in patients with and without preexisting hypertension. Preexisting hypertension presence was confirmed based on the patient's clinical history. Critical outcomes were defined as high-flow oxygen use, non-invasive and invasive positive-pressure ventilation, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, or death during hospitalization. Preexisting hypertension was observed in 64.6% of the patients. Multivariable logistic regression analysis of severe COVID-19 risk factors indicated that preexisting hypertension was independently associated with critical outcomes [adjusted odds ratio (OR): 1.35; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.05-1.73]. Low or high BP and high pulse pressure on admission were associated with critical outcomes in patients without preexisting hypertension [OR for systolic BP < 100 mmHg: 2.13, 95% CI: 1.21-3.75; OR for high BP stage 2 (160-179 systolic and/or 100-109 mmHg diastolic BP): 2.13, 95% CI: 1.27-3.58; OR for pulse pressure ≥60 mmHg: 1.68, 95% CI: 1.14-2.48]. Preexisting hypertension is a risk factor for critical outcomes in Japanese patients with COVID-19. BP indices are useful biomarkers for predicting COVID-19 outcomes, particularly in patients without preexisting hypertension. Thus, hypertension history, systolic BP, and pulse pressure should be assessed to predict severe COVID-19 outcomes.

2023 update and perspectives

Total 276 manuscripts were published in Hypertension Research in 2022. Here our editorial members picked up the excellent papers, summarized the current topics from the published papers and discussed future perspectives in the sixteen fields. We hope you enjoy our special feature, 2023 update and perspectives in Hypertension Research.

Intrinsic factors behind long-COVID: II. SARS-CoV-2, extracellular vesicles, and neurological disorders

With the decline in the number of new Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections, the World Health Organization announced the end of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. However, the repercussions of this viral pandemic may remain with us for a longer period of time, as it has remodeled the lives of humankind in many ways, including social and economic. Of course, its most important repercussions remain on the human health level. Long-coronavirus disease (COVID) or post-COVID is a state for which we do not have a concrete definition, a specific international classification of diseases Code, clear diagnostic tools, or well-known effective cures as of yet. In this second article from the Intrinsic Factors behind long-COVID Series, we try to link long-COVID symptoms with their causes, starting from the nervous system. Extracellular vesicles (ECVs) play very complex and ramified roles in the bodies of both healthy and not-healthy individuals. ECVs may facilitate the entry of many bioactive molecules and pathogens into the tissues and cells of the nervous system across the blood-brain barrier. Based on the size, quantity, and quality of their cargo, ECVs are directly proportional to the pathological condition and its severity through intertwined mechanisms that evoke inflammatory immune responses typically accompanied by pathological symptoms over variable time periods according to the type of these symptoms.

COVID-19 and metabolic syndrome

Convergence of the two pandemics: metabolic syndrome and COVID-19 over last two years has posed unprecedented challenges to individuals as well as healthcare systems. Epidemiological data suggest a close association between metabolic syndrome and COVID-19 while variety of possible pathogenic connections have been proposed while some have been proven. Despite the evidence of high risk for adverse COVID-19 outcomes in people with metabolic syndrome, little is known about the differences in efficacy and safety among people with metabolic syndrome and without. It is important to recognize that among people with metabolic syndrome This review summarizes the current knowledge and epidemiological evidence on the association between metabolic syndrome and adverse COVID-19 outcomes, pathogenic interrelationships, management considerations for acute COVID-19 and post-COVID sequalae and sustaining care of people living with metabolic syndrome with appraisal of evidence and gaps in knowledge.

Effect of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor and Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Initiation on Organ Support-Free Days in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19.

Objective

To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non-critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022).

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was organ support-free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes.

RESULTS

On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support-free days among critically ill patients was 10 (-1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (-1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support-free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707.

Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers and outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Our prior analysis demonstrated no significant difference in risk of mortality or disease progression among patients with COVID-19. With the availability of findings from randomized controlled trials (RCTs), we provide an updated review of RCTs which explored the outcomes among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 treated with Angiotensin Converting Enzyme inhibitor (ACEis)/Angiotensin Receptor Blockers (ARBs) versus control.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis covers RCTs exploring mortality, intensive care unit admission, and mechanical ventilation outcomes among hospitalized COVID-19 patients treated with ACEi/ARBs.

RESULTS

Ten studies were included in this meta-analysis. For mortality with ACEi/ARB utilization among hospitalized COVID-19 patients, the pooled risk ratio (RR) was 0.97 (95% CI 0.64-1.47, p = 0.89) with heterogeneity of 26%. Further, the pooled RR for ACEi/ARB use on ICU admission and mechanical ventilation were 0.55 (0.55-1.08, p = 0.13) with a heterogeneity of 0% and 1.02 (0.78-1.32, p = 0.91) with a heterogeneity of 0%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, the use of ACEi/ARB was not associated with increased risk of mortality, ICU admission, or mechanical ventilation compared to control. These findings support continuation of ACEi/ARB for whom baseline clinical indications for these agents exist.