The economic burden of heart failure

Heart failure, a major cause of morbidity and mortality among the elderly, is a serious public health problem. As the population ages and the prevalence of heart failure increases, expenditures related to the care of these patients will climb dramatically. As a result, the health care industry must develop strategies to contain this staggering economic burden. Strategies may include adopting approaches for preventing heart failure and implementing new treatment modalities with proven efficacy into large-scale clinical practice. Successful implementation of these strategies will require intensive physician and patient education and development of innovative approaches to fund support services.

Hyperkalemia After Initiating Renin-Angiotensin System Blockade: The Stockholm Creatinine Measurements (SCREAM) Project

BACKGROUND

Concerns about hyperkalemia limit the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-I) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), but guidelines conflict regarding potassium-monitoring protocols. We quantified hyperkalemia monitoring and risks after ACE-I/ARB initiation and developed and validated a hyperkalemia susceptibility score.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We evaluated 69 426 new users of ACE-I/ARB therapy in the Stockholm Creatinine Measurements (SCREAM) project with medication initiation from January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2010, and follow-up for 1 year thereafter. Three fourths (76%) of SCREAM patients had potassium checked within the first year. Potassium >5 and >5.5 mmol/L occurred in 5.6% and 1.7%, respectively. As a comparison, we propensity-matched new ACE-I/ARB users to 20 186 new β-blocker users in SCREAM: 64% had potassium checked. The occurrence of elevated potassium levels was similar between new β-blocker and ACE-I/ARB users without kidney disease; only at estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min per 1.73 m² were risks higher among ACE-I/ARB users. We developed a hyperkalemia susceptibility score that incorporated estimated glomerular filtration rate, baseline potassium level, sex, diabetes mellitus, heart failure, and the concomitant use of potassium-sparing diuretics in new ACE-I/ARB users; this score accurately predicted 1-year hyperkalemia risk in the SCREAM cohort (area under the curve, 0.845, 95% CI: 0.840-0.869) and in a validation cohort from the US-based Geisinger Health System (N=19 524; area under the curve, 0.818, 95% CI: 0.794-0.841), with good calibration.

CONCLUSIONS

Hyperkalemia within the first year of ACE-I/ARB therapy was relatively uncommon among people with estimated glomerular filtration rate >60 mL/min per 1.73 m², but rates were much higher with lower estimated glomerular filtration rate. Use of the hyperkalemia susceptibility score may help guide laboratory monitoring and prescribing strategies.

Initiation, Continuation, or Withdrawal of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/Angiotensin Receptor Blockers and Outcomes in Patients Hospitalized With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

Background

Guidelines recommend continuation or initiation of guideline‐directed medical therapy, including angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers (ACEi/ARB), in hospitalized patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

Methods and Results

Using the Get With The Guidelines‐Heart Failure Registry, we linked clinical data from 16 052 heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (ejection fraction ≤40%) patients with Medicare claims data. We divided ACEi/ARB‐eligible patients into 4 categories based on admission and discharge ACEi/ARB use: continued (reference group), started, discontinued, or not started on therapy. A multivariable Cox proportional hazard model was used to determine the association between ACEi/ARB category and outcomes. Most, 90.5%, were discharged on ACEi/ARB (59.6% continued and 30.9% newly started). Of those discharged without ACEi/ARB, 1.9% were discontinued, and 7.5% were eligible but not started. Thirty‐day mortality was 3.5% for patients continued and 4.1% for patients started on ACEi/ARB. In contrast, 30‐day mortality was 8.8% for patients discontinued (adjusted hazard ratio [HR_adj] 1.92; 95% CI 1.32‐2.81; P<0.001) and 7.5% for patients not started (HR_adj 1.50; 95% CI 1.12‐2.00; P=0.006). The 30‐day readmission rate was lowest among patients continued or started on therapy. One‐year mortality was 28.2% for patients continued and 29.7% for patients started on ACEi/ARB compared to 41.6% for patients discontinued (HR_adj 1.35; 95% CI 1.13‐1.61; P<0.001) and 41.7% (HR_adj 1.28; 95% CI 1.14‐1.43; P<0.001) for patients not started on therapy.

Conclusions

Compared with continuation, withdrawal of ACEi/ARB during heart failure hospitalization is associated with higher rates of postdischarge mortality and readmission, even after adjustment for severity of illness.

Angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors versus angiotensin receptor blockers for primary hypertension

BACKGROUND

Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE inhibitors) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are widely prescribed for primary hypertension (systolic blood pressure > 140 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure > 90 mmHg). However, while ACE inhibitors have been shown to reduce mortality and morbidity in placebo-controlled trials, ARBs have not. Therefore, a comparison of the efficacies of these two drug classes in primary hypertension for preventing total mortality and cardiovascular events is important.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of ACE inhibitors and ARBs on total mortality and cardiovascular events, and their rates of withdrawals due to adverse effects (WDAEs), in people with primary hypertension.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hypertension Group Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and the ISI Web of Science up to July 2014. We contacted study authors for missing and unpublished information, and also searched the reference lists of relevant reviews for eligible studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials enrolling people with uncontrolled or controlled primary hypertension with or without other risk factors. Included trials must have compared an ACE inhibitor and an ARB in a head-to-head manner, and lasted for a duration of at least one year. If background blood pressure lowering agents were continued or added during the study, the protocol to do so must have been the same in both study arms.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine studies with 11,007 participants were included. Of the included studies, five reported data on total mortality, three reported data on total cardiovascular events, and four reported data on cardiovascular mortality. No study separately reported cardiovascular morbidity. In contrast, eight studies contributed data on WDAE. Included studies were of good to moderate quality. There was no evidence of a difference between ACE inhibitors and ARBs for total mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.98; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88 to 1.10), total cardiovascular events (RR 1.07; 95% CI 0.96 to 1.19), or cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.85 to 1.13). Conversely, a high level of evidence indicated a slightly lower incidence of WDAE for ARBs as compared with ACE inhibitors (RR 0.83; 95% CI 0.74 to 0.93; absolute risk reduction (ARR) 1.8%, number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 55 over 4.1 years), mainly attributable to a higher incidence of dry cough with ACE inhibitors. The quality of the evidence for mortality and cardiovascular outcomes was limited by possible publication bias, in that several studies were initially eligible for inclusion in this review, but had no extractable data available for the hypertension subgroup. To this end, the evidence for total mortality was judged to be moderate, while the evidence for total cardiovascular events was judged to be low by the GRADE approach.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our analyses found no evidence of a difference in total mortality or cardiovascular outcomes for ARBs as compared with ACE inhibitors, while ARBs caused slightly fewer WDAEs than ACE inhibitors. Although ACE inhibitors have shown efficacy in these outcomes over placebo, our results cannot be used to extrapolate the same conclusion for ARBs directly, which have not been studied in placebo-controlled trials for hypertension. Thus, the substitution of an ARB for an ACE inhibitor, while supported by evidence on grounds of tolerability, must be made in consideration of the weaker evidence for the efficacy of ARBs regarding mortality and morbidity outcomes compared with ACE inhibitors. Additionally, our data mostly derives from participants with existing clinical sequelae of hypertension, and it would be useful to have data from asymptomatic people to increase the generalizability of this review. Unpublished subgroup data of hypertensive participants in existing trials comparing ACE inhibitors and ARBs needs to be made available for this purpose.

Factors determining angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor underutilization in heart failure in a community setting

BACKGROUND

Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors were underprescribed for patients with congestive heart failure (CHF) treated in the community setting in the early 1990s despite convincing evidence of benefit.

HYPOTHESIS

We postulated that (1) the prevalence of ACE inhibitor use has increased, and (2) prescribing biases have narrowed, as community physicians have gained additional clinical experience with these drugs for treatment of CHF.

METHODS

We examined rates of ACE inhibitor use among 1,150 patients with CHF hospitalized at 10 community hospitals in 1995, evaluated determinants of ACE inhibitor prescription, and compared the results with survey data gathered among similar patients during 1992.

RESULTS

Compared with 1992, ACE inhibitor use prior to hospital admission was increased among all patients (42 vs. 33%, p < 0.001) and the subset with a history of CHF (53 vs. 39%, p < 0.0005). Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor prescription at hospital discharge also increased among all survivors (64 vs. 51%, p < 0.00005) and the subset eligible for ACE inhibitor treatment based on clinical trial criteria (77 vs. 66%, p = 0.04). Multivariate analysis suggested no change in the prescribing biases previously observed; ACE inhibitor use was related to lower ejection fraction, lower serum creatinine, documentation of left ventricular systolic function, younger patient age, prescription of any diuretic drug, and nonprescription of alternate vasodilators and calcium blockers. In multivariate analyses, physician specialty did not predict ACE inhibitor use.

CONCLUSIONS

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor use among patients with CHF is increasing but remains below the 80-90% rates of drug tolerance documented in randomized clinical trials. This discrepancy is partially explained by the prevalence of renal impairment and "diastolic" heart failure in the community setting. However, age bias, use of alternative vasodilators, and substandard quality of care may also play a role.

Clinical implications of endothelial dysfunction

Endothelial dysfunction is increasingly recognized as an early event in the pathogenesis of cardiovascular disease. This observation is consistent with the growing appreciation of the role of endothelium in maintaining cardiovascular health. Endothelial dysfunction and coronary artery disease are both linked to hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, diabetes mellitus, and cigarette smoking. Modification of these conditions improves both endothelial function and coronary artery disease outcomes. Dietary and lifestyle modifications and antioxidant vitamin supplementation have a beneficial effect on endothelial function, as do angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and lipid-lowering agents. Future studies will determine whether interventions that specifically target endothelial dysfunction can reduce rates of clinical disease.

Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitors in Patients With COVID-19: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Led by the International Society of Hypertension

Background

Published randomized controlled trials are underpowered for binary clinical end points to assess the safety and efficacy of renin‐angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) in adults with COVID‐19. We therefore performed a meta‐analysis to assess the safety and efficacy of RASi in adults with COVID‐19.

Methods and Results

MEDLINE, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register were searched for randomized controlled trials that randomly assigned patients with COVID‐19 to RASi continuation/commencement versus no RASi therapy. The primary outcome was all‐cause mortality at ≤30 days. A total of 14 randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria and enrolled 1838 participants (aged 59 years, 58% men, mean follow‐up 26 days). Of the trials, 11 contributed data. We found no effect of RASi versus control on all‐cause mortality (7.2% versus 7.5%; relative risk [RR], 0.95; [95% CI, 0.69–1.30]) either overall or in subgroups defined by COVID‐19 severity or trial type. Network meta‐analysis identified no difference between angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors versus angiotensin II receptor blockers. RASi users had a nonsignificant reduction in acute myocardial infarction (2.1% versus 3.6%; RR, 0.59; [95% CI, 0.33–1.06]), but increased risk of acute kidney injury (7.0% versus 3.6%; RR, 1.82; [95% CI, 1.05–3.16]), in trials that initiated and continued RASi. There was no increase in need for dialysis or differences in congestive cardiac failure, cerebrovascular events, venous thromboembolism, hospitalization, intensive care admission, inotropes, or mechanical ventilation.

Conclusions

This meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials evaluating angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers versus control in patients with COVID‐19 found no difference in all‐cause mortality, a borderline decrease in myocardial infarction, and an increased risk of acute kidney injury with RASi. Our findings provide strong evidence that RASi can be used safely in patients with COVID‐19.

Association of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers With the Risk of Hospitalization and Death in Hypertensive Patients With COVID-19

Background

Despite its clinical significance, the risk of severe infection requiring hospitalization among outpatients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection who receive angiotensin‐converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) remains uncertain.

Methods and Results

In a propensity score–matched outpatient cohort (January–May 2020) of 2263 Medicare Advantage and commercially insured individuals with hypertension and a positive outpatient SARS‐CoV‐2, we determined the association of ACE inhibitors and ARBs with COVID‐19 hospitalization. In a concurrent inpatient cohort of 7933 hospitalized with COVID‐19, we tested their association with in‐hospital mortality. The robustness of the observations was assessed in a contemporary cohort (May–August). In the outpatient study, neither ACE inhibitors (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 0.53–1.13, P=0.18) nor ARBs (HR, 0.88; 0.61–1.26, P=0.48) were associated with hospitalization risk. ACE inhibitors were associated with lower hospitalization risk in the older Medicare group (HR, 0.61; 0.41–0.93, P=0.02), but not the younger commercially insured group (HR, 2.14; 0.82–5.60, P=0.12; P‐interaction 0.09). Neither ACE inhibitors nor ARBs were associated with lower hospitalization risk in either population in the validation cohort. In the primary inpatient study cohort, neither ACE inhibitors (HR, 0.97; 0.81–1.16; P=0.74) nor ARBs (HR, 1.15; 0.95–1.38, P=0.15) were associated with in‐hospital mortality. These observations were consistent in the validation cohort.

Conclusions

ACE inhibitors and ARBs were not associated with COVID‐19 hospitalization or mortality. Despite early evidence for a potential association between ACE inhibitors and severe COVID‐19 prevention in older individuals, the inconsistency of this observation in recent data argues against a role for prophylaxis.

Antihypertensive agents for preventing diabetic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Various blood pressure-lowering agents, and particularly inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS), are widely used for people with diabetes to prevent the onset of diabetic kidney disease (DKD) and adverse cardiovascular outcomes. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2003 and updated in 2005.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aimed to assess the benefits and harms of blood pressure lowering agents in people with diabetes mellitus and a normal amount of albumin in the urine (normoalbuminuria).

SEARCH METHODS

In January 2011 we searched the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register through contact with the Trials Search Co-ordinator.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any antihypertensive agent with placebo or another agent in hypertensive or normotensive patients with diabetes and no kidney disease (albumin excretion rate < 30 mg/d) were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two investigators independently extracted data on kidney and other patient-relevant outcomes (all-cause mortality and serious cardiovascular events), and assessed study quality. Analysis was by a random effects model was applied to analyse results which were expressed as risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 26 studies that enrolling 61,264 participants. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) reduced the risk of new onset of microalbuminuria, macroalbuminuria or both when compared to placebo (8 studies, 11,906 patients: RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.89), with similar benefits in people with and without hypertension (P = 0.74), and when compared to calcium channel blockers (5 studies, 1253 participants: RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.85). ACEi reduced the risk of death when compared to placebo (6 studies, 11,350 participants: RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.97). No effect was observed for angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) when compared to placebo for new microalbuminuria, macroalbuminuria or both (5 studies, 7653 participants: RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.19) or death (5 studies, 7653 participants: RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.41); however, meta-regression suggested possible benefits from ARB for preventing kidney disease in high risk patients. There was a trend towards benefit from use of combined ACEi and ARB for prevention of DKD compared with ACEi alone (2 studies, 4171 participants: RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.00).The risk of cough was significantly increased with ACEi when compared to placebo (6 studies, 11,791 patients: RR 1.84, 95% CI 1.24 to 2.72), however there was no significant difference in the risk of headache or hyperkalaemia. There was no significant difference in the risk of cough, headache or hyperkalaemia when ARB was to placebo. On average risk of bias was judged to be either low (27% to 69%) or unclear (i.e. no information available) (8% to 73%). Blinding of participants, incomplete outcome data and selective reporting were judged to be high in 23%, 31% and 31% of studies, respectively.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

ACEi were found to prevent new onset DKD and death in normoalbuminuric people with diabetes, and could therefore be used in this population. More data are needed to clarify the role of ARB and other drug classes in preventing DKD.

Interventions for idiopathic steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome in children

BACKGROUND

The majority of children who present with their first episode of nephrotic syndrome achieve remission with corticosteroid therapy. Children who fail to respond may be treated with immunosuppressive agents including calcineurin inhibitors (cyclosporin or tacrolimus) and with non-immunosuppressive agents such as angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi). Optimal combinations of these agents with the least toxicity remain to be determined. This is an update of a review first published in 2004 and updated in 2006 and 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of different interventions used in children with idiopathic nephrotic syndrome, who do not achieve remission following four weeks or more of daily corticosteroid therapy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Kidney and Transplant's Specialised Register (up to 2 March 2016) through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs and quasi-RCTs were included if they compared different immunosuppressive agents or non-immunosuppressive agents with placebo, prednisone or other agent given orally or parenterally in children aged three months to 18 years with SRNS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently searched the literature, determined study eligibility, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. For dichotomous outcomes, results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Data were pooled using the random effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

Nineteen RCTs (820 children enrolled; 773 evaluated) were included. Most studies were small. Eleven studies were at low risk of bias for allocation concealment and only four studies were at low risk of performance bias. Fifteen, eight and 10 studies were at low risk of detection bias, attrition bias and reporting bias respectively. Cyclosporin when compared with placebo or no treatment significantly increased the number of children who achieved complete remission. However this was based on only eight children who achieved remission with cyclosporin compared with no children who achieved remission with placebo/no treatment in three small studies (49 children: RR 7.66, 95% CI 1.06 to 55.34). Calcineurin inhibitors significantly increased the number with complete or partial remission compared with IV cyclophosphamide (2 studies, 156 children: RR 1.98, 95% CI 1.25 to 3.13; I² = 20%). There was no significant differences in the number who achieved complete remission between tacrolimus versus cyclosporin (1 study, 41 children: RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.66), cyclosporin versus mycophenolate mofetil plus dexamethasone (1 study, 138 children: RR 2.14, 95% CI 0.87 to 5.24), oral cyclophosphamide with prednisone versus prednisone alone (2 studies, 91 children: RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.87), IV versus oral cyclophosphamide (1 study, 11 children: RR 3.13, 95% CI 0.81 to 12.06), IV cyclophosphamide versus oral cyclophosphamide plus IV dexamethasone (1 study, 49 children: RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.96), and azathioprine with prednisone versus prednisone alone (1 study, 31 children: RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.15 to 5.84). One study found no significant differences between three agents (cyclophosphamide, mycophenolate mofetil, leflunomide) used in combination with tacrolimus and prednisone. One study found no significant difference in the percentage reduction in proteinuria (31 children: -12; 95% CI -73 to 110) between rituximab with cyclosporin/prednisolone and cyclosporin/prednisolone alone. Two studies reported ACEi significantly reduced proteinuria.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

To date RCTs have demonstrated that calcineurin inhibitors increase the likelihood of complete or partial remission compared with placebo/no treatment or cyclophosphamide. For other regimens assessed, it remains uncertain whether the interventions alter outcomes because the certainty of the evidence is low. Further adequately powered, well designed RCTs are needed to evaluate other regimens for children with idiopathic SRNS. Since SRNS represents a spectrum of diseases, future studies should enrol children from better defined groups of patients with SRNS.

Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors or Angiotensin Receptor Blockers Use and COVID-19 Infection Among 824 650 Patients With Hypertension From a US Integrated Healthcare System

Background Previous reports suggest that the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) may upregulate angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptors and increase severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infectivity. We evaluated the association between ACEI or ARB use and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection among patients with hypertension. Methods and Results We identified patients with hypertension as of March 1, 2020 (index date) from Kaiser Permanente Southern California. Patients who received ACEIs, ARBs, calcium channel blockers, beta blockers, thiazide diuretics (TD), or no therapy were identified using outpatient pharmacy data covering the index date. Outcome of interest was a positive reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction test for COVID-19 between March 1 and May 6, 2020. Patient sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were identified within 1 year preindex date. Among 824 650 patients with hypertension, 16 898 (2.0%) were tested for COVID-19. Of those tested, 1794 (10.6%) had a positive result. Overall, exposure to ACEIs or ARBs was not statistically significantly associated with COVID-19 infection after propensity score adjustment (odds ratio [OR], 1.06; 95% CI, 0.90-1.25) for ACEIs versus calcium channel blockers/beta blockers/TD; OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.91-1.31 for ARBs versus calcium channel blockers/beta blockers/TD). The associations between ACEI use and COVID-19 infection varied in different age groups (P-interaction=0.03). ACEI use was associated with lower odds of COVID-19 among those aged ≥85 years (OR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.12-0.77). Use of no antihypertensive medication was significantly associated with increased odds of COVID-19 infection compared with calcium channel blockers/beta blockers/TD (OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.11-1.56). Conclusions Neither ACEI nor ARB use was associated with increased likelihood of COVID-19 infection. Decreased odds of COVID-19 infection among adults ≥85 years using ACEIs warrants further investigation.

Perioperative angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers for preventing mortality and morbidity in adults

BACKGROUND

Perioperative hypertension requires careful management. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers (ARBs) have shown efficacy in treating hypertension associated with surgery. However, there is lack of consensus about whether they can prevent mortality and morbidity.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically assess the benefits and harms of administration of ACEIs or ARBs perioperatively for the prevention of mortality and morbidity in adults (aged 18 years and above) undergoing any type of surgery under general anaesthesia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the current issue of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2014, Issue 12), Ovid MEDLINE (1966 to 8 December 2014), EMBASE (1980 to 8 December 2014), and references of the retrieved randomized trials, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing perioperative administration of ACEIs or ARBs with placebo in adults (aged 18 years and above) undergoing any type of surgery under general anaesthesia. We excluded studies in which participants underwent procedures that required local anaesthesia only, or participants who had already been on ACEIs or ARBs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection, assessed the risk of bias, and extracted data. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven RCTs with a total of 571 participants in the review. Two of the seven trials involved 36 participants undergoing non-cardiac vascular surgery (infrarenal aortic surgery), and five involved 535 participants undergoing cardiac surgery, including valvular surgery, coronary artery bypass surgery, and cardiopulmonary bypass surgery. The intervention was started from 11 days to 25 minutes before surgery in six trials and during surgery in one trial. We considered all seven RCTs to carry a high risk of bias. The effects of ACEIs or ARBs on perioperative mortality and acute myocardial infarction were uncertain because the quality of the evidence was very low. The risk of death was 2.7% in the ACEIs or ARBs group and 1.6% in the placebo group (risk ratio (RR) 1.61; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 5.85). The risk of acute myocardial infarction was 1.7% in the ACEIs or ARBs group and 3.0% in the placebo group (RR 0.55; 95% CI 0.14 to 2.26). ACEIs or ARBs may improve congestive heart failure (cardiac index) perioperatively (mean difference (MD) -0.60; 95% CI -0.70 to -0.50, very low-quality evidence). In terms of rate of complications, there was no difference in perioperative cerebrovascular complications (RR 0.48; 95% CI 0.18 to 1.28, very low-quality evidence) and hypotension (RR 1.95; 95% CI 0.86 to 4.41, very low-quality evidence). Cardiac surgery-related renal failure was not reported. ACEIs or ARBs were associated with shortened length of hospital stay (MD -0.54; 95% CI -0.93 to -0.16, P value = 0.005, very low-quality evidence). These findings should be interpreted cautiously due to likely confounding by the clinical backgrounds of the participants. ACEIs or ARBs may shorten the length of hospital stay, (MD -0.54; 95% CI -0.93 to -0.16, very low-quality evidence) Two studies reported adverse events, and there was no evidence of a difference between the ACEIs or ARBs and control groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, this review did not find evidence to support that perioperative ACEIs or ARBs can prevent mortality, morbidity, and complications (hypotension, perioperative cerebrovascular complications, and cardiac surgery-related renal failure). We found no evidence showing that the use of these drugs may reduce the rate of acute myocardial infarction. However, ACEIs or ARBs may increase cardiac output perioperatively. Due to the low and very low methodology quality, high risk of bias, and lack of power of the included studies, the true effect may be substantially different from the observed estimates. Perioperative (mainly elective cardiac surgery, according to included studies) initiation of ACEIs or ARBs therapy should be individualized.

Intervention to improve adherence to ACC/AHA recommended adjunctive medications for the management of patients with an acute myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

The most recent published guidelines regarding management of patients surviving an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) advocate the administration of aspirin (ASA), beta blockers (BB), and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and discourages the use of calcium-channel blockers (CCB). Previous data collected in our region from the National Registry (NR) showed a dismal compliance with these guidelines. In an attempt to increase physician awareness and to optimize implementation of recommended guidelines, a cardiac and pharmacy steering committee was created.

METHODS

The pharmacist assigned to the project identified all patients admitted with an AMI using troponin-I and creatine kinase-MB (CK-MB) reports. The pharmacist then contacted physicians to make recommendations if an adjunctive medication was not prescribed for a patient with no apparent contraindications. Administration rates for ASA, BB, ACEi, and CCB were then assessed and compared with the previously obtained baseline data from the NR.

RESULTS

At admission, the use of ASA increased from 70 to 72%, BB from 45 to 72%, and ACEi from 12 to 44%. In terms of medications at discharge, ASA use increased from 74 to 88%, BB from 55 to 76%, and ACEi from 30 to 40%. In addition, the prescription rates for CCB at discharge decreased from 36 to 21%.

CONCLUSIONS

An interdisciplinary approach for disease management is an effective method for improving adherence to treatment guidelines simply with pharmacy intervention. The percentage of patients receiving the recommended adjunctive medications increased significantly. We propose that these guidelines should be periodically inserviced to physicians. Furthermore, patient counseling sessions should also be instituted to help reinforce the importance of compliance with the medications after discharge, as well as lipid management and smoking cessation.

Rheum officinale (a traditional Chinese medicine) for chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a major public health issue worldwide. Standard therapies to delay CKD progression include dietary protein restriction and administration of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) to help control blood pressure and confer additional renoprotective effects. Despite such interventions, CKD incidence and mortality rates continue to increase. Rheum officinale (Da Huang) a medicinal herb used widely in China to treat CKD has been reported to offer a range of pharmacological properties that may delay disease progression.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of Rheum officinale for preventing the progression of CKD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register and CENTRAL (Issue 4, 2011), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Chinese Biomedicine Database (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP (Chongqing VIP Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database), and Wanfang Data. We also handsearched reference lists of articles. We applied no restrictions on language of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that assessed the benefits and harms of Rheum officinale for preventing the progression of CKD regardless of dosage, type, maturity, mode of administration, duration of treatment, or storage time before use.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened titles and abstracts for eligibility, assessed study quality, and extracted data. We expressed results for dichotomous outcomes (need for renal replacement therapy, all-cause mortality, quality of life) as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Continuous outcomes (glomerular filtration rate (GFR), serum creatinine (SCr), creatinine clearance (CrCl), blood urea nitrogen (BUN)) were expressed as mean differences (MD) with 95% CIs.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified nine studies that enrolled 682 participants. None of the studies reported blinding or group allocation methods. Seven studies were judged to be at low risk of incomplete outcome reporting; three studies were judged to be a low risk of selective reporting (protocols were available and/or all outcomes relevant to the this review were reported); and two studies were judged free of other potential biases.Seven studies compared Rheum officinale with no treatment and two made comparisons with captopril, an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi). Compared with no treatment, Rheum officinale had a positive effect on SCr (MD -87.49 µmol/L, 95% CI -139.25 to -35.72) and BUN (MD -10.61 mmol/L, 95% CI -19.45 to -2.21). Compared with captopril, a statistically significant difference was not demonstrated in relation to Rheum officinale for any outcome (BUN, CrCl, or patients' capacity to undertake work). No data were available on all-cause mortality or cost of treatment. Only minor adverse events were reported in association with Rheum officinale.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently available evidence concerning the efficacy of Rheum officinale to improve SCr and BUN levels in patients with CKD is both scant and low quality. Although Rheum officinale does not appear to be associated with serious adverse events among patients with CKD, there is no current evidence to support any recommendation for its use.

Effect of heart failure program on cardiovascular drug utilization and dosage in patients with chronic heart failure

BACKGROUND

Utilization and dosage of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) remain low. Recent data suggest that care of patients with CHF in specialized heart failure programs is associated with improved clinical outcomes.

HYPOTHESIS

Specialized heart failure care is associated with better utilization and higher dose of cardiovascular drugs.

METHODS

Data from 133 patients with CHF referred to a heart failure program were analyzed. Mean functional class 3.1 +/- 0.5, left ventricular ejection fraction 19 +/- 8. Utilization and doses of cardiovascular drugs were examined at initial evaluation and at last visit, after an average period of 17 +/- 14 months. Hospitalization and survival data were determined.

RESULTS

Utilization of ACE inhibitors and angiotensin-receptor blockers increased from 87 to 100% (p < 0.001). Average daily dose increased by 60%, from the equivalent of captopril 105 +/- 78 mg to 167 +/- 86 mg (p < 0.001). Utilization of the following drugs increased significantly: beta blockers (16-37%, p < 0.001), metolazone (10-23%, p = 0.007), spironolactone (1-36%, p < 0.001), amiodarone (7-15%, p = 0.05), hydralazine (1-9%, p = 0.004), and nitrates (20-33%, p = 0.03). One-year survival was 90%. The 3- and 6-month hospitalization rates for heart failure were 4 and 7%, and for all cardiovascular causes they were 6 and 11%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Care of patients with CHF in a specialized heart failure program was associated with significant increase in the utilization and doses of all beneficial cardiovascular drugs, especially ACE inhibitors. It was also associated with excellent clinical outcomes.

Modulating atherosclerosis through inhibition or blockade of angiotensin

Angiotensin-convertng enzyme (ACE) inhibitors are well recognized for their benefits in treating hypertension and congestive heart failure and preventing postmyocardial infarction heart failure or left ventricular (LV) dysfunction. Recently, blockade of the angiotensin II type 1 (AT1) receptor was shown to reduce cardiovascular events in hypertensive subjects with LV hypertrophy. Several lines of evidence are now converging to show that ACE inhibitors may affect the atherosclerotic process itself. Emerging clinical data indicate that angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) may possibly modulate atherosclerosis as well. The antiatherogenic properties of ACE inhibitors and ARBs may derive from inhibition or blockade of angiotensin II, now recognized as an agent that increases oxidative stress.Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition and angiotensin-receptor blockade also increase endothelial nitric oxide formation, which improves endothelial function. In contrast to the effects of ARBs, the vascular effects of ACE inhibitors may, in part, be mediated by an increase in bradykinin. This article reviews some of the biologic mechanisms whereby ACE inhibitors and ARBs may modulate atherosclerosis.

Beta-Blocker Use Is Associated With Impaired Left Atrial Function in Hypertension

Background

Impaired left atrial (LA) mechanical function is present in hypertension and likely contributes to various complications, including atrial arrhythmias, stroke, and heart failure. Various antihypertensive drug classes exert differential effects on central hemodynamics and left ventricular function. However, little is known about their effects on LA function.

Methods and Results

We studied 212 subjects with hypertension and without heart failure or atrial fibrillation. LA strain was measured from cine steady‐state free‐precession cardiac MRI images using feature‐tracking algorithms. In multivariable models adjusted for age, sex, race, body mass index, blood pressure, diabetes mellitus, LA volume, left ventricular mass, and left ventricular ejection fraction, beta‐blocker use was associated with a lower total longitudinal strain (standardized β=−0.21; P=0.008), and lower LA expansion index (standardized β=−0.30; P<0.001), indicating impaired LA reservoir function. Beta‐blocker use was also associated with a lower positive strain (standardized β=−0.19; P=0.012) and early diastolic strain rate (standardized β=0.15; P=0.039), indicating impaired LA conduit function. Finally, beta‐blocker use was associated with a lower (less negative) late‐diastolic strain (standardized β=0.15; P=0.049), strain rate (standardized β=0.18; P=0.019), and a lower active LA emptying fraction (standardized β=−0.27; P<0.001), indicating impaired booster pump function. Use of other antihypertensive agents was not associated with LA function.

Conclusions

Beta‐blocker use is significantly associated with impaired LA function in hypertension. This association could underlie the increased risk of atrial fibrillation and stroke seen with the use of beta‐blockers (as opposed to other antihypertensive agents) demonstrated in recent trials.

Medical interventions for treating anthracycline-induced symptomatic and asymptomatic cardiotoxicity during and after treatment for childhood cancer

BACKGROUND

Anthracyclines are frequently used chemotherapeutic agents for childhood cancer that can cause cardiotoxicity during and after treatment. Although several medical interventions in adults with symptomatic or asymptomatic cardiac dysfunction due to other causes are beneficial, it is not known if the same treatments are effective for childhood cancer patients and survivors with anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity. This review is an update of a previously published Cochrane review.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effect of medical interventions on anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity in childhood cancer patients or survivors with the effect of placebo, other medical interventions, or no treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2015, Issue 8), MEDLINE/PubMed (1949 to September 2015), and EMBASE/Ovid (1980 to September 2015) for potentially relevant articles. In addition, we searched reference lists of relevant articles, conference proceedings of the International Society for Paediatric Oncology (SIOP), the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), the American Society of Hematology (ASH), the International Conference on Long-Term Complications of Treatment of Children & Adolescents for Cancer, and the European Symposium on Late Complications from Childhood Cancer (from 2005 to 2015), and ongoing trial databases (the ISRCTN Register, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Register, and the trials register of the World Health Organization (WHO); all searched in September 2015).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing the effectiveness of medical interventions to treat anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity with either placebo, other medical interventions, or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed the study selection. One review author performed the data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessments, which another review author checked. We performed analyses according to the guidelines in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.

MAIN RESULTS

In the original version of the review we identified two RCTs; in this update we identified no additional studies. One trial (135 participants) compared enalapril with placebo in childhood cancer survivors with asymptomatic anthracycline-induced cardiac dysfunction. The other trial (68 participants) compared a two-week treatment of phosphocreatine with a control treatment (vitamin C, adenosine triphosphate, vitamin E, oral coenzyme Q10) in leukaemia patients with anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity. Both studies had methodological limitations.The RCT on enalapril showed no statistically significant differences in overall survival, mortality due to heart failure, development of clinical heart failure, and quality of life between treatment and control groups. A post-hoc analysis showed a decrease (that is improvement) in one measure of cardiac function (left ventricular end-systolic wall stress (LVESWS): -8.62% change) compared with placebo (+1.66% change) in the first year of treatment (P = 0.036), but not afterwards. Participants treated with enalapril had a higher risk of dizziness or hypotension (risk ratio 7.17, 95% confidence interval 1.71 to 30.17) and fatigue (Fisher's exact test, P = 0.013).The RCT on phosphocreatine found no differences in overall survival, mortality due to heart failure, echocardiographic cardiac function, and adverse events between treatment and control groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Only one trial evaluated the effect of enalapril in childhood cancer survivors with asymptomatic cardiac dysfunction. Although there is some evidence that enalapril temporarily improves one parameter of cardiac function (LVESWS), it is unclear whether it improves clinical outcomes. Enalapril was associated with a higher risk of dizziness or hypotension and fatigue. Clinicians should weigh the possible benefits with the known side effects of enalapril in childhood cancer survivors with asymptomatic anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity.Only one trial evaluated the effect of phosphocreatine in childhood cancer patients with anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity. Limited data with a high risk of bias showed no significant difference between phosphocreatine and control treatments on echocardiographic function and clinical outcomes.We did not identify any RCTs or CCTs studying other medical interventions for symptomatic or asymptomatic cardiotoxicity in childhood cancer patients or survivors.High-quality studies should be performed.

Renin-Angiotensin Aldosterone System Inhibitors and COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Revealing Critical Bias Across a Body of Observational Research

Background Renin-angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitor-COVID-19 studies, observational in design, appear to use biased methods that can distort the interaction between RAAS inhibitor use and COVID-19 risk. This study assessed the extent of bias in that research and reevaluated RAAS inhibitor-COVID-19 associations in studies without critical risk of bias. Methods and Results Searches were performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases (December 1, 2019 to October 21, 2021) identifying studies that compared the risk of infection and/or severe COVID-19 outcomes between those using or not using RAAS inhibitors (ie, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II type-I receptor blockers). Weighted hazard ratios (HR) and 95% CIs were extracted and pooled in fixed-effects meta-analyses, only from studies without critical risk of bias that assessed severe COVID-19 outcomes. Of 169 relevant studies, 164 had critical risks of bias and were excluded. Ultimately, only two studies presented data relevant to the meta-analysis. In 1 351 633 people with uncomplicated hypertension using a RAAS inhibitor, calcium channel blocker, or thiazide diuretic in monotherapy, the risk of hospitalization (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor: HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.66-0.87; P<0.001; angiotensin II type-I receptor blockers: HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77-0.97; P=0.015) and intubation or death (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor: HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.48-0.85; P=0.002; angiotensin II type-I receptor blockers: HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.58-0.95; P=0.019) with COVID-19 was lower in those using a RAAS inhibitor. However, these protective effects are probably not clinically relevant. Conclusions This study reveals the critical risk of bias that exists across almost an entire body of COVID-19 research, raising an important question: Were research methods and/or peer-review processes temporarily weakened during the surge of COVID-19 research or is this lack of rigor a systemic problem that also exists outside pandemic-based research? Registration URL: www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/; Unique identifier: CRD42021237859.

Pharmacological interventions for hypertension in children

BACKGROUND

Hypertension is a major risk factor for stroke, coronary artery disease and kidney damage in adults. There is a paucity of data on the long-term sequelae of persistent hypertension in children, but it is known that children with hypertension have evidence of end organ damage and are at risk of hypertension into adulthood. The prevalence of hypertension in children is rising, most likely due to a concurrent rise in obesity rates. In children with hypertension, non-pharmacological measures are often recommended as first-line therapy, but a significant proportion of children will eventually require pharmacological treatment to reduce blood pressure, especially those with evidence of end organ damage at presentation or during follow-up. A systematic review of the effects of antihypertensive agents in children has not previously been conducted.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the dose-related effects of different classes of antihypertensive medications, as monotherapy compared to placebo; as combination therapy compared to placebo or a single medication; or in comparisons of various doses within the same class, on systolic or diastolic blood pressure (or both) in children with hypertension.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hypertension Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2013, Issue 9), Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to October 2013), Ovid EMBASE (1974 to October 2013) and bibliographic citations.

SELECTION CRITERIA

The selection criteria were deliberately broad due to there being few clinical trials in children. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of at least two weeks duration comparing antihypertensive agents either as monotherapy or combination therapy with either placebo or another medication, or comparing different doses of the same medication, in children with hypertension. Hypertension was defined as an average (over a minimum of three readings) systolic or diastolic blood pressure (or both) on the 95(th) percentile or above for age, height and gender. 

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected relevant studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We summarised data, where possible, using a random-effects model. Formal assessment of heterogeneity was not possible because of insufficient data.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 21 trials evaluated antihypertensive medications of various drug classes in 3454 hypertensive children with periods of follow-up ranging from three to 24 weeks. There were five RCTs comparing an antihypertensive drug directly with placebo, 12 dose-finding trials, two trials comparing calcium channel blockers with angiotensin receptor blockers, one trial comparing a centrally acting alpha blocker with a diuretic and one trial comparing an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor with an angiotensin receptor blocker. No randomised trial was identified that evaluated the effectiveness of antihypertensive medications on target end organ damage. The trials were of variable quality and most were funded by pharmaceutical companies.Among the angiotensin receptor blockers, candesartan (one trial, n = 240), when compared to placebo, reduced systolic blood pressure by 6.50 mmHg (95% confidence interval (CI) -9.44 to -3.56) and diastolic blood pressure by 5.50 mmHg (95% CI -9.62 to -1.38) (low-quality evidence). High dose telmisartan (one trial, n = 76), when compared to placebo, reduced systolic blood pressure by -8.50 (95% CI -13.79 to -3.21) but not diastolic blood pressure (-4.80, 95% CI -9.50 to 0.10) (low-quality evidence). Beta blocker (metoprolol, one trial, n = 140), when compared with placebo , significantly reduced systolic blood pressure by 4.20 mmHg (95% CI -8.12 to -0.28) but not diastolic blood pressure (-3.20 mmHg 95% CI -7.12 to 0.72) (low-quality evidence). Beta blocker/diuretic combination (Bisoprolol/hydrochlorothiazide, one trial, n = 94)when compared with placebo , did not result in a significant reduction in systolic blood pressure (-4.0 mmHg, 95% CI -8.99 to -0.19) but did have an effect on diastolic blood pressure (-4.50 mmHg, 95% CI -8.26 to -0.74) (low-quality evidence). Calcium channel blocker (extended-release felodipine,one trial, n = 133) was not effective in reducing systolic blood pressure (-0.62 mmHg, 95% CI -2.97 to 1.73) or diastolic blood pressure (-1.86 mmHg, 95% CI -5.23 to 1.51) when compared with placebo. Further, there was no consistent dose response observed among any of the drug classes. The adverse events associated with the antihypertensive agents were mostly minor and included headaches, dizziness and upper respiratory infections.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, there are sparse data informing the use of antihypertensive agents in children, with outcomes reported limited to blood pressure and not end organ damage. The most data are available for candesartan, for which there is low-quality evidence of a modest lowering effect on blood pressure. We did not find evidence of a consistent dose response relationship for escalating doses of angiotensin receptor blockers, calcium channel blockers or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. All agents appear safe, at least in the short term.

Patterns of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor prescriptions, educational interventions, and outcomes among hospitalized patients with heart failure

BACKGROUND

Among hospitalized patients with heart failure, we describe characteristics associated with prescription of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors in the doses recommended by clinical practice guidelines. We also describe the impact of ACE inhibitor prescriptions, increases in ACE inhibitor dose, and nonpharmacologic educational interventions on readmission-free survival rates.

HYPOTHESIS

We hypothesize that care by a cardiologist physician and higher mean arterial blood pressure on admission are associated with receipt of optimal ACE inhibitor doses. We hypothesize that receipt of an ACE inhibitor at discharge and an increase in ACE inhibitor dose during hospitalization are associated with superior readmission-free survival.

METHODS

Between January 1, 1992, and December 31, 1993, medical records were reviewed for consecutively hospitalized patients with a principal diagnosis of heart failure at an academic medical center. Documented instructions and medications prescribed at discharge were abstracted. Deaths and readmissions through December 31, 1994, were identified with the National Death Index and the study institution's administrative data base, respectively.

RESULTS

During 1992 and 1993, 387 patients were discharged alive from hospitalization for heart failure. Among patients discharged on enalapril or captopril, 18% received doses recommended by heart failure clinical practice guidelines. Patients discharged on a recommended ACE inhibitor dose were more likely to be African-American and had lower sodium levels and higher mean arterial pressures than patients discharged on lower ACE inhibitor doses. In survival analyses, an increase in ACE inhibitor dose was associated with improved readmission-free survival, independent of left ventricular systolic function type. Receipt of an ACE inhibitor at discharge was also associated with superior readmission-free survival, while nonpharmacologic educational instructions were not associated with improved outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Interventions are needed to improve the frequency with which ACE inhibitors are prescribed at recommended doses to hospitalized patients with heart failure. We conclude that among these patients, receipt of an ACE inhibitor at discharge and an increase in ACE inhibitor dose during hospitalization are each associated with measurable effects on readmission-free survival, while provision of educational instructions as currently practiced is not associated with better outcomes.

Impact of left ventricular size on pharmacologic reverse remodeling in heart failure

BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS

Although medical therapy may normalize echocardiographic left ventricular (LV) systolic function in selected patients with cardiomyopathy, other patients experience no change or a further deterioration in heart failure remodeling. Our aim was to determine what clinical or echocardiographic parameters predict a beneficial therapeutic response.

METHODS

We prospectively followed biannual clinical and echocardiographic assessments in 215 patients. Forty-six of these patients ("Nonresponders") experienced no change or a decline in LV ejection fraction at 6 months. Of the 148 patients who improved LV function, 21 ("Responders") normalized LV systolic function at 6 months. Only Responders (n = 21) and Nonresponders (n = 46) were compared.

RESULTS

On average, these 67 patients were 54 +/- 12 years old with 4.5 +/- 3.3 years of heart failure. At 6 months, following up-titration of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and nitrates, Responder LV ejection fraction rose from 22 +/- 6 to 50 +/- 5% with improvement in New York Heart Association classification (2.6 +/- 0.8 to 1.5 +/- 0.8, p = 0.001). These patients had significantly more favorable clinical and echocardiographic outcomes versus Nonresponders despite comparable medical therapy. All baseline demographic, clinical, and echocardiographic variables were equivalent, except for initial LV end-diastolic diameter which differentiated Nonresponders (7.1 +/- 0.7 cm) from Responders (6.1 +/- 0.8 cm), p = 0.007.

CONCLUSION

Thus, although heart failure therapy improves LV systolic function in a majority of patients, with normalization in up to 10% of patients, significant LV enlargement may render remodeling unresponsive to pharmacologic intervention, with a potential future need for alternative mechanical or surgical intervention.

Sudden death in dilated cardiomyopathy

The purpose of this review is to examine the potential contribution of arrhythmia to the occurrence of sudden death in dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) and to discuss current treatment options. We performed a search of the MEDLINE database from 1985 to the present and the reference citations of selected articles pertaining to the prognostic significance, management, and pathophysiology of arrhythmias in DCM. A large proportion of patients with DCM die suddenly, most secondary to ventricular arrhythmia and a smaller proportion due to bradyarrhythmia. The presence and severity of ventricular ectopy may predict risk for sudden death, but the role of electrophysiologic study and signal-averaged electrocardiography in further risk stratifying patients remains uncertain. Abnormalities of the autonomic nervous system and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone axis appear to promote the occurrence of ventricular arrhythmias. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors improve overall mortality in congestive heart failure, and the use of direct angiotensin-receptor antagonists is currently being studied. In addition, beta-receptor antagonists appear to improve morbidity and may prove to improve mortality in heart failure as well. Other interventions still under investigation include amiodarone and the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. The underlying pathophysiology of sudden death in DCM involves primarily ventricular tachyarrhythmia. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors remain a mainstay of improving overall mortality, while further study on the roles for newer drugs and devices is ongoing.

The use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in patients with acute myocardial infarction in community hospitals. Michigan State University Inter-Institutional Collaborative Heart (MICH) Study Group

BACKGROUND

Previous studies documenting underutilization of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) have been limited to Medicare populations.

HYPOTHESIS

This study examines ACEI prescription rates and predictors in a community sample of hospitalized patients with AMI.

METHODS

The charts of 1163 community patients with AMI, prospectively identified at admission between January 1, 1994, and April 30, 1995, were reviewed.

RESULTS

Only 64 of 158 (40%) patients considered ideal candidates for ACEI prescription were discharged with a prescription for an ACEI. In a multivariate logistic regression model, prior ACEI utilization [adjusted odds ration (OR) = 3.26; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.05-5.20], presence of congestive heart failure (OR = 2.33; CI = 1.50-3.61) and black race (OR = 2.20; CI = 1.34-3.64) were identified as positive predictors of ACEI prescription. Conversely, lack of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) measurement (OR = 0.46; CI = 0.28-0.75), LVEF > 40 ( OR = 0.27; CI = 0.18-0.40), and acute renal failure (OR = 0.08; CI = 0.01-0.44) were negative predictors. Women were also less likely to be discharged with an ACEI prescription (OR = 0.71; CI = 0.48-1.05). Furthermore, women were significantly less likely to have LVEF measured prior to discharge than were males (77 vs. 85%, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This study underscores the need for improvement in the utilization of ACEI in eligible patients with AMI. It also identifies opportunities for improvement in prescription rates, especially in women.

The anti-ischemic potential of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition: insights from the heart outcomes prevention evaluation trial

Therapy with an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor is established for reducing excessive blood pressure, reducing mortality in patients with congestive heart failure (CHF), preventing the development of CHF in patients with asymptomatic left ventricular (LV) dysfunction, and preventing death and CHF when initiated early after the onset of acute myocardial infarction (MI). Although these benefits have been attributed largely to hemodynamic mechanisms, recent preclinical and clinical evidence reveal ACE inhibition as potent in preventing ischemic events and in blocking an array of ischemic processes, including atherogenesis. A major contributor to this new evidence is the large, placebo-controlled Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation (HOPE) trial, which found that the ACE inhibitor ramipril ( 10 mg daily) prevented MI and other ischemic events in patients with a broad range of cardiovascular (CV) risks (including coronary artery disease, stroke, peripheral vascular disease, or diabetes plus one additional risk factor) but no LV dysfunction or history of heart failure at baseline. The data from the HOPE trial suggest a greatly expanded role for ramipril in the prevention and management of CV disease.