Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors Versus Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers in Acute Coronary Syndrome and Preserved Ventricular Ejection Fraction

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) showed comparable survival results in patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). However, there is lack of evidence of the comparative effectiveness in preserved LVE...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Published in:	Angiology Vol. 71; no. 10; pp. 886 - 893
Main Authors:	Cespón-Fernández, María, Raposeiras-Roubín, Sergio, Abu-Assi, Emad, Pousa, Isabel Muñoz, Queija, Berenice Caneiro, Paz, Rafael José Cobas, Erquicia, Pablo Domínguez, Rodríguez, Luis Manuel Domínguez, Rodríguez, Elena López, Busto, María Castiñeira, Barbeira, Saleta Fernández, Romo, Andrés Íñiguez
Format:	Journal Article
Language:	English
Published:	Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 01-11-2020
Subjects:	acute coronary syndrome comparison preserved left ventricular ejection fraction prognosis angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor angiotensin II receptor blockers
Online Access:	Get full text
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Description
Summary:	Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) showed comparable survival results in patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). However, there is lack of evidence of the comparative effectiveness in preserved LVEF patients after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the selection between ACEi and ARB in preserved LVEF after an ACS confers a prognostic benefit, based on real life results. We analyzed a cohort of 3006 contemporary patients with LVEF ≥40% after an ACS. A propensity score matching and Cox regression analysis were performed to assess the association between treatment and events (death, acute myocardial infarction [AMI], HF, and combined event) for a mean follow-up of 3.6 ± 2.1 years. We found no significant differences between ACEi/ARB for all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] for ARB: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.70-1.29), AMI (HR for ARB: 1.34, 95% CI: 0.95-1.89), HF (HR for ARB: 1.11, 95% CI: 0.85-1.45), or combined end point (death, AMI and HF: HR for ARB: 1.14, 95% CI: 0.92-1.40). In conclusion, there are no prognostic differences between the use of ACEi and ARB in patients with LVEF ≥40% after ACS. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm our results.
Bibliography:	ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23
ISSN:	0003-3197 1940-1574
DOI:	10.1177/0003319720946971