Key result
Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, particularly eplerenone, are essential components of basic medical therapy that improve survival and reduce hospitalizations in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.
Why the study?
MRAs are basic medical therapy for heart failure with proven efficacy in randomized trials, but comparative efficacy and tolerability data required review.
Does spironolactone compared to eplerenone improve efficacy and tolerability in patients with systolic heart failure?
Does spironolactone compared to eplerenone improve efficacy and tolerability in patients with systolic heart failure?
This review evaluates the comparative efficacy and tolerability of spironolactone versus eplerenone in patients with systolic heart failure.
Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) are part of basic medical therapy for heart failure. The clinical efficacy of MRAs has been proven by randomized clinical trials. To review comparative efficacy and tolerability data between the two main MRAs, spironolactone and eplerenone, in patients with systolic heart failure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Safronova et al. (2022) conducted a review in chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (spironolactone and eplerenone) was evaluated. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, particularly eplerenone, are essential components of basic medical therapy that improve survival and reduce hospitalizations in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: