Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
PulseExploreClubsResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeClubsExplore
January 1, 1996European Heart JournalOpen Access

What is the ideal study design for evaluation of treatment for heart failure?: Insights from trials assessing the effect of ACE inhibitors on exercise capacity

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Why the study?

How do study design factors affect the ability to detect improvements in exercise capacity and symptoms with ACE inhibitors in patients with symptomatic chronic heart failure?

Population

35 published, double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trials involving a total of 3411 patients with…

Comparison

ACE inhibitors vs Placebo

Design

Systematic_review

Authors

RNRajiv NarangIndo Soviet Friendship College of Pharmacy
Karl Swedberg
Karl SwedbergHeart Failure & Transplant
John G.F. Cleland
John G.F. ClelandHeart Failure / Cardiomyopathy

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Implication

Well-designed trials (n>50, 3-6 months, treadmill) detect ACE inhibitor benefits on exercise capacity and symptoms in HF; confirms study design as key to revealing treatment effects.

Key Points

  • To determine how trial design and methodology influence the detection of improvements in symptoms and exercise capacity among patients with chronic heart failure receiving ACE inhibitors.
  • Reviewed 35 published, double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trials encompassing 3,411 patients with symptomatic chronic heart failure evaluating ACE inhibitors versus placebo.
  • Analyzed trial characteristics including cross-over versus parallel design, sample size, exercise modality (treadmill vs. bicycle ergometry), publication year, inclusion criteria, follow-up duration, and specific ACE inhibitor agent.
  • Exercise duration improved in 23 of 35 trials, while symptoms improved in 25 of 33 trials evaluating symptomatic outcomes.
  • Concordance between symptom improvement and exercise capacity was present in 27 of 33 trials, while 6 trials demonstrated discrepant results.
  • Study size, follow-up duration, and exercise test modality significantly influenced outcomes; all 9 trials with sample sizes over 50, follow-up of 3–6 months, and treadmill exercise testing demonstrated improvements in both exercise capacity and symptoms.

Structured PICO

How do study design factors affect the ability to detect improvements in exercise capacity and symptoms with ACE inhibitors in patients with symptomatic chronic heart failure?

P
Population
35 published, double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trials involving a total of 3411 patients with symptomatic chronic heart failure
I
Intervention
ACE inhibitors
C
Comparator
Placebo
O
Outcome
Exercise capacity and symptomssurrogate

Study size, duration of follow-up, and method of exercise testing (treadmill vs bicycle) are major factors affecting the ability to detect treatment benefits in heart failure trials.

Cite This Study

Narang et al. (1996) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a121cffc031bb6829a5ec97https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.eurheartj.a014670

Topics

Heart failureHFrEF treatment
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Hemodynamic and metabolic effects of enalapril in patients with heart failure1985 · 5 citations
  2. 2Effect of captopril on functional, physiological and biochemical outcome criteria in aged heart failure patients.1992 · 9 citations
  3. 3Effects of enalapril in heart failure: a double blind study of effects on exercise performance, renal function, hormones, and metabolic state.1985 · 279 citations
  4. 4Effects of enalapril on myocardial noradrenaline overflow during exercise in patients with chronic heart failure.1989 · 19 citations
  5. 5Effect of Captopril on Mortality and Morbidity in Patients with Left Ventricular Dysfunction after Myocardial Infarction1992 · 5,954 citations