Key result
This protocol outlines a systematic review and meta-regression analysis to determine the extent to which clinical outcomes in trials of ACE inhibitors and ARBs are attributable to systolic blood pressure reductions.
Why the study?
Does the reduction in systolic BP with ACEis and ARBs explain their effects on clinical outcomes such as MI and all-cause mortality?
Systematic Review
Does the reduction in systolic BP with ACEis and ARBs explain their effects on clinical outcomes such as MI and all-cause mortality?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This protocol outlines a systematic review and meta-regression to investigate whether the divergent effects of ACE inhibitors and ARBs on myocardial infarction and mortality are attributable to differences in systolic blood pressure reduction.
Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) efficaciously reduce systolic blood pressure (BP), a well-established risk factor for myocardial infarction (MI). Both inhibit the renin-angiotensin system, albeit through different mechanisms, and produce similar reductions in BP. However, in parallel meta-analyses of ACEi and ARB trials, ACEis reduce risk of MI whereas ARBs do not—a phenomenon described as the ‘ARB-MI paradox’. In addition, ACEis reduce all-cause mortality, whereas ARBs do not, which appears to be independent of BP lowering. The divergent cardiovascular effects of ACE inhibitors and ARBs, despite similar BP reductions, are counter-intuitive. This systematic review aims to ascertain the extent to which clinical outcomes in randomised trials of ACEi and ARBs are attributable to reductions in systolic BP. A comprehensive search of bibliographic databases will be performed to identify all randomised studies of agents of the ACEi and ARB class. Placebo and active comparator-controlled studies that report clinical outcomes, with greater than 500 person-years of follow-up in each study arm, will be included. Two independent reviewers will screen study records against a priori-defined eligibility criteria and perform data extraction. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool will be applied to all included studies. Studies retracted subsequent to initial publication will be excluded. Primary outcomes of interest include MI and all-cause mortality; secondary outcomes include stroke, heart failure, revascularisation and cardiovascular mortality. Meta-regression will be performed, evaluating the relationship between attained reduction in systolic BP and relative risk of each outcome, stratified by drug class. Where a BP-dependent effect exists (two-tailed p value < 0.05), relative risks, standardised per 10 mmHg difference in BP, will be reported for each study outcome. Publication bias will be examined using Funnel plots, and calculation of Egger’s statistic. This systematic review will provide a detailed synthesis of evidence regarding the relationship between BP reduction and clinical outcomes with ACEi and ARBs. Greater understanding of the dependency of the effect of each class on BP reduction will advance insight into the nature of the ARB-MI paradox and guide the future usage of these agents.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Batty et al. (2018) conducted a systematic review in Indications for renin-angiotensin aldosterone system inhibition (e.g., hypertension, heart failure). Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) vs. Placebo or active comparator was evaluated on Myocardial infarction and all-cause mortality. This protocol outlines a systematic review and meta-regression analysis to determine the extent to which clinical outcomes in trials of ACE inhibitors and ARBs are attributable to systolic blood pressure reductions.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: