Key result
Sacubitril/valsartan was associated with a modest decrease in an expanded cardiovascular composite outcome compared with ramipril (HR 0.87; 95% CI 0.77-0.97; p=0.012).
Why the study?
Despite improvements in post-AMI care, the risk of subsequent CV events remains substantial, particularly HF in patients with LVSD and/or pulmonary congestion.
Does sacubitril/valsartan compared to ramipril reduce cardiovascular events in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by LVSD and/or pulmonary congestion?
RCT (n=5,661)
Does sacubitril/valsartan compared to ramipril reduce cardiovascular events in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by LVSD and/or pulmonary congestion?
In patients with AMI complicated by LVSD or congestion, sacubitril/valsartan may provide a modest reduction in an expanded composite of cardiovascular events compared to ramipril, with potential benefits emerging in the late post-AMI period.
AIMS: Despite improvements in post-acute myocardial infarction (AMI) care, the risk of subsequent cardiovascular (CV) events remains substantial, particularly heart failure (HF) in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) and/or pulmonary congestion. METHODS: The PARADISE-MI trial randomized 5661 patients with AMI complicated by LVSD and/or pulmonary congestion to sacubitril/valsartan (97/103 mg bid) or ramipril (5 mg bid) at a mean of 4 days post-AMI. This post hoc analysis described the timing and distribution of CV events, and compared treatment effects in early (≤ 3 months) and late (> 3 months) post-AMI periods. RESULTS: Post-AMI, CV events peaked early; HF was the most frequent (16.2/100 patient-years (py)), followed by CV death (11.6/100 py) and recurrent MI (10.9/100 py). Later, HF remained predominant (3.2/100 py vs. 2.6/100 py for MI, p=0.008; CV death 2.1/100 py). Early post-AMI, patients with HF or recurrent MI shared similar profiles. Later, HF patients were predominantly older and female, with greater pulmonary congestion and lower eGFR; recurrent MI patients had more frequent history of coronary revascularization. Only sacubitril/valsartan showed a favorable influence late post-AMI (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.60-1.00, p=0.05) and expanded CV composite outcome (CV death, HF events, recurrent MI, hospitalization for angina, or post-randomization coronary revascularization) benefit over the trial (HR=0.87, 95% CI 0.77-0.97, p=0.012). CONCLUSIONS: Post-AMI, HF predominates both early and late among CV events. Compared with ramipril, sacubitril/valsartan was associated with a possible late reduction in recurrent MI and a modest decrease in an expanded CV composite outcome that merits further investigation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Boulet et al. (2026) conducted an RCT in acute myocardial infarction complicated by left ventricular systolic dysfunction and/or pulmonary congestion (n=5,661). sacubitril/valsartan vs. ramipril (5 mg bid) was evaluated on expanded CV composite outcome (CV death, HF events, recurrent MI, hospitalization for angina, or post-randomization coronary revascularization) (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.77-0.97, p=0.012). Sacubitril/valsartan was associated with a modest decrease in an expanded cardiovascular composite outcome compared with ramipril (HR 0.87; 95% CI 0.77-0.97; p=0.012).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: