Why the study?
Pharmacologic blockade of neurohormonal pathways after acute MI can cause acute changes in kidney function biomarkers, prompting evaluation of the effects of sacubitril/valsartan versus ramipril on initial creatinine changes and longer-term outcomes.
Does sacubitril/valsartan compared with ramipril increase the frequency of acute elevations in serum creatinine at 1 week, and are these initial changes associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes or longer-term eGFR decline in patients following acute myocardial infarction?
RCT (n=5,207)
Double-blind
Randomized, with no run-in
Yes
Does sacubitril/valsartan compared with ramipril increase the frequency of acute elevations in serum creatinine at 1 week, and are these initial changes associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes or longer-term eGFR decline in patients following acute myocardial infarction?
Although sacubitril/valsartan caused a slightly higher frequency of acute serum creatinine elevations at 1 week post-MI compared with ramipril (driven by greater blood pressure reductions), these initial renal changes were not associated with worse cardiovascular outcomes, mortality, or long-term kidney function decline.
Acute creatinine rises with sacubitril/valsartan post-MI lack prognostic value; confirms they should not prompt therapy changes or alter risk assessment.
AIMS: Pharmacologic blockade of neurohormonal pathways in patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) can result in acute changes in biomarkers of kidney function. We evaluated the effect of sacubitril/valsartan versus ramipril on initial changes in serum creatinine and the association of these changes with longer-term outcomes among participants in PARADISE-MI. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, event-driven trial, 5661 patients with an acute MI were assigned to receive sacubitril/valsartan or ramipril, with no run-in. The frequency of an initial pre-specified increase in serum creatinine (≥26.5 or ≥44 μmol/L) from baseline to week 1 was compared between arms. Multivariable Cox regression models were fit to examine the association of acute changes in serum creatinine with the primary cardiovascular composite outcome (cardiovascular death, first heart failure hospitalization, or outpatient heart failure), all-cause mortality, and longer-term changes in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). An initial increase in serum creatinine ≥26.5 μmol/L occurred in 155 of 2604 (6.0%) patients assigned to sacubitril/valsartan and 120 of 2603 (4.6%) patients assigned to ramipril (odds ratio [OR] 1.32; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-1.68). The corresponding numbers for an increase ≥44 μmol/L were 57 (2.2%) and 42 (1.6%), respectively (OR 1.37; 95% CI 0.92-2.05). A higher odds of increased serum creatinine ≥26.5 and ≥44 μmol/L for sacubitril/valsartan versus ramipril appeared to be restricted to patients who had a greater decline in systolic blood pressure over the same period (p-interaction = 0.05 and 0.001, respectively). In multivariable analyses, neither an acute increase in serum creatinine ≥26.5 or ≥44 μmol/L was associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular outcomes, all-cause mortality, or differences in longer-term eGFR slope. Findings were similar across the randomized treatment arms (p-interaction >0.6 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Following acute MI, patients assigned to sacubitril/valsartan had a higher frequency of initial increases in serum creatinine at 1 week, compared with ramipril. In adjusted models, initial increases in serum creatinine with either treatment were not associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes or changes in longer-term kidney function.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Causland et al. (2024) conducted an RCT in Acute myocardial infarction with LVEF ≤40% or pulmonary congestion (n=5,207). Sacubitril/valsartan vs. Ramipril was evaluated on Initial increase in serum creatinine ≥26.5 µmol/L (≥0.3 mg/dL) from baseline to week 1 (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.03-1.68).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: