Why the study?
Previous trials showed dual RAS blockade increased adverse risks in older patients with cardiorenal diseases, but evidence regarding tailored low-dose regimens and newer agents warranted reconsidering its safety and efficiency.
Does dual renin-angiotensin system blockade improve outcomes safely in patients with cardiorenal diseases?
Does dual renin-angiotensin system blockade improve outcomes safely in patients with cardiorenal diseases?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This review suggests that individualized, low-dose dual RAS blockade may be safe and effective in specific cardiorenal patients, challenging the broad guideline recommendation against its use.
Studies on pharmacological mechanisms demonstrated that a strategy of dual renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockade may have a synergistic effect in the treatment of cardiorenal diseases and may reduce adverse reactions. However, some previous clinical studies reported that dual RAS blockade did not significantly benefit many patients with cardiorenal diseases and increased the risk of hyperkalemia, hypotension and renal function damage. Therefore, the current clinical guidelines suggest that the combined use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) should be used with caution in the clinic. However, these studies enrolled older patients with cardiovascular risk factors, and the results of these trials may not be generalized to the overall population. Some clinical evidence suggests that the combination of low-dose ACEIs and ARBs leads to more effective RAS blockade with few adverse effects. The advent of new RAS inhibitors with superior pharmacological effects provides a more suitable drug choice for individualized therapy for dual RAS blockade. Therefore, the choice of appropriate ARBs/ACEIs for individualized therapy based on patient condition may be a better way to improve the efficiency and safety of the dual RAS blockade strategy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mei et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: