Key result
Amlodipine/benazepril reduced composite cardiovascular events compared to HCTZ/benazepril in patients achieving systolic BP ≤130 mm Hg (HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.70-0.99) and those with resistant hypertension.
Why the study?
To investigate whether 2017 hypertension guideline changes lowering systolic BP goals and redefining resistant hypertension alter the cardiovascular benefits of combining a CCB versus HCTZ with an ACEI.
Does amlodipine/benazepril reduce composite cardiovascular events compared to hydrochlorothiazide/benazepril in patients achieving tight blood pressure control and those with resistant hypertension?
RCT (n=11,506)
Does amlodipine/benazepril reduce composite cardiovascular events compared to hydrochlorothiazide/benazepril in patients achieving tight blood pressure control and those with resistant hypertension?
Hazard Ratio: 0.83 (95% CI 0.7–0.99)
Absolute Event Rate: 9.2% vs 10.9%
Combining an ACE inhibitor with a calcium channel blocker rather than a thiazide diuretic provides superior cardiovascular protection even in patients achieving aggressive systolic BP targets (<130 mm Hg) and those with resistant hypertension.
May support amlodipine/benazepril at tight BP targets; hypothesis-generating, needs RCT confirmation.
BACKGROUND: The 2017 hypertension guidelines lowered systolic blood pressure (BP) goals to <130 mm Hg and redefined resistant hypertension. We investigated if these changes alter the cardiovascular benefits demonstrated by combining a calcium channel blocker (CCB), rather than hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ), with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI). METHODS: In this post hoc analysis of the Avoiding Cardiovascular Events Through Combination Therapy in Patients Living with Systolic Hypertension trial (n = 11,506), we compared the primary composite outcome (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for angina, resuscitation after sudden cardiac death, and coronary revascularization) between the 2 combination-treatment limbs in patients achieving a systolic BP ≤130 mm Hg and those with "apparent resistant hypertension" (prescribed ≥4 antihypertensive medications). RESULTS: Among study patients, 5,221 (45.4%) achieved a systolic BP ≤130 mm Hg. There were fewer primary endpoints in the amlodipine/benazepril (9.2%) vs. the HCTZ/benazepril (10.9%) limb (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70-0.99). There were also fewer primary endpoints in the amlodipine/benazepril (12.8%) vs. the HCTZ/benazepril (15.2%) limb (n = 4,451, 38.7%) among patients with apparent resistant hypertension (HR 0.81, 95% CI, 0.70-0.95). CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy adding a CCB, rather than HCTZ, to an ACEI was more effective in preventing composite cardiovascular events even in hypertensive patients achieving aggressive systolic BP targets as well as in those with apparent resistant hypertension. Our findings add support that most patients, including those following contemporary clinical guidelines, will benefit from this combination. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: Trial Number NCT00170950.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brook et al. (2020) conducted an RCT in Systolic Hypertension (n=11,506). Amlodipine/benazepril vs. Hydrochlorothiazide/benazepril was evaluated on Composite outcome (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for angina, resuscitation after sudden cardiac death, and coronary revascularization) (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.70-0.99). Amlodipine/benazepril reduced composite cardiovascular events compared to HCTZ/benazepril in patients achieving systolic BP ≤130 mm Hg (HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.70-0.99) and those with resistant hypertension.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: